text
stringlengths 4
2.78M
| meta
dict |
|---|---|
---
abstract: 'Recent studies on the Fermi-Pasta-Ulam (FPU) paradox, like the theory of $q$–breathers and the metastability scenario, dealing mostly with the [*energy localization*]{} properties in the FPU space of normal modes ($q$–space), motivated our first work on [*$q$–tori*]{} in the FPU problem [@chrietal2010]. The $q$–tori are low-dimensional invariant tori hosting trajectories that present features relevant to the interpretation of FPU recurrences as well as the energy localization in $q$–space. The present paper is a continuation of our work in [@chrietal2010]. Our new results are: We extend a method of analytical computation of $q$–tori, using Poincaré–Lindstedt series, from the $\beta$ to the $\alpha$–FPU and we reach significantly higher expansion orders using an improved computer–algebraic program. We probe numerically the convergence properties as well as the level of precision of our computed series. We develop an additional algorithm in order to systematically locate values of the incommensurable frequencies used as an input in the PL series construction of $q$–tori corresponding to progressively higher values of the energy. We generalize a proposition proved in [@chrietal2010] regarding the so-called ‘sequence of propagation’ of an initial excitation in the PL series. We show by concrete examples how the latter interprets the localization patterns found in numerical simulations. We focus, in particular, on various types of extensive initial excitations that lead to $q$–tori solutions with exponentially localized profiles. Finally, we discuss the relation between $q$–tori, $q$–breathers (viewed as one-dimensional $q$–tori), and the so–called ‘FPU–trajectories’ invoked in the original study of the FPU problem.'
author:
- |
**H. Christodoulidi$^{a}$, C. Efthymiopoulos$^{b}$** ,\
$^{a}$ Università degli Studi di Padova,\
Dipartimento di Matematica Pura e Applicata,\
Via Trieste 63, 35121 - Padova, Italy\
$^{b}$ Research Center for Astronomy and Applied Mathematics,\
Academy of Athens, Greece
title: |
Low–dimensional $q$–tori in FPU lattices:\
dynamics and localization properties
---
Introduction {#intro}
============
In the well known numerical experiment of Fermi, Pasta and Ulam in 1955, reported in [@feretal1955], a dynamical system consisting of $N$ nonlinearly coupled oscillators showed an integrable–like behavior, contradicting the ergodic hypothesis of Fermi. This surprising result motivated numerable historical works, from Korteweg -– de Vries, solitons and Toda to ergodic theory etc., that together with the KAM theorem discovered in the same period, changed the perspective of statistical mechanics, ergodic and perturbation theory.
The FPU recurrences in the energies of normal modes, observed in [@feretal1955] when exciting one or few low–frequency normal modes, lead to the conclusion that energy transfer between modes is practically frozen, with only few modes sharing the total energy, leaving the system far from equilibrium (see also the review [@lichetal2008]). A careful inspection of the averaged in time energy spectra shows an exponentially localized profile in $q$–space, characterized by a ‘plateau’ in the low–frequency part of the energy spectrum, a so–called [*natural packet*]{} of modes [@beretal2004; @beretal2005; @gentaetal], accompanied by an exponential tail of the energy distribution for the remaining modes. This state of the system is called ‘metastable state’ [@bampon2006; @fucetal1982; @livetal1985; @ponbam2005; @dresden] and recent studies on its persistence and times to equipartition are given in [@benetal2011].
On the other hand, it was observed that there exist periodic orbits called [*$q$–breathers*]{}, introduced in the series of works [@flaetal2005]–[@flachtiz], [@flaetal2006b], [@kanetal2007], which share many common features with trajectories rising by the excitation of just one normal mode (called ‘FPU–trajectories’). These Lyapunov orbits are continuations of the linear modes, which, at low energies, have a similar exponentially localized energy spectrum as the FPU–trajectories, characterized by an exponent that depends logarithmically on the system’s parameters.
This latter remark initiated the idea of studying trajectories corresponding to the excitation of more than one linear modes, i.e. lying on [*tori of low dimensionality*]{} in the FPU phase space. These tori were named $q$–tori in [@chrietal2010], and numerical evidence of their existence came out from the implementation of the method of Poincaré – Lindstedt (PL) series. We should stress at this point that, while the existence of $q$–breathers is guaranteed by basic theorems on the continuation of periodic orbits, the corresponding demonstration for $q$–tori would require proving the convergence of the associated PL series. A rigorous proof appears at present hardly tractable. However, in the present paper we will provide numerical tests showing that our computed series exhibit the behavior of convergent PL series. In particular, we identify near-cancellations between terms of a big absolute size, leaving a small residual in the final series. Let us note that precisely this mechanism has been invoked in well known formal proofs of the convergence of Lindstedt series in simple models [@eli1997; @gal1994]. Furthermore, as in [@chrietal2010] we employ the GALI indicator [@skoetal2007], thus obtaining further evidence that our computed solutions lie on low-dimensional tori. Finally, we demonstrate that the $q$-–tori exhibit a number of features not encountered in $q$–breathers. However, we emphasize that $q$–tori and $q$–breathers should not be regarded as competitive theories, but rather as complementary interpretation tools for the FPU localization phenomena.
We finally note that the study of FPU trajectories presenting energy localization by various means of classical perturbation theory is a known subject (for an early implementation of the simple Birkhoff normal form approach see [@delucetal1995]; see also references in [@gentaetal]). In particular, the problem of motions on or close to low-dimensional manifolds using the classical method of Birkhoff was studied in [@giomur2006]. As commented in [@chrietal2010], this approach leads to Nekhoroshev-like estimates for the time of stability of motions. However, the corresponding estimates have a bad behavior as $N\rightarrow\infty$. For an alternative approach to the same problem using a ‘resonant’ Birkhoff construction see [@gentaetal]. On the other hand, the fact that we find indications about cancellations in our PL series implies that the $q$–tori constructed by the present method should be recoverable also by some ‘indirect’ (i.e. Kolmogorov-like normal form) approach. However, one can easily check that a recently proposed algorithm for the computation of low-dimensional tori via normal forms [@sansetal2011] has different divisors than in our construction. Thus, we leave the question of the existence of an appropriate Kolmogorov algorithm for the FPU $q$–tori as an open problem.
The main results and the content of this paper are stated as follows: After introducing the FPU model in Section \[fpumodel\], we sketch the construction of $q$–tori by Poincaré–Lindstedt series in Section \[plseries\]. We also present our numerical indications regarding the convergence of the PL series with the help of a concrete example referring to a two-dimensional $q$–torus solution.
In Section \[4toros\], we give an example of a 4-dimensional $q$–torus solution. Here, we focus on the energy localization properties of such a torus. Furthermore, we compare this object with a corresponding so-called ‘FPU–trajectory’ (subsection \[fputra\]), finding results analogous to the study in [@dresden], but for groups of modes rather than one mode.
Section \[sequence\] deals with an extension of our proposition found in [@chrietal2010], where, we prove the so–called propagation of [*initial excitations*]{} of modes for both the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ FPU models. In the context of perturbation theory, an initial excitation means a particular selection of a subset of modes in $q$–space for which we consider an oscillation with non–zero amplitude at the zero order of perturbation theory. Then, this excitation [*propagates*]{} to new modes at subsequent orders, giving justification to the observed exponential localization profile of $q$–tori.
In section \[numqtor\] we give several numerical examples and localization profiles associated to $q$–tori, and we compare them with the predictions of the proposition developed in section \[sequence\]. We examine, in particular:
i\) low–frequency packet excitations (subsection \[lowfreqmod\]), paying emphasis on so-called [*extensive*]{} initial excitations, i.e. ones in which the number of initially excited consecutive modes varies proportionally to $N$. We predict, based on a leading term analysis of the associated PL series, that the form of their energy spectrum has an exponentially localized profile with a slope that depends [*logarithmically* ]{} on the specific energy $\varepsilon=E/N$ and on the system’s parameters.
ii\) ‘arbitrary’ initial excitations (subsection \[patternqtor\]), i.e. excitations of modes chosen arbitrarily within the whole spectrum, leading to the formation of a variety of localization patterns, whose form is predicted theoretically and confirmed by numerical experiments.
iii\) ‘generalized packet excitations’ (subsection \[general\]), i.e. excitations of extensive packets of modes in various arbitrarily chosen parts of the spectrum. In this case we study the formation of local exponential profiles far from the low-frequency part of the spectrum.
iv\) $q$–breathers, examined as a particular case of one-dimensional $q$–tori (subsection \[trajbreath\]). In this case we examine how the $q$–breathers compare with the FPU–trajectories studied in the original FPU report, i.e. for the lowest frequency mode excitation, but also for a high frequency mode excitation. In particular, we point out the similarity between $q$–breathers and FPU trajectories regarding their energy localization pattern, but also their different behavior related to the phenomenon of FPU recurrences at higher energies.
Section \[concl\] is a summary of our basic conclusions from the present study and a discussion on future perspectives.
The Fermi Pasta Ulam model {#fpumodel}
==========================
The FPU Hamiltonian for a lattice of $N-1$ particles reads: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{fpuham}
H= {1\over 2}\sum_{k=1}^{N-1} y_k^2 + { 1 \over
2}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1}(x_{k+1}-x_k)^2 + {\alpha \over
3}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1}(x_{k+1}-x_k)^3
+ {\beta \over 4}
\sum_{k=0}^{N-1}(x_{k+1}-x_k)^4\end{aligned}$$ where $x_k$ is the $k$–th particle’s position with respect to equilibrium and $y_k$ its canonically conjugate momentum. Fixed boundary conditions are defined by setting $x_0=x_{N}=0$. The cases $\alpha \neq 0$, $\beta = 0$, and $\alpha=0$, $\beta \neq 0$ are called FPU–$\alpha$ and FPU–$\beta$ model respectively.
The normal mode canonical variables $(Q_q,P_q)$ are introduced by the linear canonical transformation $$\begin{aligned}
\label{lintra}
x_k &=&\sqrt{2\over N}\sum_{q=1}^{N-1} Q_q\sin\left({qk\pi\over
N}\right)\nonumber\\
y_k&=&\sqrt{2\over N}\sum_{q=1}^{N-1}
P_q\sin\left({qk\pi\over N}\right).\end{aligned}$$ Substitution of (\[lintra\]) into (\[fpuham\]) yields the Hamiltonian in the normal mode space ($q$–space): $$\begin{aligned}
\label{fpuham2}
& &H={1\over 2 } \sum_{q=1}^{N-1} { (P_q^2+\Omega_q^2Q_q^2 ) }
+{\alpha\over 3\sqrt{2N}}\sum_{q,l,m=1}^{N-1} B_{qlm}
\Omega_q\Omega_l\Omega_m Q_qQ_lQ_m\\
& &+{\beta\over 8N}\sum_{q,l,m,n=1}^{N-1} C_{qlmn}
\Omega_q\Omega_l\Omega_m\Omega_n Q_qQ_lQ_mQ_n \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ with normal mode frequencies $$\label{fpuspec}
\Omega_q=2\sin\left({q\pi\over2N}\right),~~~1\leq q\leq N-1~~~.$$ The harmonic energy $E_q$ of each normal mode $q$ is given by $$\label{harmonicene}
E_q= {1\over 2} (P_q^2+ \Omega_q ^2 Q_q^2)~~~.$$ The coefficients $B_{qlm}$ and $C_{qlmn}$ are non–zero only for particular combinations of the indices $q,l,m,n$, namely $$\begin{aligned}
\label{transa}
B_{qlm}&=&\sum_{\pm} (\delta_{q\pm l\pm m, 0} - \delta_{q\pm l\pm m,
2N})\nonumber \\
C_{qlmn}&=&\sum_{\pm} (\delta_{q\pm l\pm m \pm n, 0} -
\delta_{q\pm l\pm m \pm n, 2N})~~.\end{aligned}$$ In the above expressions, all possible combinations of the $\pm$ signs must be taken into account. In the new canonical variables, the equations of motion are: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqmo}
\ddot{Q}_q+\Omega_q^2Q_q=-{\alpha\over {\sqrt{2N}}}
\sum_{l,m=1}^{N-1} B_{qlm} \Omega_q\Omega_l\Omega_m
Q_lQ_m \nonumber\\
-{\beta\over 2N}\sum_{l,m,n=1}^{N-1} C_{qlmn}
\Omega_q\Omega_l\Omega_m\Omega_n Q_lQ_mQ_n~~.\end{aligned}$$
Construction of $q$–tori by Poincaré–Lindstedt series {#plseries}
=====================================================
PL Algorithm
------------
As in [@chrietal2010], we will now construct quasi-periodic solutions lying on $q$–tori by implementing the method of Poincaré–Lindstedt series. The main steps of our constructive algorithm are the following:
As a starting point we consider first the trivial case $\alpha=\beta=0$. Let $${\cal D}_0\equiv\{q_1,q_2,\ldots,q_s\},~~\mbox{where}
~~1\leq q_i\leq N-1 ~~\mbox{with} ~~ q_i < q_j,~~\mbox{for}
~~i<j$$ be an arbitrary set of $s<N$ modes, called hereafter ‘seed modes’ (in analogy to [@flaetal2005], where the case $s=1$ corresponding to $q$–breathers is considered). The set of functions $Q_{q_i}(t)=A_{q_i}\cos(\Omega_{q_i}t+\phi_{q_i})$, $i=1,\ldots,s$ and $Q_q(t)=0$ if $q\notin{\cal D}_0$, constitutes a particular solution of the linear system. The resulting trajectory lies on a $s$–dimensional torus, provided that the frequencies $\Omega_{q_i}$ of Eq. (\[fpuspec\]) satisfy no commensurability relation. This turns out to be always the case if $N-1$ is a prime number or $\log_2 N\in\mathbf{N}^*$ [@hem1959]. If, on the other hand, the frequencies $\Omega_{q_i}$ satisfy $s'$ linearly independent commensurability relations ($0<s'<s$), the trajectories lie on a ‘resonant torus’ of dimension $s-s'$, which is a sub–manifold of the original $q$–torus of dimension $s$.
Passing now to the nontrivial case $a\neq 0$, or $\beta\neq 0$, we aim to define quasi–periodic trajectories lying on $s$–dimensional tori. To this end, let $\omega_{q_i}$, $i=1,\ldots,s$ be a set of frequencies with fixed values [*chosen in advance*]{}, which are incommensurable between themselves as well as with each one of the linear frequencies $\Omega_{q}$ of the remaining modes $q \notin {\cal D}_0$. We then determine formal solutions $Q_q(t)$, $q=1,\ldots,N-1$ containing only trigonometric terms of the form $\cos(n\cdot(\omega t +\phi))$, where $n\equiv(n_1,n_2,\ldots,n_s)$ is an $s$–dimensional integer vector and $\omega\equiv(\omega_{q_1},\ldots,\omega_{q_s})$, $\phi\equiv(\phi_{q_1},\ldots,\phi_{q_s})$ are the frequency and phase vectors respectively.
According to the PL method, these solutions are written as series in powers of a small parameter $\mu= \alpha/\sqrt{2N}$, or $\mu=\beta/2 N$, namely: $$\label{qser}
Q_q(t)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \mu^k Q_q^{(k)}(t)
,~~~q=1,\ldots,N-1~~.$$ The series terms $Q_q^{(k)}$ are computed step by step. The zero order terms are set as $$\label{qq0}
Q_q^{(0)}(t)=\left\{
\begin{array}{rl}
A_q\cos (\omega_{q} t+\phi_q), & \mbox{if}~q\in{\cal D}_0\\
0, & \mbox{otherwise}~~.
\end{array}
\right.$$ We emphasize that the amplitudes $A_{q_i}$, $i=1,\ldots,s$ are unknown quantities to be specified at the end of the process. In the computer–algebraic program, $A_{q_i}$ are symbols carried all along the construction of the PL series, while the frequencies $\omega_{q_i}$ are substituted at the beginning by their selected numerical values. However, according to the PL method, the frequencies $\omega_{q_i}$ must also be expressed in the form of a series in powers of the amplitudes $A_{q_i}$, namely $$\label{omeser}
\omega_{q_i}=\Omega_{q_i}
+ \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \mu^k
\omega_{q_i}^{(k)}(A_{q_1},\ldots ,A_{q_s} )~~.$$ The functions $\omega_{q_i}^{(k)}(A_{q_1},\ldots ,A_{q_s})$ are polynomials of the amplitudes $A_{q_1},\ldots ,A_{q_s}$, of order $k+1$ in the $\alpha$–case, or $2k+1$ in the $\beta$–case.
Substituting Eqs.(\[qser\]) and (\[omeser\]) in the equations of motion (\[eqmo\]), we find the following equations to be solved at order $k$: for the FPU–$\alpha$ model we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{moda}
\ddot {Q}_q^{(k)}+\omega _q^2Q_{q}^{(k)}&=&
\sum _{n_{1}=1}^{k}\sum _{n_{2}=0} ^{n_{1}} \omega _{q}^{(n_{2})}
\omega _{q}^{(n_{1} - n_{2})}Q_{q}^{(k-n_{1})} \nonumber\\
&-&\Omega_{q} \sum_{l,m=1}^{N-1}\Omega _l\Omega _m
B_{qlm}\sum_{\mathop{n_{1,2}=0}\limits_
{n_1+n_2=k-1}}^{k-1}Q_l^{(n_1)}Q_m^{(n_2)},
~~~\mbox{if $q\in{\cal D}_0$}\nonumber\\
\ddot {Q}_q^{(k)}+\Omega_q^2Q_{q}^{(k)}&=&
-\Omega_{q} \sum_{l,m=1}^{N-1}\Omega _l\Omega _m
B_{qlm}\sum_{\mathop{n_{1,2}=0}\limits_
{n_1+n_2=k-1}}^{k-1}Q_l^{(n_1)}Q_m^{(n_2)},
~~~\mbox{if $q\notin{\cal D}_0$}\nonumber\\\end{aligned}$$ while for the FPU–$\beta$ model we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{modb}
\ddot {Q}_q^{(k)}+\omega_q^2Q_q^{(k)}&=&
\sum _{n_{1}=1}^{k}\sum_{n_{2}=0} ^{n_{1}} \omega _{q}^{(n_{2})}
\omega _{q}^{(n_{1} - n_{2})}Q_q^{(k-n_{1})}\nonumber \\
&-&\Omega _q \sum_{l,m,n=1}^{N-1}\Omega _l\Omega _m \Omega
_nC_{qlmn}\sum_{\mathop{n_{1,2,3}=0}\limits_
{n_1+n_2+n_3=k-1}}^{k-1}Q_l^{(n_1)}Q_m^{(n_2)}Q_n^{(n_3)},
~~~\mbox{if $q\in{\cal D}_0$}\nonumber\\
\ddot {Q}_q^{(k)}+\Omega_q^2Q_q^{(k)}&=&
-\Omega _q \sum_{l,m,n=1}^{N-1}\Omega _l\Omega _m \Omega
_nC_{qlmn}\sum_{\mathop{n_{1,2,3}=0}\limits_
{n_1+n_2+n_3=k-1}}^{k-1}Q_l^{(n_1)}Q_m^{(n_2)}Q_n^{(n_3)},
~~~\mbox{if $q\notin{\cal D}_0$.}\nonumber\\\end{aligned}$$
By integrating either Eqs.(\[moda\]) or (\[modb\]), secular terms of the form $t\sin(\omega_q t)$ appear in the right hand side (when $q \in {\cal D}_0$), at even orders in the FPU–$\alpha$ and at all orders in the FPU–$\beta$. The requirement to eliminate all secular terms leads to an algebraic expression for the frequency correction terms $\omega_{q_i}^{(k)}$, $i=1,\ldots,s$. After eliminating the secular terms, direct integration of Eqs.(\[moda\]) or (\[modb\]) yields the solution of the series terms $Q_q^{(k)}(t)$.
Each term in both series (\[qser\]) and (\[omeser\]) depends, now, on the yet unspecified amplitudes $A_{q_i}$. However, since the numerical values of the frequencies $\omega_{q_i}$ are specified in advance, the series (\[omeser\]) can be solved for the amplitudes $A_{q_i}$. In practice, we solve the set of equations resulting from finite truncations of the series (\[omeser\]). Thus, the amplitudes $A_{q_i}$ are also specified with finite accuracy. After determining the values of the $A_{q_i}$, substitution into the series (\[qser\]) yields also numerical coefficients for all series terms $Q_q^{(k)}(t)$. Thus, we specify approximately a $q$–torus solution given by finite truncations of the functions $Q_q(t)$ for all $q=1,\ldots,N-1$.
Convergence and precision tests – Torus dimension
-------------------------------------------------
The existence of a solution of Eqs.(\[omeser\]) for a fixed choice of frequency values $\omega_{q_i}$, along with the convergence of the series (\[qser\]) for that particular solution, constitutes a proof that a $q$–torus with the so chosen frequencies exists.
In practice, we can hardly provide such a proof by rigorous means. Instead, as mentioned already we work with finite truncations of the PL series. In [@chrietal2010] we computed only low order truncations, i.e. for orders not higher than three. In order to probe the behavior of our series we developed a computer–algebraic program able to perform high order computations of the PL series. In the limiting case of one-dimensional $q$–tori, i.e., $q$–breathers, we were able to reach expansion orders as high as 200. However, more interesting is the case of two– (or more) dimensional tori, where quite small divisors are present. Despite this fact, it is known from theoretical works [@eli1997], [@gal1994] that the PL series exhibit [*near-cancellations*]{} between terms of large size generated in the series by the recursive appearance of small divisors. Such near-cancellations have been shown to lead to the convergence of the PL series for diophantine frequencies in simple Hamiltonian models.
In our particular model, we observe numerically the appearance of near-cancellations in our computed PL series. One example is shown in Fig.\[canc\], referring to $N=16$, $a=0.33$, where, at the zeroth order of the PL series, we ‘excite’, i.e. consider a non-zero amplitude at the zeroth order for the modes $q_1=1$ and $q_2=2$. We construct a series representing a 2D $q$–torus with frequencies $\omega_1=0.19626$, $\omega_2=0.39046$. These frequencies are commensurable beyond the fifth decimal digit, but they can be considered as practically incommensurable regarding the divisors they generate up to our maximum reached expansion order $k=30$.
The resulting solution corresponds to a total energy $E=0.02345$. Computing the average harmonic energy for each mode (up to a time $T$), given by $\overline{E}_q=(1/T)\int_0^T (P_q(t)^2+\Omega_q^2 Q_q(t)^2)dt$, where $Q_q(t)$, $P_q(t)=\dot{Q}_q(t)$ are the theoretical functions determined by the truncated PL series, we arrive at the profile shown in Fig.\[canc\](a). This profile exhibits exponential localization, since the energy of the $q$–th mode decays exponentially with $q$. This phenomenon will be studied with more detailed examples in sections \[4toros\] to \[numqtor\] below.
![ (a) The exponentially localized energy spectrum of a 2–torus. (b) The logarithm of the absolute errors $\Delta A_i (k) =|A_i(k+2)-A_i(k)|$ for $i=1,2$ versus the order $k$. (c) The logarithm of the sums $S_1$ and $S_2$ defined in Eq.(\[serabs2\]) and Eq.(\[serabs3\]) respectively versus $k$. (d) The relative errors in time of the harmonic and the total energy calculated by the PL method. (e) The GALI indices for $r=2,\ldots,5$. \[canc\] ](Fig1a.eps "fig:") ![ (a) The exponentially localized energy spectrum of a 2–torus. (b) The logarithm of the absolute errors $\Delta A_i (k) =|A_i(k+2)-A_i(k)|$ for $i=1,2$ versus the order $k$. (c) The logarithm of the sums $S_1$ and $S_2$ defined in Eq.(\[serabs2\]) and Eq.(\[serabs3\]) respectively versus $k$. (d) The relative errors in time of the harmonic and the total energy calculated by the PL method. (e) The GALI indices for $r=2,\ldots,5$. \[canc\] ](Fig1b.eps "fig:") ![ (a) The exponentially localized energy spectrum of a 2–torus. (b) The logarithm of the absolute errors $\Delta A_i (k) =|A_i(k+2)-A_i(k)|$ for $i=1,2$ versus the order $k$. (c) The logarithm of the sums $S_1$ and $S_2$ defined in Eq.(\[serabs2\]) and Eq.(\[serabs3\]) respectively versus $k$. (d) The relative errors in time of the harmonic and the total energy calculated by the PL method. (e) The GALI indices for $r=2,\ldots,5$. \[canc\] ](Fig1c.eps "fig:")\
![ (a) The exponentially localized energy spectrum of a 2–torus. (b) The logarithm of the absolute errors $\Delta A_i (k) =|A_i(k+2)-A_i(k)|$ for $i=1,2$ versus the order $k$. (c) The logarithm of the sums $S_1$ and $S_2$ defined in Eq.(\[serabs2\]) and Eq.(\[serabs3\]) respectively versus $k$. (d) The relative errors in time of the harmonic and the total energy calculated by the PL method. (e) The GALI indices for $r=2,\ldots,5$. \[canc\] ](Fig1d.eps "fig:") ![ (a) The exponentially localized energy spectrum of a 2–torus. (b) The logarithm of the absolute errors $\Delta A_i (k) =|A_i(k+2)-A_i(k)|$ for $i=1,2$ versus the order $k$. (c) The logarithm of the sums $S_1$ and $S_2$ defined in Eq.(\[serabs2\]) and Eq.(\[serabs3\]) respectively versus $k$. (d) The relative errors in time of the harmonic and the total energy calculated by the PL method. (e) The GALI indices for $r=2,\ldots,5$. \[canc\] ](Fig1e.eps "fig:")
In order, now, to probe the behavior of our series with increasing truncation order, we perform a number of numerical tests leading to Figs.\[canc\](b),(c),(d), and (e).
Figure \[canc\](b) shows, on a logarithmic scale, the absolute errors in the determination of the amplitudes $A_1$,$A_2$ using numerical solutions of finite truncations of Eqs.(\[omeser\]) at various (increasing) orders. The plotted quantities are $\Delta A_1(k)= |A_1(k+2)-A_1(k)|$ and $\Delta A_2(k)=|A_2(k+2)-A_2(k)|$, where $A_1(k),A_2(k)$ and $A_1(k+2),A_2(k+2)$ are approximations to the amplitudes as determined by solving numerically Eqs.(\[omeser\]) truncated at the $k-th$ and $k+2$nd orders respectively. We note that the error in the determination of the amplitudes decreases as the truncation order increases, up to the order $k=24$, while afterwards the error slightly increases. The increase appears after the error reaches a minimum level $\Delta A\sim 10^{-8}$–$10^{-7}$, while the frequencies themselves become commensurable at this level of precision. Thus, in subsequent calculations we use the values of the amplitudes found at the order $k=24$, up to which the behavior of the series appears as convergent. The computed values of the amplitudes are $A_1=0.5848897$, $A_2=0.4115552$.
Figure \[canc\](c) shows now the main effect regarding the appearance of near-cancellations in our series. After completing the calculations up to the $k$–th order, we re-cast all computed series terms $Q_q^{(k)}(t)$ under the form: $$\label{serabs1}
Q_q^{(k)}(t)= \sum_{m_1,m_2}
\left(\sum_{i,j} h^{(k)}_{m_1,m_2,i,j} A_1^i A_2^j\right)
\cos[m_1(\omega_1t +\phi_1)+m_2(\omega_2t +\phi_2)]~~,$$ where the sums are over integers $m_1,m_2,i,j$ whose range depends on $k$. Then, focusing for example on $q=1$, the upper curve in Fig.\[canc\](c) shows the value of the sum: $$\label{serabs2}
S_1(k)=\sum_{m_1,m_2}\sum_{i,j}
|h^{(k)}_{m_1,m_2,i,j} A_1^i A_2^j|$$ while the lower curve shows the value of the sum: $$\label{serabs3}
S_2(k)=\sum_{m_1,m_2}\Bigg|\left(\sum_{i,j}
h^{(k)}_{m_1,m_2,i,j} A_1^i A_2^j\right)\Bigg|~~.$$ In words, the upper sum represents the absolute sum of all individual Fourier coefficients appearing in the series at the order $k$, while, in the lower sum, all coefficients corresponding to the same harmonics $\cos[m_1(\omega_1t +\phi_1)+m_2(\omega_2t +\phi_2)]$ are grouped first together and summed algebraically (as actually happens in the real series after substitution of the numerical values of the amplitudes). We now observe that the latter summation leads to a near–cancellation of terms of increasing size, leaving a residual which decreases as $k$ increases. As a result, the cancellation takes place up to four orders of magnitude compared to the size of each independent term of the PL series at the order $k=14$. The overall size of the terms of $Q_1^{(k)}$ at $k=14$ is about $10^{-5}$. However, as shown in Fig.\[canc\](c), beyond the order 14 numerically we cannot observe a cancellation better than one part in $10^4$. We attribute this fact to the finite precision by which the amplitudes $A_1$, $A_2$ have been specified. Nevertheless, despite a slight increase after $k=14$, the upper and lower curves in Fig.\[canc\](c) appear to move one parallel to the other on a logarithmic scale, indicating that the cancellations take place at all computed orders beyond $k=14$.
As an independent test of the precision of our series computations, Fig.\[canc\](d) shows the time evolution of the relative harmonic and total energy, $RE=(E(t)-E(0))/E(0)$, found by substituting the functions $Q_q(t)$, $P_q(t)$, as computed by our truncated PL series, into the harmonic part or the total Hamiltonian (\[fpuham2\]). For an exact solution, the harmonic energy undergoes some time variations due to the presence of the cubic terms in the Hamiltonian, whose size in our case is of order $\sim 10^{-2}$. On the other hand, the value of the full Hamiltonian energy should be a preserved quantity. Using our truncated series, we observe some fluctuations in the total energy which indicate an error of the level of $10^{-4}$. On the other hand, the total harmonic energy undergoes fluctuations at the expected level $10^{-2}$.
As a final test, we implement (as in [@chrietal2010]) the method of the Generalized Alignment Index (GALI) [@skoetal2007], which determines the dimension of a [*stable*]{} low-dimensional torus by the temporal behavior of a set of indices (denoted G$_{2}$, G$_{3}$, …) computed via an integration of the variational equations of motion along with the original ones. We recall that each index $G_r$ represents the $r$–volume of $r$ unitary deviation vectors. In the case of chaotic orbits, all indices $G_r$ decay exponentially in time. However, in the case of regular quasi-periodic orbits, the indices $G_r$ obtain an asymptotically constant value in time for $r$ smaller or equal to the dimension of the torus on which the orbit lies, while they decay by power laws for $r$ larger than the torus dimension (see [@chri06; @skoetal2007; @skoetal2008] for more details).
Figure \[canc\](e) shows the behavior of the indices $G_r$ for $r=2,
3,4,5$, for an orbit integrated numerically with initial conditions as specified by our truncated series solution at the time $t=0$. We observe that even after a quite long integration time ($10^9$), the index $G_2$ appears so be stabilized to a nearly constant value, while all other indices decay in time by the power laws $t^{-1}$, $t^{-2}$, and $t^{-3}$ respectively. This behavior implies that our initial conditions lie indeed on a 2D-torus embedded in the 30–dimensional phase space of the considered FPU system.
A further example. Comparison of $q$–torus and ‘FPU trajectory’ {#4toros}
===============================================================
In order to construct the two-dimensional $q$–torus PL series solution of the previous section, a specific choice of values for the frequencies $\omega_1$ and $\omega_2$ was made. In general, such choices lead to formal series of the form (\[omeser\]) for which there is no a priori guarantee that i) real-valued solutions for the amplitudes $A_{q_i}$ exist, and ii) if they exist, that they lead to convergent series (\[qser\]). In order to circumvent this difficulty, we have developed a step-by-step algorithm by which we specify appropriate sets of numerical values $\omega_{q_i}$ for constructing $q$–torus solutions. For fixed $N$ and choice of $q_i$, this algorithm allows to move in frequency space, by specifying sets of values $\omega_{q_i}$ of progressively higher difference from the unperturbed frequencies $\Omega_{q_i}$. Using the so-determined values of the frequencies $\omega_{q_i}$ we nearly always find real-valued solutions $A_{q_i}$ of the equations (\[omeser\]) (in truncated form). This, in turn, allows to determine series of the form (\[qser\]) exhibiting an apparently convergent behavior according to all numerical criteria set in section \[plseries\]. In this way we construct approximate $q$–torus solutions corresponding to progressively higher values of the energy.
The above step-by-step algorithm for the determination of frequency values is discussed in \[AppA\]. Implementing this algorithm in the FPU–$\alpha$ model with $N=32$, and an initial excitation of the 4 lowest frequency modes $q_1=1$, $q_2=2$, $q_3=3$, $q_4=4$, we determine sets of values $\omega_{1}$, $\omega_{2}$, $\omega_{3}$, $\omega_{4}$ yielding $q$–torus solutions corresponding to progressively higher energy. For each set we solve numerically the truncated Eqs.(\[omeser\]) in order to specify the corresponding values of the amplitudes $A_{1}$, $A_{2}$, $A_{3}$, $A_{4}$.
![ (a) Normalized averaged exponential spectra $e_{\kappa }$ versus $\kappa =q/N $ for the system with ${\cal D}_0 = \{1,2,3,4\}$, $\alpha =0.33$, $E=0.000182466$, $N=32$, for a total time $T=10^6$. The blue spheres correspond to a $q$–torus construction with the truncated PL series, denoted $Q_q^{PL,11}(t)$. The orange triangles correspond to a numerical solution, denoted $Q_q^{PLn,11}(t)$, obtained by numerically integrating the FPU equations of motion with initial conditions $Q_q^{PL,11}(0)$, $P_q^{PL,11}(0)$. The continuous line is $\log (E_q/E)= 3.49545 - 36.6613\kappa
-2 \log (\kappa )$. (b) GALI indices (see text) for $r=2,3,4,5$ calculated for the orbit of the orange spectrum in (a). (c) The logarithm of the sums $S_1$ and $S_2$ defined in Eq.(\[serabs2\]) and Eq.(\[serabs3\]) respectively versus $k$. \[fig:qexample\] ](1-2-3-4.eps "fig:") ![ (a) Normalized averaged exponential spectra $e_{\kappa }$ versus $\kappa =q/N $ for the system with ${\cal D}_0 = \{1,2,3,4\}$, $\alpha =0.33$, $E=0.000182466$, $N=32$, for a total time $T=10^6$. The blue spheres correspond to a $q$–torus construction with the truncated PL series, denoted $Q_q^{PL,11}(t)$. The orange triangles correspond to a numerical solution, denoted $Q_q^{PLn,11}(t)$, obtained by numerically integrating the FPU equations of motion with initial conditions $Q_q^{PL,11}(0)$, $P_q^{PL,11}(0)$. The continuous line is $\log (E_q/E)= 3.49545 - 36.6613\kappa
-2 \log (\kappa )$. (b) GALI indices (see text) for $r=2,3,4,5$ calculated for the orbit of the orange spectrum in (a). (c) The logarithm of the sums $S_1$ and $S_2$ defined in Eq.(\[serabs2\]) and Eq.(\[serabs3\]) respectively versus $k$. \[fig:qexample\] ](gali4.eps "fig:") ![ (a) Normalized averaged exponential spectra $e_{\kappa }$ versus $\kappa =q/N $ for the system with ${\cal D}_0 = \{1,2,3,4\}$, $\alpha =0.33$, $E=0.000182466$, $N=32$, for a total time $T=10^6$. The blue spheres correspond to a $q$–torus construction with the truncated PL series, denoted $Q_q^{PL,11}(t)$. The orange triangles correspond to a numerical solution, denoted $Q_q^{PLn,11}(t)$, obtained by numerically integrating the FPU equations of motion with initial conditions $Q_q^{PL,11}(0)$, $P_q^{PL,11}(0)$. The continuous line is $\log (E_q/E)= 3.49545 - 36.6613\kappa
-2 \log (\kappa )$. (b) GALI indices (see text) for $r=2,3,4,5$ calculated for the orbit of the orange spectrum in (a). (c) The logarithm of the sums $S_1$ and $S_2$ defined in Eq.(\[serabs2\]) and Eq.(\[serabs3\]) respectively versus $k$. \[fig:qexample\] ](Fig2c.eps "fig:")
Figure \[fig:qexample\] refers to a $q$–torus solution of this form computed for the numerical values for the frequencies and amplitudes given in the first group of the table in \[AppF\]. The corresponding series (\[qser\]) are truncated at the order $k_0=11$. We refer to such [*analytical*]{} (i.e. truncated series) solutions by the notation $Q_q^{PL,k_0}(t)$. However, in a number of tests we also use orbits obtained by [*numerical*]{}[^1] integration of analytical initial conditions, i.e. the initial conditions $Q_q^{PL,k_0}(0)$. We denote such orbits by $Q_q^{PLn,k_0}(t)$.
In Fig.\[fig:qexample\](a) the blue spheres refer to the analytical orbit $Q_q^{PL,11}(t)$, while the orange spheres refer to the numerical orbit $Q_q^{PLn,11}(t)$. The figure shows the averaged in time and normalized harmonic energies $e_{\kappa } = E_{\kappa}/E$ for the above solutions as a function of the rescaled wavenumber $\kappa=q/N$. We observe that $Q_q^{PL,k_0}(0)$ and $Q_q^{PLn,k_0}(t)$ have no distinguishable difference in their profiles $e_{\kappa}$. This implies that the analytical or numerical determination of the orbit using the same initial conditions leads to an invariant profile $e_{\kappa}$, as expected for a solution lying on a $q$–torus[^2]. The main feature to observe in Fig.\[fig:qexample\] is, again, exponential localization. Namely, we observe a strong localization of the energy in the first four modes, followed by an exponential decay of $e_{\kappa}$ versus the re–scaled wavenumber $\kappa$. We emphasize that this is the profile corresponding to a $q$–torus solution computed by analytical means, i.e., by truncated PL series. As shown in subsection \[acaseqtor\] below, for such solutions we can predict theoretically the exponential slope of the localization profile. This prediction is shown in Fig.\[fig:qexample\](a) by a continuous line with negative slope.
Besides comparing the solutions $Q_q^{PL,11}(t)$ and $Q_q^{PLn,11}(t)$, here, as in section \[plseries\], we perform two more tests:
i\) We compute the GALI indices. Fig.\[fig:qexample\](b) shows the evolution of the GALI indices $G_r$ for $r=2,3,4,5$. The indices $G_2$ and $G_3$ converge very rapidly to a constant value, while $G_4$ oscillates also around a constant average value after an initial decay lasting for a rather long time, $t=3\cdot 10^7$. On the other hand, at times greater than the time of stabilization of $G_4$, the index $G_5$ clearly decays as $1/t$, up to at least the time $10^9$. Thus we conclude that the numerical orbit $Q_q^{PLn,11}(t)$ lies on a torus of dimension $s=4$. In fact, since we only have a finite precision in the initial conditions, a more precise statement is that the orbit follows a $4$–torus dynamics for times up to a time $10^9$, i.e., no large scale chaotic diffusion phenomena arise for the orbit within this timescale.
ii\) We probe the convergence of the PL series using the sums $S_1(k)$ and $S_2(k)$ (Eqs.(\[serabs2\]) and (\[serabs3\]) respectively, Fig.\[fig:qexample\](c)). In the present case both sums $S_1$ and $S_2$ decay up to the maximum considered truncation order $k_0=11$. However, we observe again the phenomenon of cancellations, which results in a difference of about two orders of magnitude between $S_1$ and $S_2$ at $k_0=11$.
Comparison with a FPU–trajectory. Stages of dynamics \[fputra\]
---------------------------------------------------------------
A question of central relevance concerns the behavior of nearby trajectories to a $q$–torus solution. A case of particular interest regards the the so–called ‘FPU–trajectories’ [@flaetal2005]. These are trajectories arising from initial conditions in which we excite initially only a small subset of modes. In the example of the $q$–torus solution of Fig.\[fig:qexample\], a corresponding nearby FPU–trajectory arises by setting initially $Q_q(0)=A_q$, for $q=1,2,3,4$, and $Q_q(0)=0$ for $4<q<32$. We stress that such an initial condition cannot be confused with the one of the $q$–torus solution itself, given by $Q_q(0)=Q_q^{PL,11}(0)\neq 0$ for [*all*]{} $q$ with $1\leq q<32$. In fact, in the latter case [*all*]{} modes have some energy initially, while in the case of the FPU–trajectory only the four first modes have energy initially.
Nevertheless, in the case of FPU-trajectories we observe an energy flow from the initially excited modes to the remaining modes in $q$–space. As a result, the energy localization profiles after a long time present quite similar features with those of the nearby $q$–tori solutions.
In [@dresden] a detailed study was made of the dynamics of FPU–trajectories arising from the initial excitation of just one mode. Such FPU–trajectories are nearby to one-dimensional $q$–tori, i.e., $q$–breathers. It was found that their evolution can be separated into two main so-called [*stages of dynamics*]{}, whose distinction becomes more evident by observing the time evolution of the energy acquired by each one of the normal modes. During the [*first stage*]{}, energy is transfered from the initially excited (low frequency) mode to the rest of modes, the transfer taking place via a resonant mechanism (see [@dresden]). The first stage stops after a relatively short time, beyond which the energy spectrum of the system appears to be practically frozen to an exponentially decaying profile. In [@dresden] it was emphasized that this process is integrable-like, since the same process occurs in the so-called Toda lattice model, which is integrable. However, in the FPU case the first stage of dynamics is followed by a [*second stage*]{} of dynamics, during which a weakly chaotic (and slow) drift of energy to the high frequency modes takes place. The time scale of the second stage of dynamics, which leads the system towards energy equipartition, was the main subject of study in [@benetal2011; @dresden].
We will now show that the distinction of two stages of dynamics applies to FPU–trajectories not only close to $q$–breathers, but also close to $q$–tori of dimension larger than one. An example, referring to a FPU–trajectory near the 4–torus of Fig.\[fig:qexample\], is shown in Fig.\[fig:dif\]. Fig.\[fig:dif\](a) shows the evolution of the normalized time averaged energies $\overline{E}_q(T)/E$ for all the modes $q=1,\ldots,N-1$, in the case of the FPU–trajectory, during the ‘first stage’ of dynamics. The energies of all modes besides $q=1,2,3,4$ are initially equal to zero. Thus, the initial distance in phase space between the FPU–trajectory and the $q$–torus trajectory is of order $O(\mu)$, where in this case $\mu\approx 4\times 10^{-2}$. One can observe that the modes $q=1,2,3,4$, which shared exclusively the total energy at $T=0$, continue to share most of the energy at all subsequent times $T$. As a result, $\overline{E}_q(T)/E$ remains practically constant for these 4 modes, exhibiting only small variations (of order $10^{-4}$) which correspond to the energy gradually transferred to the remaining modes. However, the energy transfer to the remaining modes modes is also evident. This takes place in a rather short time interval, of order $T=10^3$ for the modes $q=5,6,7,8$, and $T=10^2$ for the remaining ones.
![ (a) Time evolution of the normalized averaged energies $\overline{E}_q(t)/E$, in double logarithmic scale, for the FPU–trajectory arising from the excitation of the first $s=4$ modes with initial conditions $Q_q(0)=A_q$ if $q=1,2,3,4$ and $Q_q(0)=0$ else, and system’s parameters as in Fig.\[fig:qexample\] for the $q$–torus solution. (b) Comparison of the normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa}$ versus $\kappa$ of the $q$–torus solution (blue) and the corresponding FPU–trajectory (orange) over a total integration time $T=10^6$. \[fig:dif\]](qtori4.eps "fig:") ![ (a) Time evolution of the normalized averaged energies $\overline{E}_q(t)/E$, in double logarithmic scale, for the FPU–trajectory arising from the excitation of the first $s=4$ modes with initial conditions $Q_q(0)=A_q$ if $q=1,2,3,4$ and $Q_q(0)=0$ else, and system’s parameters as in Fig.\[fig:qexample\] for the $q$–torus solution. (b) Comparison of the normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa}$ versus $\kappa$ of the $q$–torus solution (blue) and the corresponding FPU–trajectory (orange) over a total integration time $T=10^6$. \[fig:dif\]](qtori5.eps "fig:")
A key feature, now, of the energy transfer process during the first stage of dynamics is the formation of well distinguished [*groups of modes*]{}. Besides the group ${\cal D}_0=\{1,2,3,4\}$, which shared the energy initially, by the time evolutions of the energies in Fig.\[fig:dif\] we clearly distinguish the groups ${\cal D}_1=\{5,6,7,8 \}$, ${\cal D}_2 =\{ 9,10,11,12 \}$ etc, or, in general, ${\cal D}_k=\{ks+1,\ldots, (k+1)s\}$. It is observed that, during this stage, for all modes $q$ in the same group ${\cal D}_k$, $k>0$ the quantity $\overline{E}_q/E$ grows in time by almost the same power–law, i.e. the energy spectra behave as $\overline{E}_q(t)/E\sim t^{c_q(k)}$, where the exponent is also almost constant within a group: $c_q(k)={3\over 2} k + \epsilon_q $, with $|\epsilon_q|<<1$ for all $q\in{\cal D}_k$.
As shown in section \[sequence\], the above groups ${\cal D}_k$ correspond exactly to the so-called ‘sequence of mode excitations’ associated with a $q$–torus construction via PL series with initial excitation ${\cal D}_0$. That is, [*the sequence of groups formed in the energy transfer process for a FPU-trajectory, during the ‘first stage of dynamics’, coincides with the formal ‘sequence of mode excitations’ appearing in the PL series construction of nearby $q$–tori with the same initial excitation ${\cal D}_0$*]{}.
It must be emphasized that, in the case of a FPU-trajectory, the separation of the modes into groups is a [*dynamical*]{} phenomenon related to the process of energy transfer. On the contrary, in the case of $q$–tori, the groups only concern a [*formal*]{} aspect of perturbation theory, as analyzed in section \[sequence\] below. The fact that the final groups defined in either case are the same, indicates some deeper connection between the $q$–torus solutions and the FPU–trajectories, whose evolution during the first stage of dynamics is integrable-like. Nevertheless, most FPU–trajectories enter eventually into the stage of approach to energy equipartition, whereby their time evolution is weakly chaotic, while the solutions lying on $q$–tori maintain their regular character at all times $t$.
The averaged normalized energy spectrum for the FPU–trajectory at the end of the first stage of dynamics appears to be stabilized to a form persisting for quite long times. This stabilized spectrum exhibits also an exponential profile, very similar to the $q$–torus profile shown in Fig.\[fig:qexample\](a). The two profiles are superposed in Fig.\[fig:dif\](b). We observe that the groups ${\cal D}_k$ are well distinguished in the spectrum of the FPU–trajectory, and they coincide with the ones of the $q$–torus solution. To the theoretical interpretation of the latter groups we now turn our attention.
Sequence of mode excitations {#sequence}
============================
It is well known that for some special choices of initial conditions, the resulting FPU–trajectories (in both the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ models) take place on lower dimensional invariant sub–manifolds of the FPU phase space. This is due to the existence of [*discrete symmetries*]{}, which give rise to explicit low–dimensional FPU solutions. An extensive study on such symmetries is made in [@chechin2005; @poggi1997; @rink2003] (in the latter such solutions are called ‘bushes of normal modes’). A particular case are [*periodic*]{} trajectories, arising from exciting only one of the modes $q_0=N/3$, $N/2$ or $2N/3$ in the $\beta$ model [@Pasta73] (see also [@chechin2005; @poggi1997]). Solutions like the above lead, by definition, to energy localization, since the energy remains always distributed among a small subset of modes.
On the other hand, as pointed out in the examples of the previous sections, energy localization occurs also for sets of initial conditions not obeying any obvious or simple symmetry. As in [@chrietal2010], we now study this phenomenon using the concept of [*propagation*]{} of some initial [*excitation*]{} in the PL series for low–dimensional tori. We can briefly state our main result as follows: through the study of propagation, we can define a hierarchy of groups of modes participating in a $q$–torus solution, such that all the modes in one group share a similar (in order of magnitude) amount of energy, while distinct groups share quite different amounts of energy. The hierarchy of these groups allows us to predict the whole localization profile via a leading order analysis of the associated PL series. However, as shown in the previous section, it also allows us to characterize the [*paths of energy transfer*]{} in $q$–space for FPU trajectories neighboring some $q$–torus solution, from an initial excitation up to the moment when a metastable profile is established for the FPU–trajectories (like in the example of Fig.\[fig:dif\](a)).
We start by the following formal definitions:\
\
[**Definition 1:**]{} A mode $q$ is said to be [*excited at the $n$–th order of the PL scheme*]{}, iff in the series (\[qser\]) it is $Q_q^{(k)}(t)=0$ for all $k<n$, and $Q_q^{(n)}(t)\neq 0$. In addition, $Q_q^{(n)}(t)$ is called [*leading order term*]{} of the series (\[qser\]).\
\
[**Definition 2:**]{} Let ${\cal D}_0$ be a set of modes excited at the zero order of the PL scheme according to Eqs.(\[qq0\]). The sequence of sets ${\cal D}_k$, $k=1,2,\ldots$, where ${\cal
D}_k$ consists of modes excited at the $k$–th order of the PL scheme, is called [*sequence of mode excitations*]{}.\
\
[**Definition 3:**]{} Let $k_0$ be a positive integer. We call [*tail modes*]{} with respect to $k_0$ the modes belonging to the set $\cup_{k\geq k_0} {\cal D}_k$. [^3]\
\
[**Definition 4:**]{} We call [*FPU–trajectory*]{} with initial excitation in the set of modes ${\cal D}_0\equiv\{ q_1,\ldots,q_s\}$ the trajectory resulting from the equations of motion (\[eqmo\]) for the set of initial conditions $Q_{q}(0)=A_{q}\cos\phi_{q}$, $P_{q}(0)=-A_{q}\Omega_q\sin\phi_{q}$, for some set of amplitudes $A_q$ and phases $\phi_q$, if $q\in{\cal D}_0$, and $Q_q(0)=P_q(0)=0$ if $q\notin{\cal D}_0$. [^4]\
In order to determine the sequence ${\cal D}_k$ produced by a particular initial excitation ${\cal D}_0$, we first define the set $$\begin{aligned}
\label{set}
\Sigma ^r= \{ -1,+1 \}^{r}~~~.\end{aligned}$$ The elements of $\Sigma ^r$ are $r$–dimensional vectors of the form $\sigma^{(r)} = (\sigma_1, \ldots, \sigma_r)$, where $\sigma_i =1$ or $-1$, $i=1, \ldots, r$. Furthermore, for an $r$–vector $x\equiv(x_1,\ldots,x_r)$ we define $\sigma^{(r)}
\cdot x$ as the Euclidean product $\sigma^{(r)} \cdot x = \sigma_1
x_1 + \ldots + \sigma_r x_r $. We can now prove the following\
\
[**Proposition:**]{} [*Let ${\cal D}_0=\{q_1,q_2,\ldots,q_s\}$, $1\leq q_1 < \ldots < q_s\leq N -1$ be the set of seed modes of an initial excitation yielding a formal PL solution associated with trajectories on an $s$–dimensional $q$–torus. Let $M_k$ be the set $$\begin{aligned}
\label{app}
M_k = \left\{ \Bigg| 2 \left[ \frac{\mid \sigma ^{(r)}
q^{(r)} \mid +N-1}{2N} \right] N - \mid \sigma ^{(r)} q^{(r)}
\mid \Bigg|
: \sigma^{(r)} \in \Sigma ^r,~~q^{(r)} \in {\cal D}_0^r
\right\}
\end{aligned}$$ where $r=r(k)$ with $r(k)=k+1$ for the FPU–$\alpha$ model and $r(k)=2k+1$ for the FPU–$\beta$ model. Then, the sequence of mode excitations ${\cal D}_k$ corresponding to the initial choice ${\cal D}_0$ is defined by the recursive relations $$\label{dk}
{\cal D}_k =M_k \setminus \bigcup_{0 \leq j \leq k-1}
{\cal D}_{j},~~k=1,2,\ldots$$* ]{}
An explicit proof of the above proposition is given in [@chrietal2010] for the FPU–$\beta$, and in \[AppB\] for the FPU–$\alpha$. We note that $\left[ \cdot \right]$ is the integer part of a number and $M_k$ represents the set of all modes for which the right hand side of Eqs. (\[moda\]) and (\[modb\]) is non–zero, i.e. the modes yielding some non–zero contribution to the energy spectrum up to the $k$–th order of the PL series (some modes excited at previous orders up to $k$ might also belong to $M_k$).
Some examples clarify the use of Eq.(\[dk\]):\
i) [*q–breathers*]{}: If we choose ${\cal D}_0 = \{q_0\}$, the so–induced PL solution corresponds to a one–dimensional torus, i.e. a periodic orbit. In this case we find: $$\label{qbre}
{\cal D}_k=\{q_k\}~\mbox{with}~
q_k= \Bigg| 2 \left[ \frac{r q_0+N-1}{2N} \right]
N - r q_0 \Bigg|,$$ where $r(k)=k+1$ in the FPU–$\alpha$, or $r(k)=2k+1$ in the FPU–$\beta$. This rule coincides with the one given in [@flachtiz] for an arbitrary seed mode $q_0$. From Eq. (\[qbre\]) we readily find that, if $q_0$ is even, only even modes become excited at subsequent orders in both the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ models. On the other hand, if $q_0$ is odd, in the $\alpha$ model both odd and even modes become excited, while in the $\beta$ model only odd modes become excited. The localization properties of solutions corresponding to $q$–breather excitations will be discussed in detail in Section \[trajbreath\] below.\
ii) [*Example with two seed modes:*]{} Suppose ${\cal D}_0 =
\{q_1,q_2\} = \{3,5\}$ for $N$ large in FPU–$\alpha$. At first order ($k=1$) it is $r(1)=2$. In order to determine $M_1$, we consider all possible combinations of the symbols $\sigma^{(2)}
\in \Sigma ^2$ and $q^{(2)} \in {\cal D}_0^2$. These are $\{(1,1),(1,-1),(-1,1),(-1,-1)\}$ and $\{(3,3),(3,5),(5,3),(5,5)\}$ respectively. Then from Eq.(\[app\]) we find $M_1 = \{ 2,3,5,6,8,10 \}$. Since ${\cal
D}_0 = \{ 3, 5 \}$, from Eq.(\[dk\]) we have ${\cal D}_1 = M_1
\setminus {\cal D}_0 = \{ 2,6,8,10 \}$. Repeating the above procedure for $k=2$, we find $M_2= \{ 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 \}$ and ${\cal D}_2 = M_2 \setminus {\cal D}_0\cup {\cal D}_1 = \{ 1,
7, 9, 11, 13, 15 \}$. In the same way we proceed to subsequent orders $k=3,4,\ldots$ In the FPU–$\beta$ one follows the same steps, but for $r(k)=2k+1$.\
iii) [*Excitation representing a low–frequency packet of seed modes*]{}: Let us consider as an initial excitation the packet of modes ${\cal D}_0 = \{ 1,2,3,4 \}$ for $N$ large. Following the same procedure as above, in the FPU–$\alpha$ we find the sequence of excitations ${\cal D}_1 = \{ 5,6,7,8 \}$, ${\cal D}_2 = \{ 9,10,11,12 \}$, etc. We notice that at each order modes are excited [*in groups*]{}. In the same way, the $\beta$ model yields ${\cal D}_1
= \{5,\ldots,12 \}$, ${\cal D}_2 = \{ 13,\ldots,20\}$, etc.
These propagation rules can be generalized for $s$–dimensional $q$–tori corresponding to low–frequency packets of modes. The seed mode excitation ${\cal D}_0 = \{1,2,\ldots,s\}$ generates ${\cal
D}_k=\{ks+1,\ldots, (k+1)s\}$ in the FPU–$\alpha$, and ${\cal
D}_k=\{(2k-1)s+1,\ldots, (2k+1)s\}$ in the FPU–$\beta$, with $k\geq 1$. Furthermore, we observe that ${\cal D}_k^{\beta } =
{\cal D}_{2k-1}^{\alpha } \cup {\cal D}_{2k}^{\alpha }$. As shown in the next subsection, these rules imply that the resulting $q$–tori solutions exhibit [*exponential energy localization profiles*]{}.\
iv) [*Excitation representing a high–frequency packet of seed modes*]{}: As an example, let us consider ${\cal D}_0
=\{28,29,30,31\}$ in the $N=32$ dimensional chain. In the FPU–$\alpha$ we find ${\cal D}_1 =\{1,\ldots,8\}$, then ${\cal
D}_2 =\{ 20,\ldots,27\}$, etc. The general rule, by setting the last $s$ modes ${\cal D}_0 = \{N-s,\ldots,N-1\}$ as seed modes, is: ${\cal D}_k=\{(k-1)s+1,\ldots, (k+1)s\}$, if $k=2n+1$ and ${\cal
D}_k=\{N-(k+1)s,\ldots, N-(k-1)s-1\}$, if $k=2n$. By the same way, in the FPU–$\beta$ we find ${\cal D}_k=\{N-(k+1)s,\ldots,
N-(k-1)s-1\}$, $\forall k$. Comparing the two models, we see that ${\cal D}_k^{\beta } = {\cal D}_{2k}^{\alpha }$.\
v) [*Discrete symmetry solutions:*]{} Suppose ${\cal D}_0 =
\{N/2\}$, or ${\cal D}_0 = \{2N/3\}$. We then find ${\cal D}_k=
{\cal D}_0$ for all $k=1,2,\ldots$ in both models, while in FPU–$\beta$ the condition ${\cal D}_k= {\cal D}_0$ holds also for ${\cal D}_0 = \{N/3\}$. The $q$–breather solutions for these cases correspond to the ‘nonlinear normal modes’ of the FPU system [@Pasta73; @chechin2005; @poggi1997], that coincide with the FPU–trajectories resulting from the same seed mode.\
We note finally, that for $q$–breathers we have a general relation connecting the sequences of excitations ${\cal D}_k$ in the $\alpha$ and in the $\beta$ model, starting from the same seed mode. Namely, from Eq.(\[qbre\]) we find that ${\cal
D}_k^{\beta} = {\cal D}_{2k}^{\alpha}$. In words, the mode excited at the $k$–th order in the FPU–$\beta $ is the same as the mode excited at the $2k$–th order in the FPU–$\alpha$. This relation holds also for excitations of small packets around $N/4$, $N/2$ and $3N/4$, but it does not hold in the case (iii) (low-frequency packets of modes). In fact, for an arbitrary excitation we have $M^{\alpha }_{2k}
=M^{\beta }_{k} $, but we only have ${\cal D}_k^{\beta } = {\cal
D}_{2k}^{\alpha}$ provided that $M^{\alpha }_{2k-1} \cap
M^{\alpha }_{2k} = \emptyset$.
Numerical examples. Localization profiles {#numqtor}
=========================================
In this section we provide various numerical tests on the energy profiles and dynamics of the $q$–tori and their neighboring FPU–trajectories. We are interested to examine several generic localizations profiles, rising by the excitation of arbitrary modes, consecutive or isolated, that form different localization patterns in $q$–space. In particular, we derive the precise sequence of modes that become excited in subsequent orders by $s$ consecutive modes, chosen to be in the i) beginning, ii) one fourth, iii) middle and iv) three fourths of the spectrum, while in case i) we predict the localization law of the energy profile. Finally, few examples on $q$–breathers, as particular cases of one dimensional $q$–tori, are given.
The frequencies and amplitudes used throughout all examples below are listed in \[AppF\].
$q$–Tori low frequency packet solutions and exponential energy localization {#lowfreqmod}
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FPU–trajectory examined in Section \[4toros\] is an example of a class of solutions of particular interest in the literature (see [@benetal2011; @beretal2004; @beretal2005; @deletal1999]), namely solutions corresponding to the initial excitation of a [*packet*]{} of low–frequency modes. In fact, it is numerically found that, for values of the specific energy beyond some threshold, low–frequency packets of modes are formed naturally, even if initially we excite only [*one*]{}, e.g. the $q=1$ mode. Some questions of central interest in the literature concern the dependence of: i) the width of natural packets and ii) the exponential slope of the energy spectrum of the remaining modes, on system’s parameters $E$, $N$ etc (see [@lichetal2008] for a review).
In the sequel we examine the form of localization profiles for $q$–torus solutions associated with an initial excitation of a low–frequency packet of modes. We obtain theoretical results based on a leading order term analysis of the PL series for $q$–tori (see \[leading\]). Furthermore, we compare these results with ones found numerically for FPU–trajectories with a similar initial excitation.
### FPU–$\alpha$ model {#acaseqtor}
Our main result for the FPU–$\alpha$ can be stated as follows: in Section \[sequence\] it was mentioned that, for $q$–tori, an initial excitation ${\cal D}_0=\{ 1,2,\ldots ,s\}$ in the PL series leads to the sequence of mode excitations ${\cal D}_k=\{ks+1,\ldots,(k+1)s\}$. Starting, now, from the median mode in the group ${\cal D}_k$, i.e. the mode $q_{mid}=ks+[{s}/{2}]$, we can obtain estimates of the size of the leading term $Q_{q_{mid}}^{(k)}$ given by Eq.(\[Qqkr\]) and derive estimates on the magnitude of the harmonic energy $E_{q_{mid}}^{(k)}$, which is hereafter denoted by $E^{(k)}$. Then, we find: $$\label{eksa}
E^{(k)} \simeq \frac{(k+1/2)^2 \varepsilon}{M}
\left(\frac{\alpha^2 N^4 \varepsilon}{\pi^4 s^4} \right)^k$$ where $M=s/N$ is the fraction of initially excited modes with respect to the total number of modes. The derivation of Eq. (\[eksa\]) is given in \[AppE\].
![\[fig:atori\] Normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa}$ versus $\kappa$ for FPU–trajectories (orange spheres) in both the FPU–$\alpha$ and FPU–$\beta$ models, keeping the specific energy $\varepsilon$ and the ratio of initially excited modes $M$ fixed. The parameters are: (a) FPU–$\alpha$ model with $\alpha=0.33$, $M=1/8$, $\varepsilon=1.5625 \times 10^{-8}$. (b) FPU–$\beta$ model with $\beta=0.3$, $M=1/16$ and $\varepsilon=1.5625 \times 10^{-6}$. In (a), the blue line in all panels corresponds to the theoretical prediction of Eq.(\[eksa2\]) based on the leading order term analysis for $q$–tori. This is given by $\log e_{\kappa }=-56.27\kappa +4.46+2\log
\kappa $. In (b) the blue line corresponds to a similar prediction for the FPU–$\beta$, given by Eq.(\[eksp2\]). We find $\log e_{\kappa }
=-78.64\kappa -1.204$.](a_tori.eps "fig:") ![\[fig:atori\] Normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa}$ versus $\kappa$ for FPU–trajectories (orange spheres) in both the FPU–$\alpha$ and FPU–$\beta$ models, keeping the specific energy $\varepsilon$ and the ratio of initially excited modes $M$ fixed. The parameters are: (a) FPU–$\alpha$ model with $\alpha=0.33$, $M=1/8$, $\varepsilon=1.5625 \times 10^{-8}$. (b) FPU–$\beta$ model with $\beta=0.3$, $M=1/16$ and $\varepsilon=1.5625 \times 10^{-6}$. In (a), the blue line in all panels corresponds to the theoretical prediction of Eq.(\[eksa2\]) based on the leading order term analysis for $q$–tori. This is given by $\log e_{\kappa }=-56.27\kappa +4.46+2\log
\kappa $. In (b) the blue line corresponds to a similar prediction for the FPU–$\beta$, given by Eq.(\[eksp2\]). We find $\log e_{\kappa }
=-78.64\kappa -1.204$.](b_tori.eps "fig:")
Normalizing Eq.(\[eksa\]) we obtain an equivalent expression for $e_{\kappa } = E^{(k)} / E$ $$\label{eksa2}
\log e_{\kappa } \simeq \frac{\log \lambda}{M} \kappa +2 \log \kappa
- \log ( \lambda^{1/2} M^3 N)$$ where $\kappa =q/N$ is re–scaled wavenumber and $\lambda = \alpha^2 \varepsilon/\pi^4 M^4$. The main prediction is that if $\alpha, \varepsilon$, and the fraction $M=s/N$ are kept fixed, [*the normalized energy profiles of $q$–tori remain unaltered as $N$ increases.*]{}
This prediction becomes hardly possible to test by a direct construction of the $q$–tori solutions via PL series, because as $N$ increases, we quite soon encounter the limits of computer memory required for storing the coefficients produced by the computer–algebraic program. However, taking into account the evidence presented in subsection \[fputra\], that FPU–trajectories with the same initial excitations as $q$–tori exhibit similar localization profiles, we can test numerically the extent up to which the invariance of the averaged normalized energy spectrum holds, at least for FPU–trajectories.
Such a test is made in Fig.\[fig:atori\]. In (a) we give the normalized averaged energy spectrum $e_{\kappa }$ as a function of the re–scaled wavenumber $\kappa =q/N$ for an FPU–trajectory of $\alpha=0.33$, $M=1/8$, and $\varepsilon = 1.5625 \times 10^{-8}$. We computed these trajectories by progressively increasing $N$, namely $N=64$, $128$, $256$ and $512$. The energy spectra of Fig.\[fig:atori\] are all evaluated at $T=10^6$. The solid line corresponds to the fitting law of Eq. (\[eksa2\]), which, for the adopted parameters, takes the form indicated in the figure caption. The main remark is that [*the same*]{} line fits all re–scaled normalized spectra, for different $N$ (while the fraction of initially excited modes $M=1/8$ as well as the specific energy $\varepsilon = 1.5625 \times 10^{-8}$ are kept constant).
A relevant question of central interest regards the upper limit in the specific energy for which the normalized spectra for the FPU–trajectories continue to exhibit exponential localization. Eq.(\[eksa\]) allows us to obtain an upper limit, by requiring that $\lambda=\alpha^2\varepsilon/\pi^4 M^4<1$. However, as we approach the upper limit $\varepsilon=\pi^4M^4/\alpha^2$, the analysis based on only the leading order terms of the PL series ceases to be valid, since important contributions to the energy spectrum are made also by the higher order terms in each mode’s series expansion of Eq.(\[qser\]).
The condition $\lambda<1$ implies $s>\alpha^{1/2}\varepsilon^{1/4}N$. Thus Eq.(\[eksa\]) applies when the initially excited packet has a width larger than the width of the so–called natural packets [@benetal2011; @beretal2004; @beretal2005]. In the case of natural packets, it is found that by the excitation of a number of low frequency modes satisfying $s<\alpha^{1/2}\varepsilon^{1/4}N$, the so resulting energy spectrum exhibits a plateau of width $\alpha^{1/2}\varepsilon^{1/4}N$ (larger than the initially excited modes). Furthermore, there is evidence that the slope $\tilde{\sigma} $ of the exponential energy localization profile $e_{\kappa } \sim \exp(- \tilde{\sigma} \cdot \kappa )$ depends linearly on $\alpha^{-1/2}\varepsilon^{-1/4}$ [@ponbam2005]. This is in contrast to the slope which refers to $q$–tori solutions of Eq.(\[eksa\]), that depends logarithmically on $[\alpha^{-1/2}\varepsilon^{-1/4}]^{-4}$ and points out that [*different choices in the fraction of the initially excited low–frequency modes result in different exponential laws*]{}.
### FPU–$\beta$ model {#bcaseqtor}
For the sake of completeness we report the results of our previous work [@chrietal2010], concerning exponential energy localization in the FPU–$\beta$ model. Assuming the initial excitation to be ${\cal D}_0=\{1,2,\ldots,s\}$, the sequence of mode excitations in the PL series at the orders $k=1,2,
\ldots$ is ${\cal D}_k=\{(2k-1)s+1,\ldots,(2k+1)s\}$. Estimating the size of the median mode $q_{mid,k} =2ks$ in each group ${\cal D}_k$ via Eq.(\[Qqkr\]), we are lead to an estimate for the energy spectra of $q$–tori with the above excitation, namely $$\label{eksp}
E^{(k)} \simeq {\varepsilon \over M}
\left({ \beta^2\varepsilon^2\over \pi^4M^4}\right)^k~~$$ where $M=s/N$. Using re-scaled variables as in the $\alpha $ case, Eq.(\[eksp\]) takes the form $$\label{eksp2}
\log e_{\kappa }\simeq\frac{\log\lambda}{M}\kappa -\log s$$ where $\lambda={\beta\varepsilon/\pi^2M^2}$. We find a similar result as in the $\alpha$ case, namely Eq.(\[eksp2\]) implies that by keeping both the specific energy $\varepsilon$ and the fraction of excited modes $M$ fixed, while $N$ increases, the normalized exponential profile remains invariant. Again, in order that the analysis be valid, one must have $s>N(\beta\varepsilon)^{1/2}$, implying that the initial excitation should be in a regime quite different from that of natural packets. In fact, in the present case as well, Eq.(\[eksp2\]) describes correctly the localization profile provided that $\lambda<<1$ (see also [@chrietal2010]).
As a numerical test of the above predictions we use again numerical computations based on FPU–trajectories rather than exact $q$–tori solutions. The four panels of Fig.\[fig:atori\](b) show the normalized averaged spectra $e_{\kappa }$ of FPU–trajectories, along with the predictions of Eq.(\[eksp2\]), for the fixed values $M=s/N=1/16$, and $\varepsilon=1.5625 \cdot 10^{-6}$. We observe again that the spectrum remains practically invariant with increasing $N$.
Localization patterns for arbitrary initial excitations {#patternqtor}
-------------------------------------------------------
So far, we focused on $q$–tori, and their neighboring FPU–trajectories corresponding to initial excitations in the low–frequency part of the spectrum. However, it is possible to see that energy localization appears also in cases where the initial excitation has quite different features than in the case of packets of low–frequency modes. In particular, we will examine now $q$–tori solutions in the FPU–$\alpha$ system produced by an initial excitation ${\cal D}_0$ consisting of a small set of $s$ modes [*arbitrarily distributed*]{} in $q$–space. We give several such examples, in which we vary $s$, $N$, $E$, as well as ${\cal D}_0$. As in the example of Fig.\[fig:qexample\](a), in all present cases we compare the averaged normalized energy spectra $e_{\kappa }^{PL}$ obtained with the PL series, with the ones $e_{\kappa}^{PLn}$ obtained by numerical integration of the equations of motion for the initial conditions $Q_q ^{PL}(0)$, $P_q^{PL}(0)$, $q=1,\ldots,N-1$.\
![Normalized averaged energy spectra $E_q$ versus $q$, deduced by the PL series $q$–torus solution (blue spheres), or a numerical integration (PLn) with initial conditions on a $q$–torus (orange triangles, see text). (a) $N=32$, $\alpha =0.33$, ${\cal D}_0 = \{1,11,21,31\}$, (b) $N=64$, $\alpha=1$ with ${\cal D}_0 = \{60,61,62,63\}$. (c) $N=128$, $\alpha=1$ with ${\cal D}_0 = \{63,64,65 \}$. (d) $N=128$, $\alpha=1$ and ${\cal D}_0 = \{94,95,96,97,98\}$. The chosen frequency values, and resulting amplitudes and energies in each case are given in \[AppF\]. \[fig:nnn\] ](qtori2.eps "fig:") ![Normalized averaged energy spectra $E_q$ versus $q$, deduced by the PL series $q$–torus solution (blue spheres), or a numerical integration (PLn) with initial conditions on a $q$–torus (orange triangles, see text). (a) $N=32$, $\alpha =0.33$, ${\cal D}_0 = \{1,11,21,31\}$, (b) $N=64$, $\alpha=1$ with ${\cal D}_0 = \{60,61,62,63\}$. (c) $N=128$, $\alpha=1$ with ${\cal D}_0 = \{63,64,65 \}$. (d) $N=128$, $\alpha=1$ and ${\cal D}_0 = \{94,95,96,97,98\}$. The chosen frequency values, and resulting amplitudes and energies in each case are given in \[AppF\]. \[fig:nnn\] ](60-61-62-63.eps "fig:")\
![Normalized averaged energy spectra $E_q$ versus $q$, deduced by the PL series $q$–torus solution (blue spheres), or a numerical integration (PLn) with initial conditions on a $q$–torus (orange triangles, see text). (a) $N=32$, $\alpha =0.33$, ${\cal D}_0 = \{1,11,21,31\}$, (b) $N=64$, $\alpha=1$ with ${\cal D}_0 = \{60,61,62,63\}$. (c) $N=128$, $\alpha=1$ with ${\cal D}_0 = \{63,64,65 \}$. (d) $N=128$, $\alpha=1$ and ${\cal D}_0 = \{94,95,96,97,98\}$. The chosen frequency values, and resulting amplitudes and energies in each case are given in \[AppF\]. \[fig:nnn\] ](63-64-65.eps "fig:") ![Normalized averaged energy spectra $E_q$ versus $q$, deduced by the PL series $q$–torus solution (blue spheres), or a numerical integration (PLn) with initial conditions on a $q$–torus (orange triangles, see text). (a) $N=32$, $\alpha =0.33$, ${\cal D}_0 = \{1,11,21,31\}$, (b) $N=64$, $\alpha=1$ with ${\cal D}_0 = \{60,61,62,63\}$. (c) $N=128$, $\alpha=1$ with ${\cal D}_0 = \{63,64,65 \}$. (d) $N=128$, $\alpha=1$ and ${\cal D}_0 = \{94,95,96,97,98\}$. The chosen frequency values, and resulting amplitudes and energies in each case are given in \[AppF\]. \[fig:nnn\] ](94-98.eps "fig:")
[*Example 1: evenly distributed initial excitation.*]{} In the FPU–$\alpha$ with $N=32$, we construct a $q$–torus PL series starting from the 0–th order excitation ${\cal D}_0 = \{1,11,21,31\}$, when the frequency values for $\omega_1 $, $\omega_{11} $, $\omega_{21}
$, $\omega_{31} $ are chosen as in the second group of \[AppF\]. The truncation order here is $k_0=11$. Solving numerically Eqs.(\[omeser\]) we specify the values of the amplitudes $A_1$, $A_{11}
$, $A_{21} $ and $A_{31}$. The total energy is $E=0.001563$.
Fig.\[fig:nnn\](a) shows the averaged normalized energy spectrum for the above $q$–torus solution. Energy localization is manifestly present, since we observe the formation of four peaks of the energy spectrum around the seed modes 1,11,21 and 31. The localization pattern is readily understood by computing the sequence of mode excitations ${\cal D}_k$ deduced by the proposition of Section \[sequence\]. Namely, we find ${\cal D}_1 =\{2,10,12,20,22,30\}$, ${\cal D}_2 = \{3,9,13,19,23,29 \}$, ${\cal D}_3 = \{ 4,8,14,18,24,28 \}$, ${\cal D}_4 = \{5,7,15,17,25,27 \}$ etc. We observe that consecutive modes, adjacent (on either side) to the initially excited ones, are excited at subsequent orders of perturbation theory. Thus, starting for example from the mode $q=11$, the modes $q=10,12$ are excited at first order, $q=9,13$ at second order, etc. This explains the formation of the peaks in the spectrum. In fact, the pairs $\{10,12\}$, $\{9,13 \}$, etc. share quite similar energies, corresponding to excitation amplitudes $O(\mu)$, $O(\mu^2)$, $\ldots$ As a result, the local form of the energy spectrum on either side of one peak is exponential.
Finally, as evident in Fig.\[fig:nnn\](a), we find a very precise agreement between the normalized spectrum corresponding to the analytical solution $Q_{q }^{PL}(t)$, and the one $Q_{q}^{PLn}(t)$ obtained by numerical integration of the initial conditions on the $q$–torus. This fact indicates that at the truncation order $k_0=11$ the solution has converged to a good accuracy.\
[*Example 2: initial excitation in the high–frequency part of the spectrum.*]{} We consider a $q$–torus solution found by PL series in the case $N=64$, $\alpha=1$, when ${\cal D}_0 = \{60,61,62,63\}$, while the choice in the frequencies and the resulting amplitudes are shown in the third group of \[AppF\]. The truncation order of the series is $k_0=8$ and the energy is $E = 0.000883$.
Fig.\[fig:nnn\](b) shows the resulting averaged normalized energy spectrum for the above $q$–torus solution. This displays several features similar to the case of a low–frequency excitation. Namely, we observe the formation of groups of consecutive modes sharing a similar amount of energy. The sequence of mode excitations in this case turns out to be ${\cal D}_1=\{1,\ldots, 8\}$, ${\cal D}_2=\{52,\ldots, 59\}$, ${\cal D}_3=\{9,\ldots, 16\}$, ${\cal D}_4=\{44,\ldots, 51\}$, etc.
Finally, we note again the exponential fall of the energy along two separate branches of the spectrum, namely a low–frequency and a high–frequency branch.\
[*Example 3: excitation in the middle part of the spectrum.*]{} We consider the middle modes initial excitation ${\cal D}_0 =
\{63,64,65 \}$ in the FPU–$\alpha$ with $\alpha=1$, $N=128$, and with frequencies and amplitudes displayed in the fourth group of \[AppF\]. The PL series are truncated at $k_0=16$ and the energy of the system is $E=7.63469\times 10^{-5}$.
In the averaged normalized energy spectrum $E_{q }^{PL}/E$ (Fig.\[fig:nnn\](c)) we observe that three energy peaks are formed: by the lowest, the highest and the middle modes. The spectrum of our numerical solution $E_{q }^{PLn}/E$ follows $E_{q }^{PL}/E$ until values of the order $10^{-60}$. We find that the sequence of mode excitations here is ${\cal D}_1 = \{ 1,2, 126,127 \}$, ${\cal D}_2 = \{ 61,62,66,67\}$, ${\cal D}_3 = \{ 3,4,124,125 \}$, ${\cal D}_4 = \{ 59, 60, 68,69 \}$, etc.\
[*Example 4: excitation in the 3/4 part of the spectrum.*]{} We consider, as before, $N=128$, $\alpha =1$, and an initial excitation ${\cal D}_0=\{94,95,96,$ $97,98\}$. The chosen frequency values and the so–resulting amplitudes are shown in the fifth group of \[AppF\]. The truncation order is $k_0=9$ and the energy is $E=0.000649478$.
At subsequent orders, we now find the sequence of mode excitations ${\cal D}_1=\{1,2,3,4 \}\cup\{60,\ldots,68\}$, ${\cal D}_2=\{ 26,\ldots
,38\}\cup\{90,\ldots ,93\}\cup\{99,\ldots,102\}$, ${\cal D}_3=\{5,\ldots,8 \}\cup\{56,\ldots ,72\}\cup
\{120,\ldots,127\}$, ${\cal D}_4=\{22,\ldots ,25 \} \cup
\{39,\ldots,42\}$ $\cup\{86,\ldots ,89\}\cup [103,\ldots ,106
\}$, etc. This leads to the localization pattern shown in Fig.\[fig:nnn\](d).\
![Propagation of modes for an initial excitation ${\cal D}_0 =
[\kappa _0 - \epsilon , \kappa _0 + \epsilon]$ when (a) $\kappa _0 =1/4$, (b) $\kappa _0=1/2$ and (c) $\kappa _0 = 3/4$. In all panels, the ordinate yields the order $k$ of perturbation theory at which the (re–scaled) mode $\kappa =q/N$ is first excited. Since in the exponential energy localization regime we always have $\log e_\kappa \sim \kappa $, the patterns shown in the present panels are similar to the energy spectra for the same excitations plotted in semi–logarithmic scale. \[fig:promod\] ](1_4.eps "fig:") ![Propagation of modes for an initial excitation ${\cal D}_0 =
[\kappa _0 - \epsilon , \kappa _0 + \epsilon]$ when (a) $\kappa _0 =1/4$, (b) $\kappa _0=1/2$ and (c) $\kappa _0 = 3/4$. In all panels, the ordinate yields the order $k$ of perturbation theory at which the (re–scaled) mode $\kappa =q/N$ is first excited. Since in the exponential energy localization regime we always have $\log e_\kappa \sim \kappa $, the patterns shown in the present panels are similar to the energy spectra for the same excitations plotted in semi–logarithmic scale. \[fig:promod\] ](1_2.eps "fig:") ![Propagation of modes for an initial excitation ${\cal D}_0 =
[\kappa _0 - \epsilon , \kappa _0 + \epsilon]$ when (a) $\kappa _0 =1/4$, (b) $\kappa _0=1/2$ and (c) $\kappa _0 = 3/4$. In all panels, the ordinate yields the order $k$ of perturbation theory at which the (re–scaled) mode $\kappa =q/N$ is first excited. Since in the exponential energy localization regime we always have $\log e_\kappa \sim \kappa $, the patterns shown in the present panels are similar to the energy spectra for the same excitations plotted in semi–logarithmic scale. \[fig:promod\] ](3_4.eps "fig:")
Patterns from generalized packet excitation {#general}
-------------------------------------------
We now generalize results on the localization patterns formed by initial excitations of packets of arbitrary width, around the locations in $q$–space corresponding the one fourth, half and three thirds of the spectrum. We suppose that each packet is of the form ${\cal D}_0 = [\kappa_0 -
\epsilon , \kappa_0 + \epsilon]$, having a width equal to $s/N=2\epsilon $, $\epsilon<<1$ in the normalized $q$–space $\kappa =q/N\in[0,1]$. In order to specify the sequence of mode excitations ${\cal D}_k$ at subsequent orders, we first specify the sets $M_k$ defined in Eq.(\[app\]), whereby the sets ${\cal D}_k$ are immediately derived by the relation ${\cal D}_k =M_k \setminus
\cup_{0 \leq j \leq k-1}M_j$. Examining in detail the case of excitations around the re–scaled wavenumbers $\kappa_0=1/4$, $1/2$, or $3/4$ we have:
1\) For $\kappa_0 = 1/4$ we find $M_k = [0, \epsilon (k+1)] \cup [1/2 - \epsilon (k+1),
1/2 + \epsilon (k+1) ] \cup [1-\epsilon (k+1),1] $, if $k=2n+1$ and $k>1$, or $M_k = [1/4 - \epsilon (k+1), 1/4 + \epsilon (k+1)]
\cup [3/4 - \epsilon (k+1), 3/4 + \epsilon (k+1) ]$, if $k=2n$. Only the case of $k=1$ differs, for which it turns out that $M_1=
[0, 2\epsilon] \cup [1/2 - 2\epsilon, 1/2 + 2 \epsilon ]$, i.e. the last modes are not yet excited. The resulting localization pattern displays three peaks around $\kappa=0$, $1/2$, and $1$, produced at odd orders, and two peaks around $1/4$ and $3/4$, produced at even orders. The total pattern is shown in Fig.\[fig:promod\](a). In this figure, the ordinate in all panels indicates the order $k$ of the PL series at which the corresponding mode, of wavenumber $\kappa=q/N$, is first excited. In fact, according to the leading order term analysis of the PL series discussed above we have $\log e_\kappa\sim\kappa$. Thus, the patterns shown in all panels of Fig.\[fig:promod\] are similar to the averaged normalized energy spectra for the corresponding excitations when plotted in semi–logarithmic scale.
2\) For $\kappa_0=1/2$ we find $M_k=[0, \epsilon (k+1)] \cup [1-\epsilon
(k+1),1]$, if $k=2n+1$, or $M_k=[1/2-\epsilon (k+1),1/2+\epsilon (k+1)]$, if $k=2n$. Thus, we have two localization peaks around $\kappa=0$ and $\kappa=1$ created by contributions at odd orders of the PL series, and one more peak around $\kappa=1/2$ for contributions at even orders. The overall localization pattern is shown in Fig.\[fig:promod\](b).
3\) For $\kappa_0=3/4$ we find similar results as in case (1), i.e. $M_1$ is $[0, 2\epsilon] \cup [1/2 - 2\epsilon, 1/2 + 2 \epsilon ]$ and then $M_k = [0, \epsilon (k+1)] \cup [1/2 - \epsilon (k+1),
1/2 + \epsilon (k+1) ] \cup [1-\epsilon (k+1),1] $, if $k=2n+1$ and $k>1$, and $M_k = [1/4 - \epsilon (k+1), 1/4 + \epsilon (k+1)]
\cup [3/4 - \epsilon (k+1), 3/4 + \epsilon (k+1) ] $, if $k=2n$. In fact, the only difference with respect to case (1) concerns the initial excitation at the order $k=0$. The resulting localization pattern is shown in Fig.\[fig:promod\](c).
$q$–breathers and FPU–trajectories {#trajbreath}
----------------------------------
The existence, stability, and energy localization properties of $q$–breathers were studied extensively in [@flaetal2005]–[@flachtiz], [@flaetal2006b], [@kanetal2007]. It was found that $q$–breathers have quite similar energy localization profiles as their nearby FPU–trajectories. Furthermore, the $q$–breathers are periodic orbits whose existence, for an arbitrarily high energy, is guaranteed by the Lyapunov’s theorem. Therefore, their existence extends well beyond the domain of convergence of their associated PL series.
However, the PL series can still be quite useful in studying analytically some properties of $q$–breathers. In the sequel we examine $q$–breathers as a particular case of one–dimensional $q$–tori. A computational advantage is that, at any fixed order $k$, the number of terms in the resulting series is substantially smaller for $q$–breathers than for $q$–tori of any other dimension $s>1$. This fact allows us to construct the series up to a very high order (in the case $N=32$ we were able to compute examples of PL series for $q$–breathers up to the truncation order $k_0=250$). Even so, the convergence of the resulting series is very slow, and in practice we obtain little gain in precision after a truncation order near $k_0=50$. In most of our trial examples, the precision achieved for the computation of initial conditions on a $q$–breather using PL series is 4 to 6 significant digits, while in some cases we reach 10 significant digits. However, using these numbers as [*initial guess*]{}, we are able to determine many more via a root–finding technique. Let us note that a root-finding determination is possible only in the case of $q$–breathers, which are periodic orbits, while we cannot use such technique in the case of $q$–tori of dimension higher than one.
### The breather $q=1$ {#q1breather}
![ FPU–$\alpha $ system with $\alpha =0.33$, $N=32$ and $E=0.00016635$. In Panels (a), (b) and (c) is shown the evolution of the normalized instantaneous spectra $E_q(t)/E$ of modes $q=1,\ldots ,8$ for the PL solution, the numerical integration of FPU–dynamics for the same initial conditions with (a) and for the FPU–trajectory with seed mode $q =1$, respectively (the energy $E_q$ has the highest value for $q =1$ and it progressively decreases for $q=2,3,\dots$). In panel (d) is the exponential profile of the normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa }$ versus $\kappa $ of panel (a) with blue spheres, of (b) with orange triangles, of (c) with green triangles, as well as the $q$–breather found by Newton–Raphson (NR) with black spheres. The continuous line is the fitting law (\[brelaw\]). \[fig:qbreath2\] ](q1PL.eps "fig:") ![ FPU–$\alpha $ system with $\alpha =0.33$, $N=32$ and $E=0.00016635$. In Panels (a), (b) and (c) is shown the evolution of the normalized instantaneous spectra $E_q(t)/E$ of modes $q=1,\ldots ,8$ for the PL solution, the numerical integration of FPU–dynamics for the same initial conditions with (a) and for the FPU–trajectory with seed mode $q =1$, respectively (the energy $E_q$ has the highest value for $q =1$ and it progressively decreases for $q=2,3,\dots$). In panel (d) is the exponential profile of the normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa }$ versus $\kappa $ of panel (a) with blue spheres, of (b) with orange triangles, of (c) with green triangles, as well as the $q$–breather found by Newton–Raphson (NR) with black spheres. The continuous line is the fitting law (\[brelaw\]). \[fig:qbreath2\] ](q1FPU.eps "fig:")\
![ FPU–$\alpha $ system with $\alpha =0.33$, $N=32$ and $E=0.00016635$. In Panels (a), (b) and (c) is shown the evolution of the normalized instantaneous spectra $E_q(t)/E$ of modes $q=1,\ldots ,8$ for the PL solution, the numerical integration of FPU–dynamics for the same initial conditions with (a) and for the FPU–trajectory with seed mode $q =1$, respectively (the energy $E_q$ has the highest value for $q =1$ and it progressively decreases for $q=2,3,\dots$). In panel (d) is the exponential profile of the normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa }$ versus $\kappa $ of panel (a) with blue spheres, of (b) with orange triangles, of (c) with green triangles, as well as the $q$–breather found by Newton–Raphson (NR) with black spheres. The continuous line is the fitting law (\[brelaw\]). \[fig:qbreath2\] ](q1tra.eps "fig:") ![ FPU–$\alpha $ system with $\alpha =0.33$, $N=32$ and $E=0.00016635$. In Panels (a), (b) and (c) is shown the evolution of the normalized instantaneous spectra $E_q(t)/E$ of modes $q=1,\ldots ,8$ for the PL solution, the numerical integration of FPU–dynamics for the same initial conditions with (a) and for the FPU–trajectory with seed mode $q =1$, respectively (the energy $E_q$ has the highest value for $q =1$ and it progressively decreases for $q=2,3,\dots$). In panel (d) is the exponential profile of the normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa }$ versus $\kappa $ of panel (a) with blue spheres, of (b) with orange triangles, of (c) with green triangles, as well as the $q$–breather found by Newton–Raphson (NR) with black spheres. The continuous line is the fitting law (\[brelaw\]). \[fig:qbreath2\] ](q=1_success.eps "fig:")
As a first example, we consider the construction of a $q$–breather with ‘seed mode’ $q_0=1$. The sequence of mode excitations here is $q_k=k+1$. Fig.\[fig:qbreath2\] refers to a calculation for $N=32$, $\alpha =0.33$ and $E=0.00016635$, for the truncation order $k_0=51$. The choice of $\omega_1$, as well as the resulting amplitude $A_1$, are given in \[AppF\]. As for the overall precision in the analytic determination of the periodic orbit using PL series at the truncation order $k_0=51$, we find that this trajectory returns to its initial conditions after the time $T=2\pi/\omega_1$, with $\omega_1$ specified by the PL method, up to 10 significant digits, or more using the values $Q_q^{PL,51}(0),P_q^{PL,51}(0)$ as initial guess values for a numerical (Newton–Raphson) determination of the periodic orbit.
Fig.\[fig:qbreath2\](a),(b) and (c) show the evolution of the normalized harmonic energies $E_q(t)/E$, for $q=1,\ldots,8$ in three different computations. Namely, in (a) we compute $E_q (t)$ by the analytical solution $Q_q^{PL,51}(t)$ as found by the truncated PL series. In (b), we integrate numerically the initial conditions $Q_q^{PL,51}(0)$, $P_q^{PL,51}(0)$. Finally, in (c) we consider a FPU–trajectory rising by the simple initial condition (corresponding to $q_0=1$): $x_n(0)=A_1\sin(\pi n/N)$, $y_n(0)=0$, $n=1,\ldots,N-1$.
The main remark, by a direct comparison of the three panels, is an important difference in the temporal behavior of the $q$–breather (in Fig.\[fig:qbreath2\] (a) and (b)) from that of the corresponding FPU–trajectory (Fig.\[fig:qbreath2\] (c)). Namely, the energies $E_q (t)$, $q=1,\ldots,8$ remain practically constant in the case of the $q$–breather, while they behave as quasi–periodic functions in the case of the FPU–trajectory. In fact, the energies $E_q(t)$ for the latter oscillate around mean values following closely the energy values of the $q$–breather solution, but with an amplitude causing variations of more than one orders of magnitude.
Fig.\[fig:qbreath2\](d) shows a comparison of the averaged normalized energy spectra in all four computations, namely (i) $Q_q^{PL,51}(t)$, (ii) $Q_q^{PLn,51}(t)$, (iii) the FPU–trajectory, and (iv) the periodic orbit with initial conditions as determined by the Newton–Raphson. The solid line in Fig.\[fig:qbreath2\](d) corresponds to the exponential law $$\label{brelaw}
E_q = \gamma ^{ q-1} q^2 E_1,~~ where ~~\gamma =
\alpha^2 N^4 \varepsilon / \pi ^4 ,$$ suggested as a fitting law in [@flaetal2006].
### The breather $q=25$ {#q25breather}
![FPU–$\alpha $ system with $\alpha =0.33$, $N=32$, $E=0.00465079$ with seed mode $q_0=25$. In panel (a) it is shown the evolution of the normalized instantaneous spectra $E_q(t)/E$ of modes $25,14,11,28,3,22,17$ for the PL solution of the $q$–breather (blue) and the numerical integration (PLn) of the initial condition $Q_q^{PL}(0)$, $P_q^{PL}(0)$ (orange). In panel (b) is the exponential profile of the normalized averaged energy spectra $\overline{ E} _{q }/E$ versus $q$ of PL with blue spheres, of PLn with orange triangles and of the FPU–trajectory with green triangles. \[fig:qbreath1\] ](Et25.eps "fig:") ![FPU–$\alpha $ system with $\alpha =0.33$, $N=32$, $E=0.00465079$ with seed mode $q_0=25$. In panel (a) it is shown the evolution of the normalized instantaneous spectra $E_q(t)/E$ of modes $25,14,11,28,3,22,17$ for the PL solution of the $q$–breather (blue) and the numerical integration (PLn) of the initial condition $Q_q^{PL}(0)$, $P_q^{PL}(0)$ (orange). In panel (b) is the exponential profile of the normalized averaged energy spectra $\overline{ E} _{q }/E$ versus $q$ of PL with blue spheres, of PLn with orange triangles and of the FPU–trajectory with green triangles. \[fig:qbreath1\] ](breather25.eps "fig:")\
Fig.\[fig:qbreath1\] refers, now, to a different $q$–breather example, in which we choose to initially excite a mode at an arbitrary position in $q$–space, namely $q_0=25$, for the system with $\alpha =0.33$, $N=32$ and $E=0.00465079$. Again $\omega_{25}$ and $A_{25}$ are found in the table of \[AppF\], while the truncation order here is $k_0=60$. The sequence of mode excitations derived from Eq.(\[qbre\]) up to the $10$–th order of perturbation theory is $q_1=14$, $q_2=11$, $q_3=28$, $q_4=3$, $q_5=22$, $q_6=17$, $q_7=8$, $q_8=31$, $q_9=6$, and $q_{10}=19$.
Fig.\[fig:qbreath1\](a) shows the temporal evolution of the normalized energies $E_q(t)/E$ of the first seven modes in the sequence of excitations, namely $q_0, \ldots ,q_6$, for the solutions $Q_q^{PL,60}(t)$ (blue) and $Q_q^{PLn,60}(t)$ (orange). Differences observed between the energy spectra which are below $10^{-15}$ show that the numerical integration cannot preserve precisely the analytical construction and therefore the energy spectra make some small oscillations.
Fig.\[fig:qbreath1\](b) now shows the normalized averaged spectra for the solutions (i) $Q_q^{PL,60}(t)$, (ii) $Q_q^{PLn,60}(t)$, and (iii) a FPU–trajectory rising by the seed mode excitation $q_0=25$. We clearly see again that the FPU–trajectory’s spectrum deviates from the $q$–breather’s one at modes corresponding to a higher order in the excitation sequence. Still, however, the hierarchy of modes in the energy spectrum is preserved.
![FPU–$\alpha $ with $N=32$, $\alpha=0.33$, $E=0.014915$ and seed mode $q_0=1$. Panels (a) and (b) are for the evolution of the normalized instantaneous spectra $E_q(t)/E$ for the $q$–breather and the FPU–trajectory, respectively. In panel (c) is the exponential profile of the normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa }$ of PL with blue spheres, the numerical integration (PLn) of the initial condition $Q_q^{PL}(0)$, $P_q^{PL}(0)$ with orange triangles, of FPU–trajectory with green triangles and of NR with black spheres. The continuous line is the fitting law (\[brelaw\]). In (d) is the evolution of the GALI indices $G_2,G_3,\ldots, G_7$. \[fig:qbreath\] ](001PL.eps "fig:")![FPU–$\alpha $ with $N=32$, $\alpha=0.33$, $E=0.014915$ and seed mode $q_0=1$. Panels (a) and (b) are for the evolution of the normalized instantaneous spectra $E_q(t)/E$ for the $q$–breather and the FPU–trajectory, respectively. In panel (c) is the exponential profile of the normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa }$ of PL with blue spheres, the numerical integration (PLn) of the initial condition $Q_q^{PL}(0)$, $P_q^{PL}(0)$ with orange triangles, of FPU–trajectory with green triangles and of NR with black spheres. The continuous line is the fitting law (\[brelaw\]). In (d) is the evolution of the GALI indices $G_2,G_3,\ldots, G_7$. \[fig:qbreath\] ](001FPU.eps "fig:")\
![FPU–$\alpha $ with $N=32$, $\alpha=0.33$, $E=0.014915$ and seed mode $q_0=1$. Panels (a) and (b) are for the evolution of the normalized instantaneous spectra $E_q(t)/E$ for the $q$–breather and the FPU–trajectory, respectively. In panel (c) is the exponential profile of the normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa }$ of PL with blue spheres, the numerical integration (PLn) of the initial condition $Q_q^{PL}(0)$, $P_q^{PL}(0)$ with orange triangles, of FPU–trajectory with green triangles and of NR with black spheres. The continuous line is the fitting law (\[brelaw\]). In (d) is the evolution of the GALI indices $G_2,G_3,\ldots, G_7$. \[fig:qbreath\] ](001spectra "fig:") ![FPU–$\alpha $ with $N=32$, $\alpha=0.33$, $E=0.014915$ and seed mode $q_0=1$. Panels (a) and (b) are for the evolution of the normalized instantaneous spectra $E_q(t)/E$ for the $q$–breather and the FPU–trajectory, respectively. In panel (c) is the exponential profile of the normalized averaged energy spectra $e_{\kappa }$ of PL with blue spheres, the numerical integration (PLn) of the initial condition $Q_q^{PL}(0)$, $P_q^{PL}(0)$ with orange triangles, of FPU–trajectory with green triangles and of NR with black spheres. The continuous line is the fitting law (\[brelaw\]). In (d) is the evolution of the GALI indices $G_2,G_3,\ldots, G_7$. \[fig:qbreath\] ](gali2 "fig:")
### The original FPU–trajectory: how many frequencies?
We finally discuss a FPU–trajectory similar to the classical experiment of Fermi Pasta and Ulam in [@feretal1955], leading to the observation of the celebrated [*FPU–recurrences*]{} (Fig.\[fig:qbreath\](b)). Practically, we return to the example of Subsection \[q1breather\], but for a higher energy. The PL construction of the corresponding $q$–breather to this FPU–trajectory was made for $E=0.014915$ and truncation order $k_0=242$ ($\omega_1$ and $A_1$ are given in \[AppF\]).
Comparing their energy spectra in Fig.\[fig:qbreath\](c), we see a quite good agreement, especially to the low–frequency modes. While these two objects are lying close in phase space, we would like to emphasize that they exhibit a different dynamical behavior. It can be observed, from the temporal evolution of their energy spectra, that the case of the FPU–trajectories shown in Fig.\[fig:qbreath\](b), contrary to the almost constant $q$–breather’s spectra of Fig.\[fig:qbreath\](a), clearly show a recursive behavior, leading to a nearly complete return to their initial values at the time $t=12000$.
By implementing the GALI method, we find that the number of incommensurable frequencies that govern this FPU–trajectory is five, a fact implying that it lies on a 5–dimensional torus. In particular, Fig.\[fig:qbreath\](d) shows that the indices $G_2$ and $G_3$ are constant from the beginning, while $G_4$ and $G_5$ reach an asymptotic constant value at nearly $t=5\times 10^{7}$, giving evidence for a 5–dimensional torus with 3 dominant actions and 2 compactified in smaller scales.
We note, in this latter respect, that according to [@beretal2005], an excitation as in Fig.\[fig:qbreath\] should lead to the formation of a ‘natural packet’ of modes exhibiting a sort of internal equipartition. However, the prediction for the packet width yields $\alpha ^{1/2}\varepsilon ^{1/4} N \simeq 2.7 \simeq
3$, which is smaller than the dimension of the torus as suggested by the GALI indicators. On the other hand, a very recent study by Genta et al. [@gentaetal] shows that the cutoff of the packet’s width is proportional to $a^{2/5} \varepsilon ^{1/5} N \simeq 4.43$ (between 4 and 5).
We thus conclude that the dynamics of the FPU trajectory of Fig.\[fig:qbreath\](b) shares a number of common features with a $q$–breather with a similar initial excitation, but also a number of common features with low–dimensional objects of dimension higher than one. In fact, the numerical indications are that the dimension of the associated object is around 5. However, in the present case the energy is quite high and our attempt to construct a torus solution analytically does not appear to lead to a convergent PL series. We thus leave open for future study the question of truly separating between solutions of different dimension that approximate the dynamics of FPU trajectories in this regime.
Conclusions {#concl}
===========
In the present paper, we study the dynamical features and localization properties of low–dimensional invariant objects of the FPU phase space called [*$q$–tori*]{}. Our main findings can be summarized as follows:
1\) We use the method of Poincaré – Lindstedt (PL) series in order to compute quasi-periodic series representations of trajectories approximating the motion on $q$–tori, up to a high order in a small parameter. We give some details on the way by which appropriate values of the torus frequencies are chosen in order for the PL method to proceed. We also test numerically the convergence behavior of our PL series. In particular we show that our series exhibit the phenomenon of cancellations between terms of a big size, leaving a small residual. Furthermore, the GALI indicator was used as an additional test for verifying the dimension of our computed $q$–tori solutions.
2\) Using properties of the PL series construction, we study the phenomenon of [*energy localization*]{} on $q$–tori. We present a theory of propagation of initial ‘excitations’ in the series terms. Via this theory we predict theoretically the form and shape of energy localization profiles for $q$–tori. Finally, we compare the latter with the energy localization profiles of orbits lying in the neighborhood of $q$–tori (called ‘FPU–trajectories’).
3\) Regarding the FPU–trajectories lying in the neighborhood of $q$–tori solutions, we find that they exhibit energy localization phenomena leading to an averaged normalized energy spectrum tending to saturate to a form quite close to that of a $q$–torus solution with similar initial excitation. We provide numerical evidence that the so–called ‘first stage’ in [@dresden] of energy transfer in FPU–trajectories, involves energy transfer among groups defined by the sets ${\cal D}_k$, as in the $q$–tori case. A theoretical interpretation of this phenomenon remains an open question.
4\) As a case of particular interest, we study low–frequency packet excitations. In this case, we show that $q$–tori solutions predict the appearance of exponential localization profiles, with a slope depending logarithmically on the specific energy of the system and on the percentage of the modes excited. Thus, the normalized energy spectra are invariant with respect to the re–scaled wavenumber $\kappa=q/N$, as long as the fraction of modes excited $s/N$ and the specific energy are kept constant. Via leading order estimates in the PL series, we derive a law for the slope of the exponential energy profile, both in the FPU–$\alpha $ and FPU–$\beta$ models. This turns out to be similar to that of $q$–breather solutions in which the ‘seed mode’ $q_0$ is allowed to vary proportionally to $N$. In fact, such laws suggest the invariance of the $q$–tori’s localization profiles as we approach the thermodynamic limit, provided that $s/N$ and specific energy $\varepsilon $ are kept constant. However, the existence of $q$–tori as $N\rightarrow\infty$ is still an open issue, as we have no proof of the convergence of the PL series in a finite domain of initial conditions as we approach this limit.
5\) Excitations of packets of consecutive modes not in the low frequency part of the spectrum lead to non–trivial localization profiles that have not been extensively studied in the literature. A study of the FPU–trajectories arising from such initial conditions, as well as of the times needed for such trajectories to reach equipartition, is an interesting open problem.
6\) The computer–algebraic program of the PL series presently used for the determination $q$–tori was employed also in the case of $q$–breathers, leading to high precision calculations corresponding to orders of the PL series higher than $k=60$. Using also our algorithm of systematic determination of frequencies (\[AppA\]), we are able to locate $q$–breathers of quite high energy values. We find that, as the energy of the system increases, the distance between $q$–breathers and FPU–trajectories resulting from the same initial excitation also grows. Furthermore, the FPU–trajectories exhibit a dynamics consistent with an increasing number of incommensurable frequencies. Nevertheless, the spectra of the FPU–trajectories remain strongly localized in $q$–space.
As a final remark, we note that the time for which ‘metastable states’ of FPU–trajectories started close to $q$–tori persist, as well as its dependence on the system’s parameters, is an interesting open question that can be considered as complementary to the study in [@benetal2011] (where the initially excited packet is smaller than the natural one). This is proposed as a subject for future study.
#### Acknowledgments
We wish to thank A. Ponno and G. Benettin for their useful discussions clarifying particular points of the paper. H.C. gratefully acknowledges the hospitality of the Dipartimento di Matematica Pura e Applicata, Universitá di Padova, during the period May 2010 to May 2012, where this work was initiated and completed.
[**APPENDIX**]{}\
[**A. Algorithm of determination of frequency values for the PL series construction \[AppA\]**]{}
We give an iterative algorithm of determination of numerical values of the frequencies $\omega_{q_i}$, $q_i\in{\cal D}_0$, for a $q$–torus solution with initial excitation ${\cal D}_0$, such that the solution constructed at every step corresponds to a higher specific energy than the solution constructed in the previous step. The algorithm consists of the following steps:\
[**Initialization.**]{} i) We choose some value of ‘trial amplitudes’ $A_{q_i}^{trial}$ and define $$\label{linespe}
\epsilon_{l,trial} = {1\over N}\sum_{i=1}^s {1\over 2}
\Omega_{q_i}^2 A_{q_i,trial}^2,~~
q_i\in{\cal D}^{(0)}~~, i=1,\ldots s.$$\
ii) We compute ‘trial’ frequencies by the lowest-order frequency correction terms in the series (\[omeser\]) corresponding to the trial amplitudes $A_{q_i,trial}$.
In the FPU-$\alpha$ the frequencies $\omega_{q_i}$ appear in the denominators of the lowest order terms, we implement a two-step substitution-iteration procedure. Namely we set $$\begin{aligned}
\label{omamid}
\omega_{q,mid}^{(2)} &=&
- \frac{\Omega _q}{4} \sum_{\mathop{m \in
{\cal D}^{(0)} \cup {\cal D}^{(1)} }}
\Omega _m^2 \times
\Bigg[ \Omega _q^2 A_{q,trial}^2 B_{mqq}^2 \left( \frac{1}
{\Omega _m^2 - 4 \Omega _q^2} + \frac{ 2 }
{\Omega _m^2 }\right)\nonumber\\
&+& \sum_{\mathop{n \in {\cal D}^{(0)} }\limits_
{n \neq q, j=1,...,4} } \Omega _n^2 A_{n,trial}^2
\left( \frac{2 B_{qnm}^2}
{\Omega _m^2 -({\cal P}_j( \Omega _{q},\Omega _{n}))^2}
+\frac{B_{qqm} B_{mnn}}
{\Omega _m^2 -({\cal P}_j( \Omega _{n},\Omega _{n}))^2}
\right) \Bigg]~~~ \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ for $q\in{\cal D}^{(0)}$, or $$\omega_{q,mid}^{(2)}=0$$ for $q\notin{\cal D}^{(0)}$, and determine $\omega_{q,mid}=\Omega_q+
\mu^2\omega_{q,mid}^{(2)}$ for all $q=1,...N$. In the above formulae, ${\cal P}_1(x,y)=x+y$, ${\cal P}_2(x,y)=x-y$, ${\cal P}_3(x,y)=-x+y$, ${\cal P}_4(x,y)=-x-y$. Then we compute $$\begin{aligned}
\label{omafin}
\omega _{q,trial}^{(2)} &=&
- \frac{\Omega _q}{4} \sum_{\mathop{m \in {\cal D}^{(0)}
\cup {\cal D}^{(1)} }}
\Omega _m^2 \times
\Bigg[ \Omega _q^2 A_{q,trial}^2 B_{mqq}^2 \left( \frac{1}
{\omega _{m,mid}^2 - 4 \omega_{q,mid}^2} +
\frac{ 2 }{\omega _m^2 }\right)\nonumber\\
&+& \sum_{\mathop{n \in {\cal D}^{(0)} }\limits_
{n \neq q, j=1,...,4} } \Omega _n^2 A_{n,trial}^2
\left( \frac{2 B_{qnm}^2}
{\omega_{m,mid}^2 -({\cal P}_j( \omega_{q,mid},\omega_{n,mid}))^2}
+\frac{B_{qqm} B_{mnn}}
{\omega_{m,mid}^2 -({\cal P}_j( \omega_{n,mid},\omega_{n,mid}))^2}
\right) \Bigg]~~. \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ and set $\omega_{q,trial}=\Omega_q+
\mu^2\omega_{q,trial}^{(2)}$.
In the FPU–$\beta$, we simply have $$\label{omebguess}
\omega_{q,trial}= \Omega_q
+\mu \omega_q^{(1)}(A_{q_1,trial},\ldots,A_{q_s,trial})~~~.$$\
iii) We compute the PL series for the excitation ${\cal D_0}$, using as frequency values $\omega_{q_i}=\omega_{q_i,trial}$. We attempt to determine numerically a root of Eqs.(\[omeser\]) for the amplitudes $A_{q_i}$, with a root-finding technique starting by $A_{q_i,trial}$ as guess amplitudes. If this fails, we return to substep (i), trying some lower value for the amplitudes $A_{q_i,trial}$, until a successful solution is found. We store the pairs $(\omega_{q_i},A_{q_i})$ of the latter.
iv\) we repeat the process (i) to (iii) for some neighboring trial amplitudes $A_{q_i,trial}'$ and store the pairs $(\omega_{q_i}',A_{q_i}')$ for the corresponding solution. We define $\Delta\epsilon_l=\epsilon_{l,trial}'
-\epsilon_{l,trial}$.\
[**Iteration.**]{} (i) We define $$\label{delome}
\Delta\omega = \left(\sum_{i=1}^s
(\omega_{q_i}-\omega_{q_i}')^2\right)^{1/2}~~,$$ and denote by $(\omega_{q_i,0},A_{q_i,0})$ the original solution $(\omega_{q_i},A_{q_i})$.
ii\) We compute $s$ neighboring solutions corresponding to the set of frequencies $\omega_{q_i,j}=\omega_{q_i}+\delta_{ij}\Delta\omega$.
iii\) We compute the matrix $J_\omega=J_A^{-1}$, where $J_A$ is a matrix defined by the finite differences $$\label{jacome}
J_{A,ij}={A_{q_i,j}^2-A_{q_i,0}^2\over\Delta\omega}~~.$$
iv\) Finally, we compute the next set of frequencies to be used in PL series construction by $$\label{omeprime}
\omega_{q_i}' = \omega_{q_i}+{2N\Delta\epsilon_l\over s}
\sum_{j=1}^s {J_{\omega,ij}\over\Omega_{q_j}^2}~~.$$
This completes one full step of the iterative algorithm of determination of frequencies. We note that a change of the frequencies as in Eq.(\[omeprime\]) leads to an increment of the total energy corresponding to each successive step by an amount of order $\Delta\epsilon_l$.\
[**B. Proof of the proposition of subsection \[sequence\] \[AppB\]**]{}
We give the proof of the proposition of subsection \[sequence\] in the case of the FPU–$\alpha$ model (see [@chrietal2010] for the proof in the case of the FPU–$\beta$ model).
The proof follows by induction. Let $M_k$ be the set defined in Eq.(\[app\]), which corresponds to the set of all modes for which the r.h.s. of Eq.(\[moda\]) is non–zero at the $k$–th order. According to Definition 1, the set of modes excited at the $k$–th order is given by ${\cal D}_k =M_k \setminus \bigcup_{0 \leq j \leq k-1}
{\cal D}_{j}$, where $r(k)=k+1$. For $k=1$, the r.h.s. of Eq.(\[moda\]) is non–zero if $B_{qq_1 q_2}\neq 0$, implying that for all modes $q \in M_k$ we have that $q$ is either of the form $q = \mid\sigma^{(2)}q ^{(2)}\mid $, or of the form $q=\big|2N-\mid\sigma^{(2)}q ^{(2)}\mid\big|$, where the allowable combinations of values of $q^{(2)}=(q_1,q_2) \in {\cal D}_0^2$ and of $\sigma^{(2)}=(\sigma _1,\sigma _2)\in\Sigma ^2$, are those leading to $1\leq q\leq N-1$.
Assuming, now, the proposition to be true at order $k-1$, one finds that, at the $k$–th order, the r.h.s. of Eq.(\[moda\]) is non–zero if $B_{qlm}\neq 0$, $Q_{l}^{(n_1)}\neq 0$ and $Q_{m}^{(n_2)}\neq 0$, where $n_1+n_2=k-1$. For the modes $l \in M_{n_1}$ and $m \in M_{n_2}$ we then have: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{lmn}
l = \Bigg| 2 \nu _1 N - \mid \sigma ^{(n_1+1)}
q^{(n_1+1)} \mid \Bigg| ~~ , ~~
m = \Bigg| 2 \nu _2 N - \mid \sigma ^{(n_2+1)}
q^{(n_2+1)} \mid \Bigg| ~~, \nonumber
\end{aligned}$$ where $\nu _i = \left[ \frac{\mid \sigma ^{(n_i+1)}
q^{(n_i+1)} \mid +N-1}{2N} \right] $. However, the condition $B_{qlm}\neq 0$ implies that $q$ is necessarily of the form $q = \mid l \pm m \mid $ or $q = \big| 2N - \mid l \pm m \mid \big|$. Provided that $1\leq q\leq N-1$, the two latter equations can be written in a combined form as: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{wg}
q = \big| 2Ng - \mid l \pm m \mid \big|\end{aligned}$$ where $g=0\mbox{ or }1$. Then, Eq.(\[wg\]) takes the form $$\begin{aligned}
q &=& \big| 2Ng \pm 2 \nu _1 N \pm 2 \nu _2 N
\mp \mid \sigma ^{(n_1+1)} q^{(n_1+1)} \mid \mp
\mid \sigma ^{(n_2+1)} q^{(n_2+1)} \mid \big| \nonumber\\
&=&\big| 2N (\underbrace{ \mid g \pm \nu _1 \pm
\nu _2\mid }_{\nu }) - \mid \sigma ^{(k+1)}
q^{(k+1)} \mid \big|, ~~\end{aligned}$$ after a possible sign reversal within $|\cdot|$ (not affecting the absolute value) and with $\nu $ a positive integer.
However, by the restriction $1\leq q\leq N-1$, one necessarily has that $\nu=\left[ ( \mid \sigma ^{(k+1)} q^{(k+1)}
\mid +N-1)/2N \right] $. This concludes the proof of the proposition.
[**C. Explicit expressions for the leading order terms of the PL series \[leading\]**]{}
We give by the following Lemma an expression for the leading order terms of the solution $Q_q(t)$, $q \in {\cal D}_k$ (see Definition 1). This will be used in section \[numqtor\] in order to predict the forms of energy localization profiles of $q$–tori.
Let ${\cal D}_0=\{q_1,q_2,\ldots,q_s\}$ be a zero order excitation set, ${n^{(r)}\in{\cal D}_0^r}$ an $r$–vector in ${\cal D}_0^r$ and $\omega_{n}^{(r)}\equiv\{\omega_{n_1}, \dots,\omega_{n_{r}}\}$, $\phi_{n}^{(r)} \equiv(\phi_{n_1},\dots,\phi_{n_r})$ its associated frequency and phase vectors respectively. Some basic features of the PL construction arising in accordance with the Definitions 1 – 4 of subsection \[sequence\] are:
i\) If $q \in {\cal D}_k$, then $Q_q^{(k)}(t)$ is a leading order term of the series (\[qser\]).
ii\) The only modes that admit frequency corrections are those in ${\cal D}_0$, for the rest holds $\omega _q = \Omega _q$, $q \notin {\cal D}_0$.
iii\) At the $k$–th order, the expressions for $Q_q^{(k)}(t)$ contain divisors which are the products of $k$ factors of the form $ \Omega_q^2-(\sigma ^{(r(m))}\omega^{(r(m))}_{n})^2$, $m\leq k$.
For convenience, in subsequent formulae we use exponential rather than trigonometric expressions. In both the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ models, for $q\in{\cal D}_k$ we find that:
[**Lemma:**]{} [*The leading order terms $Q_q^{(k)}(t)$ of Eqs.(\[moda\]) and (\[modb\]), starting by the zero order solution $Q_q^{(0)}(t)$ of Eq.(\[qq0\]) read $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Qqkr}
Q_q^{(k)} (t) = \sum_{\mathop{n^{(r)} \in {\cal D}_0^r }\limits_
{\sigma ^{(r)} \in \Sigma ^{r} } }
\mathcal{R}_q^{(k)} (n^{(r)}) \mathcal{K}_q^{(k)} (n^{(r)})
e^{i \sigma ^{(r)} ( \omega _{n}^{(r)}t + \phi_{n}^{(r)})}\end{aligned}$$ where $r(k)=k+1$ for the FPU–$\alpha$ and $r(k)=2k+1$ for the FPU–$\beta$. In the above expression, the factor $\mathcal{R}_q^{(k)}$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Rqr}
\mathcal{R}_q^{(k)} (n^{(r)}) &=& \frac{ (-1)^k }{2^{r}}
\cdot\frac{\Omega_q\Omega_{n_1}\ldots\Omega_{n_{r}} A_{n_1}\ldots
A_{n_{r}}}{\Omega_q^2-(\sigma ^{(r)}\omega^{(r)}_{n})^2}\end{aligned}$$ and $\mathcal{K}_q^{(k)}$ by the recursive relation $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Kkga}
\mathcal{K}_{q ;\alpha}^{(k)}(n^{(r)}) =
\sum_{\mathop{l_{1,2}=0}\limits_
{l_1+l_2=k-1}}^{k-1} \sum_{\mathop{ m_{i}\in
{\cal D}_{l_i}} \limits_
{i=1,2}} \mathfrak{L}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} (n^{(r(l_1))})
\mathfrak{L}_{m_2}^{(l_2)} (n^{(r(l_2))})
\mathcal{K}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} (n^{(r(l_1))})
\mathcal{K}_{m_2}^{(l_2)} (n^{(r(l_2))})
B_{q m_1m_2}\end{aligned}$$ with $$\begin{aligned}
\label{nvecta}
n^{(r(k))}=(\underbrace{ n_1,\ldots ,n_{r(l_1)}}_{n^{(r(l_1))}}
,\underbrace{n_{r(l_1)+1}, \ldots ,n_{r(k)} }_{n^{(r(l_2))}} )\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ in the $\alpha $ case and $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Kk}
\mathcal{K}_{q ;\beta } ^{(k)} (n^{(r)})
= \sum_{\mathop{l_{1,2,3}=0}\limits_
{l_1+l_2+l_3=k-1}}^{k-1} \sum_{\mathop{ m_{i}\in
{\cal D}_{l_i}} \limits_
{i=1,2,3}} \mathfrak{L}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} (n^{(r(l_1))})
\mathfrak{L}_{m_2}^{(l_2)} (n^{(r(l_2))})
\mathfrak{L}_{m_3}^{(l_3)} (n^{(r(l_3))} ) \nonumber\\
\mathcal{K}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} (n^{(r(l_1))})
\mathcal{K}_{m_2}^{(l_2)} (n^{(r(l_2))})
\mathcal{K}_{m_3}^{(l_3)} (n^{(r(l_3))})
C_{q m_1m_2m_3} ~~~,\end{aligned}$$ with $$\begin{aligned}
\label{nvectb}
n^{(r(k))} =(\underbrace{ n_1,\ldots,n_{r(l_1)}}_{n^{(r(l_1))}},
\underbrace{n_{r(l_1)+1}, \ldots ,n_{r(l_1)+r(l_2)}}_{n^{(r(l_2))}},
\underbrace{ n_{r(l_1)+r(l_2)+1}, \ldots , n_{r(k)} }_{n^{(r(l_3))}})\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ in the $\beta $ case, setting, in both cases, $\mathcal{K}_q^{(0)}=1$ at $k=0$. The terms $\mathfrak{L}_m^{(l)}$, $m \in {\cal D}_{l}$ entering the expressions (\[Kkga\]) and (\[Kk\]) are $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Lm}
\mathfrak{L}_m^{(l)} (n^{(r(l))})=
\frac{\Omega _m^2}{\Omega_m^2-(\sigma^{(r(l))}
\omega^{(r(l))}_{n})^2}~~\end{aligned}$$ for $l>0$, or $\mathfrak{L}_q^{(0)}=1$ at $l=0$.* ]{} [**proof**]{}\
We prove by induction that the leading order terms $Q_q^{(k)}$ for the modes $q \in {\cal D}_{k}$ are given by Eqs. (\[Qqkr\]) with the quantities $\mathcal{R}_q^{(k)}$, $\mathcal{K}_{q} ^{(k)}$ given by (\[Rqr\]), (\[Kkga\]) and (\[Kk\]). We focus again on the FPU–$\alpha$ model.
For $k=1$, the solutions of Eqs.(\[moda\]) read $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Qq1cora}
Q_q^{(1)} (t)&=& - \frac{\Omega_q}{4} \sum_{\mathop{n^{(2)}
\in {\cal D}^{(2)}_0}\limits_
{\sigma ^{2} \in \Sigma^2 }}
\Omega_{n_1} \Omega_{n_2} A_{n_1} A_{n_2} B_{qn_1n_2}
\frac{ e^{i(\sigma_1 \omega _{n_1} + \sigma _2 \omega_{n_2} )t}}
{\Omega_q^2 - (\sigma_1 \omega _{n_1} + \sigma _2 \omega_{n_2} )^2 }\nonumber\\\end{aligned}$$ so, $Q_q^{(1)}$ satisfies Eq.(\[Qqkr\]).
Assume now that Eq.(\[Qqkr\]) holds true for the solution $Q_q^{(k)}(t)$ at the order $k-1$. For simplicity, we use the notation $\mathcal{R}_l^{(n_i)} = \mathcal{R}_l^{(n_i)}
(n^{(r(n_i))})$ and $\mathcal{K}_l^{(n_i)}
=\mathcal{K}_l^{(n_i)} (n^{(r(n_i))}) $, $i=1,\ldots,r(k)$. At order $k$, Eq.(\[moda\]) takes the form $$\begin{aligned}
\ddot {Q}_q^{(k)}+\Omega_q^2Q_{q}^{(k)}=
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\
-\Omega_{q} \sum_{m_1,m_2=1}^{N-1}\Omega _{m_1}\Omega _{m_2}
B_{qm_1m_2}\sum_{\mathop{l_{1,2}=0}\limits_
{l_1+l_2=k-1}}^{k-1}\sum_{\mathop{n^{(r(k))} \in
{\cal D}_0^{r(k)} }\limits_
{\sigma ^{(r(k))} \in \Sigma ^{r(k)} } }
\mathcal{R}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} \mathcal{R}_{m_2}^{(l_2)}
\mathcal{K}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} \mathcal{K}_{m_2}^{(l_2)}
e^{i \sigma ^{(r(k))} \omega _{n}^{(r(k))}t} .\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ By replacing the term $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{R}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} \mathcal{R}_{m_2}^{(l_2)}
&=&{(-1)^{l_1+l_2} \over 2^{r(l_1)+r(l_2)}} \cdot
\frac{\mathfrak{L}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} \mathfrak{L}_{m_2}^{(l_2)}}
{\Omega _{m_1} \Omega _{m_2}}
\cdot \Omega_{n_1}\ldots\Omega_{n_{r(k)}} A_{n_1}\ldots
A_{n_{r(k)}} \nonumber\\
&=& - \frac{\mathfrak{L}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} \mathfrak{L}_{m_2}^{(l_2)} }
{\Omega _{m_1} \Omega _{m_2} }
\cdot \frac{\Omega_q^2 - (\sigma ^{(r(k))} \omega _{n}^{(r(k))})^2}
{\Omega _{q}} \cdot \mathcal{R}_{q}^{(k)}\end{aligned}$$ into the above equation, one has that $$\begin{aligned}
\ddot {Q}_q^{(k)}+\Omega_q^2Q_{q}^{(k)}=
(\Omega_q^2 - (\sigma ^{(r(k))} \omega _{n}^{(r(k))})^2)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\nonumber\\
\times \sum_{\mathop{n^{(r(k))} \in {\cal D}_0^{r(k)} }\limits_
{\sigma ^{(r(k))} \in \Sigma ^{r(k)} } } \mathcal{R}_{q}^{(k)}
\left( \sum_{\mathop{l_{1,2}=0}\limits_
{l_1+l_2=k-1}}^{k-1} \sum_{m_1,m_2=1}^{N-1}
\mathfrak{L}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} \mathfrak{L}_{m_2}^{(l_2)}
\mathcal{K}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} \mathcal{K}_{m_2}^{(l_2)} B_{qm_1m_2}
\right) e^{i \sigma ^{(r(k))} \omega _{n}^{(r(k))}t} \nonumber\\
=
(\Omega_q^2 - (\sigma ^{(r(k))} \omega _{n}^{(r(k))})^2)
\sum_{\mathop{n^{(r(k))} \in {\cal D}_0^{r(k)} }\limits_
{\sigma ^{(r(k))} \in \Sigma ^{r(k)} } } \mathcal{R}_{q}^{(k)}
\mathcal{K}_{q}^{(k)}
e^{i \sigma ^{(r(k))} \omega _{n}^{(r(k))}t}~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\end{aligned}$$ However, the solution of the latter equation is $$\begin{aligned}
Q_{q}^{(k)}(t)&=&
\sum_{\mathop{n^{(r(k))} \in {\cal D}_0^{r(k)} }\limits_
{\sigma ^{(r(k))} \in \Sigma ^{r(k)} } } \mathcal{R}_{q}^{(k)}
\mathcal{K}_{q}^{(k)}
e^{i \sigma ^{(r(k))} \omega _{n}^{(r(k))}t}~~.\end{aligned}$$ Thus, Eq.(\[Qqkr\]) holds true at the order $k$, with the expressions $\mathcal{R}_q^{(k)}$, $\mathcal{K}_{q} ^{(k)}$ given by (\[Rqr\]), (\[Kkga\]) and (\[Kk\]).\
Both quantities $\mathcal{K}_{q ;\alpha}^{(k)}$, and $\mathcal{K}_{q ;\beta } ^{(k)} $ are polynomials of degree $k-1$ in the terms $\mathfrak{L}_m^{(l)}$, $l=0,1,\ldots$ and can be computed iteratively. Explicit expressions for the first few orders of the mapping (\[Kkga\]) are given in \[AppC\].
[**D. The mapping $\mathcal{K}_{q} ^{(k)}$ for FPU–$\alpha $ \[AppC\]**]{} We give the expressions of the quantities appearing in the mapping (\[Kkga\]), up to the order $k=3$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Kqalpha}
&&\mathcal{K}_{q_1 ; \alpha} ^{(1)} = B_{q_1 q_0 q_0} \nonumber\\
&&\mathcal{K}_{q_2 ; \alpha} ^{(2)} = 2 \mathfrak{L}_{q_0}^{(0)}
\mathfrak{L}_{q_1}^{(1)} \mathcal{K}_{q_0}^{(0)} \mathcal{K}_{q_1}^{(1)}
B_{q_2 q_1 q_0} = 2 \frac{\Omega _{q_1}^2}{\Omega_{q_1}^2 -
( \sigma _1 \omega _{q_0}+ \sigma _2 \omega _{q_0} )^2 } B_{q_1 q_0 q_0}
B_{q_2 q_1 q_0} \nonumber\\
&&\mathcal{K}_{q_3 ; \alpha} ^{(3)} = 2 \mathfrak{L}_{q_0}^{(0)}
\mathfrak{L}_{q_2}^{(2)} \mathcal{K}_{q_0}^{(0)} \mathcal{K}_{q_2}^{(2)}
B_{q_3 q_2 q_0} + [ \mathfrak{L}_{q_1}^{(1)} \mathcal{K}_{q_1}^{(1)} ]^2
B_{q_3 q_1 q_1} = \nonumber\\
&& 4 \frac{\Omega _{q_1}^2 \Omega _{q_2}^2 B_{q_1 q_0 q_0}
B_{q_2 q_1 q_0} B_{q_3 q_2 q_0}}{[\Omega_{q_1}^2 -
( \sigma _1 \omega _{q_0}+ \sigma _2 \omega _{q_0} )^2][\Omega_{q_2}^2
- ( \sigma _1 \omega _{q_0}+\sigma _2\omega _{q_0}+\sigma _3\omega _{q_0} )^2] }
\nonumber\\
&&+ \left[ \frac{\Omega _{q_1}^2 B_{q_1 q_0 q_0}}{\Omega_{q_1}^2 -
(\sigma _1 \omega _{q_0}+\sigma _2\omega _{q_0})^2 } \right]^2
B_{q_3 q_1 q_1},\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $q_0$, $q_1$, $q_2$ and $q_3$ represent any mode belonging in the sets ${\cal D}_0$, ${\cal D}_{1}$, ${\cal D}_{2}$ and ${\cal D}_{3}$ respectively.
[**E. Localization profiles of $q$–tori estimated by leading order terms in the PL series \[AppE\]**]{}
We derive estimates for the form of the energy localization profiles for $q$–tori solutions corresponding to an initial excitation of the modes $1\leq q\leq s$, with $s$ varying proportionally to $N$.
We first make the following estimates:\
i) For any mode $q \in {\cal D}_{k}$ we use the approximation $q\simeq c_k s$, where $c_k s$ is the mid mode of $ {\cal D}_{k}$, i.e. $q=ks+[s/2]$ ($c_k\simeq k+1/2$) in FPU–$\alpha $ and $q=2ks$ ($c_k=2k$) in FPU–$\beta $.
ii\) For the unperturbed frequencies we use the approximation $\Omega _q \simeq \pi q / N$.
iii\) For $m \in {\cal D}_{k}$ and for ‘almost resonant terms’, for which $m-\sigma^{(r(k))}n=0$, we use the approximation $\big|\Omega_m-\sigma^{(r(k))}\omega^{(r(k))}_{n} \big| \simeq
{\pi ^3 m^3}/ ({24 N^3})$ (See Appendix B of [@chrietal2010] for its derivation).
iv\) For the quantities $\mathfrak{L}_m^{(k)}$ of Eq.(\[Lm\]) we set $$\big| \mathfrak{L}_m^{(k)} (n^{(r(k))}) \big| \simeq
\frac{\Omega _m}{2[\Omega_m-\sigma^{(r(k))}
\omega^{(r(k))}_{n}]} \sim \frac{12 N^2 } {\pi ^2 m^2}$$
v\) Finally, for the total energy of the system we use the approximation $E \simeq \sum_{n=1,\ldots,s } E_n $, where $E_n \simeq 1/2 A_n^2 \Omega _n^2$.
We will now derive an estimate for the quantity $\big| Q_q^{(k)}\big| $ of Eq.(\[Qqkr\]). We first write some approximations for the terms of Eqs.(\[Rqr\]), (\[Kkga\]) and (\[Kk\]). Recalling that $r(k)=k+1$ in the $\alpha $ model, and $r(k)=2k+1$ in $\beta $, and taking into account the approximations (i)–(v), we find $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Rqrapp}
\big| \mathcal{R}_q^{(k)} \big| \simeq
\frac{\Omega_q }{\Omega_q^2 - (\sigma ^{(r)}\omega^{(r)}_{n})^2}
\cdot \Omega_{n_1}\ldots\Omega_{n_{r}} A_{n_1}\ldots
A_{n_{r}} \sim \frac{12 N^3 } {\pi^3 q^3 } \cdot
\left( \frac{2 E}{s} \right)^{r(k)/2}.\end{aligned}$$ The quantities $\mathcal{K}_{q ;\alpha }^{(k)}$ and $ \mathcal{K}_{q ;\beta } ^{(k)} $ of (\[Kkga\]) and (\[Kk\]) cannot be evaluated analytically. However, as already mentioned in section \[leading\], their form is a polynomial of degree $k-1$ in the terms $\mathfrak{L}_m^{(l)}$, $l=0,1,
\ldots$ and a polynomial of degree $k$ in $B_{q,l,m}$ (or $C_{q,l,m,n}$). We denote here by ${\cal P}(q,n^{(r)},m^{(k-1)})$ the product of $k$ factors of the coefficients $B_{q,l,m}$ (or $C_{q,l,m,n}$) in $\mathcal{K}_{q ;\alpha }^{(k)}$ (or $ \mathcal{K}_{q ;\beta } ^{(k)} $). The size of the mid mode is then $$\begin{aligned}
\label{dddd}
&& A^{(k)}_q \sim \big| Q_q^{(k)} \big| \sim \sum_{\mathop{n^{(r)}
\in {\cal D}_0^r }\limits_
{\sigma ^{(r)} \in \Sigma ^{r} } } \big|
\mathcal{R}_q^{(k)} \big| \cdot \big| \mathcal{K}_q^{(k)} \big|
\nonumber\\ && \sim \big|
\mathcal{R}_q^{(k)} \big| \cdot C_k \sum_{\mathop{n^{(r)}
\in {\cal D}_0^r }\limits_
{\sigma ^{(r)} \in \Sigma ^{r} } }
\sum_{\mathop{ m_{i}\in
{\cal D}_{l_i}} \limits_
{i=1,\ldots,k-1}} \big| \mathfrak{L}_{m_1}^{(l_1)} \big|
\big| \mathfrak{L}_{m_2}^{(l_2)} \big| \ldots
\big| \mathfrak{L}_{m_{k-1}}^{(l_{k-1})} \big|
{\cal P}(q,n^{(r)},m^{(k-1)})\nonumber\\
&& \sim \big|
\mathcal{R}_q^{(k)} \big| \cdot C_k \cdot
\left( \frac{12 N^2}{\pi ^2} \right)^{k-1} \sum_{\mathop{n^{(r)}
\in {\cal D}_0^r }\limits_
{\sigma ^{(r)} \in \Sigma ^{r} } }
\sum_{\mathop{ m_{i}\in
{\cal D}_{l_i}} \limits_
{i=1,\ldots ,k-1}} \frac{1}{\left( m_1 \ldots m_{k-1} \right)^2}
{\cal P}(q,n^{(r)},m^{(k-1)}) ~~, \nonumber\\\end{aligned}$$ where by $C_k$ we note constants in powers of $k$. Due to the term ${\cal P}(q,n^{(r)},m^{(k-1)})$, the sums over $n^{(r)} $ and $m^{(k-1)}$ in (\[dddd\]) give rise to a factor $s^{(r(k)+1)/2}$, i.e. $s^{k/2+1}$ in $\alpha $ and to $s^{k+1}$ in $\beta $ [^5]. Replacing $m_i$, $i=1,\ldots,k-1$ and $q$ in (\[dddd\]) by their mid mode expression $c_k s$, one has $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ddda}
A^{(k)}_q &\simeq &C_k ^{'} \frac{12 N^3 } {\pi^3 q^3 } \cdot
\left( \frac{2 E}{s} \right)^{r(k)/2} s^{(r(k)+1)/2}
\left( \frac{12 N^2}{\pi ^2 s^2} \right)^{k-1} \nonumber\\
&&= C_k ^{''} \frac{N^{2k+1} } {\pi^{2k+1} s^{2k+1} } E^{r(k)/2}~~.\end{aligned}$$ The energy in each group of modes is then estimated as $$\begin{aligned}
E^{(k)} &\simeq &{1\over 2} \mu ^{2k} \Omega _{q}^2
A_q^2 \simeq {1\over 2} \mu ^{2k}
\left( \frac{ \pi c_k s } {N} \right)^2
\cdot \left( C_k ^{''} \frac{N } {\pi s }
\right)^{2(2k+1)} E^{r(k)} \nonumber\\
&& \simeq C_k ^{'''} \cdot \left( \frac{ \mu N^2 }
{\pi^2 s^2 } \right)^{2k} E^{r(k)} ~~.\end{aligned}$$ Finally, replacing $r(k)$ and $\mu $ by $k+1$ and $\alpha /\sqrt{2N}$ for FPU–$\alpha$, or $2k+1$ and $\beta /(2N)$ for FPU–$\beta$ respectively, we arrive at the exponential laws $$\begin{aligned}
E_{\alpha }^{(k)} &\sim & C_k ^{'''} \cdot
\left( \frac{ \alpha^2 E N^3 } {\pi^4 s^4 } \right)^{k}
\sim \left( \frac{ \alpha^2 \varepsilon N^4 }
{\pi^4 s^4 } \right)^{k} \nonumber\\
E_{\beta }^{(k)} &\sim & C_k ^{'''} \cdot
\left( \frac{ \beta^2 E^2 N^2 } {\pi^4 s^4 } \right)^{k}
\sim\left( \frac{ \beta^2 \varepsilon ^2 N^4 }
{\pi^4 s^4 } \right)^{k} ~~.\end{aligned}$$
[**F. Precise values of frequencies and amplitudes in all paper’s numerical examples \[AppF\]**]{}
$$\label{Table1}
\small{
\begin{array}{lllll}
\bf{Example} & \bf{Frequencies} & \bf{Amplitudes} \nonumber\\
& & & \nonumber\\
\text{Fig.1},~~ {\cal D}_0 = \{ 1,2,3,4\} &
\begin{array} {ll}\omega _1 = 0.09813690483108113 \\
\omega _2 = 0.19603499627351076 \\
\omega _3 = 0.29346131418681830 \\
\omega _4 =0.39018079936090050
\end{array}
&
\begin{array} {ll}A _1 = 0.098097447281306230 \\
A _2 = 0.048959912346992665 \\
A _3 = 0.032444239210574590 \\
A _4 = 0.023892612612360370
\end{array} \\
& & & \\
\text{Fig.4a},~~ {\cal D}_0 = \{1,11,21,31\} &
\begin{array} {l}\omega _{1} = 0.09814720863898445 \\
\omega _{11} = 1.0282023436963477 \\
\omega _{21} = 1.7154505429645952 \\
\omega _{31} =1.9975829222954775
\end{array} &
\begin{array} {ll}A _1 = 0.2699420271816366000 \\
A _{11} = 0.027437337334704704 \\
A _{21} = 0.015901830855243902\\
A _{31} = 0.014550407721151376
\end{array} \\
& & & \\
\text{Fig.4b},~~ {\cal D}_0 = \{ 60,61,62,63\} &
\begin{array} {l}\omega _{60} = 1.9903455323483594 \\
\omega _{61} = 1.9945569202421924 \\
\omega _{62} = 1.9975668544869103 \\
\omega _{63} =1.9993735255838023
\end{array} &
\begin{array} {ll}A _{60} = 0.010626655362545707 \\
A _{61} = 0.010540492500677328 \\
A _{62} = 0.010486090307194270\\
A _{63} = 0.010462240436802113
\end{array} \\
& & & \\
\text{Fig.4c},~~ {\cal D}_0 = \{ 63,64,65\} &
\begin{array} {ll}
\omega _{63} = 1.3967520180075357 \\
\omega _{64} = 1.4142130013133483 \\
\omega _{65} =1.4314611496716776
\end{array} &
\begin{array} {ll}
A _{63} = 0.005128073559888574 \\
A _{64} = 0.005045052412361571\\
A _{65} = 0.004963639646819611
\end{array} \\
& & & \\
\text{Fig.4d},~~ {\cal D}_0 = \{ 94,\ldots ,98 \} &
\begin{array} {l}\omega _{94} =1.8284112766464593 \\
\omega _{95} = 1.8382194182395468 \\
\omega _{96} = 1.8477507307792000 \\
\omega _{97} =1.8570037790005570\\
\omega _{98} =1.8659771693147402
\end{array} &
\begin{array} {ll}A _{94} = 0.008845316872292220 \\
A _{95} = 0.008752766020034742\\
A _{96} = 0.008700391793859069\\
A _{97} = 0.008662026577864702 \\
A _{98} =0.008661383820872627
\end{array} \\
& & & \\
\text{Fig.6},~~ {\cal D}_0 = \{ 1 \} &
\omega _{1} =0.09814109959448596 & A_1 =0.18574105489382606\\
& & & \\
\text{Fig.7},~~ {\cal D}_0 = \{ 25 \} &
\omega _{25} =1.8830741847088537 & A_{25} =0.0512142216322969\\
& & & \\
\text{Fig.8},~~ {\cal D}_0 = \{ 1 \} &
\omega _{1} =0.09844127049688513 & A_1 =1.3009149083500795\\
\end{array}}$$
[00]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}bibnamefont \#1[\#1]{}bibfnamefont \#1[\#1]{}citenamefont \#1[\#1]{}url \#1[`#1`]{}urlprefix\[2\][\#2]{} \[2\]\[\][[\#2](#2)]{}
, **** () .
, **** () .
, , , **** () .
, , , **** () .
, , , **** () .
, , , **** () .
, **** () .
, , **** () .
, **** () .
, , , () .
, , , **** () .
, , , **** () .
, **** () .
, , , , **** () .
, **** () .
, , , , , , , **** () .
, **** () .
, , , , **** () .
, , **** () .
, **** () .
, , , , **** () .
, , , , **** () .
, , , , **** () .
, , , , **** () .
, , , **** () .
, , , **** () .
, **** () .
, **** () .
, , , **** () .
, **** () .
, , , **** () .
, , , **** () .
, , , **** () .
[^1]: We used all over the paper the Yoshida symplectic splitting algorithm of forth order.
[^2]: Actually, not only the two profiles match, but also the solutions themselves $Q_q^{PL,11}(t)$ and $Q_q^{PLn,11}(t)$ are almost identical.
[^3]: In [@dresden], studying solutions corresponding to an initial excitation of the first normal mode, tail modes were called those belonging to the last third of the spectrum. This is equivalent to state that $k_0=[2N/3]$.
[^4]: As rendered clear with specific examples throughout the paper, in the case of $q$–tori one has in general $Q_q(0)\neq 0$ or $P_q(0)\neq 0$ for [*all*]{} $q=1,\ldots, N-1$. In fact, for the modes belonging to the $k$–th set ${\cal D}_k$ (see Definition 2) we have in general $Q_q(t)\simeq O(\mu^k)$ for all times $t$, including $t=0$. This implies that in $q$–tori all modes have some energy already at $t=0$. On the contrary, according to the Definition 4, in FPU–trajectories only the modes belonging to ${\cal D}_0$ share the total energy at $t=0$. In that sense, the use of the term ‘excitation’ for FPU–trajectories is literal, i.e. ${\cal D}_0$ refers to the modes excited at $t=0$. The origin of the term ‘FPU–trajectories’ is that these are trajectories with initial conditions of the same type as those considered in the original FPU paper.
[^5]: These factors are found by recursively solving $\sum_{\mathop{n^{(r)}
\in {\cal D}_0^r }\limits_{\sigma ^{(r)} \in \Sigma ^{r} } }
{\cal P}(q,n^{(r)},m^{(k-1)}) $, for those $q$ and $m^{(k-1)}$ that maximize the results. In $\beta$ one finds for $k=1$ the factor $2s(s-1)$, for $k=2$ the factor $4s^2(s-1)$, etc.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
address:
- 'Princeton University Observatory, Princeton, NJ 08544'
- 'Astronomy Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195'
- 'Dept. Astronomy & Astrophysics, Penn State Univ., University Park, PA 16802'
- 'Astronomy Dept. & Enrico Fermi Institute, Univ. of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637'
- 'Apache Point Observatory, P.O. Box 59, Sunspot, NM 88349'
author:
- 'P. B. HALL, G. R. KNAPP, G. T. RICHARDS, M. A. STRAUSS'
- 'S. F. ANDERSON'
- 'D. P. SCHNEIDER, D. A. VANDEN BERK'
- 'D. G. YORK'
- 'K. S. J. ANDERSON, J. BRINKMANN, S. A. SNEDDEN'
title: Unconventional AGN from the SDSS
---
Introduction
============
The Sloan Digital Sky Survey (York et al. 2000; Fukugita et al. 1996; Gunn et al. 1998; Hogg et al. 2001; Stoughton et al. 2002; Smith et al. 2002; Pier et al. 2003) is obtaining optical spectra for $\sim$10$^5$ quasars over $\sim$$\frac{1}{4}$ of the entire sky. Through careful target selection (Richards et al. 2002) and sheer size, the SDSS includes numerous AGN with unconventional properties. The high-quality, moderate-resolution SDSS spectra can be used to set the stage for the detailed multiwavelength studies often needed to understand interesting quasar subclasses. We illustrate this fact using several unusual AGN included in the SDSS Second Data Release (Abazajian et al. 2004).
The first He[II]{} $\lambda$1640 broad absorption line quasar
=============================================================
=4.29in
Although broad absorption line (BAL) quasar outflows are known to include highly ionized gas (e.g., Telfer et al. 1998), He[ii]{} absorption had not been detected in them until this meeting (see Maiolino et al. 2004 for the second case). Figure\[he2\] shows SDSS J162805.81+474415.6, a $z$=1.597 quasar with an outflow at $v$=8000 km s$^{-1}$ seen in C[iv]{} and He[ii]{} $\lambda$1640. He[ii]{} $\lambda$1640 is analogous to H[i]{} $\lambda$6563 (H$\alpha$) since it is the $n$=2$\leftrightarrow$3 transition. The agreement between the velocity profiles of the C[iv]{} and the putative He[ii]{} absorption is not exact, but is within the range of variation seen between troughs of different ions in BAL quasars (e.g., Arav et al. 2001). There is also a narrow system at $z$=1.4967 ($v$=11800 km s$^{-1}$) seen in C[iv]{}, Al[ii]{}, Fe[ii]{} and Mg[ii]{} and an intervening, narrow Fe[ii]{}+Mg[ii]{} system at $z=0.9402$.
There are two other possible explanations for this trough. First, it could be due to Al[iii]{} at $v$=46000 km s$^{-1}$; the lack of accompanying Mg[ii]{} absorption would not be unprecedented (Hall et al. 2002). Detection of C[iv]{} absorption at 3450Å would confirm this hypothesis. Second, two SDSS quasars have Mg[ii]{} absorption extending $\simeq$1500 kms$^{-1}$ redward of the systemic redshift (Hall et al. 2002); by analogy, this trough could be C[iv]{} redshifted by $\simeq$7000 kms$^{-1}$ (without accompanying Mg[ii]{}). That is an implausibly large velocity in terms of the redshifted absorption models discussed in Hall et al. (2002), but definitively ruling out this possibility requires spectroscopy at $<$3800Å to search for redshifted Si[iv]{} and N[v]{}.
BAL quasars are thought to have large columns of highly ionized gas which absorb X-ray but not UV photons (e.g., Chartas et al. 2002). If the absorbing gas is modeled as a slab whose illuminated face has ionization parameter $U$ (photon to H[i]{}+H[ii]{} density ratio), then the front of the slab is a He[iii]{} zone of equivalent column $N_H$$\simeq$$10^{21.8} U$, followed by a He[ii]{} zone of column $N_H$$\simeq$$10^{22.7} U$ and a He[i]{}+H[ii]{} zone of column $N_H$$\simeq$$10^{23} U$ (Wampler et al. 1995). In this object we measure $N_{\rm HeII,n=2}$$\geq$10$^{15}$ cm$^{-2}$ (the lower limit applies if the trough is saturated). In the He[ii]{} zone, $N_{\rm HeII}$$\simeq$0.1$N_H$, so as few as 1 in 10$^{6.7}$$U$ He[ii]{} ions in the $n$=2 state would explain the observed He[ii]{} $\lambda$1640 absorption. But normal BAL quasar outflows do not show such absorption, and so must have an even smaller He[ii]{} $n$=2 population. The two candidate He[ii]{} BAL quasars known could differ from the norm either by having extremely high ionization parameters $U$$\gg$10 (from gas at exceptionally small distances) or, more probably, high densities $n_e$$\gg$10$^{10}$ throughout the He[ii]{} region, such that collisional excitation of the $n$=2 state is non-negligible (Wampler et al. 1995). Densities of at least $10^{10.5}$ cm$^{-3}$ are known to exist in BAL outflows (Hall & Hutsemékers 2003).
A full understanding of He[ii]{} BALs will require photoionization modeling, preferably in conjunction with wider wavelength coverage spectroscopy.
Quasars with very strong and narrow UV Fe[II]{} emission
========================================================
=4.5in
Fe[ii]{} emission is very important to the energy balance of AGN broad emission line regions (BELRs), but theoretical models have difficulty reproducing the strength and shape of the observed Fe[ii]{} complexes. Bright objects with strong, narrow Fe[ii]{} are thus extremely useful for refining models and defining the areas of parameter space occupied by BELRs. Figure \[uvfe2\] shows two such objects from the SDSS. The very weak optical Fe[ii]{} emission in SDSS J1408+5152 confirms that the UV and optical emission strengths of Fe[ii]{} can be highly anticorrelated in individual objects (Shang et al. 2003).
Even more interesting is SDSS J091103.49+444630.4 (Figure \[fe2freak\]). It shows Fe[ii]{} emission and self-absorption only in transitions involving lower energy levels $\leq$1 eV above ground (UV78 at $\lambda$$\simeq$3000Å has its lower level at 1.7eV, and is at best very weak). The spectrum can be explained as a reddened continuum plus indirect (scattered) light from a low-temperature BAL outflow (Figure \[fe2freak\]c). Normally, such scattered emission is swamped by the direct spectrum, but it is entirely plausible that the direct spectrum could be obscured in 1 out of 10,000 quasars. Alternatively, it may be a quasar where the Fe[ii]{} emission is powered only by photoionization, and thus closely matches theoretical expectations (Baldwin et al. 2004). Improved spectra are needed to discriminate between these hypotheses.
=4.5in
=4.5in
=3.5in
A REAL mystery object
=====================
=4.5in
Lastly, we present SDSS J073816.91+314437.2 (Figure \[ucs\]). This object is optically unresolved and was targeted only as a faint radio source. Its redshift is probably $z$=2.0127, from narrow C[iv]{} and Si[iv]{} absorption, with similar absorption systems at $z$=2.0097 and $z$=1.9575 (insets), and must be $z$$\leq$2.4, from the observed lack of Ly$\alpha$ forest absorption. But even though we know its redshift, we have no clear understanding of the spectrum of SDSS J0738+3144. Our best guess is that the spectrum contains broad, blueshifted emission in Mg[ii]{}, Fe[iii]{} $\lambda\lambda$2080 (UV48), C[iii]{}\]+Fe[iii]{} $\lambda\lambda$1915 (UV34), and possibly C[iv]{}, plus BAL troughs of C[iv]{}, Al[iii]{} and Mg[ii]{} outflowing at 37,000 kms$^{-1}$ to explain the dips observed at 4100, 4900 and 7400Å. UV and NIR spectroscopy are needed to determine if idea is correct, but the universe clearly contains some very unconventional AGN!
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
[0]{}
K. Abazajian [*et al.*]{}, 2004, [*AJ*]{}, submitted (astro-ph/0403325)
N. Arav [*et al.*]{}, 2001, [*ApJ*]{}, 561, 118
J. Baldwin [*et al.*]{}, 2004, to appear in [*AGN Physics with the Sloan Digital Sky Survey*]{} (ASP: San Francisco), ed. G. Richards & P. Hall
M. Fukugita [*et al.*]{}, 1996, [*AJ*]{}, 111, 1748
J. Gunn [*et al.*]{}, 1998, [*AJ*]{}, 116, 3040
P. Hall [*et al.*]{}, 2002, [*ApJS*]{}, 141, 267
P. Hall & D. Hutsemékers 2003, in [*Active Galactic Nuclei from Central Engine to Host Galaxy*]{} (ASP: San Francisco), ed. S. Collin [*et al.*]{}, 209
D. Hogg [*et al.*]{}, 2001, [*AJ*]{}, 122, 2129
R. Maiolino [*et al.*]{}, 2004, [*A&A*]{}, in press (astro-ph/0312402)
J. Pier [*et al.*]{}, 2003, [*AJ*]{}, 125, 1559
G. Richards [*et al.*]{}, 2002, [*AJ*]{}, 123, 2945
Z. Shang [*et al.*]{}, 2003, [*ApJ*]{}, 586, 52
J. Smith [*et al.*]{}, 2002, [*AJ*]{}, 123, 2121
C. Stoughton [*et al.*]{}, 2002, [*AJ*]{}, 123, 485
E. Wampler, N. Chugai & P. Petitjean, 1995, [*ApJ*]{}, 443, 586
D. York [*et al.*]{}, 2000, [*AJ*]{}, 120, 1579
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- |
[^1]\
Instituto de Física Corpuscular,\
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas-Universitat de València,\
Parc Científic, E-46980 Paterna (Valencia), Spain.\
E-mail:
title: 'Tevatron anomalies and LHC cross-checks'
---
Introduction
============
Top quark production at hadron colliders is one of the most active fields of current theoretical and experimental studies [@Galtieri:2011yd], and most probably the most promising probe of physics beyond the Standard Model (SM). Sizable differences have been observed between theory predictions [@Antunano:2007da; @Kuhn:1998kw; @Kuhn:1998jr; @Bowen:2005ap] for the top quark charge asymmetry and measurements by the CDF and the D0 collaborations [@Abazov:2011rq; @d0; @Aaltonen:2011kc; @cdf19] at the Tevatron. The discrepancy is particularly pronounced for the subsample of $t\bar t$ pairs with large invariant mass, $m_{t\bar t} > 450$ GeV, and the asymmetry defined in the $t\bar t$ rest frame, where a $3.4 \sigma$ effect has been claimed [@Aaltonen:2011kc]. It is interesting to note, however, that the discrepancy is less prominent in the laboratory frame [@Aaltonen:2011kc]. The D0 Collaboration also finds positive discrepancies with the SM [@Abazov:2011rq]. These discrepancies have triggered a large number of theoretical investigations, using these results, either to restrict new physics like heavy axigluons [@Ferrario:2009bz; @Rodrigo:2010gm] or to postulate a variety of new phenomena in the t-channel [@Jung:2009jz; @Cheung:2009ch; @Shu:2009xf]. At the same time, the robustness of the leading order QCD prediction has been studied in [@Almeida:2008ug; @Ahrens:2010zv], where it has been argued that next-to-leading (NLL) as well as next-to-next-to leading (NNLL) logarithmic corrections do not significantly modify the leading order result, in agreement with the approach advocated in [@Kuhn:1998kw; @Kuhn:1998jr] (Note, however, the large corrections observed in Ref. [@Dittmaier:2008uj] for the corresponding studies of the $t\bar t$+jet sample). A small modification of the SM prediction arises from inclusion of QED corrections. In Ref. [@Kuhn:1998kw] this effect was estimated to lead to an increase of the the QCD asymmetry by a factor 1.09, in recent analysis [@arXiv:1109.6830; @Hollik:2011ps], however, an enhancement factor of 1.2 has been obtained. Obviously this small increase of the SM prediction for the asymmetry cannot resolve the discrepancy between theory an experiment mentioned above.
In this talk we revisit the SM prediction of the top quark charge asymmetry at the Tevatron and the LHC [@arXiv:1109.6830]. We paid special attention to the electroweak corrections. We summarize the experimental measurements of the asymmetry and update the pull of their discrepancy with the SM. We also analyze the effect of introducing a cut in the $t\bar t$ transverse momentum (see also [@Demina]). Finally, we introduce a new quantity $A_{t\bar t}(Y)$, which measures the forward–backward asymmetry with respect to the average rapidity of top and antitop quarks, being a suitable observable both at the Tevatron and the LHC. Beyond the SM contributions to the asymmetry have also been discussed in this conference in [@Westhoff], and will not be covered in this document.
The charge asymmetry in the SM
==============================
The dominant contribution to the charge asymmetry originates from $q\bar{q}$ annihilation [@Kuhn:1998kw; @Kuhn:1998jr]. Specifically, it originates from the interference between the Born amplitudes for $q\bar{q}\to Q\bar{Q}$ and the part of the one-loop correction, which is antisymmetric under the exchange of quark and antiquark (box and crossed box). To compensate the infrared divergences, this virtual correction must be combined with the interference between initial and final state radiation. Diagrams with triple gluon coupling in both real and virtual corrections give rise to symmetric amplitudes and can be ignored. The corresponding contribution to the rate is conveniently expressed by the absorptive contributions (cuts) of the diagrams depicted in Fig \[fig:cut\]. A second contribution to the asymmetry from quark-gluon scattering (“flavor excitation”) hardly contributes to the asymmetry at the Tevatron. At the LHC, it enhances the asymmetry in suitable chosen kinematical regions [@Kuhn:1998jr].
(200,70)(0,0)
(-10,40)
(40,0)[2]{} (70,0)[2]{} (0,30)[2]{} (0,-30)[2]{} (-60,30)[2]{} (-60,-30)[2]{} (-60,30)(0,30)[5]{}[6]{} (0,-30)(-60,-30)[5]{}[6]{} (40,0)(70,0)[4]{}[3]{} (0,30)(0,-30) (0,-30)(40,0) (40,0)(0,30) (100,30)(70,0) (70,0)(100,-30) (-90,30)(-60,30) (-60,30)(-60,-30) (-60,-30)(-90,-30) (25,30)(25,-30)[5]{} (20,40)(-20,-40)[5]{} (0,-45)\[\][(a)]{}
(195,40)
(40,0)[2]{} (70,0)[2]{} (0,30)[2]{} (0,-30)[2]{} (-60,30)[2]{} (-60,-30)[2]{} (-60,30)(0,-30)[5]{}[8]{} (0,30)(-60,-30)[5]{}[8]{} (40,0)(70,0)[5]{}[3]{} (0,30)(0,-30) (0,-30)(40,0) (40,0)(0,30) (100,30)(70,0) (70,0)(100,-30) (-90,30)(-60,30) (-60,30)(-60,-30) (-60,-30)(-90,-30) (25,30)(25,-30)[5]{} (20,40)(-20,-40)[5]{} (0,-45)\[\][(b)]{}
Diagrams similar to those depicted in Fig. \[fig:cut\], where one of the gluons has been substituted by a photon, also lead to a contribution to the charge asymmetry from mixed QED-QCD corrections. The relative factor between QCD and QED asymmetries amounts to f\_q\^[QED]{} = 3 = Q\_t Q\_q \[eq:fqQED\] for one quark species, and to f\^[QED]{} = = 0.18 , \[eq:QED\] after convolution with the PDFs if one considers as a first approximation that the relative importance of $u\bar u$ versus $d\bar d$ annihilation at the Tevatron is $4:1$. Thus, to an enhancement of nearly twenty percent of the QCD asymmetry, in good agreement with the more detailed numerical studies of [@arXiv:1109.6830; @Hollik:2011ps]. At the LHC, the relative importance of $u\bar u$ versus $d\bar d$ annihilation is approximately $2:1$, thus reducing $f^{\rm QED}$ by a factor $5/7$ down to $0.13$. Similarly, weak contributions with the photon replaced by the $Z$ boson should be considered at the same footing. However, as a consequence of the cancellation between up and down quark contributions, and the smallness of the weak coupling, the weak corrections at the Tevatron are smaller by more than a factor $10$ than the corresponding QED result. For proton-proton collisions the cancellation between up and down quark contributions is even stronger and the total weak correction is completely negligible.
Tevatron
========
Assuming that the rapidities of $t$ and $\bar t$ have been measured simultaneously, one defines the asymmetry A\_[t|t]{} (Y)= , \[eq:pair\] where $Y=(y_t+y_{\bar t})/2$ has been fixed. An almost flat asymmetry $A_{t\bar t} (Y)$ of around $8\%$ is predicted at Tevatron as a function of $Y$ (Fig. \[fig:AY\] left). Two versions of the integrated asymmetry have been introduced in Refs. [@Antunano:2007da; @Kuhn:1998kw; @Kuhn:1998jr]: the forward–backward asymmetry in the laboratory frame A\_[lab]{}= = , and the asymmetry in the $t\bar t$ rest frame A\_[t|t]{}= . Results for both of them in the SM are listed in Table \[tab:Attbar\]. These predictions include also the QED and weak (strongly suppressed) corrections. Those corrections enhance the QCD asymmetry by an overall factor $1.21$, which is slightly different from due to the deviation of the relative amount of $u\bar u$ and $d\bar d$ contributions from the simple approximation $4:1$.
![Pair charge asymmetry $A_{t\bar t} (Y)$ as a function of the mean rapidity $Y=(y_t+y_{\bar t})/2$. Solid line: without cut on $p_\perp^{t\bar t}$, dotted/dashed lines: with cut on $p_\perp^{t\bar t}$. \[fig:AY\]](pairptTevatron.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"} ![Pair charge asymmetry $A_{t\bar t} (Y)$ as a function of the mean rapidity $Y=(y_t+y_{\bar t})/2$. Solid line: without cut on $p_\perp^{t\bar t}$, dotted/dashed lines: with cut on $p_\perp^{t\bar t}$. \[fig:AY\]](pairptLHC7.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}
laboratory $A_{\rm lab}$ $m_{t\bar t}< 450$ GeV $m_{t\bar t}> 450$ GeV
------------------------- ---------------- ------------------------ ------------------------ ---------------- ----------------
SM 0.056 (7) 0.029 (2) 0.102 (9)
MCFM [@Aaltonen:2011kc] 0.038 (6)
$t\bar t$ rest frame $A_{t \bar t}$ $m_{t\bar t}< 450$ GeV $m_{t\bar t}> 450$ GeV $|\Delta y|<1$ $|\Delta y|>1$
SM 0.087 (10) 0.062 (4) 0.128 (11) 0.057 (4) 0.193 (15)
MCFM [@Aaltonen:2011kc] 0.058 (9) 0.040 (6) 0.088 (13) 0.039 (6) 0.123 (18)
: Predicted asymmetries in the laboratory $A_{\rm lab}$ and the $t\bar t$ rest frame $A_{t \bar t}$ at Tevatron. Predictions are given also for samples with the top quark pair invariant mass $m_{t\bar t}$ above and below $450$ GeV, and with $|\Delta y|=|y_t-y_{\bar t}|$ larger or smaller than one in the $t\bar t$ rest frame. \[tab:Attbar\]
In order to compare theoretical results in the SM with the most recent measurements at Tevatron, predictions in Table \[tab:Attbar\] are presented also for samples with $m_{t\bar t}$ larger and smaller than $450$ GeV, and with $|\Delta y| = |y_t-y_{\bar t}|$ larger and smaller than $1$. It is also interesting to compare these results with those based on a Monte Carlo prediction [@Aaltonen:2011kc] based on MCFM [@Campbell:1999ah]. The enhancement factor of the SM result in Table \[tab:Attbar\] compared to MCFM of about $1.5$ is easily understood: a factor $1.2$ originates from the inclusion of QED effects. Another factor of about $1.3$ originates from normalizing with respect to the Born cross-section instead of the NLO result. Since the asymmetric part of the cross-section is presently known to LO only we consider the normalization to the LO cross-section more plausible [@Kuhn:1998kw; @Kuhn:1998jr; @Almeida:2008ug; @Ahrens:2010zv].
![Summary of experimental measurements of the charge asymmetry in comparison with the SM theoretical predictions. The histogram represents the pull of the discrepancy for each measurement. \[fig:thexp\]](summaryasymtry.eps){width="6cm"}
A graphical illustration of the results in terms of the ”pull” (measured in standard deviations) is shown in Fig. \[fig:thexp\]. The systematic upward shift of all but two Tevatron results is evident. The highest discrepancy, as has extensively been discussed in the literature, occurs for samples with $m_{t\bar t} > 450$ GeV and the charge asymmetry defined in the $t\bar t$ rest frame. Also shown in this Figure are preliminary results from CMS [@CMS] and ATLAS [@ATLAS] with a slight pull in the opposite direction.
The impact of cuts on hard gluon (and photon) radiation on $A_{t\bar t} (Y)$ is also shown in Fig. \[fig:AY\]. The dotted and dashed curves in Fig. \[fig:AY\] show the effect of a cut on $p_\perp^{t\bar t}$ for values of $p_\perp^{\rm max} = 10$ GeV and $20$ GeV, respectively. An increase of the asymmetry by more than a factor 1.5 in the central region is observed for the most restrictive choice of $10$ GeV, and even a fairly loose $p_\perp^{\rm max} = 20$ GeV modifies the asymmetry by up to a factor 1.3.
LHC
===
The charge asymmetry can also be investigated in proton-proton collisions at the LHC [@Antunano:2007da; @Kuhn:1998kw; @Kuhn:1998jr] by exploiting the small $t\bar t$ sample produced in annihilation of valence quarks and antiquarks from the sea. Since valence quarks carry on average more momentum than sea antiquarks, production of top quarks with larger rapidities will be preferred in the SM, and antitop quarks will be produced more frequently at smaller rapidities. This observation suggests to define the cut-dependent asymmetries A\_C\^[in]{}(y\_C) = \[eq:aCin\] A\_C\^[out]{}(y\_C) = , which serve to characterize the depletion of top quarks in the central region ($A_C^{\rm in}(y_C)>A_C^{\rm out}(y_C)$ for $y_C \lesssim 0.7$ approximately [@Antunano:2007da; @Ferrario:2008wm; @Ferrario:2009ee]), and their enhancement at larger rapidities; $A_C^{\rm out}$ is much larger than $A_C^{\rm in}$ at large values of the rapidity cut $y_C$ [@arXiv:1109.6830]. This is because the central region is dominated by gluon fusion processes, while the sample with large rapidities has a larger relative content of $q\bar q$ initiated events. The statistical significance of both observables is, however, very similar [@Hewett:2011wz] because the larger size of the asymmetry $A_C^{\rm out}$ with respect to $A_C^{\rm in}$ is compensated by the lower rate of events at larger rapidities.
The recent CMS [@CMS] and ALTAS [@ATLAS] analysis have considered also the cut-independent charge asymmetries A\_C\^= A\_C\^y = , where $\Delta_\eta = |\eta_t|-|\eta_{\bar t}|$ and $\Delta_y = |y_t|-|y_{\bar t}|$ or $y_t^2-y_{\bar t}^2$. The SM predictions for the integrated asymmetries are listed Table \[tab:AttbarmultiTeV\] for different center-of-mass energies of the LHC, together with the experimental results for $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV. Both experiments obtain negative asymmetries, although compatible with the SM prediction within uncertainties. New analysis with larger statistics are underway.
$A_C^\eta$ $A_C^y$ $A_{t\bar t}^{\rm cut}(Y_{\rm cut}=0.7)$
-------------------------- ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------
LHC 7 TeV 0.0136 (8) 0.0115 (6) 0.0203 (8)
LHC 14 TeV 0.0077 (4) 0.0059 (3) 0.0100 (4)
LHC 7 TeV CMS [@CMS] -0.016 $\pm$ 0.030 ${}^{+0.010}_{-0.019}$ -0.013 $\pm$ 0.026 ${}^{+0.026}_{-0.021}$
LHC 7 TeV ATLAS [@ATLAS] -0.024 $\pm$ 0.016 $\pm$ 0.023
: SM cut-independent charge asymmetries $A_\eta$ and $A_y$, and integrated pair charge asymmetry $A_{t\bar t}^{cut}(Y_{\rm cut}=0.7)$, at different LHC energies. Summary of recent measurements by CMS and ATLAS. \[tab:AttbarmultiTeV\]
Top quark production in proton-proton collisions is dominated by gluon fusion, which, in turn, is dominant in the central region. Conversely, quark-antiquark annihilation will be more enriched for events with $t\bar t$ at larger rapidities (and larger $m_{t\bar t}$). This suggest to employ the definition of , which is essentially the asymmetry in the $t\bar t$ rest frame, also for the present case, and concentrate on $t\bar t$ events at large rapidities. The prediction for $A_{t\bar t} (Y)$ is shown in Fig. \[fig:AY\] for $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV (right plot). By construction, $A_{t\bar t} (Y)$ is now an antisymmetric function of $Y$. Since most of the charge asymmetry is concentrated at large rapidities the statistical significance of any measurement will be enhanced, if the sample is restricted to larger rapidities. Let us therefore define the quantity A\_[t|t]{}\^[cut]{} (Y\_[cut]{})= , \[eq:paircut\] where $Y>Y_{\rm cut}$. Theoretical predictions in the SM for $A_{t\bar t}^{\rm cut} \, (Y_{\rm cut}=0.7)$ are presented in Table \[tab:AttbarmultiTeV\]. QED and weak corrections amount to roughly a factor 1.1.
Summary
=======
Tevatron has shown in the last years a systematic upward discrepancy in the measurement of the top quark charge asymmetry with respect to theoretical predictions in the SM. These discrepancies have triggered a large number of theoretical speculations about possible contributions beyond the SM. The Tevatron collaborations can still increase the statistical significance of their measurements, particularly by combining CDF and D0 results. On the other hand, the LHC, due to his present good performance, will provide quite soon competitive and accurate measurements of this effect.
[99]{}
A. B. Galtieri [*et al.*]{} \[ CDF and D0 Collaboration \], arXiv:1109.2163 \[hep-ex\].
O. Antuñano, J. H. Kühn, G. Rodrigo, Phys. Rev. [**D77** ]{} (2008) 014003 \[arXiv:0709.1652 \[hep-ph\]\].
J. H. Kühn, G. Rodrigo, Phys. Rev. [**D59** ]{} (1999) 054017 \[hep-ph/9807420\].
J. H. Kühn, G. Rodrigo, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**81** ]{} (1998) 49-52 \[hep-ph/9802268\].
M. T. Bowen, S. D. Ellis, D. Rainwater, Phys. Rev. [**D73** ]{} (2006) 014008 \[hep-ph/0509267\].
V. M. Abazov [*et al.*]{} \[ D0 Collaboration \], arXiv:1107.4995 \[hep-ex\].
V. M. Abazov [*et al.*]{} \[D0 Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**100**]{} (2008) 142002 \[arXiv:0712.0851 \[hep-ex\]\]. T. Aaltonen [*et al.*]{} \[ CDF Collaboration \], Phys. Rev. [**D83** ]{} (2011) 112003 \[arXiv:1101.0034 \[hep-ex\]\].
T. Aaltonen [*et al.*]{} \[CDF Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**101**]{} (2008) 202001 \[arXiv:0806.2472 \[hep-ex\]\]. P. Ferrario, G. Rodrigo, Phys. Rev. [**D80** ]{} (2009) 051701 \[arXiv:0906.5541 \[hep-ph\]\].
G. Rodrigo, P. Ferrario, Nuovo Cim. [**C33** ]{} (2010) 04 \[arXiv:1007.4328 \[hep-ph\]\].
S. Jung, H. Murayama, A. Pierce, J. D. Wells, Phys. Rev. [**D81** ]{} (2010) 015004 \[arXiv:0907.4112 \[hep-ph\]\].
K. Cheung, W. -Y. Keung, T. -C. Yuan, Phys. Lett. [**B682** ]{} (2009) 287-290 \[arXiv:0908.2589 \[hep-ph\]\]
J. Shu, T. M. P. Tait, K. Wang, Phys. Rev. [**D81** ]{} (2010) 034012 \[arXiv:0911.3237 \[hep-ph\]\]
L. G. Almeida, G. F. Sterman, W. Vogelsang, Phys. Rev. [**D78** ]{} (2008) 014008 \[arXiv:0805.1885 \[hep-ph\]\].
V. Ahrens, A. Ferroglia, M. Neubert, B. D. Pecjak, L. L. Yang, JHEP [**1009** ]{} (2010) 097 \[arXiv:1003.5827 \[hep-ph\]\].
S. Dittmaier, P. Uwer, S. Weinzierl, Eur. Phys. J. [**C59** ]{} (2009) 625-646 \[arXiv:0810.0452 \[hep-ph\]\].
J. H. Kühn and G. Rodrigo, to appear in JHEP, arXiv:1109.6830 \[hep-ph\]. W. Hollik, D. Pagani, arXiv:1107.2606 \[hep-ph\].
R. Demina, Presented at HEP-EPS Grenoble 2011.
S. Westhoff, Presented at HEP-EPS Grenoble 2011, arXiv:1108.3341 \[hep-ph\].
J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis, Phys. Rev. [**D60** ]{} (1999) 113006 \[hep-ph/9905386\].
\[ CMS Collaboration \], CMS-PAS-TOP-10-010, CMS-PAS-TOP-11-014.
\[ ATLAS Collaboration \], ATLAS-CONF-2011-106.
P. Ferrario, G. Rodrigo, Phys. Rev. [**D78** ]{} (2008) 094018 \[arXiv:0809.3354 \[hep-ph\]\].
P. Ferrario, G. Rodrigo, JHEP [**1002** ]{} (2010) 051 \[arXiv:0912.0687 \[hep-ph\]\].
J. L. Hewett, J. Shelton, M. Spannowsky, T. M. P. Tait, M. Takeuchi, arXiv:1103.4618 \[hep-ph\].
[^1]: Supported by REA Grant Agreement PITN-GA-2010-264564 (LHCPhenoNet), by the MICINN Grant No. FPA2007-60323, and PR2010-0481, by CPAN (Grant No. CSD2007-00042), and by the Generalitat Valenciana Grant No. PROMETEO/2008/069. G.R. acknowledges hospitality at the Institut für Theoretische Teilchenphysik of the Karlsruher Institut für Technologie during the completion of this work, and J. H. Kühn for a fruitful collaboration.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We simultaneously fit a QCD-inspired parameterization of all accelerator data on forward proton-proton and antiproton-proton scattering amplitudes, [*together*]{} with cosmic ray data (using Glauber theory), to predict proton-air and proton-proton cross sections at energies near $\sqrt s \approx$ 30 TeV. The p-air cosmic ray measurements provide a strong constraint on the inclusive particle production cross section, as well as greatly reducing the errors on the fit parameters—in turn, greatly reducing the errors in the high energy proton-proton and proton-air cross section predictions.'
author:
- |
M. M. Block [^1]\
[*Department of Physics and Astronomy,*]{}\
[*Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208*]{}\
\
F. Halzen [^2]\
[*Department of Physics,*]{}\
[*University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706*]{}\
\
T. Stanev [^3]\
[*Bartol Research Institute, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716* ]{}\
\
title: |
\
[ Extending the Frontiers—Reconciling Accelerator and Cosmic Ray p-p Cross Sections ]{}
---
The energy range of cosmic ray experiments covers not only the energy of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), but extends beyond it. Cosmic ray experiments can measure the penetration in the atmosphere of these very high energy protons—however, extracting proton-proton cross sections from cosmic ray observations is far from straightforward [@gaisser]. By a variety of experimental techniques, cosmic ray experiments map the atmospheric depth at which cosmic ray initiated showers develop. The measured quantity is the shower attenuation length ($\Lambda_m$), which is not only sensitive to the interaction length of the protons in the atmosphere ($\lpa$), with $$\Lambda_m = k \lpa = k { 14.5 m_p \over \spai} \,, \label{eq:Lambda_m}$$ but also depends critically on the inelasticity, which determines the rate at which the energy of the primary proton is dissipated into electromagnetic shower energy observed in the experiment. The latter effect is taken into account in Eq.(\[eq:Lambda\_m\]) by the parameter $k$; $m_p$ is the proton mass and $\spai$ the inelastic proton-air cross section. The departure of $k$ from unity depends on the inclusive particle production cross section in nucleon and meson interactions on the light nuclear target of the atmosphere and its energy dependence.
The extraction of the pp cross section from the cosmic ray data is a two stage process. First, one calculates the $p$-air total cross section from the inelastic cross section inferred in Eq.(\[eq:Lambda\_m\]), where $$\spai = \spa - \spae - \spaqe \,. \label{eq:spa}$$ Next, the Glauber method[@yodh] transforms the value of $\spai$ into a proton-proton total cross section $\sigma_{pp}$; all the necessary steps are calculable in the theory, but depend sensitively on a knowledge of $B$, the slope of ${d\sigma_{pp}^{\rm el}\over dt}$, the $pp$ differential elastic scattering cross section, where $$B = \left[ {d\over dt} \left(\ln{d\sigma_{pp}^{\rm el}\over dt}\right)
\right]_{t=0} \,.$$ In Eq.(\[eq:spa\]) the cross section for particle production is supplemented with $\spae$ and $\spaqe$, the elastic and quasi-elastic cross section, respectively, as calculated by the Glauber theory, to obtain the total cross section $\spa$. We show in Fig.\[fig:p-air\]
plots of $B$ as a function of $\sigma_{pp}$, for 5 curves of different values of $\spai$. This summarizes the reduction procedure from the measured quantity $\Lambda_m$ (of Eq.\[eq:Lambda\_m\]) to $\sigma_{pp}$[@gaisser]. Also plotted in Fig.\[fig:p-air\] is a curve (dashed) of $B$ [*vs.*]{} $\sigma_{pp}$ which will be discussed later. Two significant drawbacks of this extraction method are that one needs:
1. [ a model of proton-air interactions to complete the loop between the measured attenuation length $\Lambda_m$ and the cross section $\spai$, [*i.e.,*]{} the value of $k$ in Eq. (\[eq:Lambda\_m\]).]{}
2. [a simultaneous relation between $B$ and $\sigma_{pp}$ at very high energies—well above the region currently accessed by accelerators.]{}
A proposal to minimize the impact of theory on these needs is the topic of this note.
We have constructed a QCD-inspired parameterization of the forward proton-proton and proton-antiproton scattering amplitudes[@block] which is analytic, unitary and fits all accelerator data[@orear] of $\sigma_{\rm tot}$, $B$ and $\rho$, the ratio of the real-to-imaginary part of the forward scattering amplitude; see Fig.\[fig:ppcurves\].
In addition, the high energy cosmic ray data of Fly’s Eye[@fly] and AGASSA[@akeno] experiments are also simultaneously used, [*i.e.*]{}, $k$ from Eq. (\[eq:Lambda\_m\]) is also a fitted quantity—we refer to this fit as a [*global*]{} fit[@nonglobal]. We emphasize that in the global fit, all 4 quantities, $\sigma_{\rm tot}$, $B$, $\rho$ and $k$, are [*simultaneously*]{} fitted. Because our parameterization is both unitary and analytic, its high energy predictions are effectively model-independent, if you require that the proton is asymptotically a black disk. Using vector meson dominance and the additive quark models, we find further support for our QCD fit—it accommodates a wealth of data on photon-proton and photon-photon interactions without the introduction of new parameters[@eduardo]. In particular, it also [*simultaneously*]{} fits $\sigma_{pp}$ and $B$, forcing a relationship between the two. Specifically, the $B$ [*vs.*]{} $\sigma_{pp}$ prediction of our fit completes the relation needed (using the Glauber model) between $\sigma_{pp}$ and $\spai$. The percentage error in the prediction of $\sigma_{pp}$ at $\sqrt s=30$ TeV is $\approx 1.2$%, due to the statistical error in the fitting parameters (see references [@block; @eduardo]). A [*major*]{} difference between the present result, in which we simultaneously fit the cosmic ray and accelerator data, and our earlier result[@nonglobal], in which only accelerator data are used, is a [*significant*]{} reduction (about a factor of 2.5) in the errors of $\sigma_{pp}$ at $\sqrt s=30$.
In Fig.\[fig:sigpp\_p-air\],
we have plotted the values of $\sigma_{pp}$ [*vs.*]{} $\spai$ that are deduced from the intersections of our $B$-$\sigma_{pp}$ curve with the $\spai$ curves of Fig.1. Figure \[fig:sigpp\_p-air\] allows the conversion of measured $\spai$ cross sections to $\sigma_{pp}$ total cross sections. The percentage error in $\spai$ is $\approx 0.8$ % near $\spai = 450 $mb, due to the errors in $\sigma_{pp}$ and $B$ resulting from the errors in the fitting parameters. Again, the global fit gives an error of a factor of about 2.5 smaller than our earlier result[@nonglobal], a [*distinct*]{} improvement.
When we confront our predictions of the p-air cross sections ($\spai$) as a function of energy with published cross section measurements of the Fly’s Eye[@fly] and AGASSA[@akeno] groups, we find that the predictions systematically are about one standard deviation below the [*published*]{} cosmic ray values. It is at this point important to recall Eq.(\[eq:Lambda\_m\]) and remind ourselves that the measured experimental quantity is $\Lambda_m$ and [*not*]{} $\spai$. We emphasize that the extraction of $\spai$ from the measurement of $\Lambda_m$ requires [*knowledge*]{} of the parameter $k$. The measured depth $X_{\rm max}$ at which a shower reaches maximum development in the atmosphere, which is the basis of the cross section measurement in Ref. [@fly], is a combined measure of the depth of the first interaction, which is determined by the inelastic cross section, and of the subsequent shower development, which has to be corrected for. $X_{\rm max}$ increases logarithmically with energy with elongation rate ($\Delta X_{\rm max}$ per decade of Lab energy) of 50–60 g/cm$^2$ in calculations with QCD-inspired hadronic interaction models. The position of $X_{\rm max}$ directly affects the rate of shower attenuation with atmospheric depth, which is the alternative procedure for extracting $\spai$. The rate of shower development and its fluctuations are the origin of the deviation of $k$ from unity in Eq.(\[eq:Lambda\_m\]). Its predicted values range from 1.5 for a model where the inclusive cross section exhibits Feynman scaling, to 1.1 for models with large scaling violations[@gaisser]. The comparison between prediction and experiment is further confused by the fact that the AGASA[@akeno] and Fly’s Eye[@fly] experiments used different values of $k$ in the analysis of their data, [*i.e.,*]{} AGASA used $k=1.5$ and Fly’s Eye used $k=1.6$.
We therefore decided to let $k$ be a free parameter and to make a global fit to the accelerator and cosmic ray data, as emphasized earlier. This neglects the possibility that $k$ may show a weak energy dependence over the range measured. Recently, Pryke[@pryke] has made Monte Carlo model simulations that indicate that $k$ is compatible with being energy-independent. Using an energy-independent $k$, we find that $k=1.349\pm 0.045$, where the error in $k$ is the statistical error of the global fit. By combining the results of Fig.\[fig:ppcurves\](a) and Fig.\[fig:sigpp\_p-air\], we can predict the variation of $\spai$ with energy, $\sqrt s$. In Fig.\[fig:p-aircorrected2\]
we have [*rescaled*]{} the published high energy data for $\spai$ (using the common value of $k=1.349$), and plotted the revised data against our prediction of $\spai$ [*vs.*]{} $\sqrt s$.
The plot of $\sigma_{pp}$ [*vs.*]{} $\sqrt s$, including the rescaled cosmic ray data is shown in Fig.\[fig:4sigtotcr\]. Clearly, we have an excellent fit, with good agreement between AGASA and Fly’s Eye. In order to extract the cross sections’ energy dependence from the cosmic ray data, the experimenters of course assigned energy values to their cross sections. Since the cosmic ray spectra vary so rapidly with energy, we must allow for systematic errors in $k$ due to possible energy misassignments. At the quoted experimental energy resolutions, $\Delta{\rm Log}_{10}(E_{\rm lab}({\rm ev}))=0.12$ for AGASSA[@akeno] and $\Delta{\rm Log}_{10}(E_{\rm lab}({\rm ev}))=0.4$ for Fly’s Eye[@fly], where $E_{\rm lab}$ is in electron volts, we find from the curve in Fig.\[fig:p-aircorrected2\] that $\Delta
k/k=0.0084$ for AGASSA[@akeno] and $\Delta k/k=0.0279$ for Fly’s Eye[@fly]. We estimate conservatively that experimental energy resolution introduces a systematic error in $k$ such that $\Delta k_{\rm systematic}=\sqrt
{(\Delta k_{\rm AGASSA}^2+\Delta k_{\rm FLYSEYE}^2)/2}= 0.028$. Thus, we write our final result as $k=1.349\pm 0.045\pm 0.028$, where the first error is statistical and the last error is systematic.
Recently, Pryke[@pryke] has published a comparative study of high statistics simulated air showers for proton primaries, using four combinations of the MOCCA[@mocca] and CORSIKA[@corsika] program frameworks, and SIBYLL[@sibyll] and QGSjet[@qgsjet] high energy hadronic interaction models. He finds $k=1.30
\pm 0.04$ and $k=1.32 \pm 0.03$ for the CORSIKA-QGSjet and MOCCA-Internal models, respectively, which are in excellent agreement with our measured result, $k=1.349\pm 0.045\pm 0.028$.
Further, Pryke[@pryke] obtains $k=1.15 \pm 0.03$ and $k=1.16 \pm 0.03$ for the CORSIKA-SIBYLL and MOCCA-SIBYLL models, respectively, whereas the SYBILL[@gaisser] group finds $k=1.2$, which is not very different from the Pryke value. However, the SYBILL-based models, with $k=$1.15–1.20, are significantly different from our measurement of $k=1.349\pm 0.045\pm 0.028$. At first glance, this appears somewhat strange, since our model for forward scattering amplitudes and SIBYLL share the same underlying physics. The increase of the total cross section with energy to a black disk of soft partons is the shadow of increased particle production which is modeled in SYBILL by the production of (mini)-jets in QCD. The difference between the $k$ values of 1.15–1.20 and 1.349 results from the very rapid rise of the $pp$ cross section in SIBYLL at the highest energies. This is an artifact of the fixed cutoff in transverse momentum used to compute the mini-jet production cross section, and is not a natural consequence of the physics in the model. There are ways to remedy this.
In conclusion, the overall agreement between the accelerator and the cosmic ray $pp$ cross sections with our QCD-inspired fit, as shown in Fig.\[fig:4sigtotcr\], is striking. We find that the accelerator and cosmic ray $pp$ cross sections are readily reconcilable using a value of $k=1.349\pm 0.045\pm 0.028$, which is both model independent and energy independent—this determination of $k$ severely constrains any model of high energy hadronic interactions. We predict high energy $\sigma_{pp}$ and $\spai$ cross sections that are accurate to $\approx$ 1.2% and 0.8%, respectively, at $\sqrt s=30$ TeV.
At the LHC ($\sqrt s=14$ TeV), we predict $\sigma_{\rm tot}=107.9\pm 1.2$ mb for the total cross section, $B=19.59\pm 0.11$ (GeV/c)$^{-2}$ for the nuclear slope and $\rho=0.117\pm
0.001$, where the quoted errors are due to the statistical errors of the fitting parameters.
In the near term, we look forward to the possibility of repeating this analysis with the higher statistics of the HiRes[@HiRes] cosmic ray experiment that is currently in progress and the Auger[@Auger] Observatory.
[99]{}
R. Engel [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. D[**58**]{}, 014019, 1998.
T. K. Gaisser [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. D[**36**]{}, 1350, 1987.
M. M. Block [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. D[**45**]{}, 839, 1992.
We have now included in the accelerator data the new E-811 high energy cross section at the Tevatron: C. Avila [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Lett. B [**445**]{}, 419, 1999. R. M. Baltrusaitis [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**52**]{}, 1380, 1984. M. Honda [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**70**]{}, 525, 1993. In an earlier communication, the accelerator data [*alone*]{} were fitted. Using the parameters from that fit, we then made a [*separate*]{} fit of the cosmic ray data to the value of $k$; see M. M. Block [*et al.*]{}, e:-Print Archive: [**hep-ph/9908222**]{}, Phys. Rv. Lett. [**83**]{}, 4926, 1999. In this work, we make a [*simultaneous*]{} fit of the accelerator [*and*]{} the cosmic ray data, a much more complicated and very lengthy numerical analysis—but also a much superior physical analysis, resulting in greatly reduced errors in our predictions of high energy values of $\sigma_{pp}$ and $\spai$. M. M. Block [*et al.*]{}, e-Print Archive: [**hep-ph/9809403**]{}, Phys. Rev. D[**60**]{}, 054024, 1999. C. L. Pryke, (2000), e-Print Archive: [**astro-ph/0003442**]{}. A. M. Hillas, Nuc. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) [**52B**]{}, 29, 1997. J. Knapp [*et al.*]{}, Reports [**FZKA 6019**]{} and [**FZKA 5828**]{} (1998 and 1996), Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe. Available from [ http://www-ik3.fzk.de/ heck/corsika/]{}. R. S. Fletcher [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. D[**50**]{}, 5710, 1994. N. N. Kalmykov [*et al.*]{}, Nuc. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) [**52B**]{}, 17, 1997. See http://sunshine.chpc.utah.edu/research/cosmic/hires/ The Pierre Auger Project Design Report, Fermilab report (Feb. 1997).
[^1]: Work partially supported by Department of Energy contract DA-AC02-76-Er02289 Task B.
[^2]: Work partially supported by Department of Energy Grant No. DE-FG02-95ER40896 and the University of Wisconsin Research Committee with funds granted by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation.
[^3]: Work partially supported by the U.S. Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG02-91ER40626.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this study we performed an initial investigation and evaluation of altmetrics and their relationship with public policy citation of research papers. We examined methods for using altmetrics and other data to predict whether a research paper is cited in public policy and applied receiver operating characteristic curve on various feature groups in order to evaluate their potential usefulness. From the methods we tested, classifying based on tweet count provided the best results, achieving an area under the ROC curve of 0.91.'
author:
- Christian Bailey
- Bharat Kale
- Jamieson Walker
- Harish Varma Siravuri
- Hamed Alhoori
- 'Michael E. Papka'
bibliography:
- 'sigproc.bib'
title: Exploring Features for Predicting Policy Citations
---
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'New wide-field images of the $\rho$ Ophiuchus molecular cloud at 850 and 450 $\mu$m obtained with SCUBA on the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope reveal a wide variety of large-scale features that were previously unknown. Two linear features each 4$^\prime$ (0.2 pc) in length extend to the north of the bright emission region containing SM1 and VLA 1623. These features may correspond to the walls of a previously unidentified outflow cavity, or the boundary of a photon dominated region powered by a nearby B star. A previously unidentified source is located in the north-east region of the image. The properties of this source (diameter $\sim 5000$ AU, mass $\sim 0.3-1$ M$_\odot$) suggest that it is a pre-protostellar core. Two arcs of emission are seen in the direction of the north-west extension of the VLA 1623 outflow. The outer arc appears relatively smooth at 850 $\mu$m and is estimated to have a mass of $\sim 0.3$ M$_\odot$, while the inner arc breaks up into a number of individual clumps, some of which are previously identified protostars.'
author:
- 'Christine D. Wilson, Lorne W. Avery, Michel Fich, Doug Johnstone, Gilles Joncas, Lewis B. G. Knee, Henry E. Matthews, George F. Mitchell, Gerald H. Moriarty-Schieven, Ralph E. Pudritz'
title: 'Submillimeter Continuum Emission in the $\rho$ Ophiuchus Molecular Cloud: Filaments, Arcs, and an Unidentified Far-Infrared Object'
---
Introduction
============
Young star-forming regions can encompass a wide variety of sources and phenomena, from the pre-protostellar clumps and the quiescent filamentary structure of the parent molecular cloud, to low-mass protostars with their associated disks, jets, and outflows, to young massive stars powering extensive photon-dominated regions. In the nearest clouds, where we can achieve the best spatial resolution for studying small-scale phenomena such as circumstellar disks and for disentangling crowded clusters of protostars, the largest outflows may extend over tens of arcminutes (i.e. Dent, Matthews, & Walther 1995), while the molecular cloud itself may approach a degree or more in size (i.e. Maddalena et al. 1986). Thus, high resolution imaging over large fields of view is necessary for a complete understanding of such regions.
Many of these phenomena are best traced by continuum emission, particularly the high-density cores and envelopes associated with the early stages of star formation. Given the limited sensitivity of single-pixel bolometers, most surveys have targeted sources previously identified from larger area surveys in the near- or far-infrared (i.e. André & Montmerle 1994). Although such observations can give us a good understanding of the properties of young protostars, they cannot reveal the large-scale structures associated with the protostars and, in addition, may miss the coldest and most crowded objects. For example, a large-area survey of the $\rho$ Ophiuchus molecular cloud using the IRAM bolometer array (Motte, André, & Neri 1998) was able to identify a number of weaker sources located in and around the bright complex of emission associated with SM1 and VLA 1623 (André, Ward-Thompson, & Barsony 1993). With the advent of SCUBA (Holland et al. 1999) on the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope, we now have the opportunity to survey large areas of the sky in submillimeter continuum emission routinely. Sensitive, large-area surveys that extend beyond the known regions of bright emission are likely to reveal previously unknown features, as was clearly demonstrated by recent maps of the Orion A molecular cloud (Johnstone & Bally 1999). In this Letter, we present the first results from a large-area unbiased survey of the $\rho$ Ophiuchus molecular cloud at 850 and 450 $\mu$m.
Observations and Data Reduction
===============================
We observed a $20 \times 20^\prime$ region of the $\rho$ Ophiuchus molecular cloud roughly centered on the Ophiuchus A core on 1998 July 10 and 11 with the bolometer array SCUBA (Holland et al. 1999) at the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope. We observed in standard scan-mapping mode simultaneously at 850 and 450 $\mu$m. The region was broken down into four fields each measuring roughly $10^\prime \times 10^\prime$. In this paper, we present data for only the north-east field centered on 16:26:32 -24:22:30 (J2000); all subsequent discussion refers to this single field.
The field was mapped six times each night, with chop throws of 20$^{\prime\prime}$, 30$^{\prime\prime}$, and 65$^{\prime\prime}$ oriented in either the right ascension or declination directions. Each chop throw and direction was repeated at a different time on the two nights so that the scan direction would have a different orientation on each night. The data were acquired with 3$^{\prime\prime}$ sampling. The atmospheric optical depth, measured by sky dips approximately once an hour, was quite constant on the first night, with the value at zenith being 0.10 at 850 $\mu$m and 0.43 at 450 $\mu$m during the time these observations were obtained. On the second night, the optical depth improved steadily over the course of the observations, decreasing from 0.35 to 0.24 at 850 $\mu$m and from 1.77 to 1.33 at 450 $\mu$m. The pointing was checked every 45 minutes using the bright source IRAS 16293-2422 and was stable to better than 2$^{\prime\prime}$. The beam sizes measured from observations of Uranus obtained with the same observing method were 15.1$^{\prime\prime}$ (FWHM) at 850 $\mu$m and 9.5$^{\prime\prime}$ at 450 $\mu$m. The presence of an extended error beam can be seen at both wavelengths, with a FWHM of 36$^{\prime\prime}$ at 850 $\mu$m and 72$^{\prime\prime}$ at 450 $\mu$m. At 850 $\mu$m the peak of the error beam is 5.6% of that of the main beam, while at 450 $\mu$m the peak of the error beam is 3.6%. The observations of Uranus were also used to determine the calibration factor, which was 198 Jy Volt$^{-1}$ at 850 $\mu$m and 629 Jy Volt$^{-1}$ at 450 $\mu$m.
The individual scan maps were processed using the standard SCUBA software (Holland et al. 1999) into six independent dual-beam maps at each wavelength, with pixel size 3$^{\prime\prime}$. The maps have not been corrected for sky noise. The six dual-beam maps were exported to the MIRIAD software package (Sault, Teuben, & Wright 1995) to be analyzed using the maximum entropy algorithm. Each map was shifted by one half the chop throw and the six shifted maps were averaged to produce a “dirty map” of the region showing the pattern of the 6 chop throws. We then created an ideal “beam” consisting of the sum of one positive gaussian and six negative gaussians, each with a FWHM equal to that of the observed main beam, with the six negative gaussians offset from the origin by the six chop throws, and with peak amplitude one-sixth that of the positive gaussian. The contribution of the error beam was ignored in this analysis; the effect of this will be to increase artificially the integrated fluxes of extended sources above what would be observed with an ideal beam. For a gaussian source with a full-width half-maximum diameter of 35$^{\prime\prime}$, the net effect would be to increase the total 450 $\mu$m flux inside a 40$^{\prime\prime}$ radius annulus by about 30%. However, peak fluxes will be unaffected by this problem. The dirty map and the beam were then used as inputs to the miriad routine “maxen” to create a maximum entropy restored image of the scan-mapped field. Clean boxes were used to isolate the large negative bowls around the bright sources SM1, SM1N, SM2, and VLA 1623, which improved the image restoration. The final images still contain residuals of the negative chop throws at a level of 4-6% of the peak flux in the map. However, the negative bowls are much reduced in area and depth compared to the images obtained with the “Emerson II” technique (Holland et al. 1999) and, thus, are more useful for identifying large scale features in the map. The typical rms noise in the final maps far from the negative bowl is estimated to be 30 mJy beam$^{-1}$ at 850 $\mu$m and 250 mJy beam$^{-1}$ at 450 $\mu$m.
A Wealth of Previously Unknown Structures
=========================================
Linear Features
---------------
Color images of the 850 $\mu$m and 450 $\mu$m maps of the region around the Ophiuchus A cloud core are shown in Figure \[fig-1\]. One of the most striking aspects of these images is the two linear emission features extending from the northern tip of the bright complex of emission associated with the protostellar cores SM1, SM1N, SM2, and VLA 1623 (André et al. 1993). The two linear features appear to intersect near 16:26:29 -24:22:45 (J2000) and extend for at least 4$^\prime$ (0.2 pc) to the north-east and the north-west. The peak surface brightness in these linear features is 0.6-0.7 Jy beam$^{-1}$ at 850 $\mu$m near the SM1 complex, while at large distances from the complex the peak surface brightness falls to $\sim 0.1-0.2$ Jy beam$^{-1}$. These linear features are so weak that they can only be identified with the high sensitivity of SCUBA and in wide-field images which allow their large linear extent to be traced. Similar linear features have been seen recently in Orion A (Johnstone & Bally 1999).
In the vicinity of the intersection of the two features, there is strong CO emission which is blueshifted by 1-2 km s$^{-1}$ compared to the central velocity of the emission around VLA 1623 (D. Koerner, private communication). Thus, it is possible that these two linear features trace the walls of a previously unidentified outflow cavity. For comparison, the walls of the south-east outflow lobe created by VLA 1623 are faintly visible in Figure \[fig-1\]. This outflow would have an opening angle of 56$^o$, comparable to that observed for the L1551 outflow (Moriarty-Schieven et al. 1987). At the apex of the “V” formed by the two features there is a weak compact source, seen most easily in the 20% contour of Figure \[fig-1\]b. This source has been identified previously at 1.3 mm as A-MM6 (Motte et al. 1998) and could be the protostellar driver of the outflow (Figure \[fig-1\]). However, there are many other possible interpretations for these linear features. For example, they could trace two independent outflows, which would then have collimation factors of at least 7-10. Two independent outflows emanating from a single position have been observed in several other protostellar sources (i.e. L723, Anglada et al. 1991; IRAS 16293-2422, Mundy et al. 1992). Another possibility is that these structures are being externally heated by the photon-dominated region (PDR) produced by the young B3 star S1, which lies approximately 1.5$^\prime$ east of SM1N (i.e., see Motte et al. 1998). In this scenario, the north-east feature could mark the cavity wall containing gas and dust swept up by the PDR; indeed, the location of this feature matches well the edge of the PDR seen in ISO images (Abergel et al. 1996). The north-west feature might be material associated with a second outflow recently identified in this region (Kamazaki et al. 1998), which could be heated from the outside by the PDR. The presence of a weak linear feature along the southern edge of the map, which appears to lie along the northern edge of CO outflow associated with VLA 1623 (André et al. 1990), provides some support for this interpretation. Clearly, sensitive CO observations in the region of these new linear filaments, as well as continuum observations of regions which are not illuminated by a nearby massive star, would help to distinguish between these different interpretations.
Assuming a dust temperature of 30 K, a distance to $\rho$ Ophiuchus of 160 pc, and a dust opacity coefficient $\kappa = 0.02$ cm$^{2}$ g$^{-1}$ at 850 $\mu$m (i.e. Motte et al. 1998), we can estimate the total mass (gas plus dust) contained in these linear features. The 850 $\mu$m fluxes in the peak regions near the SM1 complex correspond to masses within a 15$^{\prime\prime}$ beam of 0.04-0.05 M$_\odot$. However, the presence of extended low level emission associated with the SM1 complex means that these masses are likely upper limits to the true masses. The masses in the strongest emission regions 2-4$^\prime$ along the linear features from this bright complex are each of order 0.01 M$_\odot$. The average surface brightness of 0.04 Jy beam$^{-1}$ along the outer 150$^{\prime\prime}$ of the north-east linear feature (excluding the bright base) translates into a mass of 0.03 M$_\odot$. Thus, the total mass in the north-east linear feature is likely to be of order 0.1 M$_\odot$. For comparison, this is similar to the mass of 0.09 M$_\odot$ estimated from CO observations of the IRAS 03282 outflow (Bachiller, Martin-Pintado, & Planesas 1991). However, the masses of $\sim 0.01$ M$_\odot$ in the individual clumps are substantially larger than the masses of $10^{-4}$ M$_\odot$ obtained for the CO bullets seen in extremely high velocity outflows (i.e. Bachiller et al. 1990).
A New Compact Source in Ophiuchus
---------------------------------
Another striking feature of the images presented in Figure \[fig-1\] is the presence of four bright compact sources that lie well outside the bright emission associated with SM1 and VLA 1623. Three of these sources are the previously identified protostars EL24, EL27, and GSS26 (i.e. André & Montmerle 1994), while the fourth, located in the north-east corner of our field, appears to be previously unidentified. We will refer to this north-east source as SMM16267-2417. (Note that Loren, Wootten, and Wilking (1990) detected DCO$^+$ emission $\sim 1^\prime$ north of this source, but the line emission was too weak for it to be designated as a DCO$^+$ core.) This source is located at 16:26:43.5 -24:17:26 (J2000) and has a peak flux of 0.4 Jy beam$^{-1}$ at 850 $\mu$m and 1.9 Jy beam$^{-1}$ at 450 $\mu$m. Its full-width half-maximum diameter at 850 $\mu$m deconvolved from the 15.1$^{\prime\prime}$ beam is $26 \times 34^{\prime\prime}$ or $\sim 5000$ AU. Assuming an uncertainty of 10% for each point in the observed 450 $\mu$m radial profile, a “by-eye” fit between radii of 9$^{\prime\prime}$ and 24$^{\prime\prime}$ suggests a slope of $-0.8\pm 0.2$. This slope is comparable to that seen in the outer portions of the pre-protostellar cores by Ward-Thompson et al. (1994). A more complete modeling of the radial profile of SMM16267-2417 will be presented in a future paper. No point-like source, or indeed any obvious emission, can be seen at any waveband in either the IRAS FRESCO or HIRES images, except at 100 $\mu$m where SMM16267-2417 is located on the northern slope of another structure to the south. Assuming a dust temperature of 10-20 K for SMM16267-2417 and the other parameters as described above for the linear features, the 850 $\mu$m flux implies a total mass of 0.3-1 M$_\odot$. These properties are all consistent with SMM16267-2417 being a pre-protostellar core (i.e. Ward-Thompson et al. 1994). However, if the linear features identified in this region indeed correspond to a molecular outflow, it is possible that SMM16267-2417 corresponds to shocked gas within the outflow cavity. Here again, CO and other line observations would help distinguish between these various possibilities.
The spectral index $\gamma$, defined such that the flux $S_{\nu}$ is proportional to $\nu^{\gamma}$ between 450 and 850 $\mu$m, is related to the dust index $\beta$ and the dust temperature $T$. At temperatures below $30\,$K (Ward-Thompson et al. 1994), the Rayleigh-Jeans assumption is inappropriate, and $\gamma$, $\beta$, and $T$ are related by $${S_{450} \over S_{850}} = (850/450)^\gamma
= {{e^{16.9/T}-1} \over {e^{32.0/T}-1}} (850/450)^{3+\beta}$$ where $S_{450}$ and $S_{850}$ are the fluxes at 450 and 850 $\mu$m. We have assumed that the gas is optically thin at 450 $\mu$m, which is appropriate if the flux originates from material that fills the beam. Using the integrated fluxes of 2.3 Jy at 850 $\mu$m and 19.3 Jy at 450 $\mu$m (correcting for the error beam as discussed in §2), SMM16267-2417 has an average spectral index of 3.3. The value of $\beta$ derived from these wavelengths is highly dependent on the assumed dust temperature. Assuming an uncertainty in the flux ratio of 20% and a dust temperature of 20 K, this spectral index corresponds to a value for $\beta$ of $2.1^{+0.2}_{-0.4}$. This value of $\beta$ is consistent with that found on large scales in the interstellar medium (Hildebrand 1983), but somewhat larger than the values of $\beta \sim 1$ that are typically found in compact cores and circumstellar disks (Beckwith & Sargent 1991).
Arcs and Other Features
-----------------------
Two curved arcs of continuum emission are clearly visible in the 850 $\mu$m image of Figure \[fig-1\]a to the north-west of the SM1 complex. The more distant arc (Arc \#2, at 16:26:10, -24:20) has a peak surface brightness of 0.29 Jy beam$^{-1}$ and an integrated flux of 3.7 Jy. Arc \#2 appears quite smooth and does not obviously break up into point sources. Assuming a dust temperature of 30 K, the total mass in this arc is 0.3 M$_\odot$. This arc may be related to the VLA 1623 outflow; although the outflow has not been mapped out this far (André et al. 1990, Dent et al. 1995), if the outflow continues on in the same direction in the outer portions, it would pass just to the south of this arc.
The inner arc (Arc \#1, at 16:26:20, -24:23), although similar in structure to Arc \#2, clearly breaks up into five clumps in the 850 $\mu$m map. From north to south, these clumps are A-MM4, LFAM1, A-MM1, A-MM3, and LFAM3 (André & Montmerle 1994, Motte et al. 1998). (We do not see a clear peak corresponding to A-MM2 in our 850 $\mu$m images.) At 850 $\mu$m, the emission from LFAM1 dominates the emission from GSS30-IRS1 and IRS2, although weak peaks at the approximate location of these sources can be seen in the higher resolution 450 $\mu$m map. Motte et al. (1998) suggested that the clumps A-MM1 to A-MM3 may be related to the VLA 1623 outflow, which passes through this region; however, A-MM4 lies well outside the outflow. The presence of Arc \#2 more distant from VLA 1623 but still coincident with the outflow suggests that in both cases we may be seeing continuum emission associated with bow shocks in the VLA 1623 outflow.
The research of MF, DJ, GJ, GFM, REP, and CDW is supported through grants from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. The JCMT is operated by the Joint Astronomy Centre on behalf of the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research, and the National Research Council of Canada.
Abergel, A. et al. 1996, , 315, L329
Anglada, G., Estalella, R., Rodriguez, L. F., Torrelles, J. M., Lopes, R., & Canto, J. 1991, , 376, 615
André, P., Martin-Pintado, J., Despois, D., & Montmerle, T. 1990, , 240, 321
André, P, & Montmerle, T. 1994, , 420, 837
André, P., Ward-Thompson, D., & Barsony, M. 1993, , 406, 122
Bachiller, R., Martin-Pintado, J., & Planesas, P. 1991, , 251, 639
Bachiller, R., Martin-Pintado, J., Tafalla, M., Cernicharo, J., & Lazareff, B. 1990, , 231, 174
Beckwith, S. V. W., & Sargent, A. I. 1991, , 381, 250
Dent, W. R. F., Matthews, H. E., & Walther, D. M. 1995, , 277, 193
Hildebrand, R. 1983, , 24, 267
Holland, W., et al., 1999, , in press (astro-ph/9809122)
Johnstone, D. & Bally, J., 1999, , 510, L49
Kamazaki, T., Saito, M., Umemoto, T., Hirano, N., Kitamura, Y., & Kawabe, R. 1998, in “The Physics and Chemistry of the Interstellar Medium”, poster abstract
Loren, R. B., Wootten, A., & Wilking, B. A. 1990, ApJ, 365, 269
Maddalena, R. J., Morris, M., Moscowitz, J., & Thaddeus, P. 1986, , 303, 375
Moriarty-Schieven, G. H., Snell, R. L., Strom, S. E., Schloerb, F. P., Strom, K. M., & Grasdalen, G. L. 1987, , 319, 742
Motte, F., André, P., & Neri, R. 1998 , 336, 150
Mundy, L. G., Wootten, A., Wilking, B. A., Blake, G. A., & Sargent, A. I. 1992, , 385, 306
Sault, R. J., Teuben, P. J., & Wright, M. C. H. 1995, in ASP Conf. Ser. 77, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems IV, ed. R. A. Shaw, H. E. Payne & J. J. E. Hayes (San Francisco: ASP), 433
Ward-Thompson, D., Scott, P. F., Hills, R. E., & André, P. 1994, , 268, 276
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
Primordial black holes that survive until the present have been considered as a dark matter candidate. In this paper we argue that primordial 2-2-hole remnants provide a more promising and testable option. 2-2-holes arise in quadratic gravity as a new family of classical solutions for ultracompact matter distributions and they possess the black hole exterior without an event horizon. They may serve as the endpoint of gravitational collapse, providing a resolution for the information loss problem. Intriguing thermodynamic behavior is found for these objects when sourced by a thermal gas. A large 2-2-hole radiates with a Hawking-like temperature and exhibits an entropy-area law. At a late stage, the evaporation slows down and essentially stops as the mass asymptotically approaches a minimal value. This remnant mass is determined by a fundamental scale in quadratic gravity. We study the cosmological and astrophysical implications of having these remnants as dark matter and derive the corresponding constraints. A distinctive phenomenon associated with remnant mergers occurs, predicting fluxes of high-energy astrophysical particles due to the spectacular evaporation of the merger product. Measurements of high-energy photon and neutrino fluxes could possibly bound the remnant mass to be not far above the Planck mass. Early-universe physics, on the other hand, requires that 2-2-holes quickly evolve into the remnant state after formation, putting an upper bound on the formation mass.\
\
*Keywords:* 2-2-hole remnant, quadratic gravity, dark matter, primordial black hole, horizonless ultracompact object, thermal radiation, binary merger, high-energy particle flux
author:
- 'Ufuk Aydemir[^1]'
- 'Bob Holdom[^2]'
- 'Jing Ren[^3]'
bibliography:
- 'References\_22\_holes.bib'
title: '**Not quite black holes as dark matter**'
---
Introduction\[sec:intro\]
=========================
With the direct detection of gravitational waves, a new era of testing the strong gravity regime has begun [@LIGOScientific:2019fpa]. The signals, which appear to originate from stellar-mass astrophysical black holes, are so far consistent with General Relativity (GR). However, the implications regarding physics near the black hole horizon are not clear, and it is indeed this regime where deviations from GR might make their first appearance. Such deviations are strongly motivated by the possible resolution of information loss paradox. In particular, it might be a result of the underlying quantum gravity, although at first glance the Planck scale physics is not expected around a macroscopic horizon from naive dimensional arguments. An extraordinary, yet simple, possibility is that quantum gravity effects prevents formation of the horizon, generating horizonless ultracompact objects instead of black holes. These objects appear similar to black holes for current observations, but they may leave distinctive imprints in gravitational wave signals [@Cardoso:2019rvt].
Another great puzzle confronting the modern physics for decades is dark matter, the nature of which has so far remained elusive with only evidence coming from gravitational interactions. Among the well studied dark matter candidates in the literature have been Primordial black holes (PBHs) [@Carr:1975qj]. They have recently garnered more attention because of the null results of searches for the dark matter particles as well as the new testing opportunities due to the direct detection of gravitational waves. Yet, the present mass fraction of PHBs in dark matter is heavily constrained. In the standard scenario, where the validity of Hawking radiation is assumed all the way down to complete evaporation, $M_\textrm{PBH}\gtrsim 10^{15}\,$g is required for PBHs to survive until now and account for the dark matter, for which only very few narrow mass windows are still available [@Carr:2009jm; @Carr:2016drx].
However, it has been conjectured that the evaporation may come to a stop at some stage, and instead of an explosion as the end point, a remnant is left behind and may serve as dark matter [@MacGibbon:1987my; @Barrow:1992hq; @Carr:1994ar]. For this case, the lower mass range $M_\textrm{PBH}\lesssim 10^{15}\,$g is still allowed. In fact, phenomenological studies show that all the observational constraints can be evaded if PBHs radiate away most of their energy before Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN). When the initial mass satisfies $M_\textrm{PBH}\lesssim 10^{6}\,$g, the leftover Planck mass remnants can account for all of dark matter [@Dalianis:2019asr]. The obvious challenge is then to understand the mechanism responsible for the generation of such remnants. Theoretically, black hole remnants can be realized by either modifying gravity or the matter sector [@Chen:2014jwq]. However, ideas along these lines are often dismissed, mainly because of their apparent ad-hoc nature and their failure to resolve the information loss paradox. Modifications around the macroscopic black hole horizon are already expected before reaching the remnant stage, which constitutes an obstacle in addressing the information loss problem with black hole remnants.
In this paper, a theoretical model for horizonless ultracompact objects as dark matter is investigated. Remarkably, a remnant naturally arises as a consequence of new physics at a microscopically small distance that in turn determines the mass of the remnant. The underlying theory is quadratic gravity, a candidate for quantum gravity in the framework of quantum field theories. By including all the quadratic curvature terms on top of the Einstein-Hilbert action, i.e. the Weyl term $C^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}C_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$ and the Ricci term $R^2$, quadratic gravity provides a renormalizable and asymptotically free UV completion of GR at dimension four spacetime [@Stelle:1976gc; @Voronov:1984kq; @Fradkin:1981iu; @Avramidi:1985ki].[^4]
The horizonless ultracompact object in question, referred to as a 2-2-hole, emanates as a classical solution in the theory when sourced by a compact matter distribution [@Holdom:2002xy; @Holdom:2016nek]. The 2-2-hole has no analog in GR and is closely related to the Weyl term. Its exterior closely resembles that of a black hole, while in the interior a novel high-curvature solution takes over. A transition region at around the would-be horizon is where significant deviations from a black hole first occur. As the most generic solution in the theory, it may serve as the endpoint of gravitational collapse. In contrast to many other ultracompact objects, a 2-2-hole can be arbitrarily heavy, but it has a minimum allowed mass $\Mmin$, thus indicating the existence of stable remnants. Therefore, not only does the 2-2-hole provide a resolution for information loss paradox due to the absence of horizon, the leftover remnants of primordial 2-2-holes formed in the early universe can very well be considered as a dark matter candidate.
To investigate 2-2-hole remnants as dark matter, their thermodynamic properties are essential. Recently, solutions sourced by a thermal gas were found in [@Holdom:2019ouz] and studied further in [@Ren:2019afg]. This simple form of matter may describe the final state of infalling matter in the high curvature interior. Unlike in GR, in quadratic gravity the thermal gas is able to support an ultracompact configuration without collapsing into a black hole. This model then enables the study of 2-2-hole thermodynamics in terms of properties of a thermal gas on a curved background. Thermal 2-2-holes with different masses exhibit qualitatively distinct behaviors [@Holdom:2019ouz; @Ren:2019afg]. A large 2-2-hole with mass away from $\Mmin$ resembles a black hole thermodynamically, notwithstanding its different origin. The temperature is proportional to Hawking temperature up to a constant and the entropy satisfies the area law. A small 2-2-hole with mass quite close to $\Mmin$, on the other hand, behaves more like an ordinary thermodynamic system. With both temperature and entropy approaching zero in the minimal mass limit, it behaves as a stable remnant.
Such a change in thermodynamic behavior in the minimal mass limit is not unprecedented and occurs in various models for black hole remnants, e.g. extremal black holes. What is appealing for the 2-2-hole case is that the absence of horizon and the stabilization mechanism for the small objects both stem from quadratic curvature terms that operate at high energies or curvatures. As a result, a large primordial 2-2-hole starts by radiating like a black hole with increasing temperature and radiation power. After reaching the peak temperature, it enters into the remnant stage with much lower temperature and power. During the course of evaporation, the entropy of 2-2-hole gradually decreases with the information carried out by the thermal radiation, as with any burning object. Therefore, unlike the case of black hole remnants, there is no issue of an arbitrarily large amount of entropy stored in a small-size object.
The observational constraints for primordial thermal 2-2-hole remnants as dark matter will be explored in this paper. For this purpose, thermodynamic features of 2-2-holes sourced by a thermal gas are elaborated in Sec. \[sec:thermal\], where similarities and differences from PHBs are discussed. The present-epoch observations for the 2-2-hole remnants are studied in Sec. \[sec:present\]. As a new phenomenon specific to 2-2-holes, the binary merger of two remnants gives rise to a high temperature product, with the excess energy released almost instantly by emitting high-energy particles. We explore this process and its observational consequences in detail in Sec. \[sec:merger\]. The early-universe physics for primordial 2-2-holes are investigated in Sec. \[sec:pheno\], including the requirement from the observed relic abundance and observations from BBN and CMB. The later mainly constrains the early-stage evaporation of primordial 2-2-holes. The observational constraints and their implications are discussed in Sec. \[sec:discuss\], with the main results summarized in Fig. \[fig:LUcons\] and Fig. \[fig:EUcons\] for the present-epoch and early-universe constraints, respectively. The paper is concluded in Sec. \[sec:final\].
Thermal 2-2-holes {#sec:thermal}
=================
[ ![\[fig:22holes\] Schematic plots for thermal 2-2-holes with different masses. $M_\textrm{peak}\approx 1.2\Mmin$ denotes the 2-2-hole mass at which the temperature at infinity is maximized. For each plot, the color represents relative magnitude of the temperature (or curvature invariants) as a function of the radial coordinate. The ticks denote the interior size and the would-be horizon size $r_H$.](22holeplot.pdf "fig:"){width="17cm"}]{}
The qualitative features of 2-2-holes are quite simple, although their solutions can only be found numerically due to the nontrivial field equations. Focusing on the spherically symmetric, asymptotically flat and static cases, a general 2-2-hole consists of an exterior that resembles the Schwarzschild solution with the same physical mass $M$, an interior characterized by a novel high-curvature region as dominated by the quadratic curvature terms and a transition region around the would-be horizon $r_H=2M\lp^2$ that links the two regimes. The existence of 2-2-holes relies on the Weyl term $C^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}C_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$ in the quadratic action, which introduces a new spin-2 mode with mass $m_2$. This mass scale determines the minimum mass for the 2-2-hole as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Mmin}
\hMmin\equiv\frac{\Mmin}{\Mp}\approx 0.63\frac{\Mp}{ m_2}\approx 0.63 \frac{\lambda_2}{\lp},\end{aligned}$$ meaning that the size of 2-2-holes is bounded from below by the Compton wavelength $\lambda_2$ of the spin-2 mode. There are two scenarios for quadratic gravity, as defined by the strength of dimensionless couplings associated with the quadratic curvature terms. In the strong coupling scenario, the Planck mass arises dynamically by dimensional transmutation, and there is only one mass scale $m_2\approx \Mp$, i.e. $\hMmin\approx 0.63$. In the weak coupling scenario, the Planck mass can arise either spontaneously through vacuum expectation values of some scalar fields or it can be put in explicitly. For this case, there can be a large mass-hierarchy with $m_2\ll \Mp$, i.e. $\hMmin\gg 1$.
We find notably different behaviors for thermal 2-2-holes, as shown schematically in Fig. \[fig:22holes\]. A large hole with $M\gtrsim M_\textrm{peak}$ has an extremely narrow transition region around $r_H$, and it appears very much like a black hole for an outside observer. The high temperature thermal gas filling the interior can be thought as a firewall with a large angular proper length $\sim r_H$ but with a rather small radial proper length $\sim \lambda_2$. This novel interior geometry leads to anomalous thermodynamics e.g. negative heat capacity and the area law for the entropy, as in the case of black holes but with different numerical values. A small 2-2-hole with $M\lesssim M_\textrm{peak}$ (“small’’ refers to $M$ being close to $\Mmin$ even when $\Mmin$ is large), on the other hand, has a broader transition region and a shrinking interior. Thermodynamically it behaves more like the self-gravitating radiation inside a box, with positive heat capacity and the entropy scaling trivially with the interior size. When $M\to \Mmin$, the temperature at infinity, entropy, and the interior size all approach zero. In between these two distinctive behaviors is the intermediate-mass realm, where the 2-2-hole temperature at infinity reaches a maximum. In Appendix \[sec:22hole\], we provide more details of the structure of 2-2-holes in these particular cases.
In the following, we first review thermodynamic properties of the thermal 2-2-hole in Sec. \[sec:thermo\], and then derive time evolutions of various quantities during the 2-2-hole evaporation in Sec. \[sec:evapo\]. These properties turn out to be quite simple, as mainly determined by the mass of the hole $M$ and its minimum allowed value $\Mmin$.
Thermodynamics {#sec:thermo}
--------------
The thermal gas that sources the 2-2-hole background may include particles of all kinds. In addition to those from the original infalling matter, any new species will be produced by particle collisions in the high curvature interior. This may include ultra-heavy particles due to the extremely high temperature deep inside. As was found in [@Ren:2019afg], gas particles with large mass can significantly change the interior matter distribution, while the thermodynamic properties of the hole for an outside observer remain quite insensitive to this effect. Therefore, for our phenomenological study, it is a good approximation to consider the thermal gas model with only massless relativistic particles. The energy density and pressure are then given as, $$\rho=3p=\frac{\pi^2}{30} \mathcal{N}\, T^{4}\,.$$ $T(r)$ is the local measured temperature and $\mathcal{N}= g_b+7 g_f/8$, where $g_b$ and $g_f$ are the number of bosonic and fermionic degrees of freedom. In principle, $\mathcal{N}$ includes particle species of all kinds and could be much larger than its Standard Model value. In the following, we make the $\mathcal{N}$-dependence explicit so that its impact on the results can be clearly seen. Given the conservation law of the stress tensor, $T(r)$ satisfies Tolman’s law ($T(r)g_{00}^{1/2}=T_\infty$) and so grows large inside the gravitational potential. The value at spatial infinity $T_\infty$ is roughly the temperature measured by a distant observer. When the 2-2-hole is not in thermal equilibrium with its surroundings, $T_\infty$ represents the temperature at which it radiates as a black body. The total entropy and energy of the gas are related as, $$\begin{aligned}
S=\frac{4}{3}\frac{U}{T_\infty}=\frac{8\pi^3}{45} \mathcal{N} \,T^3_\infty\int dr \sqrt\frac{A(r)}{B(r)^3}r^2\,.\end{aligned}$$ The numerical solutions for metric functions $A(r), B(r)$ are displayed in Appendix \[sec:22hole\]. Being much smaller than unity in the highly curved 2-2-hole interior, they play a significant role in determining the unusual 2-2-hole thermodynamics.
The thermal 2-2-holes exhibit intriguing thermodynamic behavior for the small- and large-mass cases. Fig. \[fig:TSdrH\] shows the temperature $T_\infty$ and the entropy $S$ as functions of the mass, where the plots have been arranged to be independent of the values of $\Mmin$ and $\mathcal{N}$. Given that the mass $M$ can get extremely close to $\Mmin$, we display the dependence on the difference $\Delta M$, instead. The exact numerical results, denoted as black dots in Fig. \[fig:TSdrH\], can be well approximated by analytical formulae in the small- and large-mass ranges, as shown by the colored lines. In the following, we discuss this novel behavior in more detail.
[ ![\[fig:TSdrH\] The 2-2-hole temperature $T_\infty$ and entropy $S$ as functions of the mass difference $\Delta M=M-\Mmin$. Black dots denote the exact numerical results. The blue and red solid lines are the leading-order analytical approximations for the small- and large-mass ranges, respectively. The red dashed line shows the next-to-leading-order improvement for the small-mass cases. ](TdM.pdf "fig:"){width="7.8cm"}]{}
In the large-mass range, the temperature and entropy can be well approximated by the following, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:LMlimit}
T_\infty\approx 1.7\, \mathcal{N}^{-1/4}\hMmin^{1/2}\, T_\textrm{BH},\quad
S\approx 0.60\, \mathcal{N}^{1/4}\hMmin^{-1/2} \,S_\textrm{BH}\,.\end{aligned}$$ $T_\textrm{BH}=\Mp^2/8\pi M$ is the Hawking temperature and $S_\textrm{BH}=\pi\, r_H^2/\lp^2$ is the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy for a Schwarzschild black hole with the same $M$. Anomalous behavior of black hole thermodynamics, i.e. the negative heat capacity and the area law for entropy, now arises from the ordinary thermal gas on a highly curved background spacetime. Therefore, for an outside observer, a large 2-2-hole appears similar to a black hole in terms of its thermodynamic behavior. Yet, the thermodynamic quantities depend on the number of degrees of freedom $\mathcal{N}$ and the minimal mass $\Mmin$. In the strong coupling scenario, the difference is mainly from the former. For a reasonable choice of $\mathcal{N}$, e.g. the Standard Model value, we can have $S>S_\textrm{BH}$ with the same mass. This suggests that a 2-2-hole is thermodynamically more stable than a black hole, and would be favored as the endpoint of gravitational collapses. In the weak coupling scenario, where $\Mmin\gg \Mp$, 2-2-holes have much higher temperature and much smaller entropy. Thus, 2-2-holes for this case are no longer entropically favorable and their stability needs to be checked dynamically. Note that (\[eq:LMlimit\]) satisfies $T_\infty S= T_\textrm{BH} S_\textrm{BH}=M/2$ and is consistent with the first law of thermodynamics. This implies $U=3M/8$ for the gas energy, meaning that a sizable fraction of the physical mass for the hole comes from the gas source.
In the small-mass range, we find the leading-order approximation for the temperature and entropy,[^5] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:SMlimit}
T_\infty\approx 0.39\, \mathcal{N}^{-1/4}\hMmin^{-3/2}\Delta M\left(\ln\frac{M_\textrm{min}}{\Delta M}\right)^{7/4},\,\,
S\approx 3.4\, \mathcal{N}^{1/4}\hMmin^{3/2}\left(\ln\frac{M_\textrm{min}}{\Delta M}\right)^{-3/4}.\end{aligned}$$ A small 2-2-hole has a positive heat capacity and behaves more like a classical thermodynamic system. In the limit $\Delta M\to 0$, the temperature approaches zero almost linearly in $\Delta M$, while the entropy has a logarithmic dependence and decreases much slower. The energy is then dominated by the gravitational field, with negligible contribution from the gas. The approximation can be further improved by adding the next-to-leading-order contribution, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:SMlimitp}
T_\infty&\approx& 0.39\, \mathcal{N}^{-1/4}\hMmin^{-3/2}\Delta M\left[\ln\frac{M_\textrm{min}}{\Delta M}-\ln\left(\ln\frac{M_\textrm{min}}{\Delta M}\right)^{3/2}+0.17\right]^{7/4},\,\,\nonumber\\
S&\approx& 3.4\, \mathcal{N}^{1/4}\hMmin^{3/2}\left[\ln\frac{M_\textrm{min}}{\Delta M}-\ln\left(\ln\frac{M_\textrm{min}}{\Delta M}\right)^{3/2}+0.17\right]^{-3/4}.\end{aligned}$$
As we can see in Fig. \[fig:TSdrH\], with the large-mass approximation (\[eq:LMlimit\]) applied to $M\gtrsim \Mpeak$ and the small-mass one (\[eq:SMlimitp\]) applied to $M\lesssim \Mpeak$, the analytical estimations turn out to be quite accurate for the whole mass range, including the estimation in the intermediate region around the temperature peak with $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:peak}
T_{\infty,\textrm{peak}}\approx 0.050\,\Mp\, \mathcal{N}^{-1/4}\hMmin^{-1/2}\,\,
\textrm{ at }\,\, \Mpeak\approx 1.2 M_\textrm{min}\,. \end{aligned}$$ Therefore, although the 2-2-hole solution can only be found numerically, its properties can be expressed in quite simple forms.
It is instructive to compare thermal 2-2-holes to extremal black holes. In the extremal limit, the black hole surface gravity, hence the temperature, approaches zero. So a near-extremal black hole would have suppressed thermal emission rate and may serve as a remnant. In reality, there are complications from non-thermal emission. For example, the Reissner-Nordstrom black hole can emit electrons and positrons due to Schwinger effects. This process tends to discharge the black hole and spoils the possibility for it to be stable or long-lived. To make it relevant, a special arrangement of the matter sector is needed. For example, [@Bai:2019zcd] introduces a new dark charge with the lightest charged particle being heavy enough for the non-thermal emission from the charged black hole to be largely suppressed. Evidently, in comparison to extremal black holes, the stabilization mechanism for a 2-2-hole is more fundamental and less contrived. The temperature for a charged Reissner-Nordstrom black hole is, $$\begin{aligned}
T_\infty=\frac{\Mp^2}{2\pi}\frac{\sqrt{M^2-\Mmin^2}}{\left(M+\sqrt{M^2-\Mmin^2}\right)^2}\,.\end{aligned}$$ $\Mmin$ denotes the mass in the extremal limit, i.e. $\Mmin=Q\,\Mp$. The green dotted line in Fig. \[fig:TSdrH\] shows the combination $\hMmin T_\infty/\Mp $ for this case. For a given mass in the small-mass regime, a 2-2-hole has a lower temperature and a smaller radiation power. We also note that the entropy of an extremal black hole has not been fully understood. The semiclassical methods suggest vanishing entropy in the extremal limit, while the string theory calculations find a non-zero value in line with the Bekenstein-Hawking formula. A possible resolution of the discrepancy is discussed in [@Carroll:2009maa]. Therefore, while entropy remains mysterious for an evaporating black hole, it is clear that entropy and information can simply escape from an evaporating 2-2-hole.
Evaporation {#sec:evapo}
-----------
A thermal 2-2-hole will radiate if it is hotter than the cosmic microwave background. Its mass evolution due to radiation can be described by the Stefan-Boltzmann law, with the power given as $$\label{eq:SBlaw}
-\frac{dM}{dt}
\approx \frac{\pi^2}{120}\, \mathcal{N}_* \, 4\pi r_H^2 \,T_{\infty}^4\;,$$ which assumes $4\pi r_H^2$ as the effective emitted area. As in the case of black holes, an effective potential barrier in the exterior region modifies the power spectrum and yields a frequency-dependent absorption cross section. For the large-mass case where $T_\infty r_H\gtrsim 1$, the cross section is roughly a constant and emission can be well described by the black body radiation with an emitted area slightly larger than the would-be horizon one. For the small-mass case, $T_\infty r_H$ can be much smaller than unity, and the emission is suppressed by the potential barrier with the effective emitted area being also much smaller. As horizonless objects, 2-2-holes exhibit distinct behavior at low frequencies, and the suppression for small $T_\infty r_H$ deserves further study.[^6] In this paper, we restrict ourselves to the simple form in (\[eq:SBlaw\]), which provides a conservative order of magnitude estimates for the low energy emission from small 2-2-holes. $\mathcal{N}_*$ denotes the number of relativistic degrees of freedom for the radiation [@MacGibbon:1991tj]. It includes particles lighter than $T_{\infty}$ and it could be much smaller than $\mathcal{N}$ for the thermal gas in the interior. For simplicity we treat $\mathcal{N}_*$ as a constant and ignore its temperature dependence.
Due to the mass dependence of temperature being very different in the large-mass and small-mass ranges, the evaporation of a 2-2-hole can be separated into two different stages. For a large 2-2-hole, the power increases as the object shrinks. As for a black hole, this is due to the negative heat capacity. For a small 2-2-hole, the power drops fast with decreasing mass and approaches zero when $M\to \Mmin$. It then behaves as a slowly decaying cold remnant with mass well approximated by $\Mmin$. When $\Delta M\ll \Mmin$, the remnant radiates so slowly that it appears stable for the age of the universe and can serve as a candidate for dark matter. If the initial mass $\Mini$ of a primordial 2-2-hole at formation satisfies $\Mini\gtrsim \Mpeak$, the early and late stages of evaporation are governed by the large-mass and small-mass phases respectively.
In the large-mass stage, substituting $T_\infty(M)$ in (\[eq:LMlimit\]) into (\[eq:SBlaw\]), the time it takes for a 2-2-hole to evolve from $\Mini$ to $M\gtrsim \Mpeak$ is $\Delta t \equiv t-t_\textrm{init}
= 3.8\times 10^3 \,\mathcal{N}\,\mathcal{N}_*^{-1} \hMmin^{-2}\,\lp^4\, (\Mini^3-M^3)$. The time spent in the whole range of the large-mass stage, $\tau_L\equiv t_\textrm{peak}-t_\textrm{init}$, is then $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:tauL}
\tau_L
\,\approx \,\mathcal{N}\,\mathcal{N_*}^{-1} \hMmin^{-2} \left(\frac{\Mini}{3.7\times 10^8\,\textrm{g}}\right)^3\textrm{s}\,
\approx\, \mathcal{N}\, \mathcal{N_*}^{-1} \hMmin^{-1/2} \left(\frac{4.8\times 10^4\,\textrm{GeV}}{\mathcal{N}^{1/4}\,T_{\infty,\textrm{init}}}\right)^3\textrm{s}\,.\end{aligned}$$ The time dependences of the temperature and mass take the same form as a black hole, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:LMlimitTime0}
T_\infty(t)\approx T_{\infty,\textrm{init}}\left(1-\frac{\Delta t}{\tau_L}\right)^{-1/3},\quad
M(t)\approx \Mini\left(1-\frac{\Delta t}{\tau_L}\right)^{1/3}.\end{aligned}$$ In comparison to a primordial black hole with the lifetime $\tau_\textrm{BH}=\tau_L$, the time dependence differs only by an overall constant. Substituting $\Mini$ and $T_{\infty,\textrm{init}}$ as functions of $\tau_L$, (\[eq:LMlimitTime0\]) becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:LMlimitTime}
T_\infty(t)&\approx& 1.1\,\Mp\, \mathcal{N}^{1/12}\mathcal{N_*}^{-1/3} \hMmin^{-1/6}\left(\frac{\tau_L-\Delta t}{\lp}\right)^{-1/3},\nonumber\\
M(t)&\approx& 0.064\,\Mp \,\mathcal{N}^{-1/3}\mathcal{N_*}^{1/3}\hMmin^{2/3}\left(\frac{\tau_L-\Delta t}{\lp}\right)^{1/3},\end{aligned}$$ where we can see the explicit $\Mmin$ dependence.
In the small-mass stage, we use the leading order approximation in (\[eq:SMlimit\]) to find the time dependence of the temperature. Rewriting (\[eq:SBlaw\]) as the following, $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dT_\infty}{dt}=-\frac{\pi^2}{120}\, \mathcal{N_*}\, 4\pi r_H^2\, T_{\infty}^4\frac{dT_\infty}{dM}
\approx-\frac{2\pi^3}{15}\,0.4 \,\mathcal{N}^{-1/4} \mathcal{N_*} \,\hMmin^{1/2}\; T_\infty^4\,\lp^2\left(\ln \frac{\lp}{T_\infty}\right)^{7/4},\end{aligned}$$ we obtain, at the leading order, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:SMlimitTime}
T_\infty(t)\approx 1.1\,\Mp\, \mathcal{N}^{1/12} \mathcal{N_*}^{-1/3} \hMmin^{-1/6} \left(\frac{\Delta t-\tau_L}{\lp}\right)^{-1/3}\left(\ln\frac{\Delta t-\tau_L}{\lp\,\hMmin}\right)^{-7/12}.\end{aligned}$$ The behavior of the tiny mass difference with the minimum value $\Delta M(t)$ can be found from (\[eq:SMlimit\]) and (\[eq:SMlimitTime\]) as $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta M(t)\approx 19\, \Mp\, \mathcal{N}^{1/3} \mathcal{N_*}^{-1/3} \hat{M}_{\mathrm{min}}^{4/3}\left(\frac{\Delta t-\tau_L}{\lp}\right)^{-1/3}\left(\ln \frac{\Delta t-\tau_L}{\lp\,\hat{M}_{\mathrm{min}}} \right)^{-7/3}\;.\end{aligned}$$ Compared to a near-extremal black hole with temperature $T_\infty\propto (\Mmin/t)^{1/2}$ [@Bai:2019zcd], the 2-2-hole remnant has $T_\infty\propto\Mmin^{-1/6}t^{-1/3}$, which decreases more slowly with time and decreases for increasing remnant mass.
[ ![\[fig:TinfDt\] The 2-2-hole temperature $T_\infty$ as function of $\Delta t$ for $\Mini/\Mmin=10$. The dots denote the numerical results and the blue and red lines are analytical approximations (\[eq:LMlimitTime\]) and (\[eq:SMlimitTime\]). The inset shows the peak shape around $\Delta t\approx\tau_L$ with the linear scale.](TinfDt.pdf "fig:"){width="11cm"}]{}
Fig. \[fig:TinfDt\] compares the numerical and analytical results for the temperature of a 2-2-hole as a function of time. At early times, the temperature changes very slowly with time for a long period. For $t\lesssim t_\textrm{peak}$, it is well approximated by the large-mass analytical results (\[eq:LMlimitTime\]) as given by the blue line. The temperature drops right after $t_\textrm{peak}$ and approaches the late-time behavior that is insensitive to $\Mini$ and determined solely by $\Mmin$. This part is well described by the small-mass approximation (\[eq:SMlimitTime\]), as given by the red dotted line. From the inset plot, we can see that the analytical approximations become worse only in a quite narrow range around the peak temperature. Since temperature of the remnant falls rapidly below the initial value, radiation from the 2-2-hole remnant quickly becomes negligible in comparison to its early-time radiation.
We also need to compare the 2-2-hole temperature $T_\infty$ with the cosmic background temperature $T_\textrm{bkg}$. The cosmic temperature drops faster with time than the remnant temperature, i.e. $T_\textrm{bkg}\propto t^{-1/2}\,( t^{-2/3})$ in the radiation (matter) era in comparison to $T_\infty\propto t^{-1/3}$ in (\[eq:SMlimitTime\]). Thus, accretion of cosmic radiation onto primordial 2-2-holes need only be considered at the earliest times after formation when $T_\textrm{bkg}>T_\infty$. Assuming formation in the radiation era as in Sec. \[sec:pheno\], we find that the growth in the mass is at most of order one and the influence on $\tau_L$ is negligible.
Present epoch observations for 2-2-hole remnants {#sec:present}
================================================
Our interest in this paper is primordial 2-2-holes that have already become remnants today, i.e. $\tau_L\lesssim t_0\approx 4.3 \times 10^{17}\,$s (the age of the universe). Being insensitive to details of the formation, observations for the remnants at the present epoch can be used to probe the remnant mass, which in turn is related to the fundamental mass scale $\Mmin$ in quadratic gravity. This mass has a theoretical lower bound, $\Mmin\gtrsim 0.63\,\Mp$, corresponding to the strong coupling scenario. Considering the precise solar system test of GR, there is a rough upper bound $\Mmin\lesssim 10^{33}\,\textrm{g}\sim M_\odot$, by requiring that the Compton wavelength $\lambda_2$ be no larger than $\mathcal{O}(\textrm{km})$. An isolated remnant could be detected through its gravitational interaction in the same way as a PHB.[^7] The parameter space starts to be constrained for $\Mmin\gtrsim 10^{17}$g, with some examples summarized in Fig. \[fig:LUcons\]. Thus only smaller remnants with feeble gravitational interactions are able to constitute the entirety of dark matter.
Possible thermal radiation from isolated 2-2-hole remnants is expected to be weak. A conservative estimation in Appendix \[sec:remrad\] shows that the remnant radiation with the dark matter abundance can safely evade BBN, CMB constraints as well as measurements for the diffuse photon flux at present. On the other hand, if two remnants form a binary and merge, then the merger product is hot and this can produce spectacular radiation. In this section we study the high-energy particle emission from this process, which is better understood for 2-2-holes than for black hole remnants of ad-hoc nature [@Bai:2019zcd; @Barrau:2019cuo]. The corresponding experimental constraints turn out to be significant. This opens a new window onto small size dark matter that only interacts gravitationally with normal matter. The latter is usually considered to be the untestable nightmare scenario.
High-energy particles from binary mergers {#sec:merger}
-----------------------------------------
As we can see in Fig. \[fig:TSdrH\], a 2-2-hole remnant can be pushed away from the remnant stage if it is able to absorb sufficient mass. The merger of two 2-2-hole remnants or the accretion of ordinary matter onto a remnant can both contribute. Larger remnants that accrete matter more easily have already been strongly constrained by their gravitational interactions. Smaller remnants, on the other hand, may have a cross section with normal matter that is too small. The more likely mechanism is instead the merger of two remnants after forming a gravitationally bound state. After reaching equilibrium, the merger product would acquire a high temperature and radiate away the absorbed mass within a short time. This process provides a significant source of high-energy astrophysical particles, as we will show below by calculating the flux.
The binary merger of 2-2-hole remnants generates a 2-2-hole with $M_\textrm{merger}\approx 2\Mmin>\Mpeak$. The structure of a 2-2-hole with this mass is explicitly displayed in Appendix \[sec:22hole\]. From the analytical approximation for the large-mass cases (\[eq:LMlimit\]), the merger product has $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Temp-merger}
T_{\infty,\textrm{merger}}=3.4\times 10^{-2}\,\Mp\,\mathcal{N}^{-1/4}\hMmin^{-1/2}
=1.9\times10^{15} \mathcal{N}^{-1/4}\left(\frac{\Mmin}{\textrm{g}}\right)^{-1/2}\,\textrm{GeV}\,.\end{aligned}$$ As approximated by the temperature, the average energy of emitted particles drops as $\Mmin$ increases and it spans a wide range of values. For a Planck mass remnant, the particles could have roughly the Planck energy, whereas for a large remnant with $\Mmin\sim 10^{23}\,$g, the energy is around TeV scale. With the lifetime being much smaller than a second for this mass range, it is assured that such mergers release their significant amount of excess energy almost instantly to get back to the remnant phase.
Observations in high-energy cosmic rays, gamma rays and neutrinos turn out to probe energies that are quite appropriate for the high-energy particle flux from mergers and can be used to constrain the fundamental scale $\Mmin$ in the theory. Ultra-high energy cosmic rays with energy beyond the GZK cut-off have long been observed. But a clear high-energy suppression around $10^{11}\,$GeV is now seen in the latest observations, and the need for new physics explanations is no longer as strongly motivated. Recently the photon flux around the same energy has also been measured with improved precision. High-energy neutrino experiments, on the other hand, probe a much wider energy range from $10^{3}\,$GeV to $10^{16}\,$GeV.
Notice that we are dealing with high energy emissions up to the Planck scale, where the strengths of both electroweak interaction and strong interaction could be sizable. Therefore, rather than a small number of very energetic particles as characterized by the temperature, the flux generally receives the dominant contribution from high multiplicity final states with a broad energy spectrum. These are generalized parton showers of highly off-shell initial particles and they have been studied in detail for the super-heavy particle decay [@Barbot:2002gt; @Aloisio:2003xj]. The fragmentation of initial quarks or gluons generates nucleons, and then photons and neutrinos from decay of hadrons. Initial particles with only the electroweak charges can also initiate showers, depending on the strength of relevant couplings. A thorough study of the high-energy particle spectrum for the 2-2-hole evaporation is beyond the scope of this paper. Instead, we first estimate the neutrino flux by assuming only direct on-shell production, given that the shower spectrum of neutrinos peaks around the maximum energies [@Barbot:2002gt]. This already strongly bounds $\Mmin$ to be much smaller than the range accessible by the conventional PBH searches. Then we study the contribution from showers of initial quarks to cosmic ray, gamma ray and neutrino fluxes, and this limits the size of $\Mmin$ even further. As we will see, depending on fragmentation functions at small energies, the current experiments are not far from detecting the small flux from even a Planck mass remnant.
The neutrino flux from binary mergers of 2-2-hole remnants in the Milky way can be estimated as $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi_{\nu}=\frac{\mathcal{D}}{2 M_{\textrm{min}}}\,\frac{d N_{\nu}}{d E_\nu dt}\,.\end{aligned}$$ The solid-angle-averaged $\mathcal{D}$-factor, used as in the case for dark matter decay, is given as [@Evans:2016xwx] $$\label{D-factor}
\mathcal{D}=\frac{f}{4\pi}\int \rho_{\textrm{DM}}\left(r(s),\Omega\right)ds\; d\Omega\;,$$ where $f\equiv \rho(t_0)/\rho_\textrm{DM}(t_0)$ denotes the mass fraction of 2-2-hole remnants in dark matter at present. The integral is taken along the line of sight, with $d \Omega=\cos b\,db\,dl$ and $r^2= s^2 +R^2_{\odot}-2s R_{\odot} \cos b \cos l$ in spherical heliocentric coordinates. Here, $-\pi/2\leqslant b \leqslant \pi/2$ and $0\leqslant l \leqslant 2\pi$ are the galactic latitudinal and longitudinal angles respectively, $R_{\odot}$ is the distance of the Sun to the center of the galaxy, $s$ is the line of sight distance, and $0\lesssim r \lesssim 100$kpc denotes the distance to the galactic center. Using the Einasto density profile for the Milky way, $\rho_{\textrm{DM}}(r)= \rho_{s} \exp(-\frac{2}{\alpha}[(r/r_s)^{\alpha}-1])$, with $\rho_{s}=0.077\mbox{ GeV}/\mbox{cm}^3=0.002 M_{\odot}/\mbox{pc}^3$, $r_s= 20$kpc, $R_{\odot}=8.0$kpc, and $\alpha=0.17$ [@Pato:2015dua], we find that $\mathcal{D}\approx (0.04\,f)\, \textrm{g}\,\mbox{cm}^{-2}\,\mbox{sr}^{-1}$. The uncertainty from choosing different density profiles [@Navarro:1996gj; @Burkert:1995yz], sizes of the halo [@1989ApJ...345..759Z] or smaller ranges of $b$ as for some experiments is less than $10\%$, and this remains insignificant in our analysis.
The neutrino emission rate from the discharge of the excess energy, in the amount of one remnant mass, is roughly $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d N_{\nu}}{d E_\nu dt}\approx \eta_{\nu} \frac{M_{\textrm{min}}}{\langle{E}_{\nu}\rangle^2}\;\Gamma\,,\end{aligned}$$ where we approximate the spectrum by on-shell emission at the average energy $\langle{E}_{\nu}\rangle\approx 4.2$ $\,T_{\infty,\textrm{merger}}$. Here, $\eta_{\nu}\approx 0.058$ denotes the fraction of the total energy as neutrinos for the Standard Model [@MacGibbon:1991tj], which can be smaller if there are new active particles. $\eta_\nu \Mmin/\langle{E}_{\nu}\rangle$ then gives roughly the number of neutrinos emitted from one merger event, which increases with the minimal mass as $\Mmin^{3/2}$. $\Gamma$ denotes the merger rate for 2-2-hole remnants, and is a function of $f$ and $\Mmin$. The quantity used to compare with experimental data is the following, $$\begin{aligned}
E_\nu^2\, \Phi_{\nu}\approx \frac{1}{2}\,\eta_\nu\,\mathcal{D}\,\Gamma
\approx 6.5\times 10^{20} f\,\frac{\Gamma}{\textrm{s}^{-1}}\;\textrm{GeV}\;\textrm{cm}^{-2}\textrm{ s}^{-1}\textrm{ sr}^{-1}\,,\end{aligned}$$ which shows no explicit dependence on $\langle{E}_{\nu}\rangle$ and $\Mmin$ other than in the merger rate.
For the estimate of the merger rate $\Gamma$, we make use of the fact that 2-2-holes are like PBHs in forming gravitationally bound binaries [@Sasaki:2018dmp].[^8] In the early universe, this can happen after the 2-2-holes have decoupled from the cosmic expansion. Binaries with high eccentricities then contribute to the merger rate today. At the present epoch, binaries can form due to accidental encounters in a halo, with the rate enhanced by a small relative velocity. It has been found that formation in the early universe is the dominant scenario. As suggested recently in [@Raidal:2018bbj; @Vaskonen:2019jpv], earlier studies might overestimate this merger rate by ignoring disruptions of the binaries from nearby holes, especially when they constitute a significant fraction of dark matter. In the case of disruption, the total rate includes contributions from the non-perturbed binaries and the perturbed ones $\Gamma=\Gamma_{\textrm{np}}\textrm{P}_{\textrm{np}} +\Gamma_{\textrm{p}}$, where $\textrm{P}_{\textrm{np}}$ is the fraction of binaries remaining unperturbed. From the total rate per volume given in [@Vaskonen:2019jpv], we find $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{\textrm{np}} &=&4.7\times 10^{-26}\left(1+5.8\times 10^{-5}f^{-2}\right)^{-21/74}\,f^{16/37}\left(\frac{\Mmin}{\textrm{g}}\right)^{5/37} \left(\frac{t}{t_0}\right)^{-34/37} \textrm{s}^{-1}\;,\nonumber\\
\Gamma_{\textrm{p}}&=&
\begin{cases}
&\Gamma_{\textrm{p}}^{(1)}= 4.7\times10^{-32}\;f^{214/259}\left(\frac{\Mmin}{\textrm{g}}\right)^{10/37} \left(\frac{t}{t_0}\right)^{-6/7} \textrm{s}^{-1}\;,\\
&\Gamma_{\textrm{p}}^{(2)}= 4.0\times10^{-37}\;f^{358/259}\left(\frac{\Mmin}{\textrm{g}}\right)^{15/37} \left(\frac{t}{t_0}\right)^{-5/7} \textrm{s}^{-1}\;.
\end{cases}
\label{mergerrates}\end{aligned}$$ The disruption effects come into play for $f\gtrsim 4\times 10^{-3}$, in which case the fitted relation $\textrm{P}_{\textrm{np}}\approx8.2\times10^{-3} f^{-4/5}$ can be obtained; otherwise the no-disruption case is recovered with $\textrm{P}_{\textrm{np}}\approx 1$. The rate for perturbed binaries is bounded above and below by $\Gamma_{\textrm{p}}^{(1)}$ and $\Gamma_{\textrm{p}}^{(2)}$ in (\[mergerrates\]).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
[![The neutrino flux from direct on-shell production for binary mergers of 2-2-hole remnants with $f=1$ and different estimations of the merger rate. In the case with disruption, the dominant contribution comes from non-perturbed binaries (solid line), with a suppressed rate in comparison to the earlier no-disruption estimation (dashed line). For a given $\Mmin$, the energy is approximated by the average value $\langle{E}_{\nu}\rangle\approx 4.2 \,T_{\infty,\textrm{merger}}$. Colored solid lines represent the experimental upper bounds on the neutrino flux from [@Buitink:2010qn] (NuMoon-WSRT-2010), [@Gorham:2019guw] (ANITA-2019), [@Gorham:2010kv] (ANITA-2010), [@Aartsen:2018vtx] (IceCube-2018), whereas the close symbols denote the observed signals from [@Aartsen:2015xup; @Aartsen:2015knd] (IceCube-2015), and [@Aartsen:2014qna] (IceCube-2014). []{data-label="fig:neutrinoflux22"}](neutrinoflux22 "fig:"){width="12cm"}\[fig:largeD\]]{}
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
The comparison between the experimental data of high-energy neutrino flux and the on-shell production of neutrinos from the 2-2-hole binary mergers is displayed in Fig. \[fig:neutrinoflux22\], assuming $f=1$ and $\mathcal{N}\approx 107$. The experimental upper bounds for energies $10^{7}\,$GeV–$10^{16}\,$GeV were obtained from lack of signals [@Buitink:2010qn; @Gorham:2019guw; @Gorham:2010kv; @Aartsen:2018vtx] , whereas the IceCube data for energies $10^{3}\,$GeV–$10^{7}\,$GeV represent the detected signals [@Aartsen:2015xup; @Aartsen:2015knd; @Aartsen:2014qna].[^9] In order to see uncertainties associated with the merger rate, we show in Fig. \[fig:neutrinoflux22\] the theoretical predictions for $\Gamma_{\textrm{np}}$, $\Gamma_{\textrm{np}}\textrm{P}_{\textrm{np}}$ and the band of $\Gamma_{\textrm{p}}$. The 2-2-hole contribution increases with $\Mmin$ due to the $\Mmin$ dependence in the merger rate. With no disruption (dashed line), the 2-2-hole prediction with the dark matter abundance exceeds experimental upper bounds at all available energies, so only $\Mmin\lesssim 0.1\,$g is viable given the bound from the conventional PBH searches. After taking into account the suppression from disruption, with the merger rate still dominated by the non-perturbed binaries (solid line), the constraint is considerably relaxed and the 2-2-hole remnants with $\Mmin\gtrsim 10^{5}$g are excluded.
We next consider showers of the highly off-shell initial quarks (initial gluons are ten times less abundant). The flux of proton, photon, neutrino can then be well approximated by the flux of initial quarks multiplied with the fragmentation function $D_q^j(x)$, $j=p,\,\gamma,\,\nu$. For the quantities of interest, we have $$\begin{aligned}
E_j^2\,\Phi_{j}=\frac{\mathcal{D}}{2 M_{\textrm{min}}}\left[E_q^2\frac{d N_{q}}{d E_q dt}\right]\Big[x^2D_q^{j}(x)\Big]_{x=E_j/E_q}
\approx \frac{1}{2}\,\eta_q\,\mathcal{D}\,\Gamma \,\Big[x^2D_q^{j}(x)\Big]_{x=E_j/\langle E_q \rangle} \end{aligned}$$ for the galactic contribution, where $\langle{E_q}\rangle\approx 4.2\,T_{\infty,\textrm{merger}}$ and $\eta_q\approx 0.67$. For a given $\Mmin$, the shower generates a broad spectrum extending below $\langle{E_q}\rangle$. The explicit shape of the distribution depends on the coupling strength at high energy, and it becomes skewed more towards small $x$ for a larger coupling.
An extragalactic flux from merger products generated at an earlier time also needs to be included in the case of neutrinos, due to their negligible interaction with background photons as they propagate through the universe. The present flux can be defined as [@Carr:2009jm] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{flux-EG}
\Phi_\nu^\textrm{EG}=\frac{c}{4\pi}\frac{n_{\nu }}{E_{\nu }}
= \frac{c}{4\pi}\frac{n(t_0)}{E_{\nu}} \int^{t_0}_{t_\textrm{min}} E_{\nu}(t) \frac{d N_\nu}{dE_\nu dt} e^{-S_\nu(E_\nu(t),z)}\;dt\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $E_{\nu }=E_\nu(t)/(1+z(t))$ is the redshifted energy. $n_{\nu }$ is the number density of neutrinos at present, where emissions extending back to $t_\textrm{min}$ (such that $E_\nu(t_\textrm{min})=\langle E_q \rangle$) are summed up for a given $E_{\nu }$. $S_\nu(E, z)$ denotes the neutrino opacity of the Universe that increases with $E$ and $z$ [@Gondolo:1991rn]. The quantity of interest is then given as $$\begin{aligned}
E_\nu^2\,\Phi_\nu^\textrm{EG}
\approx \frac{c}{4\pi}f \,\rho_\textrm{DM}(t_0)\,\eta_q\,\frac{E_\nu}{\langle E_q \rangle} \int_{t_\textrm{min}}^{t_0} \Gamma\, \Big[x\, D_q^\nu(x)\Big]_{x=E_\nu(t)/\langle E_q \rangle}e^{-S_\nu(E_\nu(t),z(t))} \,,\end{aligned}$$ where the merger rate $\Gamma$ is given in (\[mergerrates\]) and increases back in time. We find that the extragalactic flux at $E_\nu\ll \langle E_q\rangle$ could be a few times larger than the galactic one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
[![The proton flux (black dashed line), photon flux (black solid line), neutrino flux (black dotdashed line) from parton shower of initial quarks emission for binary mergers of 2-2-hole remnants, with $\Mmin=\Mp$, $f=1$ and $\Gamma=\Gamma_{\textrm{np}}\textrm{P}_{\textrm{np}}$. Extragalactic contribution is included for the neutrino flux. Colored solid lines (without symbols) are upper bounds from neutrino experiments as in Fig. \[fig:neutrinoflux22\]. Solid lines with symbols denote constraints on the diffuse photon flux from [@Aab:2016agp] (Auger-2016) and [@Abbasi:2018ywn] (TA-2018). Open symbols show the observed signals of high-energy comic rays from [@ThePierreAuger:2013eja] (Auger-2013) and [@Abu-Zayyad:2013qwa] (TA-2013).[]{data-label="fig:showerflux22"}](showerflux22 "fig:"){width="12cm"}\[fig:shower\]]{}
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
Fig. \[fig:showerflux22\] compares the experimental data for high-energy particle flux with the parton-shower prediction from a Planck mass remnant. It is important to note that the quantity $E_j^2\,\Phi_j$ increases with $\Mmin$ for a given $x$ due to the $\Mmin$ dependence in the merger rate. For illustration, we use the fragmentation function in ordinary QCD, where the numerical results [@Aloisio:2003xj] and an analytical approximation [@Barbot:2002gt] are used for the large and small $x$ respectively.[^10] Given the dominance of pions in the parton shower, there are many more photons and neutrinos than protons due to pion decay. The latest observations for the diffuse photon flux around $10^{11}\,$GeV impose the strongest constraint. 2-2-hole remnants with $\Mmin\gtrsim 10\,\Mp$ are excluded from being the entirety of dark matter. This bound relies on the fragmentation function within a narrow range of quite small $x$, i.e. $10^{-9}\lesssim x\lesssim 10^{-7}$, and this brings in theoretical uncertainties. The observations for neutrinos from showers have poorer sensitivities, and can only exclude $\Mmin$ larger than $1$g. But this bound comes from a wider range of energy, and is more robust against the variation of the distributions. The cosmic ray data could also provide a potentially interesting constraint. But this data has quite large uncertainties, in particular for the mass composition, and we do not consider it.
There is another effect involving the fragmentation function that is special to 2-2-holes. The shower may be occurring in the deep gravitational potential well within the would-be horizon, which thus implies blue-shifted energies. This reduces the couplings in the shower and gives additional suppression for the flux at lower energy. Further studies are required for a more conclusive analysis of the viable parameter space. Overall, we can see the complementarity between different observations in probing the small-mass range for the 2-2-hole remnant.
Early-universe constraints for primordial 2-2-holes {#sec:pheno}
===================================================
Primordial thermal 2-2-holes, just like PBHs, can form in the early universe when parts of the universe stop expanding and re-collapse, either due to density inhomogeneities seeded by inflation or due to a first order phase transition. In this paper, we focus on formation due to density inhomogeneities in the radiation era. The initial mass for the 2-2-hole $\Mini$ can be no larger than the horizon mass $1/2H(t_\textrm{init})\approx 4\times 10^{38}\left(t_\textrm{init}/\textrm{s}\right)\,\textrm{g}$ at the time of formation $t_\textrm{init}$. The horizon mass ranges from $\sim 1\,$g at the end of inflation if the reheating temperature is no larger than $10^{16}\,$GeV [@Dalianis:2019asr], to $\sim 10^{50}$g at matter-radiation equality.
It should be typical for 2-2-holes to be formed with the initial mass $\Mini$ much larger than $\Mmin$. The phenomenology then strongly depends on the duration of the early stage of evaporation $\tau_L$, as given in (\[eq:tauL\]). For later discussion, it is convenient to define the following critical masses for $\Mini$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Mi}
\left(M_\textrm{uni},\, M_\textrm{rec},\, M_\textrm{BBN}\right)
=\left(2.8\times 10^{14},\, 8.8\times 10^{12},\,3.7\times 10^8\right)\hMmin^{2/3}\;\mathcal{N}^{-1/3}\,\mathcal{N_*}^{1/3} \;\textrm{g} \,,\end{aligned}$$ corresponding to $\tau_L\approx t_0$, $10^{13}\,$s (recombination), $1\,$s (BBN). Note that in the strong coupling scenario the mass values above are comparable to those for PBHs, while they can be much larger in the weak coupling scenario given the $\hMmin^{2/3}$ dependence. The mass range of interest in this paper is then $\Mini\lesssim M_\textrm{uni}$, where the primordial 2-2-hole has already become a remnant at present. The hole with larger $\Mini$ stays more or less the same as it was at its formation over the history of the universe, and such holes, like PBHs, have already been constrained by their gravitational interactions.
In this section, assuming a monochromatic mass spectrum, we discuss the early-universe constraints in terms of the formation mass $\Mini$ for a given remnant mass $\Mmin$. We study the requirement of the dark matter relic abundance in Sec. \[sec:relic\]. The mass fraction of 2-2-holes at the present epoch turns out to have a maximum as a function of $\Mini$. This in turn imposes an upper bound $\Mini\lesssim M_\textrm{DM}$ (see (\[eq:Mrelic\]) below) if the 2-2-hole remnants constitute all of dark matter. Constraints from the BBN and the cosmic microwave background (CMB) observations are explored in Sec. \[sec:BBN\] and Sec. \[sec:CMB\]. When $M_\textrm{BBN}\lesssim\Mini\lesssim M_\textrm{rec}$, the object is in the early stage of evaporation at the BBN epoch or afterwards. The radiation is then strongly constrained by the relic abundance of light elements. For $\Mini\lesssim M_\textrm{BBN}$ or $\Mini\gtrsim M_\textrm{rec}$, there are constraints from the baryon-to-photon ratio or the CMB anisotropies. A large portion of the mass range relevant to BBN and CMB turns out to be larger than $M_\textrm{DM}$. The observations then constrain the parameter space when an explanation of dark matter is absent.
Dark matter relic abundance {#sec:relic}
---------------------------
We start with the cosmic evolution of primordial ultracompact objects. The following discussion applies to both PBHs and 2-2-holes unless otherwise specified.
The mass fraction of primordial objects at formation in the radiation era is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:beta}
\beta \equiv \frac{\rho(t_\textrm{init})}{\rho_\textrm{tot}(t_\textrm{init})}
=\frac{4 \,M(t_\textrm{init})\,n(t_\textrm{init})}{3 \,T(t_\textrm{init})\,s(t_\textrm{init})}
=2.5\, g_*^{1/4}\,\gamma^{-1/2}\,\hMini^{3/2}\,\frac{n(t_\textrm{init})}{s(t_\textrm{init})}\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $\hMini\equiv \Mini/\Mp$. $\rho(t), \,n(t)$ denote the energy density and number density for primordial objects, and $\rho_\textrm{tot}(t_\textrm{init})\approx \rho_\textrm{rad}(t_\textrm{init})$ for $\beta$ of interest. For the last expression, we use $T(t)=0.55 \,\Mp\,g_*^{-1/4} (t/\lp)^{-1/2}$ and $\Mini\approx 4\times 10^{38}\gamma\left(t_\textrm{init}/\textrm{s}\right)$g. $\gamma$ denotes the fraction of the horizon mass that enters into the 2-2-hole. A typical value is $\gamma\approx 0.2$, but this is quite uncertain [@Carr:2009jm]. As we will see below, observations are determined by the number density to entropy density ratio $n(t_\textrm{init})/s(t_\textrm{init})$, namely, the combination $\beta\,\gamma^{1/2}g_*^{-1/4}$, which is insensitive to $\gamma$.
The mass fraction of primordial objects in dark matter at present is, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:betaf}
f=\frac{M(t_0)\,n(t_0)}{\rho_\textrm{DM}(t_0)}
=\frac{M(t_0)\,s(t_0)}{\rho_\textrm{DM}(t_0)}\frac{n(t_0)}{s(t_0)}\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $s(t_0)=2.9\times 10^3\,\textrm{cm}^{-3}$, $\rho_{\textrm{DM}}(t_0)\approx 0.26\rho_c$, $\rho_c=9.5\times10^{-30}\,\textrm{g}\,\textrm{cm}^{-3}$. $M(t_0)$ is $\Mini$ for the large-mass case with negligible evaporating rate, and $M(t_0)$ is $\Mmin$ for the small-mass case where a remnant is left behind.
[ ![\[fig:evolution\] Time evolution for the fractions of energy densities for radiation (red) and primordial 2-2-hole with $\Mmin=\Mp$, $\Mini=10^3$g (blue). (a) $n(t_\textrm{init})<n_c(t_\textrm{init})$, the 2-2-hole density never dominates before $t_\textrm{eva}$ and the remnants constitute all of dark matter at present. (b) $n(t_\textrm{init})>n_c(t_\textrm{init})$, the 2-2-hole density becomes dominant before $t_\textrm{eva}$ and too many remnants are left behind with $\Mini< M_\textrm{DM}$ in this example.](evolution1.pdf "fig:"){width="7.7cm"}]{}
After formation the mass fraction of primordial objects increases with time. As $M(t)$ varies slowly with time in comparison to other quantities at both early and late time, we approximate the evaporation as an instantaneous radiation of energy at $t_\textrm{eva}\equiv t_\textrm{init}+\tau_L\approx \tau_L$ (or $\tau_\textrm{BH}$) for the cosmic evolution studies in this subsection. Thus, we use $M(t)\approx\Mini$ at $t\leq t_\textrm{eva}$ and $M(t)\approx\Mmin$ at $t>t_\textrm{eva}$. It is then convenient to define a critical number density at formation, $$\begin{aligned}
n_c(t_\textrm{init})=\frac{\rho_\textrm{tot}(t_\textrm{init})}{\Mini}\sqrt{\frac{t_\textrm{init}}{t_\textrm{eva}}}\,,\end{aligned}$$ which corresponds to the equality of energy densities $\rho=\rho_\textrm{rad}$ at $t_\textrm{eva}$ for a given $\Mini$. When $n(t_\textrm{init})\lesssim n_c(t_\textrm{init})$, the primordial objects are always subdominant in the energy budget before the instantaneous evaporation. The entropy injection from evaporation is then negligible, and $n(t)/s(t)$ remains constant till the present. In this case, the mass fraction for the remnant at present $f$ is related to the number density at formation with $n(t_0)/s(t_0)=n(t_\textrm{init})/s(t_\textrm{init})$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:betaf}
f=2.6\times 10^{28}\hMmin \frac{n(t_\textrm{init})}{s(t_\textrm{init})}\,.\end{aligned}$$ In comparison to large PBHs, it receives a suppression factor of $\Mmin/\Mini$. Fig. \[fig:evolution\](a) shows the time variation of energy densities in this case and for $f=1$.
For the other case with $n(t_\textrm{init})\gtrsim n_c(t_\textrm{init})$, the primordial objects become dominant at some earlier time $t_\textrm{dom}\approx t_\textrm{init}\,\rho_\textrm{tot}^2(t_\textrm{init})/(\Mini \,n(t_\textrm{init}))^2$, and there is a new era of matter domination for $t_\textrm{dom}<t<t_\textrm{eva}$. This introduces an extra redshift of the number density, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:njeva}
n(t_\textrm{eva})\approx n(t_\textrm{init})\left(\frac{t_\textrm{eva}}{t_\textrm{dom}}\right)^{-2}\left(\frac{t_\textrm{dom}}{t_\textrm{init}}\right)^{-3/2}
=\frac{\rho_\textrm{tot}(t_\textrm{init})}{\Mini}\left(\frac{t_\textrm{eva}}{t_\textrm{init}}\right)^{-2}
=n_c(t_\textrm{init})\left(\frac{t_\textrm{eva}}{t_\textrm{init}}\right)^{-3/2},\end{aligned}$$ which cancels with the enhancement from $n(t_\textrm{init})/n_c(t_\textrm{init})$ so that $n(t_\textrm{eva})$ remains the same as the one with $n_c(t_\textrm{init})$. To find the mass fraction at present $f\propto n(t_0)/s(t_0)=n(t_\textrm{eva})/s(t_\textrm{eva})$, we also need the entropy density after evaporation, as given dominantly by radiation from primordial objects, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:entropy}
s(t_\textrm{eva})\approx \mathcal{N}_*^{1/4}\rho^{3/4}(t_\textrm{eva})
= \mathcal{N}_*^{1/4} \left(\rho_\textrm{tot}(t_\textrm{init})t_\textrm{init}^2t_\textrm{eva}^{-2}\right)^{3/4}
\approx 0.07\, \mathcal{N}_*^{1/4}\, \left(t_\textrm{eva}\lp\right)^{-3/2}\,.\end{aligned}$$ This can be compared with the entropy density without the dominance of primordial objects, $$\begin{aligned}
s(t_\textrm{eva})\approx g_*^{1/4}\rho_\textrm{rad}^{3/4}(t_\textrm{eva})
= g_*^{1/4} \left(\rho_\textrm{rad}(t_\textrm{init})t_\textrm{init}^2t_\textrm{eva}^{-2}\right)^{3/4}
\approx 0.07\, g_*^{1/4}\,\left(t_\textrm{eva}\lp\right)^{-3/2}\,.\end{aligned}$$ The two differ only by a factor of the number of degrees of freedom, where $\mathcal{N}_*\geq g_*$ due to the possibly new particle species from primordial objects radiation. Therefore, the mass fraction at present has a maximum $f_{\textrm{max}}$ as given by (\[eq:betaf\]) with $n(t_\textrm{init})=n_c(t_\textrm{init})$, and $f\approx f_{\textrm{max}}\,(g_*/\mathcal{N}_*)^{1/4}$ when the primordial objects actually dominate.
For the 2-2-hole, with $\tau_L$ in (\[eq:tauL\]), we obtain the maximal mass fraction as $$\begin{aligned}
f_{\textrm{max}}=2.6\times 10^{28}\hMmin \frac{n_c(t_\textrm{init})}{s(t_\textrm{init})}
\approx 1.7\times 10^{26}\,\mathcal{N}^{-1/2}\mathcal{N}_*^{1/2}g_*^{-1/4}\hMmin^2\hMini^{-5/2}\,.
\label{eq:betacfmax}\end{aligned}$$ For a given $\Mmin$, having the 2-2-hole remnant to account for all of dark matter then requires $f_{\textrm{max}}$ to be greater than unity. This imposes an upper bound on the initial mass as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Mrelic}
\Mini\lesssim M_\textrm{DM}
\equiv
6.8\times 10^5\,
\hMmin^{4/5}\;
\mathcal{N}^{-1/5}\,\mathcal{N}_*^{1/5}\,g_*^{-1/10}\, \,\textrm{g}\,.\end{aligned}$$ In comparison to PBHs, the bound is relaxed if $\hMmin$ is large as for the weak coupling scenario. If 2-2-holes dominate before $t_\textrm{eva}$, then the bound on $\Mini$ needs to be saturated, up to the $g_*/\mathcal{N}_*$ factor. Fig. \[fig:evolution\](b) shows the time variation of energy densities for an example with 2-2-hole dominance and where $\Mini$ is too small.
BBN constraints {#sec:BBN}
---------------
The investigation of the effects of 2-2-hole evaporation on BBN can be tied to the analyses of PBHs evaporation that has been a subject of heavy interest in the literature [@1978SvA....22..138V; @10.1143/PTP.59.1012; @1977SvAL....3..110Z; @1978SvAL....4..185V; @Kohri:1999ex; @Carr:2009jm]. We first briefly review the analysis for PBHs. The emitted particles can affect BBN in several ways [@Carr:2009jm]. First, high energy mesons with long enough lifetime scatter off the ambient nucleons inducing additional interconversion between protons and neutrons, changing the freeze-out value of $\textrm{n}/\textrm{p}$ for $t\sim 10^{-2}\text{--}10^{2}$s. Second, high energy hadrons disassociate background nuclei, predominantly ${^4}$He, thus reducing its abundance and increasing the abundance of D, T, ${^3}$He, ${^6}$Li, and ${^7}$Li for $t\sim 10^2\text{--}10^{4}$s. Finally, high energy photons generated indirectly through scattering involving the initial high energy quarks and gluons cause further disassociation of ${^4}$He and enhance the abundance of the lighter elements for $t\sim 10^{4}\text{--}10^{12}$s. The time evolution of number densities are governed by the Boltzmann equation [@Kohri:1999ex] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Boltzmann}
\frac{dn_i}{dt}+3H(t)n_i=\left[\frac{d n_i}{dt}\right]_{{\mbox{\tiny SBBN}}}-\quad \sum_{\mbox{\scriptsize proc.}}\Gamma_h(t) K_i\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $i$ denotes the particle species ($n, p$, D, T, $^3$He, $^4$He, $^6$Li, $^7$Li). The first term on the right-hand side denotes the contribution from the standard BBN scenario, and the second one sums over the available processes relevant to PBHs evaporation. $K_{i}$ is the average number of interactions with background per emission for the relevant process, and $\Gamma_h(t)$ denotes the emission rate for hadronic particles, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:emissionrate}
\Gamma_h (t)= \textrm{B}_h \,n(t) \,\frac{1}{\langle E_h(t)\rangle} \frac{dM}{dt}\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $\textrm{B}_h$ is the hadronic branching ratio and $\langle E_h (t)\rangle$ is roughly $T_\infty(t)$ up to an $\mathcal{O}(1)$ factor.
Since the effects of radiating holes on the BBN processes are directly proportional to the emission rate $\Gamma_h(t)$, constraints on the mass fraction of primordial 2-2-holes can be inferred from the analysis performed for PBHs [@Carr:2009jm] by computing the ratio $\Gamma_{h,\textrm{BH}}/\Gamma_{h,22}$. During the relevant time-period, *i.e.* $10^{-2}$ s $\lesssim t \lesssim 10^{12}$s, 2-2-holes with $M_\textrm{BBN} \lesssim \Mini \lesssim M_\textrm{rec}$ remain at the early stage and produce radiation much like PBHs. As from (\[eq:LMlimitTime0\]), if we compare the 2-2-hole in this stage to black hole with $\tau_L=\tau_{\textrm{BH}}$, $\Gamma_i$ only differs by a overall constant and $\Gamma_{\textrm{BH}}/\Gamma_{22}$ is time independent. Radiation from the remnant stage is much weaker and can be safely ignored.
Therefore, BBN constraints for 2-2-holes can be found by a simple scaling of the corresponding constraints for PBHs with an appropriate choice of masses. Given $ \tau_L= \tau_{\textrm{BH}}$, objects used for rescaling have different initial masses $\Mini^{22}=A^{4/3} \Mini^{\mathrm{BH}}$, where $A\equiv1.7\; \mathcal{N}^{-1/4} \,\hMmin^{1/2}$ is the factor that appears in $T_\infty$ in (\[eq:LMlimit\]). Using (\[eq:emissionrate\]), we obtain the ratio of the emission rates as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ratio}
\frac{\Gamma_{h,22}}{\Gamma_{h,\textrm{BH}}}= \frac{\left(\textrm{B}_h\,\mathcal{N}_*\right)_{22}}{\left(\textrm{B}_h\,\mathcal{N}_*\right)_\textrm{BH}}\frac{n_{22}(t)}{n_{\textrm{BH}}(t)} A^{5/3}\;.\end{aligned}$$ The factor $\textrm{B}_h\,\mathcal{N}_*$ denotes the number of active hadronic degrees of freedom, which depends on the temperature. As we can see from (\[eq:tauL\]), 2-2-holes with $\tau_L=\tau_\textrm{BH}$ have lower temperature for larger $\Mmin$. Thus, $\left(\textrm{B}_h\,\mathcal{N}_*\right)_{22}$ will in general be smaller than its counterpart for the black-hole case. Assuming $\Gamma_{h,\textrm{BH}}=\Gamma_{h,22}$, we obtain the following relation, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{betas}
\frac{n_{22}(t_\textrm{init})}{s(t_\textrm{init})}=\frac{n_\textrm{BH}(t_\textrm{init})}{s(t_\textrm{init})}\, \frac{\left(\textrm{B}_h\,\mathcal{N}_*\right)_\textrm{BH}}{\left(\textrm{B}_h\,\mathcal{N}_*\right)_{22}} A^{-5/3}
\approx 0.4\Big(\hMini^{22}\Big)^{-3/2}\beta_\textrm{BH}\,\gamma^{1/2}g_*^{-1/4}\, A^{1/3}\,,\end{aligned}$$ given (\[eq:beta\]) and $n(t)/s(t)=n(t_\textrm{init})/s(t_\textrm{init})$. In the last expression, we convert the ratio of the number density to entropy density for black holes to the quantity $\beta_\textrm{BH}\,\gamma^{1/2}g_*^{-1/4}$, for which the latest constraints are given in [@Carr:2009jm]. We also assume $\left(\textrm{B}_h\,\mathcal{N}_*\right)_{22}\approx \left(\textrm{B}_h\,\mathcal{N}_*\right)_\textrm{BH}$ for simplicity. This leads to a conservative upper bound for 2-2-holes. In comparison to PBHs case, this conservative constraint already enjoys some relaxation for larger $\Mmin$ with $A\gg 1$. It could be further relaxed if $\left(\textrm{B}_h\,\mathcal{N}_*\right)_{22}$ becomes considerably smaller at lower temperature.
-- -- --
-- -- --
The constraints turn out to be so strong that 2-2-holes cannot dominate the energy density before $t_\textrm{eva}$, i.e. $n(t_\textrm{init})<n_c(t_\textrm{init})$ as defined in Sec. \[sec:relic\]. Thus the upper bound on the mass fraction at present can be found by using (\[eq:betaf\]), $$\begin{aligned}
\label{fs}
f_{22}\approx A^{-5/3} f_{\textrm{BH}}\;,
\end{aligned}$$ where BBN puts stronger constraints for 2-2 hole remnants in comparison to a PBH remnant with the mass $\Mmin$. The constraints are displayed in Fig. \[fig:BBN-early\], assuming $\mathcal{N}\approx 107$. The dashed line on each panel shows the maximal mass fraction $f_\textrm{max}$ in (\[eq:betacfmax\]) as derived from the cosmic evolution. For smaller $\Mmin$, say in Fig. \[fig:f1\], $f_\textrm{max}<1$ for $\Mini$ relevant for BBN constraints, and 2-2-hole cannot constitute all of dark matter independent of the BBN observations. It is for larger $\Mmin$, as in Fig. \[fig:f2\], that there is a small region with $f_\textrm{max}>1$ being excluded directly by the BBN observations.
CMB constraints {#sec:CMB}
---------------
Depending on the mass, the evaporation of 2-2-holes may influence the CMB observations in various different ways, as in the case for PBHs.
For $\Mini\lesssim M_\textrm{BBN}$, photons emitted before BBN are completely thermalized and only contribute to the density of background radiation. If the baryon asymmetry is generated purely in the early universe, the observed baryon-to-photon ratio could be used to impose an upper bound on the entropy injection from the 2-2-hole dominant phase [@1976Zel]. The baryon number density is bounded from above by the radiation density right before the final evaporation, i.e. $n_B(t_\textrm{eva})\lesssim g^{1/4}_* \rho_\textrm{rad}^{3/4}(t_\textrm{eva})$ with $\rho_\textrm{rad}(t_\textrm{eva})\approx0.03\,(t_\textrm{eva}\lp)^{-2}(t_\textrm{eva}/t_\textrm{dom})^{-2/3}$, while the entropy density is bounded from below by the 2-2-hole entropy injection $s(t_\textrm{eva})$ given in (\[eq:entropy\]). The ratio $g^{1/4}_* \rho_\textrm{rad}^{3/4}(t_\textrm{eva})/s(t_\textrm{eva})\approx 6.4\times 10^{-3}\,\mathcal{N}^{-1/2}\mathcal{N}_*^{1/4} \hMmin \,\hMini^{-5/2}s(t_\textrm{init})/n(t_\textrm{init})$ then provides an upper bound on the baryon-to-photon ratio $n_B/n_\gamma$, which should be larger than the observed value $6\times 10^{-10}$. This imposes an upper bound on the 2-2-hole number density to entropy density ratio as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:entropybound}
\frac{n(t_\textrm{init})}{s(t_\textrm{init})}\lesssim 1.2\times 10^7\,\mathcal{N}^{-1/2}\mathcal{N}_*^{1/4} \hMmin \, \hMini^{-5/2}\,.\end{aligned}$$ This entropy constraint is weaker than the requirement of generating the observed relic abundance, and is relevant only for $M_\textrm{DM}\lesssim \Mini \lesssim M_\textrm{BBN}$.
It is possible that the baryon asymmetry can be generated by the evaporation of primordial objects, as been discussed for PBHs in [@Carr:1976zz; @Zeldovich:1976vw; @Toussaint:1978br; @Turner:1979bt; @Grillo:1980rt]. This requires that the initial temperature is above the electroweak scale, namely, $\Mini\lesssim 10^{12}\left(\Mmin/\textrm{g}\right)^{1/2}\,$g. For $\Mmin$ of interest, this upper bound is comparable to $\Mini\lesssim M_\textrm{BBN}$. Thus, 2-2-holes that complete the early-time evaporation before the BBN era may account for the observed baryon asymmetry. In this case the entropy bound derived in the previous paragraph does not apply.
The emission after BBN, but before the time of recombination, can produce distortions in the CMB spectrum. Yet, given that the parameter space has already been strongly constrained by the BBN observations discussed before, these constraints are of less interest.
The emission after recombination causes the damping of small scale CMB anisotropies, providing a new constraint on the number density of 2-2-holes for $\Mini \gtrsim M_\textrm{rec}$. With the dominant contribution from the early stage of evaporation as before, the bounds would be similar to the PBH case, which were found in [@Zhang:2007zzh] by modifying the calculation for decaying dark matter particles. The bound depends on the PBH lifetime, the mass fraction, and the branching ratio for electrons and positrons $\textrm{B}_e$, which dominates the energy that goes into heating the matter [@Carr:2009jm]. So, in the case of 2-2-holes we can make a simple replacement with $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:CMB}
\log_{10}\left(\textrm{B}_e \,f\right) < -10.8-0.50 \,x+0.085 \,x^2+0.0045 \,x^3,\quad
x=\log_{10}\left(\frac{10^{13}\,\textrm{s}}{\tau_L}\right).\end{aligned}$$ Here, $f$ denotes the mass fraction in dark matter at the time of recombination, which can be related to $n(t_\textrm{init})/s(t_\textrm{init})$ by (\[eq:betaf\]), with $\Mmin$ replaced by $\Mini$, since the 2-2-hole mass remains close to the initial value. It turns out that the constraint on $n(t_\textrm{init})/s(t_\textrm{init})$ can be well approximated by a simple form, $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{n(t_\textrm{init})}{s(t_\textrm{init})}\lesssim 3\times 10^{-80}\,\textrm{B}_e^{-1}\mathcal{N}^{\,0.8}\,\mathcal{N}_*^{-0.8}\hMmin^{-1.5}\,\hMini^{1.3}\,.\end{aligned}$$ As in the case for PBHs, the bound is quite strong and it becomes weaker as $\Mini$ increases. For an order of magnitude estimation, we use $\textrm{B}_e\approx 0.1$ for 2-2-holes with $\Mmin\lesssim 10^{20\,}$g and $T_{\infty,\textrm{init}}\gtrsim 0.1\,$MeV, as for PBHs with $M_\textrm{BH}^\textrm{init} \sim 10^{13}\text{--}10^{14}\,$g. For much larger $\Mmin$ with $T_{\infty,\textrm{init}}\ll 0.1\,$MeV, there is only heating from photons, thus the constraint would be much more relaxed.
Discussions {#sec:discuss}
===========
As we have seen, the behavior of primordial thermal 2-2-holes is mainly determined by the initial mass at formation $\Mini$ and the minimal mass $\Mmin$, with minor dependence on the number of degrees of freedom for both the gas in the interior ($\mathcal{N}$) and the radiation ($\mathcal{N}_*$). As discussed in detail in Sec. \[sec:present\] and Sec. \[sec:pheno\], various observations can be used to probe $\Mini$ and $\Mmin$. The results are summarized in Fig. \[fig:LUcons\] and Fig. \[fig:EUcons\], assuming the Standard Model values for $\mathcal{N}$ and $\mathcal{N}_*$.
[ ![\[fig:LUcons\] Summary of constraints on the mass fraction of 2-2-hole remnants in dark matter at present $f\equiv \rho(t_0)/\rho_\textrm{DM}(t_0)$ as a function of $\Mmin$. The colored lines show the constraints on the high-energy particle flux produced by binary mergers of 2-2-hole remnants. The orange solid lines denote the upper bound from neutrino observations by considering only the on-shell production, whereas the orange dashed line includes contribution from the parton shower of initial quarks. The pink dotted line shows the strongest constraints from the diffuse photon flux at energies much smaller than the average value. The gray lines present a few upper bounds from purely gravitational interactions as directly adapted from PBHs with the same mass. Femtolensing of gamma-ray bursts may constrain $\Mmin$ down to $10^{17}\,$g [@Barnacka:2012bm]. The dynamical constraints from disruptions of white dwarfs (WD) and neutron stars (NS) become relevant for $\Mmin$ around $10^{20}\,$g [@Graham:2015apa; @Capela:2013yf]. The microlensing observations, e.g. HSC [@Niikura:2017zjd; @Smyth:2019whb], cover a wide mass range from $10^{23}$g all the way up to $M_\odot$. (The validity of the gray dotted lines has been questioned recently [@Katz:2018zrn; @Conroy:2010bs; @Ibata:2012eq].)](LUcons.pdf "fig:"){width="11cm"}]{}
The present epoch observations for the remnants can be used to probe the fundamental mass scale $\Mmin$ in the theory. Constraints on the present mass fraction in dark matter $f$ as a function of $\Mmin$ are displayed in Fig. \[fig:LUcons\]. The most relevant constraints come from high-energy particles emitted by the merger product of the remnant binaries.[^11] When using a recent estimation for the binary merger rate we find that the current observations have a good coverage for the neutrino and photon fluxes for a wide range of $\Mmin$. By considering only on-shell production of neutrinos from 2-2-hole evaporation, remnants with $\Mmin\gtrsim 10^5\,$g are excluded from making up all of dark matter. We then consider parton showers of highly off-shell initial particles, where a significant amount of lower energy neutrinos and photons are generated from hadron decay. This enables us to probe smaller $\Mmin$. By assuming the fragmentation functions in ordinary QCD, the neutrino observations push the bounds down to $\sim 1$g, and the measured photon flux further strengthens the constraint to be $\Mmin\lesssim 10\,\Mp$.[^12]
It is instructive to compare these novel constraints with the existing bounds from gravitational interaction, which become relevant only for relatively large remnants, i.e. $\Mmin$ no smaller than $10^{17}\,$g. Apparently, we have opened a new window onto the range of dark matter parameter space that was previously considered untestable. The strongest photon bound nonetheless depends on the fragmentation function at quite small energy fraction and so may suffer more from the theoretical uncertainties. A better understanding of parton showers for 2-2-hole evaporation, in particular at lower energy, and a more reliable estimation of the merger rate will help clarify the observational consequences of small 2-2-hole remnants comprising the dark matter.
The fact that only small $\Mmin$ is allowed excludes a large portion of parameter space for the weak coupling scenario of quadratic gravity. One motivation for this scenario is to resolve the Higgs naturalness problem with feeble gravitational interactions. The relevant parameter range, i.e. $m_2\lesssim 10^{-8}\,\Mp$ [@Salvio:2014soa], has been excluded if the constraints from the parton shower are taken seriously. Recently, new experimental setups have been proposed for the gravitational direct detection of dark matter in the small-mass range. Ref. [@Carney:2019pza] considered an array of quantum-limited impulse sensors. A meter-scale apparatus may be capable of detecting Planck mass remnants, whereas a heavier mass range can be reached with a sparse, larger array of detectors.
-- -- --
-- -- --
Next, we review the constraints obtained from early-universe physics, assuming formation of primordial 2-2-holes in the radiation era. Fig. \[fig:EU1\] shows the constraints for Planck mass remnants in the strong coupling scenario of quadratic gravity, which resemble closely the constraints for PBH relics of the Planck mass [@Carr:2009jm; @Dalianis:2019asr]. The red curve shows the requirement of generating the observed dark matter relic abundance for $\Mini$ extending up to $M_\textrm{DM}\approx 4\times 10^5\,\textrm{g}\lesssim M_\textrm{BBN}$, meaning that the early stage of evaporation ends way before the BBN epoch. Larger 2-2-holes have too small remnant abundance, due to suppression from an extra 2-2-hole dominant phase as discussed in Sec. \[sec:relic\], but their number density can still be constrained by early universe observations, as shown for the photon-to-baryon ratio, BBN and CMB observations. In the weak coupling scenario, with the remnants being heavier, the constraints in general differ from the black hole remnants. For increasing $\Mmin$, the parameter region constrained by entropy injection shrinks. When $\Mmin\gtrsim 10^{17}\,$g, we have $M_\textrm{DM}\gtrsim M_\textrm{BBN}$ and the red and blue regions overlap, as shown in Fig. \[fig:EU3\]. This implies that the parameter space relevant to dark matter starts to be excluded by BBN observations.
With the remnant mass bounded to be small as in Fig. \[fig:LUcons\], the upper bound on the formation mass as required for remnant dark matter is $\Mini\lesssim 10^{13}$g for $\Mmin\lesssim10^5$g and $\Mini\lesssim 10^{6}\,$g for $\Mmin\lesssim 10\,\Mp$, respectively. This upper bound has implications for the inflation model that gives rise to density inhomogeneities responsible for the production of primordial 2-2-holes. For instance, our bounds are smaller than the lower bound on $\Mini$ derived from some conjectures for the UV physics [@Cai:2019igo]. The density inhomogeneities can generate a stochastic gravitational-wave background, but the peak frequency for $\Mini\lesssim 10^{13}\,$g is above kHz [@Wang:2019kaf] and is beyond the current reach of ground based detectors. As in the PBH case, the demanded mass fraction for 2-2-hole dark matter implies quite large density perturbations at small scales in comparison to CMB observations at large scales. This makes the model building of inflation more contrived, and other production mechanisms deserve to be further explored in this new context.
Summary {#sec:final}
=======
As horizonless ultracompact objects, remnants from primordial thermal 2-2-holes constitute a well-motivated candidate for dark matter. They arise in quadratic gravity, a candidate theory for quantum gravity [@Holdom:2002xy; @Holdom:2016nek; @Holdom:2019ouz; @Ren:2019afg]. The fact that remnants appear naturally in the theory puts them in a favorable position over PBH remnants. Moreover, the 2-2-hole is a probable endpoint of gravitational collapse instead of the black hole, offering a resolution to the information loss conundrum due to the absence of a horizon.
The remnant mass $\Mmin$, the minimum allowed mass for a 2-2-hole, is linked to the mass of the spin-2 mode in the theory. Therefore, any information on $\Mmin$ directly connects to the underlying theory of quantum gravity. In understanding the observational implications of 2-2-hole remnants as dark matter and exploring the available parameter space for $\Mmin$, the main determinant is the thermodynamic behavior of 2-2-holes. The case of a relativistic thermal gas as the matter source was investigated in [@Holdom:2019ouz; @Ren:2019afg], and this provides a realistic scheme to work in.
Thermodynamic properties of a thermal 2-2-hole in the large-mass range have the same form as a black hole, thus the evaporation in the early stage shares most of the features of the black hole evaporation. Once the temperature reaches the peak value, the 2-2-hole enters into the remnant stage with close to the minimal mass, where drastic changes occur in the thermodynamic behavior; heat capacity becomes positive, the evaporation significantly slows down and asymptotically halts. It is this small 2-2-hole that behaves as a cold, stable remnant, and serves as dark matter.
As we have shown in this paper, 2-2-hole remnants can account for all of dark matter and satisfy all observational constraints if both the remnant and formation masses are relatively small. The formation mass is bounded to be small mainly by the requirement of generating the observed dark matter abundance. The early stage of evaporation in turn ends way before BBN begins, with little influence on other early-universe observations. The remnant mass, on the other hand, can be probed by the observations of high-energy astrophysical particles, in additional to the conventional PBH searches through gravitational interactions. When two remnants form a binary and merge, the merger product is no longer a remnant state, but a very hot 2-2-hole that produces a strong flux of high energy particles before settling back down to a cold remnant. With the latest estimation for the binary merger rate, the predicted signals turn out to be strong enough to be confronted by the data, especially from the photon and neutrino observations. This enables us to constrain the remnant mass to be far below the range accessible by the conventional PBH searches. The neutrino bounds are more robust against theoretical uncertainties in the distribution function from parton showers, with $\Mmin\lesssim 10^5\,$g being a conservative estimate. The photon bounds are stronger, and they narrow down the viable parameter space to be $\Mmin\lesssim 10\,\Mp$. In this way, our constraints are tending to push the theory of quantum gravity towards the strong coupling regime, and thus towards a theory with only one fundamental scale.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We thank Hardi Veermae, Sai Wang, Shun Zhou for valuable discussions. Work of U.A. is supported in part by the Chinese Academy of Sciences President’s International Fellowship Initiative (PIFI) under Grant No. 2020PM0019, and the Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, under Contract No. Y9291120K2. B.H. is supported in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. J.R. is supported in part by the Institute of High Energy Physics under Contract No. Y9291120K2.
*Note added.*— Recently the authors of Ref. [@Salvio:2019llz] have also discussed the possibility that horizonless ultracompact objects in quadratic gravity serve as dark matter. However, they consider a different object, which is a new limit of the regular solution that can reach large compactness only for small masses, i.e. $M\lesssim \Mmin$. Such solutions are rather disconnected from solutions that can serve as the endpoint of gravitational collapse of large masses, which are black holes, or as we argue here, 2-2-holes.
Structure of thermal 2-2-holes {#sec:22hole}
==============================
With no horizon, the whole spacetime for a 2-2-hole can be described by one coordinate system. For a static and spherically symmetric case, we can choose the form of the line element as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:metric}
ds^2=-B(r)dt^2+A(r)dr^2+r^2d\Omega^2\,.\end{aligned}$$ A 2-2-hole is then defined by the following characteristic leading-order behavior at small $r$, $$\begin{aligned}
A(r)=a_2 r^2+...,\quad
B(r)=b_2 r^2+... \,,\end{aligned}$$ which correspond to a vanishing metric at the origin. As a new family of solutions in quadratic gravity, it is also the most generic one with a much larger parameter space than for either the regular solutions or the Schwarzschild-like solutions [@Holdom:2002xy; @Holdom:2016nek].
As the Ricci term $R^2$ is inessential, we find numerical solutions for the thermal 2-2-holes in Einstein-Weyl gravity as described by two mass scales, the Planck mass and the mass of the spin-2 mode. The latter is related to the minimum allowed mass $\Mmin$ for the thermal 2-2-holes as in (\[eq:Mmin\]). The relativistic thermal gas model is governed by the metric functions $A(r), B(r)$ and the locally measured gas temperature $T(r)$. With two field equations and the conservation law $T(r)B(r)^{1/2}=T_\infty$, a one-parameter family of solutions exists and is characterized by $M/\Mmin$ [@Ren:2019afg].
[ ![\[fig:solutions\] The metric functions $A$, $B$, the Weyl tensor square $C_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}C^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$, and the relativistic thermal gas temperature $T$ as functions of $r/r_H$ for $M/\Mmin\approx 1$ (red), 1.2 (green), 2 (blue), 80 (purple). The black dotted line in the top panels is the Schwarzschild solution. The radius at which the Weyl tensor square vanishes denotes roughly the boundary of the interior.](Ar.pdf "fig:"){width="8.0cm"}]{}\
[ ![\[fig:solutions\] The metric functions $A$, $B$, the Weyl tensor square $C_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}C^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$, and the relativistic thermal gas temperature $T$ as functions of $r/r_H$ for $M/\Mmin\approx 1$ (red), 1.2 (green), 2 (blue), 80 (purple). The black dotted line in the top panels is the Schwarzschild solution. The radius at which the Weyl tensor square vanishes denotes roughly the boundary of the interior.](C2r.pdf "fig:"){width="8cm"}]{}
Figure \[fig:solutions\] shows how the metric and matter properties vary with the radius $r$ for some typical values of $M/\Mmin$. The plots are arranged to be independent of the values of $\Mmin$ and $\mathcal{N}$, and so the features apply to $\Mmin$ of any size. The purple line shows the behavior for a typical large 2-2-hole with $M$ much larger than $\Mmin$. Deviations from the Schwarzschild solution occur at a minuscule distance outside $r_H$, and the behavior changes abruptly almost at the same radius. The blue line is for the merger product of 2-2-hole remnants, which is similar to the $M=M_\textrm{peak}$ case (green line) with the maximum $T_\infty$. The sizes of the transition region and the interior region are both at the order of $\mathcal{O}(r_H)$. The red line is for a typical 2-2-hole remnant with $\Delta M$ much smaller than $\Mmin$. This corresponds to an interior that is pushed well within the would-be horizon with a size of order $1/\sqrt{a_2}$. As for a large 2-2-hole, the interior in this case features an extremely deep gravitational potential as described by $B(r)$.
In practice, it is numerically demanding to obtain solutions with $M/\Mmin$ being too large or too close to unity. Fortunately, the solutions in these two limits are governed by distinct scaling behaviors that relate the interior solutions at different values of $M/\Mmin$. In the large mass limit, the interior is characterized by $r_H$ and $\lambda_2$, while in the small mass limit the relevant scales are defined by $a_2$ and $b_2$. With the corresponding scaling behaviors, we can then derive the analytical approximations (\[eq:LMlimit\]) and (\[eq:SMlimit\]) for the large- and small-mass cases, respectively.
Constraints on radiation from single remnants {#sec:remrad}
=============================================
When the 2-2-hole formation mass $\Mini$ is small, the early stage of evaporation ends too early to be constrained. For such cases, constraints on the remnant radiation need to be checked. As we’ve discussed in Sec. \[sec:evapo\], the remnant radiation suffers from the complicated low frequency effects, corresponding to a suppressed effective emitted surface. For simplicity we use the would-be horizon area in the Stefan-Boltzmann law (\[eq:SBlaw\]), which then provides an upper bound on the radiation power. In this section we perform order of magnitude estimates for constraints on the remnant radiation based on (\[eq:SBlaw\]). As we will see, for $\Mmin$ of interest, the remnant contributions are too small to be constrained by the current data. Any further low frequency suppression would make it even smaller.
We start from early universe observations, i.e. BBN and CMB. Constraints on the remnant radiation can still be inferred from that for PBHs by considering the ratio of the emission rate, $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\Gamma_{i,22}(t)}{\Gamma_{i,\textrm{BH}}(t)}
=\frac{\left(\textrm{B}_i\,\mathcal{N}_*\right)_{22}}{\left(\textrm{B}_i\,\mathcal{N}_*\right)_\textrm{BH}}\frac{f _{22} \,\rho_\textrm{DM} \,s(t_0)^{-1}\Mmin \,T_\infty^3(t) }{0.4\,\beta _{\text{BH}}\,\gamma^{1/2}g_*^{-1/4}\left(M_{\text{init}}^{\text{BH}}\right)^{-3/2}M_{\text{BH}}^2(t) \,T_{\text{BH}}^3(t)}\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $n_{22}(t)/s(t)=n_{22}(t_0)/s(t_0)$ and $n_\textrm{BH}(t)/s(t)=n_\textrm{BH}(t_\textrm{init})/s(t_\textrm{init})$ are used. $T_\infty(t)$ is the remnant temperature in (\[eq:SMlimitTime\]). Since $\Gamma_{i,22}(t)$, $T_\infty(t)$ decrease with time and $\Gamma_{i,\textrm{BH}}(t)$, $T_{\text{BH}}(t)$ increase with time, we can find a conservative constraint by comparing a 2-2-hole remnant with a black hole at the earliest time $t_*$ of the relevant physical process with $T_\infty(t_*)=T_{\text{BH}}(t_*)$. This equal-temperature condition determines the remnant mass $\Mmin$ used for comparison for a given $t_*$ and $M^\textrm{BH}_\textrm{init}$. Assuming $\Gamma_{i,22}(t_*)=\Gamma_{i,\textrm{BH}}(t_*)$, the upper bound on the 2-2-hole mass fraction at this $\Mmin$ is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:f22late}
f_{22}=4.6\times 10^{25} \left(\beta _{\text{BH}}\,\gamma^{1/2}g_*^{-1/4}\right) \left(\frac{M^\textrm{BH}_\textrm{init}}{\textrm{g}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{\Mmin}{\textrm{g}}\right)^{-1}\left(1-\frac{t_*}{\tau_\textrm{BH}}\right)^{2/3},\end{aligned}$$ with the upper bound on $\beta _{\text{BH}}\,\gamma^{1/2}g_*^{-1/4}$ for PBHs. This is a conservative estimation since $T_\infty(t), \left(\textrm{B}_i\,\mathcal{N}_*\right)_{22}, \Gamma_{i,22}(t)$ are smaller than the black hole counterpart during the relevant time period $t>t_*$.
The BBN observations can constrain the remnant radiation when $\Mini\lesssim M_\textrm{BBN}$. For the three processes as we have discussed before, the corresponding range of the remnant mass is $\Mmin\sim \Mp\text{--}2\times 10^{10}\,$g. Using the constraints for PBHs and (\[eq:f22late\]), we find that the conservative upper bound on $f_{22}$ in this mass range is larger than unity. In other words, these 2-2-hole remnants can safely evade the BBN constraints on the late-time radiation and account for all of dark matter. The CMB observations become relevant for $\Mini \lesssim M_\textrm{rec}$. Similarly, we find no constraint on 2-2-hole remnants with $\Mmin\lesssim 4\times 10^{12}\,$g from PBH studies [@Carr:2009jm; @Clark:2016nst]. Heavier remnants with $T_\infty$ much lower than the QCD scale or electron mass have negligible impacts on BBN or CMB.
The present observations can also be used to constrain the remnant radiation. One example is the diffuse $\gamma$-ray background, which has been studied for PBHs that haven’t completed (or just completed) their evaporation by now with mass around $10^{14}\text{--}10^{15}$g [@Page:1976wx; @MacGibbon:1991vc; @Carr:2009jm]. For 2-2-holes, the photon background receives contribution from both the Milky way at present and the whole universe from early time.
The galactic contribution can be calculated from the equation $$\label{flux}
\Phi_{\gamma}=\frac{\mathcal{D}}{\Mmin} \left(\frac{d N_{\gamma}}{dE_{\gamma} dt}\right)\;,$$ where the $D$-factor is defined in (\[D-factor\]) and the photon emission rate is given as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{emissionrate}
\left(\frac{d N_{\gamma}}{dE_{\gamma} dt}\right)\approx \frac{\pi^2}{120}2\times 4\pi r_{H}^2 \frac{T_{\infty}^4}{\langle{E}_{\gamma}\rangle^2}\;.\end{aligned}$$ Here we approximate the spectrum by emission at the average photon energy $\langle{E}_{\gamma}\rangle\approx 5.7 \,T_{\infty}$ [@Carr:2009jm], which ranges from $0.1\,$keV to $10\,$MeV for $\Mmin=\Mp\text{--}10^{22}\,$g. For 2-2-holes, the quantity of interest is then $$\begin{aligned}
\label{galacticflux}
E_{\gamma}^2\Phi_{\gamma}\approx 1.0\times10^{-7}\;f\;\mathcal{N}^{1/3}\mathcal{N_*}^{-4/3}\left(\frac{\Mmin}{\textrm{g}}\right)^{1/3} \left(\ln\frac{1.8\times10^{56}}{\Mmin/\textrm{g}}\right)^{-7/3}\;\; \mbox{ keV}\;\mbox{sr}^{-1}\mbox{ cm}^{-2}\mbox{ s}^{-1}\;,\end{aligned}$$ where $T_{\infty}$ is evaluated from (\[eq:SMlimitTime\]) for $\Delta t \approx t_0$. In order to estimate the extragalactic contribution, we can use the corresponding versions of (\[flux-EG\]) to take into account all the emission from the time of recombination and afterwards. With the Planckian distribution for initial particles, we use $2\pi^2 dN_{\gamma}/(dtdE_{\gamma})=E_{\gamma}(t)^2 \pi r_H^2 /( e^{E_{\gamma}(t)/T_{\infty}(t)}-1)$ for the emission rate, where $E_{\gamma}(t)=(1+z)E_{\gamma}$. We find that the extragalactic contribution is in the same order of magnitude as the galactic one.
Including both contributions, we find that the current existing data for isotropic photon flux [@Strong:2004ry; @Sreekumar:1997un] is unable to see a possible 2-2-hole contribution. The largest value for the average photon energy $\braket{E_{\gamma}}\approx 15$ MeV corresponds to $\Mmin\approx \Mp$, resulting in an anticipated flux contribution fifteen orders of magnitude smaller than the observed value. For larger $\Mmin$, even though the relative value of the 2-2-hole flux increases for $\braket{E_{\gamma}}\approx 0.7$ keV ($\Mmin\approx10^{22}\textrm{ g}$), the 2-2-hole contribution is still six orders of magnitude too small.
In summary, observations from BBN, CMB and diffuse photon flux impose no constraints on the thermal radiation from isolated 2-2-holes remnants with relatively small mass. The larger $\Mmin$ region, on the other hand, has already been strongly constrained by other observations, as we can see in Fig. \[fig:LUcons\].
[^1]: [email protected]
[^2]: [email protected]
[^3]: [email protected]
[^4]: At the classical level the theory suffers from a long-known ghost problem associated with the higher derivative terms. There are proposed solutions to deal with the ghost by taking quantum corrections seriously [@Lee:1969fy; @Tomboulis:1977jk; @Grinstein:2008bg; @Anselmi:2017yux; @Donoghue:2018lmc; @Bender:2007wu; @Salvio:2015gsi; @Holdom:2015kbf; @Holdom:2016xfn; @Salvio:2018crh]. That problem aside, quadratic gravity provides a more tractable framework to study high curvature effects around macroscopic would-be horizons.
[^5]: In the small mass limit, the tiny change of mass $\Delta M$ is hard to identify numerically. Instead, it can be found from the temperature and entropy by using the first law of thermodynamics, $dM=T_\infty dS$ [@Ren:2019afg].
[^6]: With a reflective boundary condition at the origin, the 2-2-hole features long-lived quasi-normal modes at low frequencies, corresponding to narrow resonance peaks in the spectrum. These resonances have been studied for large 2-2-holes, the features of which determine the signal of gravitational wave echoes generated by the binary merger [@Conklin:2017lwb]. We leave the corresponding discussion of 2-2-hole remnants for future work.
[^7]: Most of these studies assume a Newtonian force for the object, so a 2-2-hole remnant that deviates at $r\sim \mathcal{O}(r_H)$ still appears indistinguishable from a black hole.
[^8]: We assume that the 2-2-hole has already become a remnant at the time of binary formation, and so further evaporation has no influence on the merger rate estimation for PBHs.
[^9]: Translating the detected signals from IceCube into bounds on the flux have large uncertainties [@Aartsen:2015knd] that we do not show in Fig. \[fig:LUcons\].
[^10]: The numerical results for $10^{-5}\lesssim x<1$ are found by two methods (a Monte Carlo simulation and the evolution based on the DGLAP equations) that agree well. At very small $x$, a modified leading log approximation is used to account for the color coherence effects. Its normalization is determined by matching with the numerical results at $x_0\sim 10^{-3}\text{--}10^{-4}$, with both the function and its first derivative being continuous.
[^11]: Radiation from the single remnants is rather weak and does not yield signals sensitive to either the early universe or present epoch observations, as detailed in Appendix \[sec:remrad\].
[^12]: For illustration, we use the fragmentation function for temperature around $10^{16}\,$GeV. The larger $\Mmin$ cases with much lower temperature would have stronger couplings and a different shape of the distribution functions. The exact constraint on $f$ in Fig. \[fig:LUcons\] will then change for large $\Mmin$. But it remains true that remnants cannot be all of dark matter for large $\Mmin$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract:
- 'We provide a faithful translation of Hans Richter’s important 1949 paper “Verzerrungstensor, Verzerrungsdeviator und Spannungstensor bei endlichen Formänderungen” from its original German version into English, complemented by an introduction summarizing Richter’s achievements.'
- |
Postulates are laid down that have to be satisfied on forming the strain tensor, the strain deviator and the stress tensor, and thus the general form of these tensors are deduced in arbitrary coordinates. The mixed variant logarithmic strain tensor proves the simplest definition of the strain tensor. The deviator may be formed in the usual manner, and the invariants of it characterize the strain in an invariant way. If the stress tensor is defined accordingly, the form of the general law of elasticity continues to be invariant to coordinate transformations.
Es werden Postulate aufgestellt, denen bei der Bildung des Verzerrungstensors, des Verzerrungsdeviators und des Spannungstensors zu genügen ist, und hieraus die allgemeine Gestalt dieser Tensoren in beliebigen Koordinaten abgeleitet. Als einfachste Definition des Verzerrungstensors erscheint die gemischt-variante logarithmische Deformationsmatrix, wo der Deviator in üblicher Weise gebildet werden kann, und wo die Invarianten des letzteren die Beanspruchung invariant charakterisieren. Bei entsprechender Definition des Spannungstensors bleibt die Gestalt des allgemeinen Elastizitätsgesetzes invariant gegen Koordinatentransformation.
On établit des postulats pour la formation du tenseur de déformation, du déviateur de déformation et du tenseur de tension. La forme générale de ces tenseurs en coordonnées arbitraires en est déduite. La matrice logarithmique (mixte-variante) de déformation fournit la plus simple définition du tenseur de déformation. Le déviateur peut être formé comme de coutume et ses invariantes caractérisent la sollicitation d’une maniére invariante. Le tenseur de tension étant défini conformément, la forme de la loi générale d’élasticité reste invariante dans toute transformation de coordonnées.
author:
- 'Patrizio Neff[^1] and Kai Graban[^2] and Eva Schweickert[^3] and Robert J. Martin[^4]'
bibliography:
- 'bib\_main.bib'
- 'bib\_agn.bib'
title: |
The axiomatic introduction of arbitrary strain tensors by Hans Richter - a commented translation of\
“Strain tensor, strain deviator and stress tensor for finite deformations”
---
[**Keywords:** nonlinear elasticity, hyperelasticity, logarithmic strain tensor, family of strain tensors, isotropy, co- and contravariant tensors, stress tensor, Seth-Hill strain measures, Doyle-Ericksen strain measures, stress-strain relation]{}\
**AMS 2010 subject classification: 74B20, 01A75**\
Introduction {#introduction .unnumbered}
============
In this paper, we continue our efforts to translate Hans Richter’s early work on nonlinear elasticity theory (cf. [@agn_graban2019richter]). Richter’s second article in the field, entitled “Verzerrungstensor, Verzerrungsdeviator und Spannungstensor bei endlichen Formänderungen” (“Strain tensor, strain deviator and stress tensor for finite deformations”) [@richter1949verzerrung], was published in *Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik* in 1949 and concerns the axiomatic foundations of nonlinear elasticity. More precisely, Richter is concerned with introducing deductively a family of strain tensors for which he lays down an axiomatic structure.
In order to provide the context for Richter’s work, we briefly recapitulate what can be said, and what is generally accepted, about strain tensors, following Truesdell and his school after 1955. The concept of *strain* is of fundamental importance in continuum mechanics. In linearized elasticity, it is assumed that the Cauchy stress tensor $\sigma$ is a linear function of the symmetric infinitesimal strain tensor $$\eps = \sym \grad u = \sym(\grad \varphi - \id) = \sym(F-\id)\,,$$ where $\varphi\col\Omega\to\R^n$ is the deformation of an elastic body with a given reference configuration $\Omega\subset\R^n$, $\varphi(x) = x+u(x)$ with the displacement $u$, $F=\grad\varphi$ is the deformation gradient, $\sym\grad u = \frac12(\grad u + (\grad u)^T)$ is the symmetric part of the displacement gradient $\grad u$ and $\id$ is the identity tensor. In geometrically nonlinear elasticity, on the other hand, a vast number of different “strains” have been employed in the past in order to conveniently express nonlinear constitutive relations. In particular, it is common practice to choose a stress-strain pair such that a given constitutive law can be expressed in terms of a linear relation between stress and strain [@batra1998linear; @batra2001comparison; @bertram2007rank].[^5] In these cases, the strain tensor is generally a nonlinear function of the deformation gradient.
Although the specific definition of what exactly the term “strain” encompasses varies throughout the literature, it is commonly assumed [@Hill68 p. 230] (cf. [@hill1970; @hill1978; @bertram2008elasticity; @norris2008higherDerivatives]) that a (*spatial* or *Eulerian*) strain takes the form of a *primary matrix function* of the left Biot-stretch tensor $V=\sqrt{FF^T}$ of the deformation gradient $F\in\GLpn$, i.e. an isotropic tensor function $E\col\PSymn\to\Symn$ from the set of positive definite tensors to the set of symmetric tensors of the form[^6] $$\label{eq:primaryMatrixFunctionDefinition}
E(V) = \sum_{i=1}^n \operatorname{e}(\lambda_i) \cdot e_i\otimes e_i \quad\text{for}\quad V = \sum_{i=1}^n \lambda_i \cdot e_i\otimes e_i$$ with a strictly monotone *scale function* $\operatorname{e}\col(0,\infty)\to\R$, where $\otimes$ denotes the tensor product, $\lambda_i$ are the eigenvalues and $e_i$ are the eigenvectors of $V$. In addition, the normalization requirements $\operatorname{e}(1)=0$ and $\operatorname{e}'(1)=1$ are typically required to hold as well, with the former ensuring that the strain vanishes if and only if the deformation gradient describes a pure rotation, i.e. if and only if $F\in\SO(n)$, where $\SO(n)=\{Q\in\GLn \setvert Q^TQ=\id,\, \det Q = 1\}$ denotes the special orthogonal group. This property, in turn, ensures that the only strain-free deformations are rigid body movements [@Neff_curl06].
Richter’s general definition of strain {#richters-general-definition-of-strain .unnumbered}
--------------------------------------
We now turn to Richter’s original development, which precedes the work of Truesdell. Based on the polar decomposition $F=V{\hspace*{0.07em}}R=R{\hspace*{0.07em}}U$ with $R\in\SO(3)$ and $U,V\in\PSym(3)$ of the deformation gradient $F\in\GLp(3)$ as well as a certain notion of superposition (which is described in more detail in the following section), Richter arrives at a fully general definition of Eulerian as well as Lagrangian strain tensors. Expressed in terms of the *principal matrix logarithm* $\log\col\PSymn\to\Symn$ on the set $\PSymn$ of positive definite symmetric matrices, Richter’s definition is given by
\[straintensordef\] $$\begin{aligned}
{2}
E(F) &= \ftilde(\log V)\in\Sym(3)\qquad\qquad &&\text{(Eulerian strains),}\label{eq:straintensordefEulerian}\\
\widehat{E}(F) &= \ftilde(\log U)\in\Sym(3)\qquad\qquad &&\text{(Lagrangian strains),}\label{eq:straintensordefLagrangian}
\end{aligned}$$
where $\ftilde\colon\Sym(3)\to\Sym(3)$ is any differentiable and invertible (i.e. injective) primary matrix function[^7] of the form with $\ftilde(0)=0$ and $\ftilde'(0)=1$. In particular, due to the invertibility of the principal matrix logarithm, Richter’s definition is indeed equivalent to the contemporary definition of a general strain tensor; note that since $\operatorname{e}(1)=\ftilde(0)$ and $\operatorname{e}'(1)=\ftilde'(0)$ for $\ftilde=\operatorname{e}\circ\exp$ and $\operatorname{e}=\ftilde\circ\log$, the stated normalization requirements are equivalent as well.
Similar to Richter, we will mostly focus on the Eulerian family in the following; analogous considerations can of course be applied to the Lagrangian family as well. First, note that the invertibility of $\ftilde$ implies the equivalence $$\begin{aligned}
E(F)=0
\quad\iff\quad \log V=0
\quad\iff\quad V=\id
\quad\iff\quad F\in\SO(3)\,,\end{aligned}$$ thus $E(\grad\varphi)\equiv0$ if and only if $\varphi$ is a rigid body movement [@agn_munch2008curl]. Furthermore, Richter’s definitions naturally contain a number of commonly employed strains, including the material and spatial *Hencky strain tensors* [@Hencky1928; @Hencky1929; @hencky1929super; @hencky1931; @agn_neff2015geometry; @agn_neff2015exponentiatedI; @agn_neff2015exponentiatedII; @agn_neff2014exponentiatedIII; @agn_neff2014rediscovering] $$E_0 =\log V = \log(\sqrt{FF^T})\,,
\qquad
\widehat{E}_0 =\log U = \log(\sqrt{F^TF})\,,$$ which are often been considered to be the *natural* or *true* strains in nonlinear elasticity [@tarantola2009stress; @Tarantola06; @freed1995natural; @hanin1956isotropic], as well as the Seth-Hill [@seth1935; @Hill68; @seth1961generalized] and Doyle-Ericksen [@doyle1956nonlinear] strain tensor families $$\begin{aligned}
E_{(m)}=\frac{1}{2m}(V^{2m}-\id)=\frac{1}{2m}(B^m-\id)\,,
\qquad\qquad
\widehat{E}_{(m)}=\frac{1}{2m}(U^{2m}-\id)=\frac{1}{2m}(C^m-\id)\,.\end{aligned}$$ However, Richter’s definition is significantly more general and includes, for example, the *Bažant strain tensor* [@bazant1995], given by $\frac12(V-V\inv)$; note that for $\ftilde(\lambda)=\frac12(e^\lambda-e^{-\lambda})$ or, equivalently, $\ftilde\inv(x)=\log(x+\sqrt{x^2+1})$, $$\begin{aligned}
\ftilde(\log V) = \frac12{\hspace*{0.07em}}(\exp(\log V) - \exp(\log V)\inv) = \frac12{\hspace*{0.07em}}(V-V\inv)\,.
$$ Another example is the (Eulerian) Almansi strain tensor [@almansi1911sulle], attributed to Trefftz in a review of Richter’s article by Moufang, which is given by $T=\frac{1}{2}(\id-B\inv)$ with $B=V^2$ and corresponds to the choice $\ftilde(\lambda)=\frac12(1-e^{-2\lambda})$ for the transition function $\ftilde$ in .
;
Observe that Richter’s strain tensors are isomorphic to each other[^8] in the sense that for any pair $E_1$, $E_2$ of strain tensors in the family , there exists an invertible, isotropic mapping $\zeta\colon\Sym(3)\to\Sym(3)$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
E_1=\zeta(E_2)\,;\end{aligned}$$ since $E_1=\ftilde_1(\log V)$ and $E_2=\ftilde_2(\log V)$ for suitable invertible functions $\ftilde_1,\ftilde_2$, it suffices to choose $\zeta=\ftilde_1\circ\ftilde_2\inv$.
We also note that a strain tensor $E$ of the form is *tension-compression symmetric*, i.e. satisfies $E(V\inv)=-E(V)$, if and only if $\ftilde$ is odd, i.e. if $\ftilde(\lambda)=-\ftilde(-\lambda)$.
Richter’s superposition principle {#richters-superposition-principle .unnumbered}
---------------------------------
Richter obtains his general definition deductively from three axioms. Most importantly, he assumes that any strain tensor satisfies a *superposition principle* (postulate **V3**) in the case of *coaxial* stretches. More specifically, for $V_1,V_2\in\PSym(3)$ such that $V_1V_2=V_2V_1$, let $E_1=E(V_1)$ and $E_2=E(V_2)$ denote the corresponding strains. Then Richter’s superposition postulate states that for $E=E(V_1V_2)$, $$\begin{aligned}
f(E_1)+f(E_2)=f(E)\label{eq:superpospri}\end{aligned}$$ for some primary matrix function $f$, which depends on (and, in fact, determines) the specific choice of a strain mapping $F\mapsto E(F)$. This requirement is well known [@becker1893; @agn_neff2014rediscovering; @Hencky1928; @Hencky1929; @henckyTranslation; @agn_neff2015geometry] to be satisfied for $f(\lambda)=\lambda$ and $E=\log V$, since[^9] $$\begin{aligned}
\log(V_1V_2)=\log V_1+\log V_2\qquad\text{if}\quad V_1V_2=V_2V_1\,.\label{eq:knownstatement}\end{aligned}$$ However, Richter’s condition is more general, allowing for an arbitrary choice of $f$. This generalization is what allows for any $E$ of the form to be considered a (Eulerian) strain tensor, since the representation $$\begin{aligned}
E=\ftilde(\log V)\end{aligned}$$ implies that is satisfied for $f=\ftilde\inv$. The somewhat unusual superposition principle is thereby reduced to the better-known condition . As an example, consider again the Almansi strain tensor $E=\frac{1}{2}(\id-B\inv)$. Then for $\ftilde(\lambda)=\frac12(1-e^{-2\lambda})$ and $f(x)=\ftilde\inv(x)=-\frac12\log(1-2x)$, $$\begin{aligned}
{2}
&\mathrlap{E=\frac{1}{2}(\id-B\inv)=\frac12 \big( \id-\exp(\log(V^{-2})) \big) = \ftilde(\log V)}\notag
\\[.49em] \text{and}\qquad
&f(E_1)+f(E_2) &&= f(\ftilde(\log V_1)) + f(\ftilde(\log V_2))
\\ &&&= \log V_1 + \log V_2 = \log(V_1V_2) = f(\ftilde(\log(V_1V_2))) = f(E)\end{aligned}$$ if $V_1V_2=V_2V_1$.
The strain deviator {#the-strain-deviator .unnumbered}
-------------------
After giving a general definition of strain, Richter poses the following problem: given an arbitrary strain mapping $F\mapsto E(F)$, find an associated tensor valued mapping $F\mapsto D(F)$ that is invariant with respect to pure scaling transformations (i.e. $D(\lambda F)=D(F)$), reduces to $D=E$ if the deformation does not change the volume (i.e. $D(F)=E(F)$ if $\det F=1$) and coincides with the usual deviatoric strain tensor $\dev \varepsilon=\varepsilon-\frac{1}{3}\tr(\varepsilon)\cdot\id$ for infinitesimal deformations. From these conditions, Richter deduces the expression $$\label{eq:deviatorDefiniton}
D(F)=f\inv(\dev f(E(F)))=f\inv(\dev\log V)\,,$$ where $f$ is given by via the particular choice of the strain $E$. His deduction is based on the observation that the matrix logarithm naturally separates the isochoric and volumetric response, i.e. that $$\begin{aligned}
\log V=\dev(\log V)+\frac{1}{3}\tr(\log V)\cdot\id=\log\left(\frac{V}{\det V^{\afrac13}}\right)+\frac{1}{3}\log(\det V)\cdot\id\,.\end{aligned}$$ In particular, if $D$ is defined by , then $$D(\lambda F) = f\inv(\dev\log (\lambda V)) = f\inv(\dev\log V) = D(F)$$ and, if $\det F = \det V = 1$, $$D(F) = f\inv(\dev\log V) = f\inv(\log V) = E(F)\,.$$
Richter’s stress tensor {#richters-stress-tensor .unnumbered}
-----------------------
In the following, we confine our attention to the setting of Cartesian coordinates. In that case, Richter proposes the use of the Cauchy stress tensor $\sigma$ and derives the necessary relations for the work corresponding to the displacement of surface elements. As a result, he obtains the formula $$\begin{aligned}
e^j{\hspace*{0.07em}}\sigma&=\pdd{W}{j}\cdot\id+2{\hspace*{0.07em}}\pdd{W}{k}\cdot L+3{\hspace*{0.07em}}\pdd{W}{l}\cdot L^2\,, \label{Kirchhoff}\end{aligned}$$ where $W(F)=W(j,k,l)$ is the isotropic energy potential in terms of the three invariants $$j=\tr L\,, \quad k=\tr(L^2) \quad\text{and}\quad l=\tr(L^3)$$ of the logarithmic strain $L=\log V$. Equation , which had already been given by Richter in an earlier 1948 article [@richter1948 page 207, eq. (3.9)], can also be restated as a more common expression for the *Kirchhoff stress* $\tau$ in hyperelasticity: Using the notation $$\widehat{W}(\log V) = W(F) = W(j,k,l) = W\big(\tr(\log V), \tr((\log V)^2),\tr((\log V)^3)\big)$$ and the equalities $$\begin{aligned}
D_{\log V}(j)&=D_L(\tr L)=\id\,,\\
D_{\log V}(k)&=D_L(\tr(L^2))=D_L(\norm{L}^2)=2{\hspace*{0.07em}}L\,,\\
D_{\log V}(l)&=D_L(\tr(L^3))=3{\hspace*{0.07em}}L^2\,,\end{aligned}$$ we find $$\begin{aligned}
D_{\log V}\widehat{W}(\log V)=\pdd{W}{j}\cdot\id+2{\hspace*{0.07em}}\pdd{W}{k}\cdot L+3{\hspace*{0.07em}}\pdd{W}{l}\cdot L^2\,.\end{aligned}$$ Since $$\begin{aligned}
e^j=e^{\tr(\log V)}=e^{\log(\det V)}=\det V=\det F\,,\end{aligned}$$ equation can therefore be written as $$\label{Kirchhoff2}
\tau = \det F\cdot\sigma = D_{\log V}\widehat{W}(\log V)
\,,$$ where $\tau=\det F\cdot\sigma$ is the Kirchhoff stress tensor. Formula has been rediscovered several times [@Moreau76; @vallee1978; @hill1970; @hill1978; @ball2002openProblems] and is closely connected to Hill’s inequality [@hill1970], which is equivalent to the condition that the elastic energy potential $W(F)=\widehat{W}(\log V)$ is convex with respect to the logarithmic strain tensor $\log V$. In particular, this convexity of $\widehat{W}$ is sufficient for $W$ to satisfy the Baker-Ericksen inequalities [@bakerEri54; @buliga2002lower; @silhavy1997mechanics].
In the following, we provide a new translation of Richter’s original 1949 article. For the sake of readability, the notation was updated to match more closely with current usage; a complete list of the changes made can be found in Table \[table:notation\]. The same updated notation has also been employed in translating the review of Richter’s work by Ruth Moufang in *Zentralblatt für Mathematik und ihre Grenzgebiete* as well as a Mathscinet review by William Prager. Apart from these notational changes, all equations as well as the equation numbering are identical to Richter’s originally published version of the article. All numbered footnotes are part of the original article as well, whereas comments by the translators are marked as such.
[ Strain tensor, strain deviator and stress tensor for finite deformations\
By *Hans Richter* in Haltingen (Lörrach)\
Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik, Vol. 29, No. 3, 1949]{}
Introduction
============
In the theory of finite elastic or plastic deformations, one generally considers the strain tensor which results from calculating the difference of the squares of the line elements in the deformed and initial state for general coordinates.[^10] The use of this characterization of the state of strain is, of course, not compulsory. On the contrary, a more detailed analysis shows that this usual definition of the strain tensor is not particularly well adapted to the problem of studying finite deformations. The problem of deducing a deviator, which only characterizes the change of shape without regarding the volume change, from the usual strain tensor already leads to peculiar difficulties and ambiguities [@moufang1947volumtreue]. The underlying reason for this is that the treatment of finite deformations has been approached too closely to the case of infinitesimal strains, where any deformation can be split into a pure stretch and a pure rotation by additive decomposition into a symmetric and a skew symmetric part. However, for finite deformations this additive decomposition is no longer possible; it is replaced by a multiplicative decomposition of the general deformation into a rotation and a stretch, with these factors no longer being commutative. Thus any attempt to establish definitions by additive decomposition must lead to fundamental difficulties.
In this paper we want to proceed –- in a sense axiomatically –- by imposing on the necessary definitions certain a priori requirements we consider appropriate. Then, we demonstrate that among these admissible definitions, certain choices appear particularly natural.
Notation and lemmas
===================
Notation
--------
1. By Latin capital letters $A,B,\dotsc$ we denote elements of the space of $3\times3$-matrices.[^11] $a_{ik}=(A)_{ik}$ is the entry in the $i$-th row and the $k$-th column. $\det A$ is the determinant of $A$. $\tr (A)$ is the trace of $A$, i.e. the sum of the elements on the main diagonal. $A^T$ is the matrix obtained by reflecting $A$ across its main diagonal. $\id$ is the identity matrix. $A\inv$ is the inverse of $A$.
2. Latin lower case letters $x,y,\dotsc$ denote vectors: $x=(x_1,x_2,x_3)$. $\iprod{x,y}$ is the inner product. $x\times y$ is the cross product.
3. $A{\hspace*{0.07em}}x$ results from applying $A$ to $x$: $(A{\hspace*{0.07em}}x)_i=\sum a_{ik}{\hspace*{0.07em}}x_k$.
4. Products $B{\hspace*{0.07em}}A$ are read from right to left: $(B{\hspace*{0.07em}}A){\hspace*{0.07em}}x=B{\hspace*{0.07em}}(A{\hspace*{0.07em}}x)$.
5. If $f(x)=\sum b_n \cdot x^n$, then, assuming convergence: $f(A)=\sum b_n{\hspace*{0.07em}}A^n$;\
$\intd{f}(A)=f(A+\intd{A})-f(A)$, which coincides with $f'(A){\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A}$ only if $A\cdot\intd{A}=\intd{A}\cdot A$.[^12]
Lemmas
------
1. $\tr (A_1{\hspace*{0.07em}}A_2 \cdots A_n)$ is invariant under cyclic permutations of the factors.
2. Each invariant of $A$ under affine transformation $A\to B{\hspace*{0.07em}}A{\hspace*{0.07em}}B\inv$ is a function of the three invariants $j=\tr(A)$, $k=\tr(A^2)$ and $l=\tr(A^3)$. The characteristic equation of $A$ is: $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda^3-j\cdot \lambda^2+\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}(j^2-k){\hspace*{0.07em}}\lambda-\left(\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}l-\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}j{\hspace*{0.07em}}k+\tel{6}{\hspace*{0.07em}}j^3\right)=0\,.\end{aligned}$$\[2.2\]
3. We have $f(B{\hspace*{0.07em}}A{\hspace*{0.07em}}B\inv)=B{\hspace*{0.07em}}f(A){\hspace*{0.07em}}B\inv.$\[2.3\]
4. If $A$ has positive real eigenvalues, then $\log A$ is well defined and $\tr (\log A)=\log(\det A)$.\[2.4\]
5. If $B{\hspace*{0.07em}}A = A{\hspace*{0.07em}}B$, then $\tr (B\,{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{f}(A))=\tr (B{\hspace*{0.07em}}f'(A){\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A})$ even if $B\cdot\intd{A}=\intd{A}\cdot B$ does not hold.\[2.5\]
6. In Cartesian coordinates, a pure stretch $V$ is symmetric with positive eigenvalues.
7. In Cartesian coordinates, a Euclidean transformation $R$ satisfies $R{\hspace*{0.07em}}R^T=\id$.
8. Any $A$ with $\det A\neq 0$ can be uniquely represented in the form $A=V\cdot R$, i.e. as the composition mapping of a Euclidean transformation and a pure stretch. If $\det A>0$, then $R$ is a direct transformation, i.e. a pure Euclidean rotation. \[2.8\]
9. We have $\iprod{x, A{\hspace*{0.07em}}y} = \iprod{y, A^Tx}.$ \[2.9\]
10. Let $y={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}x$ be a coordinate transformation which maps $A$ onto $A^\#$. $A$ is a
----------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
twice-contravariant tensor if $A^\#={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}A{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}^T\cdot (\det{M})^n$,
twice-covariant tensor if $A^\#=({M}\inv)^TA{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}\inv\cdot (\det{M})^n$,
contravariant-covariant tensor if $A^\#={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}A{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}\inv\cdot (\det{M})^n$,
covariant-contravariant tensor if $A^\#=({M}\inv)^TA{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}^T\cdot (\det{M})^n$.
----------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
$A$ is called a proper tensor if $n=0$ holds; if $n\neq 0$, then $A$ is called a tensor density. (The coincidence of this somewhat uncommon representation of the tensor property with the usual one immediately results from symbolically setting $(A)_{ik}=x_i{\hspace*{0.07em}}y_k$, where $x$ and $y$ are contravariant or covariant vectors). \[2.10\]
11. Let $x'={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}x$ and $y'={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}y$; then $x'\times y'=\det{M}\cdot ({M}\inv)^T(x\times y)$.\[2.11\]
The strain tensor
=================
We now consider which requirements can be imposed justifiably on the strain tensor. Afterwards we will study the feasibility of these requirements.
Let $F$ be the matrix which maps the neighborhood of a point $\widehat{x}$ to the neighborhood of its image $x$ under $F$: $$\begin{aligned}
\intd{x}=F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{\widehat{x}}\,.\end{aligned}$$ $F$ is the Jacobian matrix $$\begin{aligned}
(F)_{ik}=\pdd{x_i}{\widehat{x}_k}\,,\qquad\det F>0\end{aligned}$$ and indicates the attained state of distortion. For plastic materials, where the state of stress does not only depend on the current state of distortion but also on the path leading to it, specifying only $F$ is not sufficient, whereas for elastic materials, $F$ suffices to characterize the distortion. For anisotropic materials the rotation contained in $F$ is essential as well. In this case, $F$ itself needs to be used for describing the strain, whereas every strain tensor which, like the common one, eliminates a Euclidean rotation is unsuitable. Consequently, such strain tensors are only meaningful for isotropic materials.
Postulates
----------
Thus, under the explicit assumption of applicability to *isotropic materials*, a strain tensor $E(F)$ associated with $F$ shall now be defined.[^13] Whereas $F$ is not a tensor since $F$ relates two different configurations, we want to require the tensor property for $E$. Hence, we obtain the first postulate:
*$E$ is a tensor determined by $F$ and the matrices of the metric in $\widehat{x}$ and $x$.*
Furthermore, the irrelevant rotation contained in $F$ shall be disregarded for $E$, i.e. $E$ shall not change if a Euclidean rotation $R$ is performed in $\widehat{x}$ *prior* to the application of $F$. Instead, one could also require that a rotation being performed *subsequent* to $F$ in $x$ shall not influence the strain tensor. This would imply that $F$ is considered a distortion in $\widehat{x}$ with a subsequent irrelevant rotation. We want to denote the tensor being associated with $\widehat{x}$ by $\widehat{E}$. The study of $E$ and $\widehat{E}$ is completely analogous and thus, in the following, we restrict ourselves to the study of $E$ and only mention the analogous results of $\widehat{E}$, where the corresponding quantities are marked by $\widehat{\hphantom{A}}$.
The above property of $E$ and $\widehat{E}$ is expressed by the postulate
$E(F{\hspace*{0.07em}}R)=E(F)$, resp. $\widehat{E}(R{\hspace*{0.07em}}F)=\widehat{E}(F)$.
Furthermore, we additionally require a *superposition principle* for coaxial pure stretches via the postulate
*Let $V_1$ and $V_2$ be two coaxial stretches: $V_1\,V_2=V_2\,V_1$. Let $E_1=E(V_1)$, $E_2=E(V_2)$ and $E=E(V_1{\hspace*{0.07em}}V_2)$. Then there exists an invertible function $f(x)$ such that $f(E_1)+f(E_2)=f(E)$.* The function $f$ may depend on the coordinate system.
Finally, we must require that the new definition transitions into the classical one for infinitesimal strains. This is ensured by the *limit property*
*For infinitesimal deformations $\id+\intd{F}$ in Cartesian coordinates the strain tensor turns into $\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}(\intd{F}+(\intd{F})^T)+o(\intd{F})$*.[^14]
The realization of the postulates in Cartesian coordinates
----------------------------------------------------------
For the sake of simplicity, we first want to assume Cartesian coordinates. We denote an original point and its image under the deformation by ${p}$ and ${q}$. The deformation matrix is now denoted by ${\overline{F}}$. The corresponding strain tensors are $E_0$ and $\widehat{E_0}$.
According to \[2.8\] we can write $$\begin{aligned}
{\overline{F}}=VR=R{\hspace*{0.07em}}U\qquad\text{with}\qquad U=R\inv{\hspace*{0.07em}}VR\,.\end{aligned}$$ To find this decomposition, we first consider the term ${\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}$. For $x\neq 0$ we have: $0<\iprod{{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}x,{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}x}$, which, using \[2.9\], yields : $0<\iprod{x,{\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}x}$. Thus, the symmetric matrix ${\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}$ is positive definite and therefore obviously has a positive definite square root $V=\sqrt{{\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}}$. Then $R$ can be represented in the form $R=V\inv{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\overline{F}}$. Correspondingly, we have $U^2={\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}{\overline{F}}$.
By **V2**, we have $E_0({\overline{F}})=E_0(V)$, resp. $\widehat{E_0}({\overline{F}})=\widehat{E_0}(U)$. Therefore we can restrict ourselves to strain tensors which are defined for pure stretches.
Now let $V$ be a pure infinitesimal stretch: $V=\id+\intd{V}$. Then by **V4** the equalities $E_0(\id+\intd{V})=\intd{V}+o(\intd{V})$ and $E_0(\id+\lambda{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{V})=\lambda{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{V}+o(\intd{V})$ hold for any positive number $\lambda$. Postulate **V3** then yields\
$f(\intd{V}+o(\intd{V}))+f(\lambda{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{V}+o(\intd{V}))=f((1+\lambda){\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{V}+o(\intd{V}))$. Since this equation must hold for every $\lambda$ and $\intd{V}$, it follows that $f(x)=x+o(x)$ for $x$ sufficiently small[^15]. Thus, if we set $Z=f(E_0)$, then for infinitesimal stretchings we obtain: $Z(\id+\intd{V})=\intd{V}+o(\intd{V})$.
Now let $V$ again be a finite pure stretching. Then because of the positive eigenvalues of $V$ we can set: $$\begin{aligned}
L=\log V\,;\quad\text{resp.}\quad\widehat{L}=\log U\,:\quad\text{\glqq logarithmic strain tensor\grqq.}\label{3.4}\end{aligned}$$ We then have: $\tel{n}{\hspace*{0.07em}}L=\log\sqrt[n]{V}$ and thus for $n$ sufficiently large: $\sqrt[n]{V}=\id+\tel{n}{\hspace*{0.07em}}L+o(\tel{n})$. Hence, $Z(\sqrt[n]{V})=\tel{n}{\hspace*{0.07em}}L+o(\tel{n})$. In addition, we have $Z(V)=n\cdot Z(\sqrt[n]{V})=L+n\cdot o(\tel{n})$ by postulate **V3**. Since the left hand side of this equation is independent of $n$, we can let $n$ tend to infinity and obtain: $Z(V)=L$. In particular, this implies that $f(x)$ is uniquely determined up to an arbitrary factor.
Consider the inverse function $f\inv$. Since $L$ is a uniquely invertible function of $V$ and consequently one of $V^2={\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}$, we finally have: $$\begin{aligned}
E_0=f\inv(L)=h(V)=k({\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T})\,;\quad\text{resp.}\quad\widehat{E_0}=f\inv(\widehat{L})=h(U)=k({\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}{\overline{F}})\,.\label{3.5}\end{aligned}$$ Conversely, the ansatz always satisfies the postulates **V2** and **V3**, where $f$ is uniquely chosen as the inverse function of $f\inv$, whereas satisfying the limit condition **V4** requires that for small $x$ we have: $$\begin{aligned}
f\inv(x)&=x+o(x)\,;\qquad h(1+x)=x+o(x)\,;\qquad k(1+x)=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}x+o(x)\,.\tag{3.5a}\label{3.5a}\\
\intertext{Indeed, we then have for infinitesimal deformations ${\overline{F}}=\id+\intd{{\overline{F}}}$:}
{\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}&=\id+(\intd{{\overline{F}}}+\intd{{\overline{F}}}^T)+o(\intd{{\overline{F}}})\,,\quad V=\sqrt{{\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}}=\id+\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}(\intd{{\overline{F}}}+\intd{{\overline{F}}}^T)+o(\intd{{\overline{F}}})\,,\\
L&=\log V=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}(\intd{{\overline{F}}}+\intd{{\overline{F}}}^T)+o(\intd{{\overline{F}}})\,.\end{aligned}$$ Thus for every $f\inv$ satisfying : $E_0=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}(\intd{{\overline{F}}}+\intd{{\overline{F}}}^T)+o(\intd{{\overline{F}}})\,.$
*Every strain tensor being compatible with our postulates is thus identified with a function of the logarithmic strain tensor.* Based on our postulates, $E_0=L$ appears as the simplest definition of the strain tensor since here, the superposition principle is satisfied with $f(x)\equiv x$. As we shall later see, this definition will also appear as the simplest one for taking the deviator.
If, in addition, a Euclidean rotation $R_1$ is performed subsequently to $F$, then because of $R_1{\hspace*{0.07em}}F=R_1{\hspace*{0.07em}}V{\hspace*{0.07em}}R=R_1{\hspace*{0.07em}}V{\hspace*{0.07em}}R_1\inv\cdot R_1{\hspace*{0.07em}}R$ the stretch $V$ turns into $R_1{\hspace*{0.07em}}V{\hspace*{0.07em}}R_1\inv$. We obtain the same transition if a Euclidean coordinate transformation ${q}_1=R_1{\hspace*{0.07em}}{q}$ is performed. According to \[2.3\], $E_0$ then turns into $h(R_1{\hspace*{0.07em}}V{\hspace*{0.07em}}R_1\inv)=R_1{\hspace*{0.07em}}E_0{\hspace*{0.07em}}R_1\inv$. Thus the axes of $E_0$ are simply rotated along for subsequent application of $R_1$. If we identify the last formula with the result of a coordinate transformation, we conclude from \[2.10\] that $E_0$ transforms like a tensor; since $R_1\inv=R_1^T$, there is no distinction with respect to co-contra-variance. Clearly, we obtain a corresponding result for $\widehat{E_0}$.
Extension to curvilinear coordinates
------------------------------------
We now proceed from Cartesian coordinates ${q}$ to arbitrary coordinates $x$: $x=x({q})$. For a neighborhood of the undeformed material let $\intd{\widehat{x}}=\widehat{{M}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{\widehat{{q}}}$, for the corresponding neighborhood in the deformed material let $\intd{x}={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{{q}}$. $\widehat{{M}}$ and ${M}$ are the Jacobian matrices of $x=x({q})$ in $\widehat{x}$ and $x$, respectively.
For a line element in $x$ we obtain, using \[2.9\]: $\intd{{q}}=\iprod{{M}\inv\intd{x},{M}\inv\intd{x}}=\iprod{\intd{x},({M}\inv)^T{M}\inv\intd{x}}$. Hence, $$\begin{aligned}
G&=G^T=({M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}^T)\inv\tag{3.6a}\\
\intertext{is the matrix of the metric in $x$. Correspondingly,}
\widehat{G}&=(\widehat{{M}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{{M}}^T)\inv\tag{3.6b}\end{aligned}$$ defines the metric in $\widehat{x}$.
The deformation of the material now appears as: $\intd{x}={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{{M}}\inv\intd{\widehat{x}}$. Thus, ${\overline{F}}$ is changed to $$\begin{aligned}
F={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{{M}}\inv\,,\qquad (F)_{ik}=\pdd{x_i}{\widehat{x}_k}\,.\end{aligned}$$ Conversely, $$\begin{aligned}
{\overline{F}}={M}\inv F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{{M}}\qquad\text{and}\qquad{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}=\widehat{{M}}^TF^T({M}\inv)^T\,,\tag{3.7*}\label{3.7*}\end{aligned}$$ from which we immediately obtain: $$\begin{aligned}
\left\{\begin{alignedat}{2}
\quad V^2&={\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}&&={M}\inv F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv F^T({M}\inv)^T\\
U^2&={\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}{\overline{F}}&&=\widehat{{M}}^TF^TG{\hspace*{0.07em}}F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{{M}}\,.
\end{alignedat}\right.\label{3.8}\end{aligned}$$ Using the last two formulae, the matrices ${\overline{F}}$, $V$ and $U$ associated with Cartesian coordinates can be expressed in terms of $F$ and the transformation matrices ${M}$ and $\widehat{{M}}$.
### Case of the non-mixed tensor
We first assume that the strain tensor $E$ is defined twice-contravariant and satisfies the postulates **V1**-**V4**. Then \[2.10\] implies: $$\begin{aligned}
E={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}E_0{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}^T\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $E_0$ is one of the tensors from .
To study the particular shape of $E_0$, we consider the special case where ${\overline{F}}$ is a pure stretch $V$ in the coordinate axes and coaxial to ${M}$. Hence
$V=\matr{\lambda_1&&0\\&\lambda_2&\\0&&\lambda_3}$ and ${M}=\matr{\varrho_1&&0\\&\varrho_2&\\0&&\varrho_3} .$
Then because of $E$ is again given in principal axis and has the eigenvalues $\varrho_v\cdot h(\lambda_v)$. The superposition principle now requires the existence of a function $f(x)$, whose coefficients may contain the $\varrho_v$, such that: $$\begin{aligned}
f(\varrho_v^2{\hspace*{0.07em}}h(\lambda_v))+f(\varrho_v^2{\hspace*{0.07em}}h(\mu_v))=f(\varrho_v^2{\hspace*{0.07em}}h(\lambda_v{\hspace*{0.07em}}\mu_v)) \end{aligned}$$ for arbitrary $\lambda_v$ and $\mu_v$. Therefore, $$\begin{aligned}
f(\varrho_v^2{\hspace*{0.07em}}h(\lambda))=C_v\cdot\log\lambda\,,\qquad C_v=C_v(\varrho_1,\varrho_2,\varrho_3)\,.\end{aligned}$$ By differentiation with respect to $\lambda$ we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\varrho_v^2{\hspace*{0.07em}}f'(\varrho_v^2{\hspace*{0.07em}}h(\lambda))\cdot h'(\lambda)=C_v\cdot\tel{\lambda}\,.\end{aligned}$$ In particular, if we set $\lambda=1$, then implies $\varrho_v^2\cdot f'(0)=C_v$. Therefore the normalization $f'(0)=1$ yields: $$\begin{aligned}
f'(\varrho_v^2{\hspace*{0.07em}}h(\lambda))=\tel{\lambda\cdot h'(\lambda)}\,.\end{aligned}$$ The right-hand side of this equation is independent of $\varrho_v$. We must therefore have $f'(x)\equiv f'(0)=1$, which implies $h(\lambda)=\log\lambda$. Then $E_0=\log V=L$ and thus $$\begin{aligned}
E={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}L{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}^T .\end{aligned}$$ Conversely, this definition of $E$ satisfies all postulates **V1**-**V4** for arbitrary ${\overline{F}}$ and ${M}$, since the superposition principle is purely additive for $L$ and therefore transfers to an additive law in terms of $E$ for multiplication with ${M}$ from the left and with ${M}^T$ from the right.
*Hence, there is only one possibility to define a non-mixed tensor $E$ such that our postulates are satisfied, namely: $E={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}L{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}^T$.*
Since $L=\log V=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log V^2$, and due to , we finally obtain $$\begin{aligned}
E&=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log({M}\inv F{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv F{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}\inv){\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}\,.\\
\intertext{Correspondingly, we find}
\widehat{E}&=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{{M}}\log(\widehat{{M}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}F^TG{\hspace*{0.07em}}F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{{M}}){\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{{M}}\,.\notag\end{aligned}$$ If we expand the logarithm for sufficiently small stretches into a power series, then we will see that $E$ and $\widehat{E}$ indeed only depend on $F$, $\widehat{G}$ and $G$. However, the representation by these matrices is very inconvenient. Moreover, the invariants of $E$ are different from those of $E_0$. This is unpleasant because e.g. in the theory of elasticity of finite deformations it must be assumed that the thermodynamic quantities like internal energy, entropy etc. are functions of the invariants of strain. Now, if these quantities are changed under coordinate transformations, additional difficulties will emerge. Then it is also no longer possible to describe the character of the deformation independently of the choice of coordinates by using the invariants (cf. chapter 4).
Of course, the corresponding considerations hold also for the case where $E$ or $\widehat{E}$ is twice-covariant. Therefore it will be sufficient to waive the symmetry advantage being associated with non-mixed tensors.
### Case of the mixed tensor
In the case where $E$ is covariant-contravariant, \[2.10\] implies: $E=({M}\inv)^TE_0{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}^T$. Because of \[2.3\], $E$ automatically satisfies the superposition principle with the same $f(x)$ as $E_0$. In particular, the uniquely determined, normalized $f(x)$ is independent of the choice of coordinates. Furthermore, $E$ has the same invariants as $E_0$. Every function of $E$, whose coefficients depend on the invariants of $E$, transforms to the same function of $E_0$.
From the simplest definition $E_0=L$ we now obtain for arbitrary coordinates: $L^{\ast}=({M}\inv)^TL{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}^T$ or, because of and : $$\begin{aligned}
L^{\ast}&=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}({M}\inv)^T\log({M}\inv F^T\widehat{G}\inv F^T({M}\inv)^T){\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}^T\notag\\
\intertext{or}
L^{\ast}&=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log(G{\hspace*{0.07em}}F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv F^T)\,:\quad\text{\glqq logarithmic strain tensor\grqq.}\label{3.12}\end{aligned}$$ $L^{\ast}$ satisfies the superposition principle with $f(x)\equiv x$.
*The most general strain tensor satisfying our postulates is then given by $$\begin{aligned}
E=f\inv(L^{\ast})=h\!\left(\sqrt{G{\hspace*{0.07em}}F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv F^T}\right)=k(G{\hspace*{0.07em}}F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv F^T)\,,\label{3.13}\end{aligned}$$ where $f\inv$, $h$ and $k$ satisfy the conditions .*
Completely analogous, one obtains $$\begin{aligned}
\widehat{E}=f\inv(\widehat{L}^{\ast})=h\!\left(\sqrt{F^TG{\hspace*{0.07em}}F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv}\right)=k(F^T{\hspace*{0.07em}}G{\hspace*{0.07em}}F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv)\,,\quad\widehat{L}^{\ast}=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log(F^TG{\hspace*{0.07em}}F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv)\,.\end{aligned}$$ Up to an arbitrary factor, the function $f(x)$ of the superposition principle is the inverse function of $x=f\inv(y)$.
In the case where $E$ and $\widehat{E}$ are contravariant-covariant, it is convenient to proceed correspondingly: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{cases}
&L^{\ast}=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log(F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv F^TG)\\
\quad\text{and}\qquad&\tag{3.12a}\\
&{\widehat{L}}^{\ast}=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log(\widehat{G}\inv F^TG{\hspace*{0.07em}}F)\,.
\end{cases}\label{3.12a}\end{aligned}$$ Every other relation remains unchanged.
Computation of the dilatation $v$
---------------------------------
The dilatation being associated with $F$ is $v=\det {\overline{F}}$; thus, with : $$\begin{aligned}
v=(\det{M})\inv\cdot\det{\widehat{{M}}}\cdot\det{F}\,. \end{aligned}$$ However, (3.6), and yield: $$\begin{aligned}
\det (e^{2{\hspace*{0.07em}}L^*})=\det G\cdot (\det\widehat{G})\inv\cdot (\det F)^2=v^2\,. \end{aligned}$$ Hence, due to \[2.4\]: $$\begin{aligned}
\log v&=\tr(L^*)=\tr(\widehat{L}^*)\tag{3.14a}\label{3.14a}\\
\intertext{or by \eqref{3.13}}
\log v&=\tr(f(E))=\tr(f(\widehat{E}))\,.\tag{3.14b}\end{aligned}$$
Relation to the usual strain tensor
-----------------------------------
The usual definition
=7
of the strain tensor $T$, resp. $\widehat{T}$, is[^16] $$\begin{aligned}
\intd{s}^2-\intd{\widehat{s}}^2=2\iprod{\intd{x}, T{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{x}}=2{\hspace*{0.07em}}\iprod{\intd{\widehat{x}},\widehat{T}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{\widehat{x}}}\,.\end{aligned}$$ Now, together with \[2.9\] we get $$\begin{aligned}
\intd{s}^2&=\iprod{\intd{x},G{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{x}}=\iprod{F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{\widehat{x}},G{\hspace*{0.07em}}F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{\widehat{x}}}=\iprod{\intd{\widehat{x}},F^TG{\hspace*{0.07em}}F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{\widehat{x}}}\\
\intertext{and correspondingly}
\intd{\widehat{s}}^2&=\iprod{\intd{x},(F\inv)^T\widehat{G}{\hspace*{0.07em}}F\inv\intd{x}}=\iprod{\intd{\widehat{x}},\widehat{G}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{\widehat{x}}}\,.\end{aligned}$$ Hence $$\begin{aligned}
2{\hspace*{0.07em}}T=G-(F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv F^T)\inv\qquad\text{and}\qquad 2{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{T}=F^TG{\hspace*{0.07em}}F-\widehat{G}\,. \end{aligned}$$ In order to identify the type of co-contra-variance, we use to rewrite: $$\begin{aligned}
2{\hspace*{0.07em}}T&=({M}\inv)^T\cdot (\id-{M}^T(F\inv)^T\widehat{G}{\hspace*{0.07em}}F\inv{M})\cdot{M}\inv=({M}\inv)^T\cdot (\id-V^{-2})\cdot{M}\inv\label{3.15}\\
\intertext{and correspondingly}
2{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{T}&=(\widehat{{M}}\inv)^T\cdot (U^2-\id){\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{{M}}\inv.\tag{3.15a}\end{aligned}$$ Thus, according to \[2.10\], $T$ and $\widehat{T}$ are twice-covariant symmetric tensors. The superposition principle is not satisfied for these tensors and the invariants change under coordinate transformation. However, the combined tensors $T{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv$, $G\inv T$, $\widehat{G}\inv\widehat{T}$ and $\widehat{T}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv$ satisfy all the established postulates **V1**-**V4**. From we infer for the superposition principle that one has to set
=7
$f(x)=-\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log(1-2x)$ with respect to $T{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv$ and $G\inv T$, but $f(x)=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log(1+2x)$ with respect to $\widehat{G}\inv\widehat{T}$ and $\widehat{T}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv$.
Hence, with (3.14), $$\begin{aligned}
v^2&=(\det(\id-2{\hspace*{0.07em}}T{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv))\inv=(\det(\id-2{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv T))\inv\\
&=\det(\id+2{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv\widehat{T})=\det(\id+2{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{T}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv)\,\end{aligned}$$ for the dilatation $v$.
The strain deviator
===================
Postulates
----------
The strain deviator $D$ shall be derived from the strain tensor and only characterize the change of shape associated with the deformation. The required postulates immediately follow:
*If two deformations differ only by a scaling, then they have the same $D$.*
*If the deformation does not change the volume, then $D=E$.*
Realization of the postulates
-----------------------------
A scaling in the undeformed or deformed state has the form $\lambda{\hspace*{0.07em}}\id$, $\lambda>0$, with the volume dilatation $\lambda^3$. If we set $$\begin{aligned}
F=v^\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\id\cdot v^{-\tel{3}}F=v^\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\id\cdot F_1\,,\end{aligned}$$ then postulate **D1** yields: $D(F)=D(F_1)$. Since $F_1$ is not associated with a volume dilatation, we have: $D(F)=E(F_1)=f\inv(L_1^{\ast})$, where $L_1^{\ast}=-\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log v\cdot\id+L^\ast$ according to and . Using and we conclude that $$\begin{aligned}
D=f\inv(L^\ast-\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr L^\ast\cdot\id)=f\inv(f(E)-\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr f(E)\cdot\id)\,. \end{aligned}$$ The common deviator of a matrix $A$ is denoted by $$\begin{aligned}
\dev A=A-\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr A\cdot\id\,.\end{aligned}$$ With this notation, we can reformulate the strain deviator as: $$\begin{aligned}
{2}
D&=f\inv(\dev L^\ast)&&=f\inv(\dev f(E))\,.\label{4.2}\\
\intertext{Correspondingly,}
\widehat{D}&=f\inv(\dev\widehat{L}^{\ast})&&=f\inv(\dev f(\widehat{E}))\,.\notag\end{aligned}$$ Conversely, the postulates **D1** and **D2** are obviously satisfied for this definition as well. If $F$ is multiplied by $\lambda >0$, then $L^\ast$ turns into $L^\ast+\log\lambda\cdot\id$. Thus $\dev L^\ast$ and consequently $D$ are left unchanged. If additionally $v=1$, then implies $\tr L^\ast=0$, hence $L^\ast=\dev L^\ast$ and consequently $D=f\inv(L^\ast)=E$. Note also that $D$ is automatically a tensor if we use $E$ as a mixed tensor. This observation suggests a preference towards mixed tensors over non-mixed tensors.
Taking the deviator is simplest for $E=L^\ast$, where $D=L^\ast$. Thus the use of the logarithmic strain tensor also allows the common deviator procedure for arbitrary coordinates.
It should additionally be noted that for infinitesimal strains in Cartesian coordinates the new notion of the deviator turns into the original one. If ${\overline{F}}=\id+\intd{{\overline{F}}}$ is an infinitesimal deformation, then\
$L=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}(\intd{{\overline{F}}}+(\intd{{\overline{F}}})^T)+o(\intd{{\overline{F}}})$, therefore , together with , yields $$\begin{aligned}
D=\dev L+o(\dev L)=\dev\left(\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}\left(\intd{{\overline{F}}}+(\intd{{\overline{F}}})^T\right)\right)+o(\intd{{\overline{F}}})\,.\end{aligned}$$ For the common mixed strain tensor $T{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv$ we found in chapter 3.5 that $f(x)=-\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log(1-2{\hspace*{0.07em}}x)$, thus $f\inv(y)=\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}(1-e^{-2{\hspace*{0.07em}}y})$ and $v=(\det(\id-2{\hspace*{0.07em}}T{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv))^{-\half}$. Moreover, $L^\ast=-\half{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log(\id-2{\hspace*{0.07em}}T{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv)$ and hence $2{\hspace*{0.07em}}\dev L^\ast=-\log(\id-2{\hspace*{0.07em}}T{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv)-\frac{2}{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\log(v)\cdot\id$. Therefore, we finally obtain:[^17] $$\begin{aligned}
D&=(\det (\id-2{\hspace*{0.07em}}T{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv))^{-\tel{3}}\cdot\left(T{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv-\half\cdot\left[1-\sqrt[3]{\det (\id-2{\hspace*{0.07em}}T{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv)}\right]\cdot\id\right)\,.\\
\intertext{Correspondingly,}
\widehat{D}&=(\det(\id+2{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{T}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv))^{-\tel{3}}\cdot\left(\widehat{T}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv-\half\cdot\left[\sqrt[3]{\det(\id+2{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{T}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv)}-1\right]\cdot\id\right)\,.\tag{4.3a}\end{aligned}$$
The strain invariants
---------------------
To characterize the state of strain through invariants we choose the dilatation (or a function of the same) as the first suitable invariant of $E$, whereas the other two invariants characterize the change of shape, i.e. they shall be left unchanged by additional scaling. Since for the use of the mixed tensors — which is assumed in the following — every invariant of $E$ is also an invariant of $L^\ast$, we can choose $\tr L^\ast$ as the first invariant by . According to section 2, the other two invariants must be invariants of $\dev L^\ast$. From this we conclude that the state of strain is characterized by $$\begin{aligned}
\left\{\begin{alignedat}{2}
j&=\tr L^\ast&&\text{for the dilatation}\\
y&=\tr((\dev L^\ast)^2)\,,\quad z=\tr ((\dev L^\ast)^3)\qquad&&\text{for the change of shape.}
\end{alignedat}\right.\label{4.4}\end{aligned}$$ Since $L^\ast=(U\inv)^TL{\hspace*{0.07em}}U^T$, we have $y=\tr((\dev L)^2)$ and $z=\tr((\dev L)^3)$, therefore $y$ and $z$ characterize the change of shape independently of the choice of coordinates.
Because of $\tr(\dev L)=0$, the characteristic equation of $\dev L$ according to \[2.2\] is $$\begin{aligned}
x^3-\frac{y}{2}{\hspace*{0.07em}}x-\frac{z}{3}=0\,.\label{4.5}\end{aligned}$$ In order for this equation to have three real roots, the quantity $$\begin{aligned}
\zeta=\frac{z^2}{y^3}\end{aligned}$$ must satisfy the condition $$\begin{aligned}
0\leq\zeta\leq\tel{6}.\end{aligned}$$ The geometrical meaning of $\zeta$ results from the following observation. Let $V$ be an arbitrary pure stretch. Then we can identify $V$ with the $n$-fold application of the pure stretch $V_n=\sqrt[n]{V}$. Here, $L_n=\log\sqrt[n]{V}=\tel{n}\cdot\log V=\tel{n}{\hspace*{0.07em}}L$; thus $\dev L_n=\tel{n}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\dev L$ and consequently $y_n=\tel{n^2}\cdot y$ and $z_n=\tel{n^3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}z$. From this we infer that $\zeta_n=\frac{z_n^2}{y_n^3}=\zeta$. — Conversely, if $\zeta_1=\zeta_2$ for two stretches $V_1$ and $V_2$, then $y_1=\lambda^2{\hspace*{0.07em}}y$ and $z_1=\lambda^3{\hspace*{0.07em}}z$. Then according to , the eigenvalues of $V_1$ are the $\lambda$-th power of the eigenvalues of $V_2$. Thus, disregarding a possible rotation, we have $V_1=V_2^{\lambda}$. Hence we can think of $V_1$ and $V_2$, up to a modification of the principal axes, as resulting from the same infinitesimal stretch (using the inverse for negative $\lambda$). This means that $\zeta$ determines the *character* of the deformation.
The uniaxial and volume preserving stretch is represented in suitably rotated Cartesian coordinates by $$\begin{aligned}
V=\matr{\lambda&0&0\\0&\lambda^{-\half}&0\\0&0&\lambda^{-\half}} .\end{aligned}$$ Then $L=\dev L=\log\lambda\cdot\matr{1&0&0\\0&-\half&0\\0&0&-\half}$.\
Thus $y=\log^2\lambda\cdot\frac{3}{2}$ and $z=\log^3\lambda\cdot\frac{3}{4}$, which results in $\zeta=\tel{6}$.\
On the other hand, we obtain for a volume preserving simple shear $$\begin{aligned}
{\overline{F}}=\matr{1&\lambda&0\\0&1&0\\0&0&1}\qquad\text{and thus}\qquad V^2={\overline{F}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}=\matr{1+\lambda^2&\lambda&0\\\lambda&1&0\\0&0&1} .\end{aligned}$$ For the eigenvalues of $V^2$, the characteristic equation yields: $\lambda_1=1$, $\lambda_2\cdot\lambda_3 =1$. For the eigenvalues of $L$ we thus have: $\mu_1=0$, $\mu_2+\mu_3=0$. This implies $y>0$, $z=0$; therefore $\zeta =0$. Hence, we have found that:
*$\zeta =\frac{z^2}{y^3}$ determines the character of the deformation. The extreme value $\zeta =0$ corresponds to simple shearing and the other extreme value $\zeta=\tel{6}$ to uniaxial stretching.*
The *amount* of change of shape at infinitesimal strains is usually characterized by $\sqrt{\tr D^2}$. We have just shown that $D\approx\dev L$ for infinitesimal deformations, hence $\sqrt{y}$ is identified with the amount of change of shape at infinitesimal deformations.
On the other hand, if $V$ is a finite scaling, then $\sqrt{y}=n\cdot\sqrt{y_n}$ as demonstrated above. Since for sufficiently large $n$, $y_n$ represents the amount of change of shape for the infinitesimal strain $\sqrt[n]{V}$, it is reasonable to use $\sqrt{y}=n{\hspace*{0.07em}}\sqrt{y_n}$ as a measure for the amount of change of shape resulting from an $n$-fold application of $\sqrt[n]{V}$, i.e. for $V$. From this we finally conclude:
*$\sqrt{y}$ characterizes the amount of change of shape.*
The stress tensor
=================
The stress tensor $\widetilde{\sigma}$ must characterize the state of stress in the point $x$ of the deformed configuration such that for a suitable definition of a surface element $\intd{A}$ in $x$, the force acting on $\intd{A}$ is given by $\widetilde{\sigma}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A}$. Even though the components of $\widetilde{\sigma}$ can, of course, be expressed in the coordinates of $\widehat{x}$ as well by using the transformation formulae (transition into Lagrangian coordinates), $\widetilde{\sigma}$ remains associated with $\intd{A}$. The attempt to directly connect the stresses with $\intd{\widehat{A}}$ in the reference configuration, i.e. to construct a $\widehat{\sigma}$, is unnatural from a physical point of view.
=7
We will therefore refrain from such an approach.
Postulates
----------
For Cartesian coordinates, the stress matrix $\sigma$ yields the force $\intd{{\widetilde{f}}_0}$ acting on a surface element $\intd{A_0}$ in the point ${q}$ in the form: $\intd{{\widetilde{f}}_0}=\sigma{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A_0}$. In general, it can be assumed that external forces acting on the material do not generate volume dependent torques. Then it is well known that $\sigma$ is symmetric. However, this symmetry does not need to be assumed in the following.
For arbitrary curvilinear coordinates, it is necessary to define a surface element $\intd{A}$ suitably as the transformed element of $\intd{A_0}$. Then the stress tensor $\widetilde{\sigma}$ shall be constructed such that the force acting on the surface element is again given by $\widetilde{\sigma}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A}$. Applying a translation by the vector $\intd{z}$ to the surface element corresponds to the work $\iprod{\intd{z},\widetilde{\sigma}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A}}$. From this we deduce the following postulates:
*$\widetilde{\sigma}$ is a tensor or a tensor density.*
*For the surface element we have $\intd{A}={H}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A}_0$, where ${H}$ must be chosen suitable.*
*If the surface element is displaced by $\intd{z}$, then the corresponding work is $\intd{{W}}=\iprod{\intd{z},\widetilde{\sigma}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A}}$.*
The realization of the postulates
---------------------------------
As a numerical quantity, $\intd{{W}}$ must be invariant under coordinate transformation. Hence $$\begin{aligned}
\iprod{\intd{z},\widetilde{\sigma}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A}}=\iprod{\intd{z}_0,\sigma{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A_0}}\label{5.1}\end{aligned}$$ if $\intd{z_0}={M}\inv\intd{z}$ is the corresponding translation vector in Cartesian coordinates. Now we obtain with postulate **P2** and \[2.9\]: $$\begin{aligned}
\iprod{\intd{z_0},\sigma{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A_0}}=\iprod{{M}\inv\intd{z},\sigma{\hspace*{0.07em}}{H}\inv{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A}}=\iprod{\intd{A},({H}\inv)^T \sigma^T{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}\inv\intd{z}}=\iprod{\intd{z}, ({M}\inv)^T \sigma{\hspace*{0.07em}}{H}\inv\intd{A}}.\end{aligned}$$ Since $\intd{z}$ and $\intd{A}$ are arbitrary vectors, the comparison with yields: $$\begin{aligned}
\widetilde{\sigma}=({M}\inv)^T\sigma{\hspace*{0.07em}}{H}\inv.\label{5.2}\end{aligned}$$ Equation \[2.10\] indicates that $\widetilde{\sigma}$ is either $(\alpha)$ twice-covariant for ${H}={M}\cdot\sqrt{(\det G)^n}$ or $(\beta)$ covariant-contravariant for ${H}=({M}\inv)^T\cdot\sqrt{(\det G)^n}$.
In fact, $\intd{A}$ is contravariant in case $(\alpha)$ and covariant in case $(\beta)$. If we choose the length of $\intd{A}$ as the geometrical quantity of the surface element, then we have to set $n=0$. As a consequence, $\widetilde{\sigma}$ is a proper tensor. Namely, in the cases $(\alpha)$ and $(\beta)$ we have: $$\begin{aligned}
\widetilde{\sigma}&=({M}\inv)^T\sigma{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}\inv\tag{5.2$\alpha$}\\
\text{and}\qquad\qquad&\\
\widetilde{\sigma}&=({M}\inv)^T\sigma{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}^T.\tag{5.2$\beta$}\end{aligned}$$ In case $(\alpha)$, we then have $\intd{A}={M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A_0}$. If the surface element $\intd{A_0}$ is generated by the vectors $\intd{x_{10}}$ and $\intd{x_{20}}$, then $\intd{A_0}=\intd{x_{10}}\times\intd{x_{20}}={M}\inv\intd{x_1}\times {M}\inv\intd{x_2}$ or using \[2.11\]: $\intd{A_0}=\sqrt{\det G}\cdot {M}^T(\intd{x_1}\times\intd{x_2})$. Hence $$\begin{aligned}
\intd{A}&=\sqrt{\det G}\cdot G\inv(\intd{x_1}\times\intd{x_2})\,.\tag{5.3$\alpha$}\\
\intertext{On the other hand, in case $(\beta)$ we obtain}
\intd{A}&=\sqrt{\det G}\cdot(\intd{x_1}\times\intd{x_2})\,.\tag{5.3$\beta$}\end{aligned}$$ Clearly, it does not matter whether one prefers to use contravariant or covariant $\intd{A}$ for calculations. As shown by (5.3), however, the covariant definition $(\beta)$ yields the simpler formula, although in this case, symmetry of $\widetilde{\sigma}$ does not follow from the symmetry of $\sigma$. On the other hand, all invariants of $\widetilde{\sigma}$ still remain unchanged under coordinate transformation.
The power for infinitesimal strains
-----------------------------------
Now we assume that in a spatial neighborhood of ${q}$, a homogeneous state of stress defined by $\sigma$ occurs. Suppose that a closed volume $V$ has the boundary surface $\mathcal{F}$ with the surface elements $\intd{A_0}$. We now apply a homogeneous infinitesimal deformation $\id+\intd{F}$ in the neighborhood of ${q}$. As a result, the surface element $\intd{A_0}$ is displaced by the vector $\intd{F}{\hspace*{0.07em}}r_0$, provided that $r_0$ was its original distance to the origin. Since, due to symmetry, the simultaneous infinitesimal rotation and distortion of the surface element do not require any power, the entire work with respect to the volume is given by $$\begin{aligned}
V\cdot\intd{{W}}&=\iint\limits_V\iprod{\intd{F}{\hspace*{0.07em}}r_0,\sigma{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A}_0}=\iint\limits_V\iprod{\sigma^T{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{F}{\hspace*{0.07em}}r_0,\intd{A_0}}\\
&=\iiint\limits_V\text{div} (\sigma^T{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{F}{\hspace*{0.07em}}r_0){\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{V}=\iiint\limits_V\tr(\sigma^T{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{F}){\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{V}\,.\end{aligned}$$ Hence, the work per unit volume is $$\begin{aligned}
\intd{{W}}=\tr(\sigma^T{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{F})\tag{5.4}\,.\label{5.4}\end{aligned}$$ If $\id+\intd{F}$ is an infinitesimal radial scaling, i.e. $\intd{F}=\intd{\lambda}\cdot\id$ with the dilatation $\frac{\intd{V}}{V}=3\cdot\intd{\lambda}$, then $\intd{{W}}=\intd{\lambda}\cdot\tr \sigma^T=\frac{\intd{V}}{V}\cdot\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr \sigma^T$. If the hydrostatic stress ${\overline{\sigma}}$ occurs, then $\intd{{W}}=\frac{\intd{V}}{V}\cdot{\overline{\sigma}}$. For non-symmetric $\sigma$, the hydrostatic stress is represented by $\tel{3}\tr \sigma^T$ as well, which is why $\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr \sigma^T$ is called the mean stress ${\overline{\sigma}}$.
For arbitrary coordinates, according to , the mean stress is given by $$\begin{aligned}
{\overline{\sigma}}=\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr \sigma^T=\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr({H}^T\widetilde{\sigma}^T{M})=\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr({M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{H}^T\widetilde{\sigma}^T)\,,\end{aligned}$$ thus in the cases $(\alpha)$ and $(\beta)$, $$\begin{aligned}
{\overline{\sigma}}&=\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr(G\inv\widetilde{\sigma}^T)=\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr(\widetilde{\sigma}{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv)\tag{5.5$\alpha$}\\
\text{and}\qquad\qquad&\\
{\overline{\sigma}}&=\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr \widetilde{\sigma}^T=\tel{3}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\tr \widetilde{\sigma}\,.\tag{5.5$\beta$}\end{aligned}$$ Again, the mixed-variant definition $(\beta)$ yields the simpler formula.
The infinitesimal deformation $\id+\intd{F}$ corresponds to the deformation $\id+\intd{{\overline{F}}}$ in arbitrary coordinates according to: ${M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}(\id+\intd{F}){\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{{\widetilde{f}}_0}=(\id+\intd{{\overline{F}}}){\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{{\widetilde{f}}_0}$. Thus $\intd{F}={M}\inv\intd{{\overline{F}}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}$ and, due to and , $$\begin{aligned}
\intd{{W}}=\tr({H}^T\widetilde{\sigma}^T{M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M}\inv\intd{{\overline{F}}}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{M})=\tr({M}{\hspace*{0.07em}}{H}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widetilde{\sigma}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{{\overline{F}}})\,. \end{aligned}$$ In the cases $(\alpha)$ and $(\beta)$ we find $$\begin{aligned}
\intd{{W}}&=\tr(G\inv\widetilde{\sigma}^T\intd{{\overline{F}}})=\tr(\intd{{\overline{F}}}^T\widetilde{\sigma}{\hspace*{0.07em}}G\inv)\tag{5.4$\alpha$}\\
\text{and}\qquad\qquad&\\
\intd{{W}}&=\tr(\widetilde{\sigma}^T\intd{{\overline{F}}})=\tr(\intd{{\overline{F}}}^T\widetilde{\sigma})\,.\tag{5.4$\beta$}\end{aligned}$$ Again, we obtain a simpler result for the definition $(\beta)$.
Invariance of the law of elasticity
-----------------------------------
For isotropic materials in Cartesian coordinates the law of elasticity has the form[^18] $$\begin{aligned}
e^j{\hspace*{0.07em}}\sigma=\pdd{E}{j}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\id+2{\hspace*{0.07em}}\pdd{E}{k}{\hspace*{0.07em}}L+3{\hspace*{0.07em}}\pdd{E}{l}{\hspace*{0.07em}}L^2\qquad\text{for}\qquad j=\tr L\,,\enskip k=\tr L^2\enskip\text{and}\enskip l=\tr L^3\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $E$ is the elastic potential per unit volume of the initial state.
=7
If we want this simple form to hold for arbitrary coordinates as well, then $\widetilde{\sigma}$ and $L$ must have the same mixed invariance, since the invariants and functional dependences are transferred only in this case. Therefore, and due to reasons mentioned above, it appears most practical to define both $\widetilde{\sigma}$ and $E$ covariant-contravariant, which is the reason this variance has been emphasized in the definition of $E$ in chapter 3.\
Received 25. May, 1948
Review by Ruth Moufang (Zentralblatt für Mathematik und ihre Grenzgebiete) {#review-by-ruth-moufang-zentralblatt-für-mathematik-und-ihre-grenzgebiete .unnumbered}
==========================================================================
Hencky introduced the logarithms of the principal strains as quantities of strain for finite deformation of isotropic materials. Here, this definition of the strain tensor is recovered as a special case of a characterization based on the following postulates, where $F$ is the matrix of the linear transformation of the coordinate differentials and $G$ is the fundamental tensor of the metric:
1. The strain tensor $E(F)$ is determined by the matrix $F$ and, apart from $F$, only depends on $G$.
2. If $R$ is a rotation, then $E(F{\hspace*{0.07em}}R)=E(F)$.
3. A superposition principle holds such that for two coaxial stretches $V_1$ and $V_2$ and the corresponding strain tensors $E_1=E(V_1)$, $E_2=E(V_2)$, $E_3=E(V_1{\hspace*{0.07em}}V_2)$, there exists a uniquely invertible function $f(x)$ with $f(E_1)+f(E_2)=f(E_3)$.
4. For infinitesimal deformations $\id+\intd{{\overline{F}}}$ in Cartesian coordinates, the strain tensor turns into$\frac12{\hspace*{0.07em}}(\intd{{\overline{F}}}+\intd{{\overline{F}}}^T)+o(\intd{{\overline{F}}})$, where $o(x)$ denotes the usual symbol and ${\smash{\overline{F}}\vphantom{F}^T}$ denotes the transpose of the matrix ${\overline{F}}$ in general.
If $F$, in Cartesian coordinates, is split into a product of a pure stretch $V$ with $3$ real positive eigenvalues and a Euclidean transformation, then the above postulates yield $E=f\inv(\log V)$, where $f\inv(x)$ is the inverse function of $f(x)$ and attains the form $x+o(x)$ for small $x$. In the simplest case one has to set $f\equiv x\equiv f\inv$, which leads to Hencky’s approach. Moving to curvilinear coordinates then yields a covariant, contravariant or mixed tensor at choice. In the latter case, $E=f\inv(L^\ast)$ with $L^\ast=\frac12\log(G{\hspace*{0.07em}}F{\hspace*{0.07em}}\widehat{G}\inv F^T)$, where $\widehat{G}$ is the fundamental tensor with respect to the end position. Here, in general, both $f$ and $f\inv$ are tensor-valued functions of a tensor, e.g. given in the form of a convergent infinite series with a tensorial argument. — Then the logarithm of the volume dilation is given by $\tr f(E)$, i.e. the trace of $f(E)$. — The otherwise common strain tensor introduced by Trefftz
=7
satisfies the above postulates for the superposition function $f(x)= -\frac12\log(1-2{\hspace*{0.07em}}x)$. — The strain deviator $D$ is deduced from the strain tensor by the requirements that two deformations which differ only by a similarity transformation have the same deviator and that the tensor of a volume preserving deformation is equal to its deviator. If, in general, the common deviator operation with respect to $E$ is denoted by $\dev E$, then $D=f\inv(\dev L^\ast)$. The discussion of the characteristic equation corresponding to $\dev L$ gives some indication of the physical meaning of the relation between $\tr(\dev L^3)^2$ and $\tr(\dev L^2)^3$ and indicates that $\sqrt{\tr(\dev L^2})$ can generally be considered a measure for the change of shape in agreement with the usual definition for infinitesimal deformations. — The author refers the stresses to the undeformed surface element and defines the stress tensor via the requirements that
1. in Cartesian coordinates, the force $\intd{A_0}$ acting on a surface element $\intd{{\widetilde{f}}_0}$ is given by $\intd{{\widetilde{f}}_0}=\sigma{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A_0}$,
2. in curvilinear coordinates, $\widetilde{\sigma}$ is a tensor (or a tensor density),
3. translating the surface element by $\intd{z}$ corresponds to the work $\intd{{W}}=\iprod{\intd{z},\widetilde{\sigma}{\hspace*{0.07em}}\intd{A}}$.
These conditions yield a representation of $\widetilde{\sigma}$ in terms of $\sigma$ as a mixed or twice-contravariant tensor. However, in the former case, $\widetilde{\sigma}$ is no longer symmetric along with $\sigma$. — Computing the power for infinitesimal strain yields the known formulae and shows the advantage of using mixed tensors.
Ruth Moufang (Frankfurt a. M., 1950)
Review by William Prager (Mathscinet) {#review-by-william-prager-mathscinet .unnumbered}
=====================================
To define strain in a continuous medium which undergoes a finite deformation, the author starts with the matrix $F$ which represents the mapping of a neighborhood of a point $\widehat{x}$ in the undeformed medium on to a neighborhood of the corresponding point $x$ in the deformed medium: $dx=F\,d\widehat{x}$. In a plastic material the history of deformation is important and, hence, the knowledge of $F$ alone is not sufficient. For an elastic material, on the other hand, $F$ completely characterizes the deformation. For an anisotropic elastic material, the rigid body rotation contained in $F$ is important, and $F$ itself must be used to describe the deformation. For an isotropic elastic material, however, this rigid body rotation is unessential; the strain tensor is then obtained by eliminating this rigid body rotation in a suitable manner. The author proceeds to establish postulates which should be satisfied by any acceptable definition of the strain tensor $E$. First of all, it must be possible to build up this tensor from the elements of the matrix $F$. Secondly, the tensor should not be influenced by a rigid body rotation which precedes the deformation characterized by the matrix $F$. Thirdly, if $V_1$ and $V_2$ denote pure stretches with coincident principal axes, $E_1=E(V_1)$ and $E_2=E(V_2)$ the corresponding strain tensors and $E=E(V_1\,V_2)$ the strain tensor corresponding to the deformation characterized by $V_1\,V_2$(=$V_2\,V_1$), there should exist a monotonic function $f(E)$ such that $f(E_1)+f(E_2)=f(E)$. Finally, the definition of the strain tensor should reduce to the customary one when infinitesimal deformations are considered. The author introduces a logarithmic strain tensor and shows that it satisfies these postulates.
William Prager (1949)
Footnote by C. Truesdell and R. Toupin {#footnote-by-c.-truesdell-and-r.-toupin .unnumbered}
======================================
Later \[1949\] Richter worked out various special properties of \[$\log V$\] and \[$\log U$\]. Noticing that the condition of vanishing in uniform dilation does not determine a unique strain measure, Richter proposed a set of , including a for coaxial stretches, and showed that there are at $x$ and $X$ unique distortion tensors which satisfy them. This corrects an early attempt by Moufang [@moufang1947volumtreue]. Richter’s distortion tensors are complicated algebraic functions of $e$ and $E$, respectively.
Clifford Truesdell and Richard Toupin (1960) [@truesdell60 p.270]
Footnote by C. Truesdell and W. Noll {#footnote-by-c.-truesdell-and-w.-noll .unnumbered}
====================================
The first attempts at mathematical treatment of Cauchy’s idea \[of an elastic material\], apparently, are those of Reiner [@reiner1948elasticity], Richter [@richter1948] and Gleyzal [@gleyzal1949];\
Richter [@richter1952elastizitatstheorie] was the first to observe that the reduction follows at once from a simple and natural requirement of invariance, which is in fact a special case of the principle of material frame-indifference.
Clifford Truesdell and Walter Noll (1965) [@truesdell65 p.119]
List of Symbols {#list-of-symbols .unnumbered}
===============
[**Richter’s notation**]{}
--------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[-.49em\] $A$, $B$ $\textfrak{A}$, $\textfrak{B}$/$\textfrak{C}$ arbitrary $3\times3$-matrices
$a_{ik}$, $(A)_{ik}$ $a_{ik}$, $(\textfrak{A})_{ik}$ entry in the $i$-th row and the $k$-th column of $A$
$\det A$ $|\textfrak{A}|$ determinant of $A$
$\tr A$ $\{\textfrak{A}\}$ trace of $A$
$A^T$ $\overline{\textfrak{A}}$ transpose of $A$
$\id$ $\textfrak{E}$ identity tensor
$A\inv$ $\textfrak{A}\inv$ inverse of $A$
$x$, $y$, … $\textfrak{x}$, $\textfrak{y}$, … vectors
$F$, ${\overline{F}}$ $\textfrak{A}$, $\textfrak{B}$ Jacobian matrices (deformation gradients)
$\widehat{x}$ $\widehat{x}$ preimage of $x$ under $F$
$E(F)$, $E$ $\textfrak{B}(\textfrak{A})$, $\textfrak{B}$ strain tensor corresponding to $F$
$R$ $\textfrak{R}$ pure Euclidean rotation
$V$ $\textfrak{S}$ pure stretch
$\widehat{\hphantom{A}}$ $\widehat{\hphantom{A}}$ indicator of a tensor being associated with the reference configuration $\widehat{x}$
$V_1$, $V_2$ $\textfrak{S}_1$, $\textfrak{S}_2$ coaxial stretches
$E_1$, $E_2$ $\textfrak{V}_1$, $\textfrak{V}_2$ strain tensors $E(V_1)$, $E(V_2)$
$f$ $f$ uniquely invertible function with $f(E_1)+f(E_2)=f(E)$
$o$ $o$ function with $y=o(x)$:$\lim \frac{y}{x}=0$
${p}$, ${q}$ $\textfrak{h}$, $\textfrak{y}$ original point and its image under the deformation ${\overline{F}}$
$E_0$ $\textfrak{W}$ strain tensor with respect to ${\overline{F}}$
$Z$ $\textfrak{Z}$ $Z=f(E_0)$
$L$ $\textfrak{L}$ logarithmic strain tensor:$L=\log V$
$f\inv$ $g$ inverse function of $f$
$h$, $k$ $h$, $k$ functions:$h(x)=f\inv(\log(x))$, $k(x)=h(\sqrt{x})$
${M}$ $\textfrak{U}$ Jacobian matrix of $x=x(q)$
$G$ $\textfrak{G}$ metric fundamental tensor
$L^{\ast}$ $\textfrak{L}^{\ast}$ logarithmic strain tensor in curvilinear coordinates
$v$ $v$ dilatation being associated with $F$:$v=\det F$
$T$ $\textfrak{T}$ “common” strain tensor, $T=\frac{1}{2}(\id-B\inv)$, Almansi strain tensor
$D$ $\textfrak{D}$ strain deviator (change of shape)
$\dev A$ $\widetilde{\textfrak{Q}}$ common deviator of the matrix $A$: $\dev A=A-\frac{1}{3}\tr (A)\cdot\id$
$\zeta$ $\zeta$ $\zeta$ characterizes the kind of loading
$\sigma$ $\textfrak{P}_0$ Cauchy stress tensor
$\widetilde{\sigma}$ $\textfrak{P}$ stress tensor in curvilinear coordinates
$\intd{A}$ $\intd{\textfrak{f}}$ surface element
$\intd{{\widetilde{f}}}_0$ $\intd{\textfrak{k}}_0$ the force acting on $\intd{A}_0$ at ${q}$
${H}$ $\textfrak{C}$ constant
$\intd{{W}}$ $\intd{A}$ differential of the expended work
$V$ $V$ volume
$\mathcal{F}$ $F$ surface of $V$
${\overline{\sigma}}=\frac{1}{3}\tr \sigma$ $\sigma$ hydrostatic stress, mean stress
$\iprod{x,y}$ $x\cdot y$ scalar product
$|x|^2$ $x^2$ squared length of a vector
\[-.49em\]
: \[table:notation\]Changes made to Richter’s notation.
[^1]: Patrizio Neff,Head of Lehrstuhl für Nichtlineare Analysis und Modellierung, Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann Str. 9, 45127 Essen, Germany, email: [email protected]
[^2]: Kai Graban, Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann Str. 9, 45127 Essen
[^3]: Eva Schweickert,Lehrstuhl für Nichtlineare Analysis und Modellierung, Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann Str. 9, 45127 Essen, Germany; email: [email protected]
[^4]: Robert J. Martin,Lehrstuhl für Nichtlineare Analysis und Modellierung, Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann Str. 9, 45127 Essen, Germany; email: [email protected]
[^5]: Cf. Truesdell and Noll [@truesdell65 p. 347]: [“*Various authors [[\[]{}…[\]]{}]{} have suggested that we should select the strain [[\[]{}tensor[\]]{}]{} afresh for each material in order to get a simple form of constitutive equation. [[\[]{}…[\]]{}]{} *Every* invertible stress relation $T=f(B)$ for an isotropic elastic material is linear, trivially, in an appropriately defined, particular strain [[\[]{}tensor $f(B)$[\]]{}]{}.*”]{}
[^6]: Note that more general definitions can be found in the literature as well [@agn_neff2015geometry; @truesdell60]; for example, Truesdell and Toupin [@truesdell60 p. 268] consider [“*any uniquely invertible isotropic second order tensor function of [[\[]{}the left Cauchy-Green deformation tensor $B=FF^T$[\]]{}]{}*”]{} to be a strain tensor.
[^7]: Here and throughout, we will identify the primary matrix function with its associated scale function and write, for example, $\ftilde(V)=\sum_{i=1}^n \ftilde(\lambda_i) \cdot e_i\otimes e_i$.
[^8]: Cf. Truesdell and Toupin [@truesdell60 p. 268]: [“*…any [[\[]{}tensor[\]]{}]{} sufficient to determine the directions of the principal axes of strain and the magnitude of the principal stretches may be employed and is fully general*”]{}. Truesdell and Noll [@truesdell65 p. 348] also argue that there [“*is no basis in experiment or logic for supposing nature prefers one strain [[\[]{}tensor[\]]{}]{} to another*”]{}.
[^9]: It can easily be shown [@becker1893; @agn_neff2014rediscovering] that under suitable normalization requirements, the *only* strain tensor satisfying the condition $E(V_1V_2)=E(V_1)+E(V_2)$ for all coaxial stretches $V_1,V_2$ is the logarithmic Hencky strain $E(V)=E_0(V)=\log V$.
[^10]: Cf. R. Moufang: “Volumtreue Verzerrungen bei endlichen Formänderungen”, Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik 25/27 (1947), Pp. 209–214 [@moufang1947volumtreue].
[^11]: Whether or not a matrix is a tensor is determined by (2.10).
[^12]: However, c.f. \[2.5\].
[^13]: The notation $E(F)$ does not mean that $E$ is a function of $F$ in the sense of \[2.5\], but merely indicates that $E$ is associated with $F$.
[^14]: As usual, $y=o(x)$ means that: $\lim\frac{y}{x} =0\,.$
[^15]: Since with $f$ every multiple of $f$ also satisfies postulate **V3**, $f'(0)$ can be normalized to $1$.
[^16]: See e.g. [@moufang1947volumtreue]
[^17]: Cf. the somewhat different construction by Moufang [@moufang1947volumtreue].
[^18]: See H. Richter: “Das isotrope Elastizitätsgesetz”, *Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik* 28.7/8 (1948), Pp. 205-–209 [@richter1948].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We describe the results of a search for microlensing events affecting stars in the outer bulge and inner disk of M31, due both to masses in M31 and the Galaxy. These observations, from 1994 and 1995 on the Vatican Advanced Technology Telescope and KPNO 4m, are sufficient to rule out masses in the range of $\sim 0.003~M_\odot$ to 0.08 $M_\odot$ as the primary consistuents of the mass of M31 towards this field. Furthermore we find six candidate events consistent with microlensing due to masses of about $1~M_\odot$, but we suspect that some of these may be cases where long-period red supergiant variables may be mistaken for microlensing events. Coverage from anticipated data should be helpful in determining if these sources maintain a constant baseline, and therefore are best described by microlensing events.'
author:
- 'Arlin P. S. Crotts$^{1,2}$ and Austin B. Tomaney$^{1,2}$'
title: '**RESULTS FROM A SURVEY OF GRAVITATIONAL MICROLENSING TOWARDS M31**'
---
INTRODUCTION
============
One of the most significant and stubborn mysteries in astrophysics today concerns the nature of the dark matter in spiral galaxies (e.g. Rubin et al. 1978). The least radical candidate for such dark matter is baryonic objects which are too large to be detected as dust or gas. Indeed, if the Hubble constant is not too large, a significant fraction of the baryons, as implied by Big Bang nucleosynthesis, must be hidden as dark matter (Walker et al. 1991). Arguments have been made for why such dark baryonic objects are unlikely on individual mass scales of atoms to brown dwarfs (Hills 1986, Hegyi & Olive 1986). Still, objects of primordial composition and more massive than about $10^{-7}
M_{\odot}$ might be expected to resist evaporation until the present day (de Rújula et al. 1992), while masses smaller than about $0.077 ~ M_\odot$ would fail to ignite as stars (Burrows et al. 1993).
Astrophysicists’ frustration explaining the dark matter with any directly detectable objects has led to the suggestion that gravitational microlensing might be used to at least betray the presence of individual objects via their effects on background stars as sources (Paczynski 1986), and thereby give some indication as to their mass. Such searches have recently taken place towards the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) (Alcock et al. 1996, Aubourg et al. 1995) and Bulge (Alcock et al. 1995, Paczynski et al. 1994), with searches towards the LMC ruling out most of the dark matter being composed of substellar-mass objects (Aubourg et al. 1995, Alcock et al. 1996) heavier than about $10^{-6} M_\odot$, while suggesting that a large fraction might have the same component mass as low-mass stars (Alcock et al. 1996). Given the uncertainty of the Galactic halo’s distribution of MAssive, Compact, Halo Objects (MACHOs) and therefore the lensing geometry leading to events, the relationship between mass and observed microlensing lightcurve timescale is still unclear.
In part because of its unique geometry with respect to Earth and partially due to high predicted optical depths ($\tau$) due to lensing, M31 is a uniquely powerful venue for studying microlensing. Early we realized that an M31 microlensing survey would show particular advantages if the practical aspects of studying such a distant, crowded field of stars could be overcome.
We found such an approach, briefly outlined by Crotts (1992) with a complete description of the realistic technique and preliminary results found in Tomaney and Crotts (1996, hereafter TC). By subtracting images in a time sequence, then performing “difference image photometry” (DIP, also know as “pixel lensing”), we can study the residual point sources due to variables, while the signals from the many crowded, non-varying stars subtract away. With a practical method of observation and analysis, we can exploit the advantages inherent in studying M31: 1) very small component mass limits, due to the small angle subtended by the photosphere of M31 stars compared to the Einstein radius of objects of solar mass (c.f. TC for low-mass results), 2) the ability to study different parts of M31, thereby studying the spatial distribution of microlensing objects, 3) the ability to study many stars at once in fields of high $\tau$, thereby detecting events in short periods of observation, and 4) the constrained microlensing geometry, due to the fact that lensing mass is concentrated over the center of the galaxy, thereby allowing a better determination of the MACHO mass given microlensing event timescale.
It is our hope that by studying M31 in this way, both its halo and bulge, one can more readily understand both these results and those obtained in the Galaxy. This paper presents our results from our first season of observation toward this goal.
Observations
============
Observations were made primarily at the Vatican Advanced Technology Telescope on 31 December 1994, 31 January, 17 October through 4 November and 20 November through December 3, 1995, using an imager especially made for accommodating DIP. Additional observations were made with the prime focus KPNO 4-m Prime Focus Camera on 24-27 September 1994 and 28 August 1995.
The VATT data were taken using field centers of 00:43:16.5 +41:11:33 and 00:42:13.4 +41:20:44 (J2000), and rotation of the CCD so that its sides were roughly parallel to M31’s principle axes. The first field looks past the bulge, intercepting the far side of the disk along the minor axis. Most data were obtained in the first field, such that light curves in the second are too incomplete to treat here. Observations on the KPNO 4m were centered close to the first VATT location, such that the 4m field (16.4 arcmin on a side) encompasses all but 0.1% of the VATT field (11.3 arcmin on a side). The two telescopes’ fields are rotated 38$^\circ$ with respect to each other. We do not consider here 4m data falling outside the VATT field. Assuming a distance to M31 of 770 kpc (4.46 arcmin/kpc), the VATT field covers a range of 0.4 to 2.9 kpc along the minor axis, which projects to 1.8 to 13.1 kpc along the disk, assuming an inclination $i=77^\circ$. We use the filter bands described in TC, essentially broad R and I bands to match the fact that most of our target stars in M31 are red giants or supergiants and therefore brighter in redder bands.
Analysis
========
The process of difference image photometry consists of careful flat-fielding, coordinate registration and photometric scaling of the data, followed by point spread function (PSF) matching between frames (detailed in TC). Using a convolution kernel approximating the quotient between PSFs in the image from a particular epoch and that from a high-$S/N$, good-seeing stack of many images, the PSFs are matched either by degrading the image stack or single epoch’s image to match the other. In the case of the VATT data, the entire frame can be corrected in this way due to the optical design of our imager, which insures that a single convolution kernel is need over the entire (or nearly all) of the image (see TC for more details). This is especially easy because in these data we deal only with nightly sums, composed of $\approx 5-20$ similar exposures, so that individual irregularities of single exposures, such as guiding errors, average out. After PSF matching is accomplished, the stack (taken from many night’s data) and the individual night’s image are subtracted, leaving a field of noise at nearly the photon shot noise level, as well as isolated positive or negative point source residuals due to variable stars. An example of this is shown in Figure 1, for the fourth candidate microlensing event detailed in Figure 2. DIP is completed by performing aperture photometry on these isolated residual sources, which can then be incorporated into light curves.
The error bars presented with the lightcurves in Figures 2 and 3 show the fluctuations in the difference image on the scale of the PSF in regions adjacent to each residual source. Sources were catalogued by requiring at least a 4$\sigma$ detection in at least two nightly sums (or 6$\sigma$ in the 24% of the image containing the bulge and closest to the minor axis), then tracing the lightcurve by aperture photometry in other epochs at the same location. In future papers we will track additional sources by 1) sampling variations on sub-night scales, and 2) summing difference images so that weaker residuals can be tracked over longer timescales. Even without these refinements, however, we locate over 2000 sources within the VATT field.
Results
=======
The results of this construction of lightcurves from nightly sums is that no source is only on two consecutive nights, and that none of the sources seen, with one exception, is consistent with microlensing events on any but nearly the longest timescales sampled by our survey. In the latter cases, we portray the lightcurves of the six candidate events in Figures 2, and other information in Table 1, including their positions (J2000) and distance along M31’s minor axis ($d$). Assuming that they are microlensing events, several other parameters can also be extracted: the duration (Einstein radius crossing time $t_e$), lensing impact parameter (normalized to the Einstein radius: $u_o = u/R_e$), and source baseline magnitude ($R$). Not given are the two other fit parameters, time of peak amplification and flux zero-point offset due to image subtraction. Additionally we give the goodness of the best lensing fit (for point sources and masses), and the most probable mass of the lens. It appears that fit residuals are slightly larger than expected from photometric measurement error alone, seen particularly as a surplus in the number of 3$\sigma$ or greater residuals, which are inconsistent with neighboring points. One possibility for this noise is underlying RR Lyrae variables, which should be evident at the 1-2$\sigma$ level, either coincident with the source or in its photometric background annulus. We will investigate this problem further in Tomaney et al. (1996). We stress that [*we do not claim that these are microlensing events at least until their lightcurves are observed to fall and remain at the pre-event baseline*]{} during the 1996 observing season or thereafter.
One reason for our caution is the lightcurve shown in Figure 3 for the variable star found at 0$^h$43$^m$37.$^s$9 $+$41$^\circ$14$^\prime$57$^{\prime\prime}$ (J2000), 1.92 kpc from the major axis. It is fit well by a microlensing lightcurve during its rise and fall, but does not maintain a consistent baseline before and after the event. Upon inspection of lightcurves of Mira-type variables (Wesselink 1987), we find a small fraction whose lightcurves around maximum light mimic the behaviour of microlensing lightcurves. A sparse sampling of points beyond maximum light, if chosen unfortuitously, might fail to distinguish such a variable from a microlensing event. We find several such variables in our VATT field. Further reasons for suspicion is the similarity in timescales to those of miras (except the first event), and similar shapes, indicated by $u_o$ values which cluster around 0.6 (except for the second event). Additionally, it is strange that all sources have $R\approx21$, close to the magnitude that would correspond to a mira pulsation (given the inferred $u_o$), but brighter than what we might expect for lensed sources given the luminosity function of stars in the field. We suspect that several of these events are not due to microlensing at all, but might be associated with bright variable stars. Another season of observation, which we plan, will determine if these sources maintain a constant baseline and are therefore likely to be lensed.
The reality of these events can be tested in terms of the distribution of $u_o$ values via a one-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test. The theoretical distribution is derived using a luminosity function in $R$ $\phi \propto 10^{\alpha R}$, where $\alpha = 0.59$ best describes the behavior of star counts and surface brightness fluctuations in the field, and agrees with other works (Tomaney & Crotts 1996, and references therein). Very low $u_o$ values ($u_o \la 0.02$) are not realistic since high amplification events have timescales too short for us to detect; high $u_o$ events ($u_o \ga3.5$) have amplifications too subtle for us to detect, as well. We take as the $u_o$ upper bound the lesser of the above upper bound and the maximum value providing sufficient amplification to reach our flux threshold for a given magnitude. For values of $u_o$ between these limits, we assume a uniform distribution of events in $u_o$, at a given magnitude. The largest value of the K-S distance $D$ occurs at the smallest observed $u_o=
0.369$, due to the lack of small $u_o$ events, and has a value $D\approx0.7$. Assuming that all six candidates are true microlensing events, the null hypothesis (consistency with microlensing) is rejected at the 99.5% level. If half the candidates are microlensing events (and the minimum still $u_o=0.369$), the null hypothesis is rejected at approximately the 90% level. It is unlikely that all of the events are due to microlensing, but this test cannot rule out that a large fraction may be.
These caveats aside, [*if*]{} these events are microlensing events, then we can say several things about them. The first and second events land in the bulge-dominated region, and hence likely involve bulge sources. The third and fourth might be due to disk sources (but have a high probability of belonging to the bulge) and also rest in the region where bulge lenses may dominate over halo lenses. The fifth and sixth events, if genuine, might easily be halo lenses acting on disk sources. In the case of third through sixth events, the most probable source-lens distance is $d/cos~i$, allowing us to compute a most likely mass, given $t_e$. (We assume a disk rotation speed of 260 km s$^{-1}$ \[Braun 1991\] and a halo/bulge velocity dispersion of 160 km s$^{-1}$ \[Kent 1989\], of which $\sqrt{2/3}$ is in the transverse direction. Earth’s transverse motion is negligible.) We assume no rotation of the bulge; it could be as large as $\sim$100 km s$^{-1}$ in our field (Kent 1989), meaning that inferred masses might tend to split into a bimodal distribution of under- and overestimated values, with peaks differing by as much as a factor of two in timescale, or four in mass.
Discussion
==========
Several approaches have been taken to estimating the predicted $\tau$ in M31 due to its own mass distribution. Initially Crotts (1992) just approximated the entire mass of M31 as an $r^{_{-2}}$ density distribution, which produces an optical depth for far-side disk stars of $\tau \approx 10^{-5}$. The presence of a core saturation radius will reduce $\tau$ in the center of M31 while maintaining this high plateau value at larger radii. Jetzer (1994) considers the effects of only the dark matter halo, with a large core radius of 5 kpc, and finds a value of $\tau=1\times10^{-6}$ in the center of M31, rising to $3\times10^{-6}$ at the outer edge of our field. Han and Gould (1996) treat both the halo and bulge of M31 and find $\tau=
7\times10^{-6}$ in the center, dominated by the bulge, falling to $3\times10^{-6}$ at the outside edge of our field, where the halo dominates. There is a factor of about 1.3 disagreement between the lower values of Jetzer versus Crotts and Han & Gould due to different assumed values of M31’s rotation velocity. Lensing of disk stars by other disk stars produces a $\tau$ component of $4\times10^{-7}$ (Gould 1994), while a standard Galactic halo model adds $\tau\approx1\times10^{-6}$ (Paczynski 1986). Together, these components sum to at least $\tau\approx5\times10^{-6}$ throughout the field, which is the value that we will adopt for the sake of discussion. Note that this is about an order of magnitude greater than that suggested by Galactic survey results towards the LMC ($\tau_{obs}=2.9^{+1.4}_{-0.9} \times
10^{-7}$, Alcock et al. 1996), or for predicted Galactic/LMC halo values ($\tau_{model}=4.7\times 10^{-7}$, Alcock et al. 1996), but only slightly larger than Galactic Bulge results ($\tau_{obs}=(3.3 \pm 1.2) \times 10^{-6}$, Paczynski et al. 1994; $\tau_{obs}=(3.9\pm 1.8)\times10^{-6}$, Alcock et al. 1995).
From our previous constraints on the luminosity function of stars in our field (TC), we have estimate that we are sensitive to detectable microlensing of any of $6.9\times10^5$ stars in our field. These data are primarily sensitive to timescales ranging from 2$^d$ to 10$^d$, corresponding to 0.003 $M_\odot$ to 0.08 $M_\odot$. We have 13 and 2 sample times respectively corresponding to $9.0\times 10^6$ and $1.4\times 10^6$ star-epochs. The predicted number of events for this mass range given a $\tau_{Gal+M31}$ of $5\times 10^{-6}$ is 45 to 7 events. Except for one possible detection at the upper end of this range, we find no events on these timescales, thereby eliminating this mass range as a 100% contribution to the mass of M31 at considerably better than 95% confidence. On the other hand, we expect to detect approximately 2 events (given 100% efficiency) if the mass of M31 is made entirely of $1~M_\odot$ objects, while we see six candidates, half of which are at this scale or larger. This argues that some of these may not be caused by microlensing.
Our primary result is (1) the lack of any detection corresponding to masses up to $0.08~M_\odot$ (with perhaps one exception), and (2) the possible detection of events on the scale of about $1~M_\odot$. The number of such events on this larger timescale, however, is significantly greater than would be predicted given models of the lensing optical depth, so might indicate contamination by variable stars. Both of these results are consistent with microlensing searches in both the Bulge and halo of our Galaxy (e.g. Paczynski et al. 1994, Alcock et al. 1995, 1996) in which few, if any, substellar masses are detected. Likewise, slightly sub-solar masses are indicated as the primary cause of microlensing events both towards the LMC and Bulge. A further season of data will determine whether our six candidates are simply variable stars, or exhibit constant baseline, implicating them as microlensing events.
We appreciate the assistance of Robert Uglesich in the preparation of this paper. We also thank the Vatican Observatory Research Group, in particular Richard Boyle and Chris Corbally, in assisting our efforts on the VATT, and the Steward Observatory engineering group, in particular Richard Cromwell and Steve West. Ata Sarajedini aided our program at the KPNO 4m. This research was funded by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation.
Alcock et al. 1995, ApJ, submitted
Alcock et al. 1996, ApJ, submitted
Aubourg et al. 1995, A&A, 301, 1
Burrows, A., Hubbard, W.B., Saumon, D. & Lunine, J.I. 1993, ApJ, 406, 158
Braun, R. 1991, ApJ, 372, 54
Crotts, A.P.S. 1992, ApJ, 399, L43
de Rújula, A., Jetzer, Ph. & Massó, E. 1992, A&A, 254, 99
Gould, A. 1994, ApJ, 435, 573
Han, C. & Gould, A. 1996, preprint
Hegyi, D.J. & Olive, K.A. 1986, ApJ, 303, 56
Hills, J.G. 1986, AJ, 92, 595
Jetzer, Ph. 1994, A&A, 286, 426
Kent, S. 1989, AJ, 97, 1614
Paczynski, B. 1986, ApJ, 304, 1
Paczynski, A., et al. 1994, ApJ, 435, L113
Rubin, V.C., Thonnard, N. & Ford, W.K. 1978, ApJ, 225, L107
Tomaney, A.B. & Crotts, A.P.S. 1996, AJ, in press (TC)
Tomaney et al., in preparation
Walker, T.P., Steigman, G., Kang, H.-S., Schramm, D.M. & Olive, K.A. 1991, ApJ, 376, 51
Wesselink, T.J.H. 1987, Ph.D. thesis (Nijmegen)
Figure 1: The left panel shows reduced but unsubtracted subimage (about 450 arcsec$^2$) prior to DIP. (Actually, the average of our 24 VATT epochs from autumn 1995 is shown.) Some of the sources shown here are variable, but at a level far below the average surface brightness fluctuation in the image and below a level which can be distinguished by eye. The right panel shows the difference image of the same region, after a high-$S/N$ sum of images has been scaled, registered, PSF adjusted and subtracted using DIP, for UT 17 Oct 1995. Several variable sources are revealed by the image subtraction, some fainter than the average (black), some brighter (white). The circled source corresponds to the fourth microlensing candidate shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: the lightcurves of the six candidate microlensing events described in the text and Table 1. One count is equivalent to $R = 31.09$.
Figure 3: the example described in the text of one of several lightcurves well-fit in the peak by a microlensing model, but which does not maintain a consistent baseline outside of the peak.
[cccccccc]{} 0$^h42^m55^s$.7 & $+41^\circ14^\prime27^{\prime\prime}$ & 0.59 & 7.8 & (0.09)$^a$ & 0.648 & 21.08 & 0.75 0$^h42^m42^s$.3 & $+41^\circ11^\prime~2^{\prime\prime}$ & 0.62 & 55.7 & (4.3)$^a$ & 0.369 & 21.14 & 1.67 0$^h42^m54^s$.1 & $+41^\circ10^\prime55^{\prime\prime}$ & 1.02 & 32.6 & 0.90$^b$ & 0.680 & 20.22 & 1.35 0$^h43^m14^s$.8 & $+41^\circ12^\prime32^{\prime\prime}$ & 1.49 & 39.3 & 0.90$^b$ & 0.501 & 20.77 & 1.62 0$^h43^m22^s$.6 & $+41^\circ~5^\prime52^{\prime\prime}$ & 2.67 & 31.7 & 0.32 & 0.590 & 20.93 & 2.23 0$^h43^m49^s$.0 & $+41^\circ11^\prime28^{\prime\prime}$ & 2.77 & 39.9 & 0.49 & 0.690 & 20.61 & 2.01
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The spin and flavor fractions of constituent quarks in the proton are obtained from their chiral fluctuations involving Goldstone bosons. SU(3) breaking suggested by the mass difference between the strange and up, down quarks is included, and this improves the agreement with the data markedly.'
address:
- |
Institute of Nuclear and Particle Physics, University of Virginia,\
Charlottesville, VA 22901, USA
- ' Institut für Kernphysik, J. Gutenberg Universität Mainz, D–55099 Mainz, Germany'
author:
- 'H. J. Weber,X. Song'
- and
- 'M. Kirchbach'
title: Proton Spin in Chiral Quark Models
---
0.5in
PACS numbers: 11.30.Rd, 12.39.Fe, 14.20.Dh
Keywords: Spin of proton, chiral fluctuations, Goldstone bosons, broken SU(3)
Introduction
=============
The nonrelativistic quark model (NQM) explains many of the properties of the nucleon and its excited states as originating from three valence quarks whose dynamics is motivated by quantum chromodynamics (QCD), the gauge field theory of the strong interaction. The effective degrees of freedom at low energies are dressed or constituent quarks which are expected to emerge in the spontaneous chiral symmetry breakdown of QCD that may be described by Nambu–Jona-Lasinio models [@NJL]. The light quarks of QCD become dynamical quarks with mass $m_q(p^2)$ in this process. Upon approximating the dynamical mass by $m_q(0)\approx m_N/3$ one can introduce the concept of a constituent quark (of the NQM) at low momentum $p$. Along with dynamical quarks Goldstone bosons [@GSW] occur as effective degrees of freedom in QCD below the chiral symmetry scale $4\pi f_\pi \approx 1169$ MeV for $f_\pi = 93$ MeV. Other degrees of freedom, such as gluons, are integrated out.
Chiral quark models which include these effective degrees of freedom have been developed for a long time starting with the Gell-Mann–Levy $\sigma$ model [@GML]. The nonlinear $\sigma$ model is a starting point for soliton or Skyrme models of the nucleon [@SK]. The latter became widely appreciated when Witten [@EW] linked the Skyrme model to the large $N_c$ limit of QCD. Chiral bag models started with ref. [@Cho] but further significant development stalled when it was recognized that their failure to treat quark and hadron boosts adequately along with the violation of translation invariance is rather difficult to correct systematically. Since dynamical quarks, and constituent quarks as their low momentum limit, became more widely accepted as appropriate degrees of freedom with growing support from NJL models, chiral quark models came to dominate the literature. [@WS]
Chiral fluctuations $q_{\uparrow,\downarrow}\rightarrow q_{\downarrow,\uparrow}+(q\bar q')_0$ of quarks into pseudoscalar mesons, $(q\bar q')_0$, of the SU(3) flavor octet of $0^-$ Goldstone bosons, were first applied to the spin problem of the proton in ref. [@EHQ]. It was shown that chiral dynamics can help one understand not only the reduction of the proton spin carried by the valence quarks from $\Delta \Sigma =1$ in the NQM to the experimental value of about $1/3$, but also the reduction of the axial vector coupling constant $g_A^{(3)}$ from the NQM value 5/3 to about 5/4. In addition, the violation of the Gottfried sum rule [@Go] which signals an isospin asymmetric quark sea in the proton became plausible. Here we wish to study the effects of SU(3) breaking which are needed to explain the remaining discrepancies of the spin and quark sea observables with the data.
Subsequently the analysis was extended to the $\eta'$ meson [@CL] although it is generally not regarded as a Goldstone boson. A singlet pseudoscalar coupling constant that differs from that of the octet was shown to cause the quark sea to become more flavor asymmetric. Amongst the pseudoscalar mesons the $\eta'$ is the heaviest. The Noether current of the $U_A(1)$ symmetry is the singlet axial vector current whose divergence contains the $U_A(1)$ anomaly. Despite the spontaneous breakdown of the $U_L(1)\times U_R(1)$ symmetry, no corresponding Goldstone boson seems to arise because of instanton configurations with integral topological charge. Thus the properties of the $\eta'$ meson differ significantly from those of other Goldstone bosons such as the pions, kaons and the $\eta $ meson. Nonetheless, for the sake of comparing with [@CL] in Sect. III we include also broken U(3) flavor results on the quark spin fractions with the $\eta'$ meson. Let us now turn to the $\eta $ meson case and its problems.
The $\eta$ meson arises as the octet Goldstone boson when the chiral $SU(3)_L\times SU(3)_R$ symmetry is spontaneously broken. Predictions from PCAC are not in good agreement with experiments, e. g. its octet Goldberger-Treiman relation is violated because it predicts a fairly large $\eta $NN coupling constant which disagrees with the much smaller value extracted from analyses of both $p\bar p$ collisions [@GK] and recent precision data from MAMI [@TBK] on $\eta $ photoproduction off the proton at threshold. Corrections from chiral perturbation theory are of order 30% and therefore much too small to help one understand the problem of the suppressed $\eta $NN coupling better [@SW].
The paper is organized as follows. In Sect. II we describe the formalism of SU(3) breaking on the quark spin fractions and the quark sea contents of the proton. In Sect.III we numerically evaluate the quark spin distributions by considering the SU(3) breaking effect as brought about by the mass splitting between the up/down and the strange quarks. The paper concludes with a brief summary in Sect. IV.
SU(3) Breaking
==============
If the spontaneous chiral symmetry breakdown in the infrared regime of QCD is governed by chiral $SU(3)_L \times SU(3)_R$ transformations then the effective interaction between the octet of Goldstone boson fields $\Phi_i$ and quarks is a flavor scalar given by $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal L}_{int}=-{g_A\over 2f_\pi }\sum_{i=1}^{8}\bar q \partial_\mu
\gamma^\mu \gamma_5 \lambda_i \Phi_i q.
\label{lint}\end{aligned}$$ This interaction will flip the polarization of the quark: $q_{\downarrow}\rightarrow q_{\uparrow}+GB$, etc. Here $\lambda_i$, $(i=1,2,...,8)$ are the Gell-Mann SU(3) flavor matrices, and $g_A$ is the dimensionless axial vector quark coupling constant that is taken to be 1, while $$g_A^{(3)}=\Delta u -\Delta d=\Delta_3={\cal F}+{\cal D}
=(G_A/G_V)_{n\rightarrow p},
\label{gan}$$ is the isotriplet axial vector coupling constant of the weak decay of the neutron, and $\Delta u$, $\Delta d$ and $\Delta s$ stand for the fraction of proton spin carried by the u, d and s quarks, respectively. They are defined by the following matrix elements of the axial vector currents for the nucleon state $$\begin{aligned}
\langle N|\bar q\gamma_\mu \gamma_5 {\lambda^3\over 2} q|N\rangle
= g_A^{(3)} \bar U_N\gamma_\mu \gamma_5 {\tau^3\over 2} U_N\, ,\qquad \qquad
&& g_A^{(3)} = \Delta u -\Delta d\, ,\\
\label{gA}
\langle N| \bar q \gamma_\mu \gamma_5 {\lambda^8\over 2} q |N \rangle
= {g_A^{(8)}\over 2} \bar U_N \gamma_\mu \gamma_5 U_N\, ,\qquad\qquad
&& g_A^{(8)} ={1\over \sqrt{3}} (\Delta u +\Delta d -2\Delta s)\, ,\\
\label{gA_8}
\langle N|\bar q\gamma_\mu \gamma_5 {\lambda^0\over 2} q|N\rangle
= {g_A^{(0)}\over 2} \bar U_N\gamma_\mu \gamma_5 U_N\, ,\qquad\qquad
&& g_A^{(0)} = \sqrt{{2\over 3}} (\Delta u +\Delta d + \Delta s)\, ,\\
\label{gA_0}
\langle N| \bar s \gamma_\mu \gamma_5 s|N\rangle =
\Delta s\ \bar U_N \gamma_\mu\gamma_5 U_N\, .\qquad\qquad
\label{G1_s}\end{aligned}$$ Here $U_N$ is the Dirac spinor of the nucleon and $g_A^{(i)}$ for $i=3,8,0$ are the nucleon’s isovector, hypercharge and singlet axial vector couplings, respectively. It is also common to define the hypercharge spin fraction $\Delta_8$ and the total spin $\Delta \Sigma$ as $$\Delta_8=\Delta u +\Delta d -2\Delta s=3{\cal F}-{\cal D}, \qquad
\Delta \Sigma=\Delta u +\Delta d +\Delta s.
\label{deli}$$
The SU(3) symmetric chiral quark model [@EHQ; @CL] that invokes Goldstone boson (off-mass-shell space-like) fluctuations of constituent valence quarks inside hadrons explains several, but not all, spin and sea quark observables of the proton. Clearly, the data [@e143; @SMC] call for SU(3) breaking because some of the spin fractions such as $\Delta_3/\Delta_8=$5/3 and the weak axial vector coupling constant of the nucleon, $g_A^{(3)}={\cal F}+{\cal D}=$0.85 [@EHQ] and 1.12 [@CL], respectively, still disagree with experiments in the SU(3) symmetric case. The success of hadronic mass relations suggests that a chiral interaction which breaks the SU(3) flavor symmetry also be governed by $\lambda_8$, as it is expected to originate from the mass difference between the strange and up and down quarks (and the corresponding mass differences of the Goldstone bosons).
Writing only the flavor dependence of these interactions we therefore extend the SU(3) symmetric Eq. \[lint\] to $$\begin{aligned}
L_{int}= {g_8\over \sqrt 2} \sum_{i=1}^{8} \bar q (1+\epsilon \lambda_8)
\lambda_i \Phi_i q ,
\label{fint}\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
{1\over \sqrt 2}\sum_{i=1}^{8}\lambda_i \Phi_i = \left( \begin{array}{c}
{ 1\over \sqrt 2} \pi^0 + { 1\over \sqrt 6} \eta \qquad \pi^+ \qquad K^+ \cr
\pi^- \quad -{ 1\over \sqrt 2}\pi^0+{ 1\over \sqrt 6}\eta \quad K^0 \cr
K^- \qquad \bar K^0 \qquad -{2\over \sqrt 6}\eta
\end{array}\right) .
\label{flama} \end{aligned}$$ Here $g_8^2:=a \sim f_{\pi NN}^2/4\pi \approx 0.08$ where $f_{\pi NN}:=g_{\pi NN} m_\pi/2m_N$ denotes the pseudovector $\pi$N coupling constant and $g_{\pi NN}$ the pseudoscalar one. The latter can be related to Eq. \[lint\] via the pion’s Goldberger-Treiman relation $g_{\pi NN}/m_N=
g_A^{(3)}/f_\pi $. Despite the nonperturbative nature of the chiral symmetry breakdown the interaction between quarks and Goldstone bosons is small enough for a perturbative expansion in $g_8$ to apply. Note also that $\epsilon$ is the SU(3) breaking parameter which is expected to satisfy $|\epsilon|<1$ in line with the small constituent quark mass ratio $m_q/m_s\approx$ 0.5 to 0.6.
From Eq. \[fint\] the following transition probabilities $P(u_{\uparrow} \rightarrow \pi^+ + d_{\downarrow})$,... for chiral fluctuations of quarks can be organized as coefficients in the symbolic reactions:
$$\begin{aligned}
u_{\uparrow} \rightarrow a(1+{\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2
(\pi^+ + d_{\downarrow})
+a(1+{\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2 {1\over 6}(\eta +u_{\downarrow})
+a(1+{\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2 {1\over 2}(\pi^0 + u_{\downarrow})\cr
+a(1-{2\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2 (K^+ + s_{\downarrow}),\cr
d_{\uparrow} \rightarrow a(-1-{\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2 (\pi^-
+ u_{\downarrow})
+a(1+{\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2 {1\over 6}(\eta +d_{\downarrow})
+a(-1-{\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2 {1\over 2}(\pi^0 + d_{\downarrow})\cr
+a(1-{2\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2 (K^0 + s_{\downarrow}),\cr
s_{\uparrow} \rightarrow a(1-{2\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2 {2\over 3}(\eta
+s_{\downarrow})+a(-1+{2\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2 (K^- +
u_{\downarrow}) +a(-1+{2\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2 (\bar K^0 +
d_{\downarrow}),\cr
\label{fluc}\end{aligned}$$
and similar ones for the other quark polarization. The Goldstone bosons have the usual quark composition, viz. $$\begin{aligned}
|\pi^0\rangle = {1\over \sqrt{2}}(\bar u u- \bar d d), \qquad
|\eta \rangle = {1\over \sqrt{6}}(\bar u u+ \bar d d -2 \bar s s),\qquad
|K^+ \rangle = u \bar s, \qquad etc.
\label{mes}\end{aligned}$$
From the u and d quark lines in Eq. \[fluc\] the total meson emission probability P of the proton is given to first order in the Goldstone fluctuations by $$\begin{aligned}
P = a[{5\over 3}(1+{\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2
+(1-{2\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2].
\label{prob}\end{aligned}$$
The polarized quark probabilities may now be read off the proton composition expression [@EHQ] $$\begin{aligned}
(1-P)({5\over 3} u_{\uparrow} + {1\over 3} u_{\downarrow}
+{1\over 3} d_{\uparrow} + {2\over 3} d_{\downarrow})
+ {5\over 3} P(u_{\uparrow}) + {1\over 3} P(u_{\downarrow})
+ {1\over 3} P(d_{\uparrow}) + {2\over 3} P(d_{\downarrow}).
\label{qp}\end{aligned}$$ Since the [**antiquarks from Goldstone bosons are unpolarized**]{} we use $\bar u_\uparrow = \bar u_\downarrow$ in the spin fractions $\Delta u = u_\uparrow -u_\downarrow +\bar u_\uparrow -\bar u_\downarrow$, etc and $\Delta s=\Delta s_{sea}$, $\Delta \bar u=\Delta \bar d=\Delta \bar s =0$. Moreover, the valence quark fractions are (see the NQM values in Table 1) $\Delta u_v=4/3,\quad \Delta d_v=-1/3, \quad \Delta s_v=0$. Altogether then Eq. \[qp\], in conjunction with the probabilities displayed in Eq. \[fluc\], yields the following spin fractions $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta u=u_{\uparrow}-u_{\downarrow}={4\over 3}(1-P)
-{5\over 9}a(1+{\epsilon\over \sqrt{3}})^2,
\label{del1}\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta d=-{1\over 3}(1-P)-{10\over 9}a(1+{\epsilon \over \sqrt{3}})^2,
\qquad
\label{del2}\end{aligned}$$ $$\Delta s=-a(1-{2\epsilon\over \sqrt{3}})^2. \qquad
\label{del3}$$
If the antisymmetrization of the up and down sea quarks with the valence quarks is ignored we may assume that $u_v=2,\ d_v=1,\ s_v=0$ and $u_{sea}=\bar u$, etc so that $$u=2+\bar u, \qquad d=1+\bar d, \qquad s=\bar s,
\label{us}$$ reflecting equal sea quark and antiquark numbers. From Eqs. \[fluc\], \[mes\],\[qp\] we now obtain the antiquark fractions $$\bar u=2a(1+{\epsilon\over \sqrt{3}})^2,
\label{anti1}$$
$$\bar d={8\over 3}a(1+{\epsilon\over \sqrt{3}})^2,
\label{anti2}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\bar s=3a(1-{2\epsilon\over \sqrt{3}})^2
+3a[-{1\over 3}(1+{\epsilon\over \sqrt{3}})]^2.
\label{anti3}\end{aligned}$$
From Eqs. \[anti1\],\[anti2\],\[anti3\] it is obvious that the sea violates the SU(3) flavor and isospin symmetries. We also see that for the broken SU(3) case $\bar u/\bar d=$3/4 is still the same as in the SU(3) symmetric case $\epsilon =$0. [@EHQ]
The Gottfried sum rule $$I_G=\int_{0}^{1} {dx\over x}[F_2^p(x)-F_2^n(x)]={1\over 3}+{2\over 3}
(\bar u - \bar d),
\label{GSR}$$ where x is the Bjorken scaling variable and $F_2^{p,n}(x)$ the unpolarized nucleon structure functions, measures the isospin asymmetry, $\bar u-\bar d$, of the antiquarks. The antiquark flavor fractions are generally defined as $$\begin{aligned}
f_q=(q+\bar q)/\sum_{q=u,d,s}(q+\bar q), \qquad for \qquad q=u,d,s,
\label{fq}\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
f_3=f_u-f_d, \qquad f_8=f_u+f_d-2f_s, \qquad
f_s=2\bar s/[3+2(\bar u + \bar d + \bar s)].
\label{fs}\end{aligned}$$
Numerical Results
=================
When SU(3) breaking is included that is consistent with the higher mass of the strange quark compared to the common up, down quark mass and is governed by the hypercharge generator $\lambda_8$, then nearly all observables agree with the data.
In fact, with SU(3) breaking that is characterized by the parameter $\epsilon$ defined in Eq. \[fint\], and the parameter values $a=$0.12 and $\epsilon =$0.2 (see the 4th column in Table 1) the spin fraction ratio $\Delta_3/\Delta_8$ increases from the value 5/3 of the SU(3) symmetric case for $\epsilon=$0 [@EHQ; @CL] and the NQM to 2.12, which is much closer to the experimental value $2.09\pm 0.13$ [@e143]. The situation is similar for the fraction $f_3/f_8$ [^1] decreasing from the value 1/3 for $\epsilon=0$ (and the NQM, cf. Table 1) to 0.24 for $\epsilon=$0.2 close to the experimental value 0.23$\pm$0.05. A significant defect seems to remain despite SU(3) breaking in so far as the axial vector nucleon coupling constant $g_A^{(3)}={\cal F}+{\cal D}=1.217$ for $\epsilon=0.2$ is below the experimental value $1.2573\pm 0.0028$ [@PDG]. In view of missing relativistic effects, which are known to drive this quantity even lower, this discrepancy and possibly $\bar u/\bar d=$3/4 are the only ones remaining in the broken SU(3) case. Overall, SU(3) breaking leads to markedly improved results for the $SU(3)_L \times SU(3)_R$ chiral quark model.
Another description of quark spin fractions, where $\epsilon_{SMW}$ parametrizes the suppression of kaon transitions only, has recently been given in [@SMW]. Upon comparing our $\Delta s=-a(1-{2\epsilon\over \sqrt{3}})^2$ from Eq. \[del3\] with their $\Delta s=-a\epsilon_{SMW}$ we obtain $\epsilon=(1-\sqrt{\epsilon_{SMW}}){\sqrt{3}\over 2}$, and using their fit values $\epsilon_{SMW}\approx 0.5-0.6$ we find the estimates $$0.195 \approx (1-\sqrt{0.6}){ \sqrt{3}\over 2} < \epsilon <
(1-\sqrt{0.5}){ \sqrt{3}\over 2}\approx 0.25 ,
\label{eps}$$ which are in reasonable agreement with the value, $\epsilon=$0.2, that we establish in Table 1.
Let us also compare with the case where the singlet $\eta '$ meson is included in chiral meson-quark interactions with a relative coupling constant $\zeta $ that differs from that of the octet. [@CL]. Despite varying the additional parameter $\zeta $, the fit in the fifth column of Table 1 for the case with SU(3) breaking hardly improves the case without $\eta '$ meson in the 4th column, except possibly for $\bar u/\bar d$ decreasing from 3/4 to 0.686. In particular, the inclusion of the $\eta '$ meson does not resolve the discrepancy with the nucleon axial vector coupling constant. Since the relative $\eta '$ coupling, $\zeta =$-0.3, turns out to be much smaller than in the SU(3) symmetric case, where $\zeta =$-1.2, the $\eta' $ meson becomes almost negligible in the broken SU(3) case.
Can the remaining discrepancies in the broken SU(3) case be better understood? As we mentioned in the introduction, the Goldberger-Treiman relation of the $\eta $ meson is in conflict with experiments which can be avoided if it couples only to the strange, but not the u and d, quarks. If we assume that to be the case in the last column of Table 1, we see that both remaining discrepancies become less pronounced. In fact, $g_A^{(3)}={\cal F}+{\cal D}$ increases to 1.335 (and this high value is likely to be beneficial when relativistic effects are included) and $\bar u/\bar d$ decreases from 3/4 to 7/11, while the other spin and flavor fractions change, but not by much.
Summary and Conclusion
======================
We have seen that in the broken SU(3) case nearly all of the nucleon’s spin observables are reproduced by the $SU(3)_L\times SU(3)_R$ chiral quark model, where the $\eta $ meson is the conventional octet Goldstone boson. The nucleon’s axial vector coupling constant $g_A^{(3)}$ may not be large enough, though, because relativistic effects are not included here which are known to drive this quantity to lower values. Including the $\eta '$ meson in the chiral dynamics does not seem to help one much to understand better the proton spin problem.
When the $\eta$ meson is taken to couple only to the strange, but not the u and d, quarks in the chiral quark model, then $g_A^{(3)}={\cal F}+{\cal D}$ increases and the fit improves for $\bar u/\bar d$ as well.
The remarkable improvement in the spin and flavor fractions from SU(3) breaking shows that such chiral quark models provide a sound phenomenological framework for understanding the spin problem of the proton.
Acknowledgement
===============
The work of M.K. was supported by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 201). The work of X.S. was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy.
[**Table 1**]{}Quark Spin and Sea Observables of the Proton $$\offinterlineskip \tabskip=0pt
\vbox{
\halign to 1.0\hsize
{\strut
\vrule# %Line 1
\tabskip=0pt plus 30pt
& \hfil # \hfil %Text 1
& \vrule# %Line 2
& \hfil # \hfil %Text 2
& \vrule# %Line 3
& \hfil # \hfil %Text 3
% & \vrule# %Line 4
% & \hfil # \hfil %Text 4
% & \vrule# %Line 5
% & \hfil # \hfil %Text 5
& \vrule# %Line 6
& \hfil # \hfil %Text 6
& \vrule# %Line 7
& \hfil # \hfil %Text 7
& \vrule# %Line 8
& \hfil # \hfil %Text 8
\tabskip=0pt %
& \vrule# %Line 9
\cr % END
%\noalign{\hrule} % Horizontal Line
%&&&&&&&&&&&\cr
%&&& & && & && & &\cr
%&&&&&&&&&&&\cr
\noalign{\hrule}
%&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\cr
&\quad Observable &&\quad Data &&\quad NQM && $a=$0.12 && $a=$0.12 && $a=$0.16
&\cr
& && && && && $\zeta =$-0.3 && $\eta $\ mod. &\cr
& &&\quad Ref.\cite{e143}&& && $\epsilon =$ 0.2 && $\epsilon =$ 0.2
&& $\epsilon =$ 0.2 &\cr
%&&&&&&&&&&&&&&\cr
\noalign{\hrule}
%& && && && && && && && &&\cr
& $\Delta u$ && 0.84$\pm$0.05 && 4/3 && 0.824 && 0.81 &&0.87 &\cr
%& &&E143\cite{e143} && && && && &\cr
& $\Delta d$ &&-0.43$\pm$0.05 && -1/3 &&-0.39 &&-0.39 &&-0.47 &\cr
%& &&E143\cite{e143} && && && && &\cr
& $\Delta s$ &&-0.08$\pm$0.05&&0&& -0.07 &&-0.07 &&-0.095 &\cr
%& &&E143\cite{e143} && && && && &\cr
& $\Delta \Sigma $ && 0.30$\pm$0.06&&1&& 0.36 && 0.35 && 0.31 &\cr
%& &&E143\cite{e143} && && && && &\cr
& $\Delta_3/\Delta_8$ &&2.09$\pm$0.13&&5/3&& 2.12 && 2.13 && 2.255 &\cr
%& &&E143\cite{e143} && && && && &\cr
& ${\cal F}+{\cal D}$ && 1.2573$\pm$0.0028 && 5/3 && 1.217 &&
1.205 && 1.335 &\cr
& ${\cal F}/{\cal D}$ && 0.575$\pm$0.016 && 2/3 && 0.58 && 0.58
&& 0.565 &\cr
& $\bar u/\bar d$ &&0.51$\pm$0.09 && 1 &&0.75 && 0.686 && 0.636 &\cr
& $f_3/f_8$ &&0.23$\pm$0.05 && 1/3 && 0.24 && 0.235 &&0.165 &\cr
& $I_G$ &&0.235$\pm$0.026 && 1/3 && 0.27 && 0.25 && 0.20 &\cr
%& && && && && && && && &\cr
\noalign{\hrule}
}}$$
[9]{} Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. [**122**]{}, 345 (1961). [**124**]{}, 246 (1961); U.-G. Meissner, Phys. Rept. [**161**]{}, 213 (1988). J. Goldstone, A. Salam and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. [**127**]{}, 965 (1962). M. Gell-Mann and M. Lévy, Nuovo Cim. [**16**]{}, 705 (1960). T. H. R. Skyrme, Nucl. Phys. [**31**]{}, 556 (1962). E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. [**B160**]{}, 57 (1979). A. Chodos and C. B. Thorn, Phys. Rev. [**D12**]{}, 1450 (1975); T. Inoue and T. Maskawa, Progr. Theor. Phys. [**54**]{}, 1833 (1975). S. Weinberg, Physica [**96A**]{}, 327 (1979). E. J. Eichten, I. Hinchcliffe and C. Quigg, Phys. Rev. [**D45**]{}, 2269 (1992). K. Gottfried, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**18**]{}, 1174 (1967). T. P. Cheng and L.-F. Li, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**74**]{}, 2872 (1995). W. Grein and P. Kroll, Nucl. Phys. [**A338**]{}, 332 (1980); ibid. [**A377**]{}, 505 (1982). L. Tiator, C. Bennhold and S. Kamalov, Nucl. Phys. [**A580**]{}, 455 (1994). M. Savage and J. Walden, hep-ph/9611210. P. L. Anthony [*[et al.]{}*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**71**]{}, 959 (1993); K. Abe [*[et al.]{}*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**74**]{}, 346 (1995); ibid. [**75**]{}, 25 (1995). B. Adeva [*[et al.]{}*]{}, Phys. Lett. [**B302**]{}, 553 (1993); ibid. [**B320**]{}, 400 (1994); ibid. [**369**]{}, 93 (1996); D. Adams [*[et al.]{}*]{}, Phys. Lett. [**B329**]{}, 399 (1994); ibid. [**B336**]{},125 (1994). J. Ellis and M. Karliner, Phys. Lett. [**B341**]{}, 397 (1995). A. Baldit [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Lett. [**B332**]{}, 244 (1994). Review of Particle Properties, Phys. Rev. [**D54**]{}, 1 (1996). X. Song, J. S. McCarthy and H. J. Weber, Phys. Rev. [**D55**]{}, 2624 (1997).
[^1]: The experimental value for the antiquark fraction $f_3/f_8$ is obtained from the measured octet baryon masses.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- Zdeněk Stuchlík
- Petr Slaný
- Gabriel Török
date: 'Received / Accepted'
title: 'LNRF-velocity hump-induced oscillations of a Keplerian disc orbiting near-extreme Kerr black hole: A possible explanation of high-frequency QPOs in GRS 1915+105'
---
[At least four high-frequency quasiperiodic oscillations (QPOs) at frequencies 41Hz, 67Hz, 113Hz, and 167Hz were reported in a binary system GRS 1915+105 hosting near-extreme Kerr black hole with a dimensionless spin $a>0.98$. ]{} [We attempt to explain all four observed frequencies by an extension of the standard resonant model of epicyclic oscillations. ]{} [We use the idea of oscillations induced by the hump of the orbital velocity profile (related to locally non-rotating frames–LNRF) in discs orbiting near-extreme Kerr black holes, which are characterized by a “humpy frequency” $\nu_{\rm h}$, that could excite the radial and vertical epicyclic oscillations with frequencies $\nu_{\rm r}$, $\nu_{\rm v}$. Due to non-linear resonant phenomena, the combinational frequencies are allowed as well. ]{} [Assuming mass $M=14.8\,M_{\odot}$ and spin $a=0.9998$ for the GRS 1915+105 Kerr black hole, the model predicts frequencies $\nu_{\rm h}=41$Hz, $\nu_{\rm
r}=67$Hz, $\nu_{\rm h}+\nu_{\rm r}=108$Hz, and $\nu_{\rm v}-\nu_{\rm
r}=170$Hz corresponding quite well to the observed ones. ]{} [For black-hole parameters being in good agreement with those given observationally, the forced resonant phenomena in non-linear oscillations, excited by the “hump-induced” oscillations in a Keplerian disc, can explain high-frequency QPOs in near-extreme Kerr black-hole binary system GRS 1915+105 within the range of observational errors. ]{}
Introduction
============
Detailed analysis of the variable X-ray black-hole binary system (microquasar) GRS 1915+105 reveals high-frequency QPOs appearing at four frequencies, namely $\nu_{1}=(41\pm 1)$Hz, $\nu_{2}=(67\pm 1)$Hz [@Mor-Rem-Gre:1997:ASTRJ2:; @Str:2001:ASTRJ2:], and $\nu_{3}=(113\pm
5)$Hz, $\nu_{4}=(167\pm 5)$Hz [@Rem:2004:AIPC:]. In this range of its errors, both pairs are close to the frequency ratio 3:2 suggesting the possible existence of resonant phenomena in the system. Observations of oscillations with these frequencies have different qualities, but in all four cases the data are quite convincing; see [@McCli-Rem:2004:CompactX-Sources:; @Rem-McCli:2006:ARASTRA:].
Several models have been developed to explain the kHz QPO frequencies, and it is usually preferred that these oscillations are related to the orbital motion near the inner edge of an accretion disc. In particular, two ideas based on the strong-gravity properties have been proposed. While @Ste-Vie:1998:ASTRJ2: [@Ste-Vie:1999:PHYRL:] introduced the “Relativistic Precession Model” considering that the kHz QPOs directly manifest the modes of a slightly perturbed (and therefore epicyclic) relativistic motion of blobs in the inner parts of the accretion disc, @Klu-Abr:2001:ACTPB: propose models based on non-linear oscillations of an accretion disc that assume resonant interaction between orbital and/or epicyclic modes. In a different context, the possibility of resonant coupling between the epicyclic modes of motion in the Kerr spacetime was also mentioned in the early work of @Ali-Gal:1981:GENRG2:.
In the case of near-extreme Kerr black holes, it was suggested that the epicyclic oscillations in the disc could be excited by resonances with the so-called “hump-induced” oscillations, see papers of @Asch:2004:ASTRA: [@Asch:2006:CHIJAA:] and @Stu-Sla-Tor:2004:RAGtime4and5: [@Stu-Sla-Tor:2007a:ASTRA:]. This idea was proposed so as to extend standard orbital (resonant) models meant to explain high-frequency QPOs observed in black-hole sources.
Recently, careful and detailed analysis of the spectral continuum from GRS 1915+105 has put a strong limit on the black-hole spin,[^1] namely $0.98 < a < 1$ [@McCli-etal:2006:ASTRJ2:], indicating the presence of near-extreme Kerr black hole whose mass has been restricted observationally to $M=(14.0\pm 4.4)\, M_{\odot}$, see [@McCli-Rem:2004:CompactX-Sources:; @Rem-McCli:2006:ARASTRA:]. Therefore, the microquasar GRS 1915+105 seems to be an appropriate candidate to test the extended resonant model with hump-induced oscillations.[^2]
The idea of hump-induced oscillations and their possible resonant coupling with the epicyclic ones is briefly discussed in Sect. \[s2\]. The related resonant model, assuming the excitation of epicyclic oscillations by the hump-induced oscillations through non-linear resonant phenomena, is applied to GRS 1915+105 in Sect. \[s3\], concluding remarks are presented in Sect. \[s4\].
Hump-induced and epicyclic oscillations in Keplerian discs and possible resonant coupling {#s2}
=========================================================================================
In order to describe the local processes in an accretion disc, it is necessary to choose a local observer (characterized by its reference frame). In general relativity there is no preferred observer. On the other hand, if we want to study processes related to the orbital motion of matter in the disc, it is reasonable to choose the observers with zero angular momentum, so-called ZAMOs, as their reference frames do not rotate with respect to the spacetime, and thus ZAMOs should reveal local kinematic properties of the disc in the clearest way. (In rotating–stationary, axisymetric–spacetimes, they are dragged along with the spacetime.) In the Kerr spacetime, ZAMOs are represented by locally non-rotating frames (LNRF); see @Bar-Pre-Teu:1972:ASTRJ2:. Notice that in the Schwarzschild spacetime, LNRF correspond to the static observer frames.
[@Asch:2004:ASTRA:] finds that for near-extreme Kerr black holes with the spin $a > 0.9953$, the test-particle orbital velocity ${\cal V}^{(\phi)}$ related to LNRF reveals a hump in the equatorial plane ($\theta=\pi/2$). This non-monotonicity is located in a small region inside the ergosphere of the black-hole spacetime close to, but above, the marginally stable orbit.[^3] Therefore, it can be relevant for thin accretion discs around near-extreme Kerr black holes, as the inner edge of the disc can extend down to the innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO).
Moreover, [@Stu-Sla-Tor-Abr:2005:PHYSR4:] shows that for $a>0.99979$ the similarly humpy behavior of the orbital velocity in LNRF also takes place for the non-geodesic motion of test perfect fluid in marginally stable barotropic tori characterized by the uniform distribution of the specific angular momentum, $\ell(r,\,\theta)\equiv -U_{\phi}/U_{t}=\mbox{const}$, where the motion of fluid elements is given by the 4-velocity field $U^{\mu}=(U^{t}(r,\,\theta),\,0,\,0,\,U^{\phi}(r,\,\theta))$. Outside the equatorial plane, the non-monotonic behavior of ${\cal V}^{(\phi)}$ in marginally stable tori is represented by the topology change of the cylindrical equivelocity surfaces in the region of the hump, because the toroidal equivelocity surfaces centered around the circle corresponding to the local minimum of ${\cal V}^{(\phi)}$ in the equatorial plane exist for $a>0.99979$ [@Stu-Sla-Tor-Abr:2005:PHYSR4:]. This suggests a generation of possible instabilities in radial and vertical directions; see @Stu-Sla-Tor:2004:RAGtime4and5:. In the following, we restrict our attention to the case of Keplerian discs.
Heuristic connection between the positive part of the velocity gradient, $\p{\cal V}^{(\phi)}/\p r$, and the excitation of epicyclic oscillations in Keplerian discs was suggested by @Asch:2004:ASTRA: [@Asch:2006:CHIJAA:], who defined the characteristic frequency of oscillations, induced by the humpy profile of ${\cal V}^{(\phi)}$, by the maximum positive slope of the orbital velocity in terms of the coordinate radius, $\nu_{\rm
crit}\equiv(\p{\cal V}^{(\phi)}/\p r)_{\rm max}$. This coordinate-dependent definition was corrected in @Stu-Sla-Tor:2007a:ASTRA:, where the proper radial distance $\d\tilde{r}=\sqrt{g_{rr}}\,\d r$ rather than the coordinate distance $\d r$ was used to define the characteristic (critical) frequency $\nu_{\rm crit}^{\tilde{r}}\equiv(\p{\cal V}^{(\phi)}/\p\tilde{r})_{\rm max}$. Such a locally defined critical frequency was further related to a stationary observer at infinity, obtaining the so-called “humpy frequency” \[e1\] \_[h]{} &=& \^\_[ crit]{}\
&=&\
&& , where $g_{\mu\nu}$ are the metric coefficients of the Kerr geometry and $\omega=-g_{t\phi}/g_{\phi\phi}$ is the angular velocity of the LNRF; see, e.g., @Bar-Pre-Teu:1972:ASTRJ2:; $\Delta_{\rm h} = r_{\rm h}^2-2r_{\rm
h}+a^2$. The analytic formula is given for the equatorial plane ($\theta=\pi/2$). The B-L radius $r_{\rm h}$ where the positive gradient of the velocity profile in terms of the proper radial distance reaches its maximum, so-called “humpy radius”, is given by the condition \[e2\] ( )=0 leading to the equation \[e4\]\
\
\
which must be solved numerically. The spin dependence of the humpy radius and the related humpy frequency is illustrated in Fig. \[f1\]. The humpy radius $r_{\rm h}$ falls monotonically with increasing spin $a$, while the humpy frequency $\nu_{\rm h}$ has a maximum for $a=0.9998$, where $\nu_{\rm h\,(max)}=607\,(M_{\sun}/M)$Hz, and it tends to $\nu_{{\rm
h}\,({a\,\rightarrow1})}=588\,(M_{\sun}/M)$Hz.
When particles following a Keplerian circular orbit are perturbed, they begin to follow, in the first approximation, an epicyclic motion around the equilibrium Keplerian orbit, generally characterized by the frequencies of the radial and vertical epicyclic oscillations $\nu_{\rm{r}}, \nu_{\rm{v}}$ [@Ali-Gal:1981:GENRG2:; @Now-Leh:1998:TheoryBlackHoleAccretionDisks:]: \[e5\] \^2\_[r]{} &=& \^2\_[K]{}(1-6r\^[-1]{} + 8ar\^[-3/2]{} - 3a\^2r\^[-2]{}),\
\[e6\] \^2\_[v]{} & & \^2\_ = \^2\_[K]{} (1- 4ar\^[-3/2]{} + 3a\^2r\^[-2]{}), where $\nu_{\rm K}$ is the Keplerian orbital frequency \[e7\] \_[K]{} = . The ratios of the humpy frequency and the epicyclic frequencies at the humpy radius were determined in @Stu-Sla-Tor:2007a:ASTRA: revealing almost spin-independent asymptotic behavior for $a\to 1$ represented closely by the ratios of integer numbers, $\nu_{\rm
v}:\nu_{\rm r}:\nu_{\rm h}\sim 11:3:2$, which imply a possibility of resonant phenomena between the hump-induced and epicyclic oscillations predicted by @Asch:2004:ASTRA:. The ratios of the epicyclic frequencies and the humpy frequency are given in the dependence on the black-hole spin in Fig. \[f2\].
Application of the hump-induced resonance model to high-frequency QPOs in GRS 1915+105 {#s3}
======================================================================================
Primarily concentrating on the lower pair of frequencies, we assume that the lowest frequency is directly the humpy frequency, \[e8\] \_[h]{}\_1 = (41 1), while the second lowest frequency corresponds directly to the radial epicyclic frequency at the same radius $r_{\rm h}$, \[e9\] \_[r]{}\_2 = (671) . These frequencies are close to a 3:2 ratio, therefore the forced non-linear resonance can be relevant in such a situation. The ratio of $\nu_{\rm r}/\nu_{\rm h} = (1.63\pm 0.06)$ gives the black hole spin $a=(0.9998 \pm 0.0001)$ (the uncertainty of the spin is implied by uncertainties of the lower pair of frequencies being $\sim 1$Hz); see Fig. \[f2\]. Notice that this spin corresponds to the maximal possible value of the humpy frequency $\nu_{\rm h\,(max)}$ (Fig. \[f1\]). Since the humpy frequency is $1/M$-scaled, the absolute value of $\nu_{\rm h}$ implies the black hole mass $M=(14.8\pm 0.4)\, M_{\sun}$. The corresponding humpy radius is $r_{\rm h}= 1.29\,^{+0.01}_{-0.02}$ (Fig. \[f1\]). At such a radius, the vertical epicyclic frequency of a particle orbiting the Kerr black hole with the mass and spin inferred above reaches the value $\nu_{\rm
v}=(0.23\pm 0.01)$kHz. Then the upper pair of observed frequencies can be explained, within the range of observational errors $\pm 5$Hz, by combinational frequencies at the humpy radius $r_{\rm h}$ in the following way: \_[3]{}\~(\_[r]{}+\_[h]{}) &=& (1082) \[e10\]\
\_[4]{}\~(\_[v]{}-\_[r]{}) &=& (0.170.01). \[e11\]
Conclusions {#s4}
===========
The idea of epicyclic oscillations induced by the LNRF-velocity hump in the region where the positive part of the velocity gradient reaches its maximum is able to address all four high-frequency QPOs observed in the X-ray source GRS 1915+105. The model implies a near-extreme spin of the central black hole ($a\sim
0.9998$), which agrees well with results from the spectral continuum fits, and the black-hole mass $M\sim 14.8\,M_{\sun}$ being well inside the interval given by other observational methods. Note that the orbital resonance model of Kluźniak & Abramowicz, assuming the parametric resonance between the vertical and radial epicyclic oscillations in frequency ratio 3:2 represented by the upper pair of observed frequencies, also gives the spin $a>0.99$ but for $M\simeq 18M_{\odot}$ [@Tor-Abr-Klu-Stu:2005:ASTRA:]. On the other hand, the “Relativistic Precession Model” gives a substantially lower value for the spin: $a\sim 0.3$ [@Ste-Vie-Mor:1999:ASTRJ2:].
In the presented model, we assume that all four observed frequencies arise due to forced non-linear oscillations of the Keplerian disc at the same radius $r_{\rm h}$, excited by the hump-induced oscillations characterized by the humpy frequency $\nu_{\rm h}$. The black-hole parameters $a,\,M$ are fixed by the requirement that the lower pair of observed frequencies is identified with the humpy frequency and the radial epicyclic frequency, $\nu_1 \equiv \nu_{\rm h}$, $\nu_2 \equiv \nu_{\rm r}$. Assuming non-linear resonant phenomena enabling the existence of combinational frequencies and the possibility of observing them, the upper pair of observed frequencies can be explained as the combinational ones of the humpy frequency and both epicyclic frequencies, $\nu_{3}\sim(\nu_{\rm r}+\nu_{\rm h})$, $\nu_{4}\sim(\nu_{\rm v}-\nu_{\rm r})$. Moreover, both frequency ratios $\nu_{\rm r}:\nu_{\rm h}$, and $(\nu_{\rm v}-\nu_{\rm r}):(\nu_{\rm r}+\nu_{\rm h})$ are close to 3:2 ratio (Fig. \[f2\]), in which the resonant phenomena can be strong enough. On the other hand, as $4\nu_{\rm h}=(164\pm 4)$Hz, which is also close to the uppermost frequency, there is another possibility of explaining $\nu_4$ through a sub-harmonic resonance forced by the humpy oscillations as well. Finally, note that @Str:2001:ASTRJ2: also reports another relatively weak QPO at frequency of $(56\pm 2)$Hz. If this is the case (which, according to our knowledge, has not been confirmed by other observations yet), it could be related to the second harmonic of the combinational frequency[^4] $(\nu_{\rm r}-\nu_{\rm h})=(26\pm 2)$Hz.
Generally, other harmonics and combinational frequencies may occur in a non-linear oscillating system corresponding to higher approximations, when the equation of motion describing the non-linear oscillations is solved by the method of successive approximations. The statement by @Lan-Lif:1976:Mechanics: that “As the degree of approximation increases, however, the strength of the resonances, and the widths of the frequency ranges in which they occur, decrease so rapidly that in practice only the resonances at frequencies[^5] $\nu\approx p\nu_{0}/q$ with small $p$ and $q$ can be observed” can explain why a QPO near the frequency 237 Hz, corresponding to the vertical epicyclic frequency $\nu_{\rm v}$ at the same radius $r_{\rm h}$ as the previously mentioned humpy and radial epicyclic frequencies $\nu_{\rm h},\,\nu_{\rm r}$, is not directly observed, despite the commensurability of these frequencies represented by the frequency ratios $\nu_{\rm v}:\nu_{\rm h}\sim 6:1$ and $\nu_{\rm v}:\nu_{\rm r}\sim 7:2$ (Fig. \[f2\]).
The authors are supported by the Czech grant MSM 4781305903.
[22]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}
Aliev, A. N. & Galtsov, D. V. 1981, Gen. Relativity Gravitation, 13, 899
Aschenbach, B. 2004, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 425, 1075
Aschenbach, B. 2006, Chines J. Astronom. Astrophys., 6, 221, special issue for Frascati Workshop 2005, `astro-ph/0603193`
Bardeen, J. M., Press, W. H., & Teukolsky, S. A. 1972, Astrophys. J., 178, 347
Belloni, T., Méndez, M., & Sánchez-Fernández, C. 2001, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 372, 551
Kluźniak, W. & Abramowicz, M. A. 2001, Acta Phys. Polon. B, 32, 3605
Landau, L. D. & Lifshitz, E. M. 1976, [C]{}ourse of [T]{}heoretical [P]{}hysics ([V]{}olume 1): [M]{}echanics (Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann), 3rd edition
McClintock, J. E. & Remillard, R. A. 2004, in [Compact Stellar X-Ray Sources]{}, ed. W. H. G. Lewin & M. van der Klis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), `astro-ph/0306213`
McClintock, J. E., Shafee, R., Narayan, R., [et al.]{} 2006, Astrophys. J., 652, 518, `astro-ph/0606076`
Middleton, M., Done, C., Gierliński, M., & Davis, S. W. 2006, Monthly Notices Roy. Astronom. Soc., 373, 1004, `astro-ph/0601540`
Morgan, E. H., Remillard, R. A., & Greiner, J. 1997, Astrophys. J., 482, 993
Nowak, M. A. & Lehr, D. E. 1998, in [T]{}heory of [B]{}lack [H]{}ole [A]{}ccretion [D]{}isks, ed. M. A. Abramowicz, G. Bj[ö]{}rnsson, & J. E. Pringle (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 233–253
Remillard, R. A. 2004, AIPC, 714, 13
Remillard, R. A. & McClintock, J. E. 2006, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 44, 49, `arXiv:astro-ph/0606352v1`
Stella, L. & Vietri, M. 1998, Astrophys. J., 492, L59, `astro-ph/9709085`
Stella, L. & Vietri, M. 1999, Phys. Rev. Lett., 82, 17, `astro-ph/9812124`
Stella, L., Vietri, M., & Morsink, S. M. 1999, Astrophys. J., 524, L63, `astro-ph/9907346`
Strohmayer, T. E. 2001, Astrophys. J., 554, L169
Stuchl[í]{}k, Z., Slan[ý]{}, P., & T[ö]{}r[ö]{}k, G. 2004, in Proceedings of RAGtime 4/5: Workshops on black holes and neutron stars, Opava, 14–16/13–15 Oct 2002/03, ed. S. Hled[í]{}k & Z. Stuchl[í]{}k (Opava: Silesian University in Opava)
Stuchl[í]{}k, Z., Slan[ý]{}, P., & T[ö]{}r[ö]{}k, G. 2007, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 463, 807, `astro-ph/0612439`
Stuchl[í]{}k, Z., Slan[ý]{}, P., T[ö]{}r[ö]{}k, G., & Abramowicz, M. A. 2005, Phys. Rev. D, 71, 024037, `gr-qc/0411091`
T[ö]{}r[ö]{}k, G., Abramowicz, M. A., Kluźniak, W., & Stuchl[í]{}k, Z. 2005, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 436, 1, [astro-ph/0401464]{}
[^1]: Units $c=G=M=1$ ($M$ is the total mass of the Kerr black hole) and the Boyer-Lindquist (B-L) coordinates $(t,\,r,\,\theta,\,\phi)$ are used hereafter.
[^2]: However, @Mid-etal:2006:MONNR: refer to a substantially lower, intermediate value of black-hole spin, $a\sim 0.7$, to which the model of hump-induced oscillations cannot be applied.
[^3]: We stress that the Aschenbach effect is frame-dependent, as it is related to LNRF, but recall the arguments for relevance of the LNRF point of view at the beginning of the section.
[^4]: Combinational frequency $(\nu_{\rm
r}-\nu_{\rm h})$ corresponds to the same order of nonlinearity as $(\nu_{\rm r}+\nu_{\rm h})$.\
*Note added in the manuscript:* After the paper was accepted we obtained an information that a weak QPO at frequency 27Hz is referenced in @Bel-Men-San:2001:ASTRA:.
[^5]: $p,\,q$ are integers.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The density irregularities and holes visible in many [*Chandra*]{} X-ray images of cluster and galactic cooling flows can be produced by symmetrically heated gas near the central galactic black hole. As the heated gas rises away from the galactic center, a relatively small number of large plumes and bubbles are formed in qualitative agreement with the observed features. The expanding centrally heated gas drives a shock into the surrounding gas, displacing it radially. Both computational and analytic results show that the ambient gas near the bubble is cooled by expansion, accounting for the cool rims commonly observed around X-ray holes in cooling flows.'
author:
- 'Fabrizio Brighenti$^{1,2}$ & William G. Mathews$^1$'
title: 'CREATION OF X-RAY HOLES WITH COOL RIMS IN COOLING FLOWS'
---
.2in
Introduction
============
High resolution X-ray images of “cooling flows” in elliptical galaxies taken with the [*Chandra*]{} observatory indicate that the central hot gas in these systems is not smoothly distributed, but is cavitated on scales comparable to the radio emission (M87: Böhringer et al. 1995; Fabian et al 2001; Wilson et al 2001; M84/NGC 4374: Finoguenov & Jones 2001: NGC 4636: Jones et al. 2001; Loewenstein et al. 2001; David et al. 2002; NGC 507: Forman et al. 2001; NGC 5044: Buote et al. 2002). In view of their short dynamical times, $10^7 - 10^8$ yrs, these disturbances, and by inference also the radio sources, must be highly transient. X-ray holes are also seen in galaxy clusters on scales of $\lta 50$ kpc, often approximately coincident with lobes of extended radio emission (e.g. Hydra A/3C295: McNamara et al. 2000; David et al. 2001; Allen et al 2001; Perseus/NGC 1275/3C84: Churazov et al. 2000; Böhringer et al. 1993; Fabian et al 2000; A2052: Blanton et al 2001; A4059: Heinz et al 2002). The Perseus cluster in particular contains a multitude of X-ray holes located at random azimuthal orientations. The X-ray holes are regions in which the gas is either heated or displaced by a non-thermal plasma of comparable energy density. In either case the low-density holes must be buoyant (e.g. Churazov et al. 2001).
One of the most remarkable features of these holes is that the X-ray gas around the rims is often [*colder*]{} than the average nearby ambient gas (e.g. Fabian et al. 2000, 2001; Fabian 2002). Low temperature rims have been held as evidence that the surrounding gas has not been (recently) strongly shocked, although shocks must accompany even a subsonic expansion of the hot gas. These low entropy rims cannot be understood as local gas that was shocked and subsequently lost entropy by radiation (Nulsen et al 2002; Soker, Blanton & Sarazin 2002), but may instead be low-entropy gas that has somehow been raised from the center of the flow as these authors suggest.
The random location of older, more distant bubbles in Perseus and the irregular X-ray images within the central few kpcs of elliptical galaxies. are apparently inconsistent with non-thermal jets having fixed orientations defined by the spin axis of massive black holes. Conversely, not every strong radio lobe corresponds to an X-ray hole, as in Perseus/NGC1275/3C84.
We show here that both the random orientation of X-ray holes and their cold rims can be understood if low entropy hot gas near the center of a cooling flow is heated by an active nucleus in the central elliptical galaxy.
Previous Studies of X-ray Holes
===============================
Several recent theoretical studies of X-ray bubbles have examined the consequences of introducing heated gas in some localized region away from the center of the cooling flow. The 2D hot buoyant bubbles by Churazov et al. (2001), for example, are accompanied by a column of colder (low entropy) gas that moves radially upward near the center of the bubble. These bubbles float upward in the cooling flow atmosphere and come to rest at some large radius where the ambient entropy is equal to that within the bubble. According to Churazov et al, rising bubbles capture cold gas and lift it to large distances from the center, although if this gas is not heated it would be expected to eventually fall back. Nevertheless, the heating required to form the bubbles reduces the global entropy gradient in the cooling flow. Quilis et al. (2001) studied the evolution of a nearly axisymmetric 3D bubble produced by heating gas at some finite radius. They noticed that the buoyant bubble is surrounded by a shell of slightly colder gas which they attributed to cooling expansion as the gas is pushed by the bubble toward regions of decreasing ambient pressure. In these studies gas is assumed to be heated at some off-center site, but the implication is that the ultimate source of energy is located in a central active black hole. Heating by jets that proceed directly from the AGN core can also create buoyant regions and upwelling of low entropy gas, but only along the jet axis (Reynolds, Heinz, & Begelman 2001; 2002). Reynolds et al. (2002) also note that “curiously, the \[observed\] cool gas seems to form a shell around the radio lobes and occupies precisely the location where we would expect shock/compressionally heated gas to reside”. Regardless of the heating geometry assumed, by jets or ad hoc off-center bubbles, the global, long-term rate that hot gas cools by radiative losses in cooling flows is unlikely to change without altering the gas density and temperature profiles in disagreement with observations. (Brighenti & Mathews 2002).
Producing Bubbles with Central Heating
======================================
We begin by constructing a simple cooling flow for a massive elliptical galaxy. The gravitational potential is a superposition of a de Vaucouleurs stellar mass profile of total mass $M_{*t} = 7.26 \times 10^{11}$ $M_{\odot}$ and a Navarro-Frenk-White dark halo with virial mass $M_{h,vir} = 4 \times 10^{13}$ $M_{\odot}$ and concentration $c = 10$, typical for the galaxy group environments in which massive E galaxies are thought to form. The initial cooling flow that we consider is generated entirely by mass loss from an old stellar population, $\alpha_* \rho_* = 4.7 \times 10^{-20}(t/t_n)^{-1.3}$ gm s$^{-1}$ where $\rho_*(r)$ is the stellar density and $t_n = 13$ Gyrs is the assumed age of the stars. Some heating is provided by Type Ia supernovae, exploding at a rate of $0.06 (t/t_n)^{-1}$ per 100 years per $10^{10}L_B$, each releasing $10^{51}$ ergs. Supernova heating at this level is consistent with the iron abundance observed in the hot gas but has a relatively minor influence on the overall energetics of the hot gas. The gas-dynamical equations that we solve are identical to those described in Brighenti & Mathews (2002). We use a 2D code modeled after ZEUS (Stone & Norman 1992) with 490 grid zones in both cylindrical coordinates. For $R,z < 50$ kpc the zones are uniform with size $125 \times 125$ pc. Outside this region the size increases geometrically toward the outer boundary at $260 \times 260$ kpc.
The quiescent cooling flow that results after slowly evolving for 13 Gyrs has a characteristic temperature of $\sim 1$ keV and a gas density profile $\rho \propto r^{-1.2}$ within about 10 kpc and slightly steeper beyond. We assume that gas within $r_h = 1$ kpc of the center is heated at a constant rate $L_h = 2.5 \times 10^{42}$ erg s$^{-1}$ for $t_h = 5 \times 10^7$ yrs. The heated gas reaches temperatures far in excess of 1 keV and has a sound crossing time much less than $t_h$, allowing an ultra-hot low-density region to develop near the galactic core. The hot gas pushes outward, driving a shock into the cooling flow gas beyond. The resulting evolution of the gas density and temperature are shown in Figure 1 at three times $t_1 = 40 \times 10^6$, $t_2 = 80 \times 10^6$, and $t_3 = 100 \times 10^6$ yrs. The Rayleigh-Taylor (RT) development of a few large plumes filled with heated gas produces irregular X-ray patterns that resemble [*Chandra*]{} images of NGC 5044 and other E galaxies. Small wavelength RT unstable features are not prominent even though they would be resolved by the numerical grid. The hot cavity expands gently and is already subsonic ($\lta 500$ km s$^{-1}$) at $t = 1$ Myr. By time $t_1$ the weakened precursor shock has moved out to $\sim 20$ kpc, moving almost sonically.
Low temperature, bright rims surrounding the hot plumes/bubbles are clearly visible in Figure 1. The peak density in the rims at $t_1$ is several times that of the initial unshocked gas at this radius. The minimum entropy $\log(T/n_e^{2/3})$ in the simulation at times $t =
0$, $t_1$, $t_2$ and $t_3$ are 7.15, 7.9, 8.1 and 8.0 respectively. Low entropy gas in the rims at $t \gta t_1$ was originally at $r \sim
r_h$ as verified with passively advected tracer particles. This gas cools by adiabatic expansion while rising in the hot gas atmosphere (see also Nulsen et al. 2002; Soker et al. 2002). The larger bubble at time $t_2$ is penetrated by a disorganized S-shaped column of slowly rising cold gas. The upper panel of Figure 2 shows the X-ray surface brightness of the central cooling flow at time $t_2$ when the plumes have separated into clearly visible buoyant X-ray bubbles.
It is important to stress that the physical size of the plumes that form is not determined by our computational resolution. Calculations repeated at higher spatial resolution (central grid size=50 pc) also produce a few plumes and (ultimately) bubbles of about the same size as those shown in Figures 1 and 2, which are similar to the X-ray patterns observed. An examination of the effective gravity in the gas rest frame indicates that the outer rims of the large bubbles are RT unstable. At time $t_3$ the gravitational freefall time across the bubble radius is $t_{ff} \approx 0.1 t_3$; coherent hot bubbles persist for times $\gg t_{ff}$, even at our highest computational resolution.
We performed similar calculations on more extended cooling flows in galaxy groups and clusters with very similar results. For example, the lower panel of Figure 2 illustrates the X-ray surface brightness at time $t = 120 \times 10^6$ years produced in a rich cluster cooling flow ($M_{vir} = 10^{15}$ $M_{\odot}$ and $T_{vir} \approx 6.9$ keV) with heating parameters: $L_h = 10^{45}$ ergs s$^{-1}$, $r_h = 2$ kpc and $t_h = 5 \times 10^7$ yrs. Very little gas cools by radiation losses during the brief duration of our calculations shown in Figures 1 and 2 so the flow is essentially adiabatic. This is expected since a defining attribute of cooling flows is that the dynamical time is much less than the radiative cooling time.
Similarity Solution
===================
Cold rims are a generic feature of flows forced to expand into a medium of increasing entropy. This can be illustrated with self-similar flows described by the variable $\eta = r^{-\lambda}t$ (Courant & Friedrichs 1948; Rogers, 1957; Parker, 1961; Chevalier & Imamura 1983). The adiabatic equations for spherical flow can be written in terms of $\eta$ provided $u = (r/t)U(\eta)$, $\rho = A_o r^{-\alpha} \Omega(\eta)$ and $P = A_o r^{2-\alpha} t^{-2} \Pi(\eta)$. The hot region of centrally heated gas can be represented by an expanding spherical piston at $\eta = \eta_2$ that drives an advancing shock at $\eta = \eta_1 < \eta_2$. The solutions $U(\eta)$, $\Omega(\eta)$ and $\Pi(\eta)$ can be found by inward integration from post-shock values $U_1$, $\Omega_1$ and $\Pi_1$ which are functions of $\lambda$, $\gamma = 5/3$ and the Mach number of the shock ${\cal M}$ (e.g. Rogers 1957). We consider the spherical flow that results for pistons uniformly expanding ($\lambda = 1$) into an isothermal, fully ionized medium ($T_o = 10^7$ K) with decreasing electron density $n_e = 0.0526 r^{-\alpha}$ cm$^{-3}$ where $\alpha = 1.2$ approximates the gas density observed in massive elliptical galaxies (e.g. Brighenti & Mathews 1997). Figure 3 illustrates the flow generated by three pistons driving shocks at $r_1 = 3$ kpc with ${\cal M} = 1.5$, 2 and 3. In each case the temperature drops sharply near the piston, [*to values even less than*]{} $T_o$, creating cold rims where the density rises accordingly. Post-shock gas that has just cooled back to $T_o$ in Figure 3, located at $\log(r/r_1) = -0.179$, -0.108, and -0.078 for ${\cal M} = 1.5$, 2 and 3 respectively, was originally located at $\log(r/r_1) = -0.347$, -0.476 and -0.957, much closer to the origin. At the piston where $U < 1 $ approaches unity, the gas temperature decreases as $\chi \equiv
\gamma \Pi / \Omega \propto (1 - U)^{p}$ where $p = 2 \alpha /3(5 - \alpha) = 0.21$ when $\lambda = 1$. The cold gas adjacent to the piston is a relic of low entropy gas initially near the center that was shocked then cooled by expansion; $d \log \rho / d \log t$ is negative throughout the flowing gas in the plotted solutions. Similarity flows with lower shock Mach numbers have flatter density profiles; for ${\cal M} = 1.5$ there is a shallow density minimum at $\log(r/r_1) = -0.047$, indicating weak post-shock RT instability. However, the constant piston velocity assumed in the similarity flows differs from the rapidly decelerating heated bubble in the computed galactic scale flow.
Final Remarks and Conclusions
=============================
If central heating is responsible for the frequently observed X-ray holes and surface brightness fluctuations in typical [*Chandra*]{} images, as we claim, then such AGN-black hole heating may be a nearly universal component of cooling flows. The physical origin and nature of this heating – e.g. shock waves, cosmic rays, etc. – has not yet been explored but these details are not essential to the formation of plumes and bubbles. While the production of X-ray irregularities is quite generally insensitive to the assumed heating parameters, we have noticed several trends when $L_h$, $r_h$ and $t_h$ are varied. Non-linear plumes mature faster when $r_h$ is reduced. If $r_h$ is too large, the cold rims are less pronounced. However, the possibility of learning about such heating details by comparing X-ray images with gasdynamical calculations is limited if the mean time between heating episodes is sufficiently short that the initial pre-heated gas is no longer perfectly quiescent as we have supposed here.
All well-observed cooling flows emit diffuse optical Balmer and forbidden lines visible in the brightest central regions. Enhanced H$\alpha$ + \[NII\] emission has been observed near the boundaries of X-ray bubbles (e.g. Blanton et al 2001; Trinchieri & Goudfrooij 2002). It is tempting to conclude that such gas has cooled from the hot phase in the cooler, denser gas around the rims of the plumes or bubbles. But direct cooling from the hot phase is not supported by our detailed hydrodynamic calculations which are essentially unchanged if radiative cooling losses are neglected. The radiative cooling time is greater than the total time of our simulations. The cooler gas at $T \sim 10^4$ K responsible for the observed optical line emission may simply be displaced by the plumes and bubbles along with the local hot gas. However, on longer timescales than we consider here, heating in the central regions stimulates cooling by thermal instabilities in more distant regions of the flow, so the time-averaged global cooling rate is essentially unchanged (Brighenti & Mathews 2002).
If intermittent AGN heating is reasonably frequent, the entire inner cooling flow will become convective and turbulent (Brighenti & Mathews 2002). Turbulent motions observed in the diffuse optical lines (e.g. Caon et al. 2000) are too energetic on large scales to be understood in terms of supernova explosions, but could result from central heating similar to that described here.
X-ray holes formed by central heating are randomly disposed around the center of the flow, as in the Perseus cluster. This is a particularly desirable feature since the X-ray bubbles need not be aligned with the accretion axis of the central black hole. Nevertheless, radio lobes often appear to be associated with X-ray holes. This connection may be causal, but in some cases the relativistic electrons may readily flow into pre-existing holes; this may be occurring in the central southwestern hole in Perseus (Fig. 1 of Fabian 2001).
Finally, the azimuthally averaged hot gas density profile in these centrally heated models is flattened by the holes, providing an excellent fit to observed X-ray surface brightness profiles which are too centrally peaked otherwise. To maintain this fit, AGN heating would need to reoccur every $\sim 10^8$ years. However, in the presence of central heating the gas temperature profile is less satisfactory, lacking the deep central minimum usually observed.
We conclude that central heating in cooling flows naturally results in a relatively small number of randomly located X-ray bubbles similar to the irregularities observed. In addition, these expanding plumes and bubbles are surrounded by considerably cooler gas, also consistent with recent [*Chandra*]{} observations. Gas in the cold rims was shock-heated but subsequently cooled by expansion.
.4in Studies of the evolution of hot gas in elliptical galaxies at UC Santa Cruz are supported by NASA grant NAG 5-8049 and NSF grants AST-9802994 and AST-0098351 for which we are very grateful. FB is supported in part by grants MURST-Cofin 00 and ASI-ARS99-74.
Blanton, E. L., Sarazin, C. L., McNamara, B. R. & Wise, M. W. 2001, ApJ 558, L15 Böhringer, H. et al. 1993, MNRAS, 264, L25 Brighenti, F. & Mathews, W. G. 2002, ApJ (in press) (astro-ph/0203409) Brighenti, F. & Mathews, W. G. 1997, ApJ 486, L83 Buote, D. A. et al. 2002, ApJ (in press) (astro-ph/0000000) Caon, N., Macchetto, D. & Pastoriza, M. 2000, ApJ 553, L125 Chevalier, R. A. & Imamura, J. N. 1983, ApJ 270, 554 Churazov, E. et al. 2000, A&A, 356, 788 Churazov, E. et al. 2001, ApJ, 554, 261 Courant, R. & Friedrichs, K. O. 1948, Supersonic Flow and Shock Waves (Interscience:London), ch. VIC David, L. P. et al. 2000, ApJ, 557, 546 David, L., Warmflash, A., Murray, S., & Nulsen, P. E. J. 2002 (ApJ in press?) (astro-ph/0108114) Fabian, A. C., Sanders, J. S., Ettori, S., Taylor, G. B., Allen, S. W., Crawford, C. S., Iwasawa, K., Johnstone, R. M. & Ogle, P. M. 2000, MNRAS, 318, L65 Fabian, A. C. 2002, (astro-ph/0201386) Fabian, A. C. et al. 2000, MNRAS, 318, L65 Fabian, A. C., Sanders, J. S., Ettori, S., Taylor, G. B., Allen, S. W., Crawford, C. S., Iwasaawa, K. & Johnstone R. M. 2001, MNRAS, 321, L33 Fabian, A. C., Mushotzky, R. F., Nulsen, P. E. J. & Peterson, J. R. 2001, 321, L20 Finoguenov, A. & Jones, C. 2001, ApJ, 547, L107 Forman, W., et al. 2001, in Lighthouses of the Universe Conference, August 2001 (astro-ph/0111526) Heinz, S., Choi, Y-Y, Reynolds, C.S., Begelman, M.C., 2002, ApJ, 569, L79 Jones, C. et al. 2001, ApJL (in press) (astro-ph/0108114) Loewenstein, M., Mushotsky, R. F., Angelini, L., Arnaud, K. A. & Quataert, E. 2000, ApJ 555, L21 McNamara, B. 2000, ApJ, 534, L135 Nulsen, P. E. J., David, L. P., McNamara, B. R., Jones, C., Forman, W. R. & Wise, M. 2002, ApJ 568, 163 Parker, E. N. 1961, ApJ 133, 1014 Quilis, V., Bower, R. G. & Balogh, M. L. 2001, MNRAS, 328, 1091 Reynolds, C. S., Heinz, S. & Begelman, M. C. 2001, ApJ, 549, L179 Reynolds, C. S., Heinz, S. & Begelman, M. C. 2002, MNRAS, 332, 271 Rogers, M. H. 1957, ApJ 125, 478 Soker, N., Blanton, E. L. & Sarazin C. L. 2002, ApJ (submitted) (astro-ph/0201325) Stone, J. M. & Norman, M. L. 1992, ApJS 80, 753 Trinchieri, G. & Goudfrooij, P. 2002, A&A (in press) (astro-ph/0202416)
.1in
.1in
.1in
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Every year, 3 million newborns die within the first month of life. Birth asphyxia and other breathing-related conditions are a leading cause of mortality during the neonatal phase. Current diagnostic methods are too sophisticated in terms of equipment, required expertise, and general logistics. Consequently, early detection of asphyxia in newborns is very difficult in many parts of the world, especially in resource-poor settings. We are developing a machine learning system, dubbed Ubenwa, which enables diagnosis of asphyxia through automated analysis of the infant cry. Deployed via smartphone and wearable technology, Ubenwa will drastically reduce the time, cost and skill required to make accurate and potentially life-saving diagnoses.'
author:
- |
Charles C. Onu$^{1,2}$, Innocent Udeogu$^{2}$, Eyenimi Ndiomu$^{2}$, Urbain Kengni$^{2}$, Doina Precup$^{1}$,\
Guilherme M. Sant’anna$^{3}$, Edward Alikor$^{4}$ and Peace Opara$^{4}$ [^1]
title: 'Ubenwa: Cry-based Diagnosis of Birth Asphyxia'
---
Problem Statement
=================
In 2016, nearly 3 million babies died within 28 days of coming into the world - the neonatal period \[1\]. Birth Asphyxia has been identified by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and other public health organisations \[1,2,3\] as one of the top 3 causes of newborn mortality globally. It also results to severe, life-long disabilities (such as cerebral palsy, deafness, and intellectual difficulty) in over 1 million infants, annually \[4\].
More than half of under-5 child deaths are due to diseases that are preventable and treatable through simple, affordable interventions \[1\] (example in Fig \[fig:manualresus\]). Unfortunately, the opportunity for early detection is limited in many resource-poor settings due to the logistics and cost of existing diagnostic system. Consequently, breathing conditions like asphyxia are generally detected only when the visual symptoms (such as pale/bluish limbs) have emerged, at which point severe neurological damage may have already occurred.
Confirmatory clinical diagnosis of asphyxia involves analysis of an arterial blood sample of the infant to measure blood gases, pH, oxygen saturation and electrolytes, using a blood gas analyser \[5\]. This information combined with the APGAR score - a standard physical assessment of the newborns based on 5 parameters - gives conclusive evaluation of the presence and/or severity of asphyxia. Whereas blood gas analysis is a routine procedure for newborns in developed countries, in many developing regions of the world it is not. Thus, a high proportion of morbidity and mortality resulting from birth asphyxia occurs in low and middle income countries \[1\].
There is need for diagnostic methods for birth asphyxia which lend themselves to early detection. Additionally, if such method is cheap, and easy to use, community health workers, midwives, nurses and even parents can use it to make life-saving diagnosis of asphyxia possible in nearly every corner of the world.
![Example of immediate manual resuscitation recommended for a severely asphyxiating infant[]{data-label="fig:manualresus"}](figs/infant_rescusitation.png){width=".35\textwidth"}
Approach
========
Previous studies have hypothesised that breathing difficulty resulting from asphyxia alters the patterns in the cry waves of affected infants, largely attributed to the fact that speech and breathing are controlled by the same underlying physiologic process \[6,7\]. Utilising the infant cry to diagnose asphyxia presents a unique opportunity for the development of a more accessible diagnostic tool.
In this work, we demonstrated via a retrospective study that the infant cry provides rich source of information about the physiological state of a newborn. We further developed a prototype mobile app which could be used in resource-poor settings to reliably detect birth asphyxia.
{width="100.00000%"}
Mel Frequency Cepstral Coefficients (MFCC) with Support Vector Machines (SVM)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
We leveraged techniques from automatic speech recognition \[8\]. We combined features extracted as coefficients of the mel frequency spectrum with a support vector machine classifier. MFCCs are widely used in automatic speech recognition problems as they provide a representation of audio signals that closely mimic the human auditory system \[10\]. SVMs are powerful classifiers that can learn complex, non-linear decision boundaries. Compared to other non-linear classifiers like neural networks, SVMs are designed to work effectively with limited examples and high-dimensional data \[11\], as is the case in our problem.
Fig. \[fig:blockdiag\] provides a overview of our diagnostic system. Samples are first broken down into time segments. Each segment undergoes pre-processing (e.g., removing leading and trailing blanks) and feature extraction (as MFCC). The MFCCs are fed as input to the SVM classifier. A sample is classified as normal or *asphyxia*, if the majority of its segments were classified as such.
Results {#section:results}
=======
We obtained the Baby Chillanto Database courtesy of the National Institute of Astrophysics and Optical Electronics, CONACYT, Mexico \[7\]. The database contains cries of 69 normal, asphyxiating and deaf infants (deafness is one of the most common disabilities resulting from asphyxia). Of interest to our work were the cry samples of normal and asphyxiating newborns. These were further synthesised into 1389 samples.
80% of the data was used to train and validate the algorithms while 20% was kept aside as a test set. Results on this test set showed sensitivity (accuracy in detecting asphyxiating infants) and specificity (accuracy in detecting normal infants) of 85% and 89%, respectively \[11\].
Prototype
---------
We acknowledge that machine learning is only a part of the solution. For deployment, we built a mobile application into which we have incorporated our current model. We have dubbed it [*Ubenwa*]{} which means “cry of a baby” in Igbo language of Nigeria. Ubenwa has allowed us to think deeply about our ultimate objective of deploying more accessible diagnostic tool. It has also given us opportunity to receive feedback from clinicians and other caregivers. Screenshots of the Ubenwa are shown in Fig. \[fig:ubenwademo\].
{width=".7\textwidth"}
The use of the infant cry as input for diagnosis of asphyxia presents significant economic, social and clinical benefits. Concretely, compared to the current method using a blood gas analyser, Ubenwa is:
1. non-invasive (requiring only cry rather than blood),
2. low-cost (only as expensive as the cost of a phone),
3. requires little or no skill to operate, and
4. delivers results much quicker (under 20 seconds).
Using Ubenwa, birth attendants, parents and other care-givers can quickly detect asphyxia in newborns, and promptly refer them for potentially life-saving treatment.
MFCC/SVM vs Deep learning
-------------------------
Until the recent surge in deep learning methodologies, the combination of MFCC and SVMs gave some of the best performances on for speech recognition tasks \[12\]. Today, recurrent neural network (RNN)-based models such as long short-term memory (LSTM) networks have led to tremendous gains on many speech and language problems \[13 - 15\]. We applied MFCC/SVM in our pilot work as it provided 2 critical advantages over a deep learning approach including feasibility of training under small number of examples and portability of model within a mobile application. As we acquire more data, and seeing that frameworks for deployment of deep models to mobile platforms are beginning to mature\[16\], we will develop deep neural networks which could potentially raise performance on this task of asphyxia detection to levels of clinical utility.
Next Steps {#section:nextsteps}
==========
Our immediate focus is to carry out data collection over a one year period (starting January 2018) at 2 selected sites in Canada and Nigeria. It is necessary to obtain more cry samples (especially of the pathological case) in order to train our algorithm to do better at correctly classifying new subjects.
Data acquisition and product validation plans
---------------------------------------------
The data acquisition will serve as an opportunity to validate our current system in a real world scenario. In particular, we plan to carry out data acquisition at 2 hospitals: University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital (UPTH), Port Harcourt, Nigeria and McGill University Health Centre (MUHC), Montreal, Canada. We have applied for and obtained approval from the institution ethics board at UPTH. We are currently working on the same at the MUHC.
Optimisations
-------------
We will continue to work on several lines of optimisations for our algorithm, namely: training for robustness to noise in the environment, finding the shortest possible record length for which we can make accurate diagnosis, optimising (math) operations to ensure that algorithm requires minimal memory and computation on mobile devices, and others.
References {#references .unnumbered}
==========
\[1\] World Health Organisation, “Children: Reducing mortality,” Fact Sheet, http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs178/en/, 2016.
\[2\] United Nations, “We can end poverty: Millenium development goals and beyond 2015,” 2013.
\[3\] J. Lawn and K. Kerber, “Opportunities for africas newborns: practical data policy and programmatic support for newborn care in africa.” 2006.
\[4\] World Health Organization, “The world health report,” 2005.
\[5\] J. Low, “Intrapartum fetal asphyxia: Definition, diagnosis, and classification,” vol. 176, pp. 957–9, 06 1997.
\[6\] K. Michelsson, P. Sirvi, and O. Wasz-Hckert, “Pain cry in full-term asphyxiated newborn infants correlated with late findings,” vol. 66, pp. 611–6, 10 1977.
\[7\] O. F. Reyes-Galaviz and C. A. Reyes-Garcia, “A system for the processing of infant cry to recognize pathologies in recently born babies with neural networks,” in 9th Conference Speech and Computer, 2004.
\[8\] A. Waibel and K.-F. Lee, Readings in speech recognition. Morgan Kaufmann, 1990.
\[9\] M. R. Hasan, M. Jamil, M. G. Rabbani, and M. S. Rahman, “Speaker identification using mel frequency cepstral coefficients,” variations, vol. 1, no. 4, 2004.
\[10\] C. Cortes and V. Vapnik, “Support-vector networks,” Machine learning, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 273–297, 1995.
\[11\] C. C. Onu, “Harnessing infant cry for swift, cost-effective diagnosis of perinatal asphyxia in low-resource settings,” in Humanitarian Technology Conference-(IHTC), 2014 IEEE Canada International. IEEE, 2014, pp. 1–4.
\[12\] B. Panda, D. Padhi, K. Dash, “Use of SVM Classifier & MFCC in Speech Emotion Recognition System”, IJARCSSE, vol. 2, no. 3, March 2012.
\[13\] Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, and G. Hinton, “Deep learning,” Nature, vol. 521, no. 7553, pp. 436–444, 2015.
\[14\] I. Sutskever, O. Vinyals, and Q. V. Le, “Sequence to Sequence Learning with Neural Networks,” Sept.2014.
\[15\] A. Graves, A. Mohamed, and G. Hinton, “Speech recognition with deep recurrent neural networks,” in 2013 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, 2013, pp. 6645–6649.
\[16\] M. Abadi, P. Barham, J. Chen, Z. Chen, A. Davis, J. Dean, M. Devin, S. Ghemawat, G. Irving, M. Isard, M. Kudlur, J. Levenberg, R. Monga, S. Moore, D. G. Murray, B. Steiner, P. A. Tucker, V. Vasudevan, P. Warden, M. Wicke, Y. Yu, and X. Zhang, “Tensorflow: A system for large-scale machine learning,” CoRR, vol. abs/1605.08695, 2016. \[Online\]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.08695
[^1]: $^{1}$ C. C. Onu and D. Precup are with the School of Computer Science, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. (e-mail: [[email protected]]{}). $^{2}$ C. C. Onu, I. Udeogu, E. Ndiomu and U. Kengni are with Ubenwa Intelligence Solutions Inc. $^{3}$ G. M. Sant’anna is with the Division of Neonatology, McGill University Health Centre. $^{4}$ E. Alikor and P. Opara are with the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital (UPTH), Nigeria
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- |
Ashish Malik\
Independent Researcher\
`ashishmalik7017[at]gmail.com`\
title: 'Zero-shot generalization using cascaded system-representations'
---
Introduction
============
Related Works {#relatedWorks}
=============
Casnet
======
Planer Manipulation {#planerManipulation}
===================
Legged locomotion {#leggedLocomotion}
=================
Discussion
==========
Conclusion
==========
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We describe short–time kinetic and steady–state properties of the non–equilibrium phases, namely, solid, liquid and gas anisotropic phases in a driven Lennard–Jones fluid. This is a computationally–convenient two-dimensional model which exhibits a net current and striped structures at low temperature, thus resembling many situations in nature. We here focus on both critical behavior and details of the nucleation process. In spite of the anisotropy of the late–time spinodal decomposition process, earlier nucleation seems to proceed by *Smoluchowski coagulation* and *Ostwald ripening*, which are known to account for nucleation in equilibrium, isotropic lattice systems and actual fluids. On the other hand, a detailed analysis of the system critical behavior rises some intriguing questions on the role of symmetries; this concerns the computer and field–theoretical modeling of non-equilibrium fluids.'
author:
- 'J. Marro, P.L. Garrido, and M. D[í]{}ez–Minguito'
title: 'Non–equilibrium Anisotropic Phases, Nucleation and Critical Behavior in a Driven Lennard–Jones Fluid'
---
\[SecI\]Introduction
====================
Steady states in non–equilibrium many–particle systems typically involve a constant flux of matter, charge, or some other quantity and, consequently, stripes or other spatial anisotropies show up at appropriate scales [haken,garr,cross,Marro]{}. This occurs during segregation in driven sheared systems [@exp; @beysens2; @follow], flowing fluids [@rheology2], shaken granular matter [@reis; @sanchez], and non–equilibrium liquid–liquid binary mixtures [@liqliq], and it has been reproduced in computer simulations of driven colloidal [@loewen3] and fluid [@Marro; @hurtado] systems, for instance. Further examples are the anisotropies observed in both high–temperature superconductors [@cuprates0; @cuprates1] and electron gases [@2deg1; @mosfet]. The ripples shaped by the wind in sand deserts [@dunes; @dunes2] and the lanes and trails formed by living organisms and vehicle traffic [@helbing; @lanes] also share some of the essential physics.
Lacking theory for the thermodynamicinstabilities causing the observed striped structures, one tries to link them to the microscopic dynamics of suitable model systems. For two decades, the *driven lattice gas* (DLG) [@KLS], namely, a computationally–convenient model system in which particles diffuse under an external driving field, has been a theoretical prototype of anisotropic behavior [@Marro; @Zia; @odor]. This model was recently shown to be unrealistic in some essential sense, however [@manolo0]. Particle moves in the DLG are along the principal lattice directions, and any site can hold one particle at most, so that a particle impedes the one behind to jump freely along the direction which is favored to model the action of the field. Consequently, the lattice geometry acts more efficiently in the DLG as an ordering agent than the field itself, which occurs rarely —never so dramatically— in actual cooperative transport. In fact, actual situations may in principle be more closely modeled by means of continuum models, and this peculiarity of the DLG implies that it lacks a natural off-lattice extension [@manolo0].
Here we present, and analyze numerically a novel non–equilibrium off-lattice, Lennard–Jones (LJ) system which is a candidate to portray some of the anisotropic behavior in nature. The model, which involves a driving field of intensity $E,$ reduces to the celebrated (equilibrium) LJ *fluid* [@smit; @Allen] as $E\rightarrow 0.$ For any $E>0,$ however, it exhibits currents and anisotropic phases as in many observations out of equilibrium. In particular, as the DLG, our model in two dimensions shows striped steady states below a critical point. We also observe critical behavior consistent with the equilibrium universality class. This is rather unexpected in view of the criticality reported both for the DLG and in a related experiment [@exp]. On the other hand, concerning the early–time relaxation before well–defined stripes form by spinodal decomposition, we first observe —as in previous studies of relaxation towards equilibrium— effective diffusion of small droplets, which is followed by monatomic diffusion probably competing with more complex processes. It is very likely that our observations here concerning nucleation, coexistence, criticality, and phases morphology hold also in a number of actual systems.
The paper is organized as follows. In section II we define the model, and section III is devoted to the main results as follows. § III.A describes the early–time segregation process as monitored by the excess energy, which measures the droplets surface. § III.B describes some structural properties of the steady state, namely, the radial and azimuthal distribution functions, and the degree of anisotropy. § III.C, which depicts some transport properties, is devoted to an accurate estimate of the liquid–vapor coexistence curve and the associated critical indexes. Section IV contains a brief conclusion.
The model
=========
Consider $N$ particles of equal mass (set henceforth to unity) in a $d-$dimensional box, $L^{d},$ with periodic boundary conditions. Interactions are via the truncated and shifted pair potential [@Allen]: $$\phi (r)=\left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
\phi _{LJ}(r)-\phi _{LJ}(r_{c}) & \text{if }r<r_{c}\ \\
0 & \text{if }r\geqslant r_{c},%
\end{array}%
\right.$$where $$\phi _{LJ}(r)=4\epsilon \left[ (\sigma /r)^{12}-(\sigma /r)^{6}\right]$$is the LJ potential, $r$ stands for the interparticle distance, and $r_{c}$ is a *cut-off* that we set $r_{c}=2.5\sigma $. The parameters $\sigma
$ and $\epsilon $ are, respectively, the characteristic length and energy —that we use in the following to reduce units as usual.
![\[figure1\] Schematic representation of the region (grey) which is accesible to a given particle as a consequence of a trial move for $E=0$ (left) and $E=\infty $ (right), assuming the infinite field points $\hat{x},$ horizontally.](Marro_PRB_fig1.ps){width="6cm"}
Time evolution is by microscopic dynamics according to the transition probability per unit time (*rate*):$$\omega ^{\left( E\right) }\left( \mathbf{\eta }\rightarrow \mathbf{\eta }%
_{i}\right) =\chi ^{(E)}\times \min \left\{ 1,e^{-\Delta \Phi
_{i}/T}\right\} . \label{rate}$$Here, $$\chi ^{(E)}=\frac{1}{2}\left[ 1+\tanh \left( E\hat{x}\cdot \vec{\delta}%
_{i}\right) \right] , \label{bias}$$$E$ is the intensity of a uniform external field along a principal lattice direction, say $\hat{x},$ $\mathbf{\eta }\equiv \left\{ \vec{r}_{1},\ldots ,%
\vec{r}_{N}\right\} $ stands for any configuration of energy $$\Phi (\mathbf{\eta })=\sum_{i<j}\phi \left( \left\vert \vec{r}_{i}-\vec{r}%
_{j}\right\vert \right) ,$$ where $\vec{r}_{i}$ is the position of particle $i$ that can be anywhere in the $d-$torus, $\mathbf{\eta }_{i}$ equals $\mathbf{\eta }$ except for the displacement of a single particle by $\vec{\delta}_{i}=\vec{r}_{i}^{\prime }-%
\vec{r}_{i},$ and $\Delta \Phi _{i}\equiv \Phi (\mathbf{\eta }_{i})-\Phi (%
\mathbf{\eta })$ is the cost of such displacement.
It is to be remarked that $\chi ^{(E)},$ as defined in (\[bias\]), contains a drive bias (see Fig. \[figure1\]) such that the rate (\[rate\]) lacks invariance under the elementary transitions $\mathbf{\eta
\leftrightarrows \eta }_{i}.$ Consequently, unlike in equilibrium, there is no detailed balance for toroidal boundary conditions if $E>0.$
We report here on the results from a series of Monte Carlo (MC) simulations using a neighbor–list algorithm [@Allen]. Simulations concern fixed values of $N,$ with $N\leq 10^{4},$ particle density $\rho =N/L^{d}$ within the range $\rho \in \left[ 0.2,0.6\right] ,$ and temperature $T\in \left[
10^{-2},10^{5}\right] .$ Following the fact that most studies of striped structures, e.g., many of the ones mentioned in the first paragraph of section \[SecI\], concern two dimensions —in particular, the DLG critical behavior is only known with some confidence for $d=2$ [Marro,beta4,beta5]{}— we restricted ourselves to a two dimensional torus. The maximum particle displacement is $\delta _{\text{max}}=0.5$ in our simulations. We report below on steady–state averages over 10$^{6}$ configurations, and kinetic or time averages over 40 or more independent runs.
![\[figure2\] Typical steady–state configurations for $E=0$ (top row) and $E\rightarrow \infty $ (bottom row) at $T=$ 0.10, 0.15, 0.30 and 0.35, respectively, from left to right. This is for $N=1000$ and $\protect\rho =0.30.$](Marro_PRB_fig2.ps){width="7.2cm"}
The distribution of displacements $\vec{\delta}_{i}$ is uniform, except that the new particle position $\vec{r}_{i}^{\prime }$ is (most often in our simulations) sampled only from within the half–forward semi–circle of radius $\delta _{\text{max}}$ centered at $\vec{r}_{i},$ as illustrated in the right graph of Fig. \[figure1\]. This is because the *infinite–field* limit, $E\rightarrow \infty ,$ turns out to be most relevant, and this means, in practice, that any displacement contrary to the field is forbidden. This choice eliminates from the analysis one parameter and, more importantly, it happens to match a physically relevant case. As a matter of fact, simulations reveal that any external field $E>0$ induces a flux of particles along $\hat{x}$ —which crosses the system with toroidal boundary conditions— that monotonically increases with $E$, and eventually saturates to a maximum. This is a realistic stationary condition in which the thermal bath absorbs the excess of energy dissipated by the drive.
![\[figure3\] Typical configurations for $E=0$ (top row) and $E\rightarrow \infty $ (bottom row) as time proceeds during relaxation from a disordered state (as for $T\rightarrow \infty )$ at $t=0$. The graphs are, respectively from left to right, for times $t=$ 10$^{2},$ 10$%
^{4},$ 10$^{5},$ and 10$^{6}$ MC steps. This is for $N=7500$, $\protect\rho %
=0.35,$ and $T=0.275,$ below the corresponding transition temperature.](Marro_PRB_fig3.ps){width="7.2cm"}
Main results
============
Fig. \[figure2\] illustrates late–time configurations, i.e., the ones that typically characterize the steady state, as the temperature $T$ is varied. These graphs already suggest that the system undergoes an order–disorder phase transition at some temperature $T_{E}.$ This happens to be of second order for any $E>0,$ as in the equilibrium case $E=0.$ We also observe that $T_{E}$ decreases monotonically with increasing $E,$ and that it reaches a well–defined minimum, $T_{\infty },$ as $E\rightarrow
\infty .$
Fig. \[figure2\] also shows that, at low enough temperature, an anisotropic interface forms between the condensed phase and its vapor; this extends along $\hat{x}$ throughout the system at intermediate densities.
Phase segregation kinetics
--------------------------
Skipping microscopic details, the kinetics of phase segregation at late times looks qualitatively similar to the one in other non–equilibrium cases, including driven lattice systems [@hurtado] and both molecular–dynamic [@zeng] and Cahn–Hilliard [@ludo] representations of sheared fluids, while it essentially differs from the one in the corresponding equilibrium system. This is illustrated in Fig. \[figure3\]. One observes, in particular, condensation of many stripes —as in the graph for $t=10^{5}$ in Fig. \[figure3\]— into a single one —as in the first three graphs at the bottom row in Fig. \[figure2\]. This process corresponds to an anisotropic version of the so–called *spinodal decomposition* [@spinod], which is mainly characterized by a tendency towards minimizing the interface surface as well as by the existence of a unique relevant length, e.g., the stripe width [@hurtado]. A detailed analysis of this late regime, which has already been studied for both equilibrium [marro2,bray]{} and non–equilibrium cases, including the DLG [hurtado,levine]{}, will be the subject of a separate report.
![\[figure4\] Time evolution of the enthalpy per particle for $N=7500,$ $\protect\rho =0.35$ and, from top to bottom, $%
T=0.200,$ 0.225, 0.250 and 0.275. Straight lines are a guide to the eye; the slope of each line is indicated. The inset shows the detail at early times. (For clarity of presentation, the main graph includes a rescaling of the time corresponding to the data for $T=0.250,$ 0.225 and 0.200 by factors 2, 3 and 3, respectively.)](Marro_PRB_fig4.ps){width="7.2cm"}
Detailed descriptions of early non–equilibrium nucleation are rare as compared to studies of the segregation process near completion. Following an instantaneous quench from a disordered state into $T<T_{\infty }\left( \rho
\right) ,$ one observes in our case that small clusters form, and then some grow at the expenses of the smaller ones but rather independently of the growth of other clusters of comparable size. This corresponds to times $%
t<10^{5}$ in Fig. \[figure3\], i.e., before many well–defined stripes form. We monitored in this regime the excess energy or enthalpy, $H\left(
t\right) ,$ measured as the difference between the averaged internal energy at time $t>0$ and its stationary value. This reflects more accurately the growth of the condensed droplets than its size or radius, which are difficult to be estimated during the early stages [@toral; @chinos]. Furthermore, $H\left( t\right) $ may be determined in microcalorimetric experiments [@marro3].
The time development of the enthalpy density $h\left( t\right) =H\left(
t\right) /N$ is depicted in Fig. \[figure4\]. This reveals some well–defined regimes at early times.
The first regime, (a) in the inset of Fig. \[figure4\], follows a power law $t^{-\theta }$ with $\theta \approx 0.165$ —which corresponds to the line shown in the graph— independently of the temperature investigated. This is the behavior predicted by the *Smoluchowski coagulation* or effective cluster diffusion [@binder2]. The same behavior was observed in computer simulations for $E=0$ and also reported to hold in actual experiments on binary mixtures [@toral; @marro3]. This suggests the early dominance of a rather stochastic mechanism, in which the small clusters rapidly nucleate, which is practically independent of the field, i.e., it is not affected in practice by the drive. The indication of some temperature dependence in equilibrium [@chinos], which is not evident here, might correspond to the distinction between *deep* and *shallow quenches* made in Ref. [@toral] that we have not investigated out of equilibrium.
At latter times, there is a second regime, (b) in Fig. \[figure4\], in which the anisotropic clusters merge into filaments and, finally, stripes. We observe in this regime that $\theta $ varies between 0.3 and 0.6 with increasing $T$. *Ostwald ripening* [@lifshitz], consisting of monomers diffusion, predicts $\theta =1/3.$ It is likely that regime (b) describes a crossover from a situation which is dominated by monomers at low enough temperature to the emergence of other mechanisms [@bray; @baum] which might be competing as $T$ is increased.
Finally, one observes a regime, (c) in Fig. \[figure4\], which corresponds to the beginning of spinodal decomposition.
![\[figure5\] Details of the structure in the low$-T,$ solid phase as obtained by zooming in into configurations such as the ones in Fig. \[figure2\]. This is for $%
T=0.05,$ $0.12$ and 0.25, from left to right, respectively.](Marro_PRB_fig5.ps){width="7.2cm"}
Structure of the steady state
-----------------------------
For any $E>0,$ the anisotropic condensate changes from a solid–like hexagonal packing of particles at low temperature (e.g., $T=0.10$ in Fig. [figure2]{}), to a polycrystalline or perhaps glass–like structure with domains which show a varied morphology at (e.g.) $T=0.12.$ The latter phase further transforms, with increasing temperature, into a fluid–like structure at (e.g.) $T=0.30$ and, finally, into a disordered, gaseous state.
More specifically, the typical situation we observe at low temperature is illustrated in Fig. \[figure5\]. At sufficiently low temperature, $%
T=0.05$ in the example, the whole condensed phase orders according to a perfect hexagon with one of its main directions along the field direction $%
\hat{x}.$ This is observed in approximately 90% of the configurations that we generated at $T=0.05,$ while all the hexagon axis are slanted with respect to $\hat{x}$ in the other 10% cases. As the system is heated up, the stripe looks still solid at $T=0.12$ but, as illustrated by the second graph in Fig. \[figure5\], one observes in this case several coexisting hexagonal domains with different orientations. The separation between domains is by line defects and/or vacancies. Interesting enough, as it will be shown later on, both the system energy and the particle current are practically independent of temperature up to, say $T=0.12.$ The hexagonal ordering finally disappears in the third graph of Fig. \[figure5\], which is for $T=0.25;$ this case corresponds to a fluid phase according to the criterion below.
![\[figure6\] Data from simulations for $%
N=7000$ and $\protect\rho =0.35$. The main graph shows the degree of anisotropy, as defined in the main text, versus temperature. The vertical dotted line denotes the transition temperature. The lower (upper) inset shows the radial (azimuthal) distribution at $T=0.20,$ full line, and $T=0.30,$ dashed line.](Marro_PRB_fig6.ps){width="7.2cm"}
A close look to the structure is provided by the radial distribution (RD),$$g\left( r\right) =\rho ^{-2}\left\langle \sum_{i<j}\delta \left( \mathbf{r}%
_{i}-\mathbf{r}_{j}\right) \right\rangle ,$$ i.e., the probability of finding a pair of particles a distance $r$ apart, relative to the case of a random spatial distribution at same density. This is shown in the lower inset of Fig. \[figure6\]. At fixed $T,$ the driven fluid is less structured that its equilibrium counterpart, suggesting that the field favors disorder. This is already evident in Fig. \[figure2\], and it also follows from the fact that the critical temperature decreases with increasing $E.$
The essential anisotropy of the problem is revealed by the azimuthal distribution (AD) defined $$\alpha (\theta )=N^{-2}\left\langle \sum_{i<j}\delta \left( \theta -\theta
_{ij}\right) \right\rangle ,$$where $\theta _{ij}\in \lbrack 0,2\pi )$ is the angle between the line connecting particles $i$ and $j$ and the field direction $\hat{x}.$ Except at equilibrium, where this is uniform, the AD is $\pi /2-$periodic with maxima at $k\pi $ and minima at $k\pi /2,$ where $k$ is an integer. The AD is depicted in the upper inset of Fig. \[figure6\].
We also monitored the *degree of anisotropy,* defined as the distance $$D=\int_{0}^{2\pi }\left\vert \alpha -1\right\vert , \label{funcD}$$which measures the deviation from the equilibrium, isotropic case, for which $\alpha (\theta )=1,$ independent of $\theta .$ The function (\[funcD\]), which is depicted in the main graph of Fig. \[figure6\], reveals the existence of anisotropy even above the transition temperature. This shows the persistence of non–trivial two–point correlations at high temperatures which has been demonstrated for other non–equilibrium models [@pedro].
![\[figure7\] Temperature dependence of the mean energy (squares; the scale is on the right axis) and normalized net current (circles; scale at the left) for $N=5000$ and $\protect\rho =0.30$ under infinite field. The inset shows the $T-$dependence of the current over a wider range.](Marro_PRB_fig7.ps){width="7.2cm"}
Coexistence curve
-----------------
The transition points may be estimated from the temperature dependence of the mean potential energy per particle, $$f=N^{-1}\left\langle \Phi (\mathbf{\eta })\right\rangle , \label{ener}$$and from the net current $j,$ defined as the mean displacement per MC step per particle. Fig. \[figure7\] shows well–defined changes of slope in both magnitudes when the phase transforms from solid to liquid ($T\approx
0.12$) and then to disorder ($T\approx 0.30$). The persistence of correlations is again revealed by the fact that the current is nonzero for any, even low $T,$ though it is small, and roughly independent of $T$, in the solid phase. The energy (\[ener\]) behaves linearly with temperature for $T\in \left( 0.12,0.3\right) ,$ as expected for a fluid phase. The maximum value of the current, $j_{max}=4\delta _{max}/3\pi ,$ is only reached for $T\rightarrow \infty $. The way this limit is approached is illustrated in the inset of Fig. \[figure7\] where the grow is shown to be slower than exponential.
A main issue concerning the steady state is the liquid–vapor coexistence curve and the associated critical behavior. The (non–equilibrium) coexistence curve may be determined from the density profile transverse to the field. This is illustrated in Fig. \[figure8\].
At high enough temperature —in fact, already at $T=0.35$ in this case for which the transition temperature is slightly above 0.3— the local density is roughly constant around the mean system density, $\rho =0.35$ in Fig. [figure8]{}. As $T$ is lowered, the profile accurately describes the existence of a single stripe of condensed phase of density $\rho _{+}$ which coexists with its vapor of density $\rho _{-}.$ The interface becomes thinner and smother, and $\rho _{+}$ increases while $\rho _{-}$ decreases, as $T$ is decreased.
As in equilibrium, one may use $\rho _{+}-\rho _{-}$ as an order parameter. The result of plotting $\rho _{+}$ and $\rho _{-}$ at each temperature results in the non-symmetric liquid-vapor coexistence curve shown in Fig. \[figure9\]. The same result follows from the current, which in fact varies strongly correlated with the local density. Notice that the accuracy of our estimate of $\rho _{\pm }$ is favored by the existence of a linear interface. This is remarkable because we can therefore get closer to the critical point than in equilibrium. Furthermore, we found that the rectilinear diameter law, $$\frac{1}{2}(\rho _{+}+\rho _{-})=\rho _{\infty }+b_{0}(T_{\infty }-T),$$and the scaling law (the first term of a Wegner-type expansion [@wegner]),$$\rho _{+}-\rho _{-}=a_{0}(T_{\infty }-T)^{\beta },$$can be used here to estimate the critical parameters with higher accuracy than in the equilibrium case [@papa]. The simulation data in Fig. [figure9]{} then yields the values in Table I, which are confirmed by the familiar log–log plots. Compared to the equilibrium critical temperature reported by Smit and Frenkel [@smit], one has that $T_{0}/T_{\infty
}\approx 1.46,$ i.e., the change is opposite to the one for the DLG [Marro]{}. This confirms the observation above that the field acts in the non–equilibrium LJ system favoring disorder.
![\[figure8\] Density profiles transverse to the field for $N=7000,$ $\protect\rho =0.35,$ and different temperature, as indicated. The coexisting densities, $\protect\rho _{\pm },$ are indicated.](Marro_PRB_fig8.ps){width="7.2cm"}
The fact that the order–parameter critical exponent is relatively small may already be guessed by noticing the extremely flat coexistence curve in Fig. \[figure9\]. This is similar to the corresponding curve for the equilibrium two–dimensional LJ fluids [@smit; @33; @34], and it is fully consistent with the equilibrium Onsager value, $\beta =1/8.$ We therefore believe that our model belongs to the Ising universality class. In any case, one may discard with confidence both the DLG value $\beta \approx 1/3$ as well as the mean field value $\beta =1/2$ which was reported for fluids under shear [@exp] —both cases would produce a hump visible to the naked eye in a plot such as the one in Fig. \[figure9\]. One may argue that this result is counterintuitive, as our model apparently has the short–range interactions and symmetries that are believed to characterize the DLG.
![\[figure9\] Coexistence curve (squares) for the LJ non-equilibrium model obtained from the density profiles in Fig. \[figure8\]. The fluid phase and the coexistence region are indicated. The triangles are the arithmetic mean points, which serve to compute the critical parameters. The large circle at the top of the curve locates the critical point, and the solid line is a fit using the Wegner expansion and the rectilinear diameter law with the critical parameters given in Table I.](Marro_PRB_fig9.ps){width="7.2cm"}
Conclusion
==========
In summary, the present (non–equilibrium) two-dimensional Lennard–Jones system, in which particles are subject to a constant driving field, has two main general features. On one hand, this case is more convenient for computational purposses, than others such as, for instance, standard molecular–dynamics realizations of driven fluid systems. On the other, it seems to contain the necessary essential physics to be useful as a prototypical model for anisotropic behavior in nature.
This model reduces to the familiar LJ case for zero field. Otherwise, it exhibits some arresting behavior, including currents and striped patterns. We have identified two processes which seem to dominate early nucleation before anisotropic spinodal decomposition sets in. Interesting enough, they seem to be identical to the ones characterizing a similar situation in equilibrium.
We have also concluded that the model critical behavior is consistent with the Ising one for $d=2$ but not with the critical behavior of the driven lattice gas. This is puzzling. For instance, using the language of statistical field theory, symmetries seem to bring our system closer to the non–equilibrium lattice model than to the corresponding equilibrium case. The additional freedom of the present, off–lattice system, which in particular implies that the particle–hole symmetry is violated —which induces the coexistence–curve asymmetry in Fig. \[figure9\] in accordance with actual systems— are likely to matter more than suggested by some naive intuition.
Further study of the present non–equilibrium LJ system and its possible variations is suggested. A principal issue to be investigated is the apparent fact that the full non–equilibrium situations of interest can be described by some rather straightforward extension of equilibrium theory. We here report on some indications of this concerning early nucleation and properties of the coexistence curve. No doubt it would be interesting to compare more systematically the behavior of models against the varied phenomenology which was already reported for anisotropic fluids. This should also help a better understanding of non–equilibrium critical phenomena.
We acknowledge very useful discussions with M. A. Muñoz and F. de los Santos, and financial support from MEyC and FEDER (project FIS2005-00791).
[99]{} H. Haken, Rev. Mod. Phys. **47**, 67 (1975). L. Garrido, ed., *Far from Equilibrium Phase Transitions*, Springer–Verlag, Berlin 1989. M. C. Cross and P. C. Hohenberg, Rev. Mod. Phys. **65**, 851 (1993) J. Marro and R. Dickman, *Nonequilibrium Phase Transitions in Lattice Models* , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1999. D. Beysens and M. Gbadamassi, Phys. Rev. A **22**, 2250 (1980). C.K. Chan, F. Perrot, and D. Beysens, Phys. Rev. A **43**, 1826 (1991). A. Onuki, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter **9**, 6119 (1997). R. G. Larson, *The Structure and Rheology of Complex Fluids* , Oxford University Press, New York 1999. P. M. Reis and T. Mullin, Phys. Rev. Lett. **89**, 244301 (2002). P. Sánchez, M. R. Swift, and P. J. King, Phys. Rev. Lett. **93**, 184302 (2004). C. K. Chan, Phys. Rev. Lett. **72**, 2915 (1994). J. Dzubiella, G. P. Hoffmann, and H. Löwen, Phys. Rev. E **65**, 021402 (2002). P. I. Hurtado, J. Marro, P. L. Garrido, and E. V. Albano, Phys. Rev. B **67**, 014206 (2003). J. Hoffman, E. W. Hudson, K. M. Lang, V. Madhavan, H. Eisaki, S. Uchida, and J. C. Davis, Science, **295**, 466 (2002). J. Strempfer, I. Zegkinoglou, U. Rütt, M.v. Zimmermann, C. Bernhard, C. T. Lin, Th. Wolf, and B. Keimer, Phys. Rev. Lett. **93**, 157007 (2004). U. Zeitler, H.W. Schumacher, A.G.M. Jansen, R.J. Haug, Phys. Rev. Lett. **86**, 866 (2001). B. Spivak, Phys. Rev. B **67**, 125205 (2003). H. Yizhaq, N. J. Balmforth, and A. Provenzale, Physica D **195**, 207 (2004). B. Andreotti, Ph. Claudin, and O. Pouliquen, arXiv:cond-mat/0506758. D.Helbing, *Rev. Mod. Phys.* **73**, 1067 (2001). D. Chowdhury, K. Nishinari, and A. Schadschneider, Phase Trans. **77**, 601 (2004). S.Katz, J. L. Lebowitz, and H. Spohn, J. Stat. Phys. **34**, 497 (1984). B. Schmittmann and R. K. P. Zia, in *Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena*, Vol. 17, Academic, London 1996. G. Ódor, Rev. Mod. Phys. **76**, 663 (2004). M. Díez–Minguito, P. L. Garrido, and J. Marro, Phys. Rev. E **72**, 026103 (2005). B. Smit and D. Frenkel, J. Chem. Phys. **94**, 5663 (1991). M. Allen and D. Tidlesley, *Computer Simulations of Liquids* , Oxford University Press, Oxford 1987. A. Achahbar, P. L. Garrido, J. Marro, and M. A. Muñoz, Phys. Rev. Lett. **87**, 195702 (2001). E. V. Albano and G. Saracco, Phys. Rev. Lett. **88**, 145701 (2002); *ibid* **92**, 029602 (2004). R. Yamamoto and X.C. Zeng, Phys. Rev. E **59**, 3223 (1999). L. Berthier, Phys. Rev. E **63**, 051503 (2001). K. Binder and P. Fratzl, in Phase Transformations in Materials, G. Kostorz ed., Wiley-VCH Verlag 2001. J. Marro, J. L. Lebowitz, and M. H. Kalos, Phys. Rev. Lett. **43**, 282 (1979). A. Bray, Adv. Phys. **43**, 357 (1994). E. Levine, Y. Kafri, and D. Mukamel, Phys. Rev. E **64**, 026105 (2001). R. Toral and J. Marro, Phys. Rev. Lett. **54**, 1424 (1985). S. Y. Huang, X. W. Zou, and Z. Z. Jin, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter **13**, 7343 (2001). J. Marro, R. Toral, and A. M. Zahra, J. Phys. C **18**, 1377 (1985). K. Binder and D. Stauffer, Phys. Rev. Lett. **33**, 1006 (1974). W. Ostwald, Z. Phys. Chem. **37**, 385 (1901); I. Lifshitz and V. Slyozov, J. Phys. Chem. Solids **19**, 35 (1961); C. Wagner, Z. Elektrochem. **65**, 58 (1961). T. Baumberger, F. Perrot, and D. Beysens, Phys. Rev. A **46**, 7636 (1992). P. L. Garrido, J. L. Lebowitz, C. Maes, and H. Spohn, Phys. Rev. A **42**, 1954 (1990). F. Wegner, Phys. Rev. B **5**, 4529 (1972). This is in spite of the fact that these fits, and the so–called *MC Gibbs method*, which are widely used for fluids in thermal equilibrium because of its accuracy when estimating coexistence–curve properties [@Pana0], have no justification out of equilibrium. A.Z. Panagiotopopoulos, *Molecular Phys.* **61**, 813 (1987). R.R. Singh, K. S. Pitzer, J. J. de Pablo, and J. M. Pravsnitz, J. Chem. Phys. **92**, 5463 (1990). A.Z. Panagiotopopoulos, Int. J. Thermophys. **15**, 1057 (1994)
$%
\begin{tabular}{l|l|l}
$\_$ & $T\_$ & $$ \\ \hline\hline
0.321(5) & 0.314(1) & 0.10(8)%
\end{tabular}%
\medskip $
[TABLE I: Critical indexes]{}
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ has been of interest for decades, as it is one of only a few ferromagnetic insulators. Recently, this material has been revisited due to its potential as a substrate for Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$, a topological insulator. This enables the possibility of studying the anomalous quantum Hall effect in topological insulators, and a route to novel spintronic devices. To probe the compatibility of these two materials, we use polarized variable temperature Raman microscopy to study Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$-Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ heterostructure as well as the phonon dynamics of Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$. We found the temperature dependence of the Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ phonons results primarily from anharmonicity, though a small magneto-elastic coupling is also observed. Our results confirm the potential of Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ as a substrate for topological insulators.'
author:
- Yao Tian
- Huiwen Ji
- 'R. J. Cava'
- 'L. D. Alegria'
- 'J. R. Petta'
- 'Kenneth S. Burch'
date:
-
-
title: 'Polarized Temperature Dependent Raman Study of Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$-Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ heterostructure and the Ferromagnetic Insulator Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$'
---
Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ is a particularly interesting material since it is in the very rare class of ferromagnetic insulators, and possesses a layered, nearly two dimensional structure.[@CGT_original] Recently this material has been revisited due to its small lattice mismatch with the topological insulator Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$, making it an ideal candidate as a substrate for novel devices.[@Huiwen_doc] Indeed, if Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ has a strong magnetic exchange with the Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$ film, it is predicted to reveal the anomalous quantum hall state.[@Hasan2010; @Fu2009; @BT_CGT_quantum_hall] This may enable future topological and spintronic devices. Nonetheless this requires cooling below the T$_{c}$ of the Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$, and thus it is important to establish the compatibility between the two materials at low temperatures. Furthermore, since the materials are van-der-waals bonded, magneto-elastic coupling between them is a likely exchange pathway. Thus understanding the phonon dynamics in Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ is crucial for determining its suitability as a potential substrate for topological devices.
Temperature dependent Raman scattering has been widely used to probe phonon dynamics as well as check the compatibility of compounds.[@compatible_Heterostructure_raman; @Raman_Characterization_Graphene; @Raman_graphene] Indeed, one can monitor the phonons and their respective symmetry to ensure no major change in the lattice occurs upon cooling, by controlling the polarization of the excitation source and detected photons.[@polarized_raman_study_of_BFO; @polarized_raman_study_of_BFO_Beekman] Also, the temperature dependence of the Raman scattering can uncover the magneto-elastic coupling.[@Pandey2013] In this letter, we first check the compatibility between Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$ and Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ by performing Raman measurements at 293 K and 10 K on a Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$-Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ heterostructure. Then, we focus on the polarized temperature dependent Raman spectra of Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$, which reveal no major changes in the lattice at low temperatures. Furthermore we find the phonon temperature dependence is primarily governed by anharmonicity, though there are also small magneto-elastic effects. Thus lattice compatibility between Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$ and Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ is maintained at low temperatures, and the magneto-elastic effect may provide a route to coupling between the two.
The heterostructure in this study was grown by MOCVD deposition of Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$ on Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{3}$. The single crystal Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ was grown with high purity elements heated to 700$^{o}$C. Detailed growth procedures of both materials can be found elsewhere.[@Huiwen_doc] The Raman spectra on the heterostructure were taken in a backscattering configuration with a home-built Raman microscope. A Tornado Hyperflux U1 spectrometer with a cooled Andor iDus charge-coupled device(CCD) was used to record the data. Two Ondax Ultra-narrow-band Notch Filters were used to reject Rayleigh scattering. This also allows us to observe both Stokes and anti-Stokes Raman shifts. A solid-state 532 nm laser was used for the excitation. The sample was glued by silver paint onto a copper mount sitting in a commercial optical microscopy cryostat from Cryo Industries of America, Inc. A glass compensated Mitutoyo long working distance 50x (N.A.=0.42) objective was used for excitation as well as collection, resulting in a laser spot of 8 $\mu$m in diameter. The laser power was kept fairly low (300 $\mu$W) to avoid laser-induced heating. This was checked at 8 K by monitoring the anti-Stokes signal as the laser power was reduced. Once the anti-Stokes signal disappeared, the power was cut an additional $\approx 50\%$. The spectra were recorded with a polarizer in front of the spectrometer.
The Raman spectra from the Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$-Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ heterostructure are shown in FIG.\[BT\_on\_CGT\]. Only the phonons of Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$ are observed, since the penetration depth of Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$ (20nm) is much smaller than the thickness of the film (100nm). The phonon peaks of Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$ at 293 K agree very well with the literature.[@Bi2Te3_Raman] As temperature decreases, the three phonons slightly harden and become sharper at 10 K, which we attribute to anharmonic renormalization. No new modes or dramatic changes in the spectra were observed. This suggests Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ and Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$ are well matched.
![Raman spectra of Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$-Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ heterostructures in XX geometry at 293 K and 10 K. The two spectra offset intentionally. The thickness of Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$ is about 100nm.[]{data-label="BT_on_CGT"}](BT_on_CGT_10k_293k.eps "fig:"){width="8cm"}\
To confirm the compatibility of these two materials, we focused on the temperature dependent Raman spectra of Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$. This analysis was complicated by the oxidation of the Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ surface. Indeed, it is well known that exposure to air can result in oxides on the surface that dominate the Raman spectra.[@Raman_aging_effect] The strong aging effect was also observed in Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$. In FIG.\[633\_532\_oldsample\_raman\] we show the Raman spectra of air-exposed and freshly cleaved Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ samples. The air-exposed sample reveals fewer phonon modes, that are also quite broad, suggesting the formation of an oxide. A similar phenomena was also observed in other materials.[@Raman_amorphous_crystalline_transition_CGTfamily]
![Raman spectra of Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ sample were taken in different conditions. All the spectra are taken at 300 K. Legend: the text states the condition of the sample.[]{data-label="633_532_oldsample_raman"}](CGT_532nm_airexposed_cleaved_300k.eps "fig:"){width="8cm"}\
In FIG.\[XX\_temp\], we show the colinearly polarized(XX) Raman specta of Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ from room temperature to 8 K. The sharpness of the phonon peaks indicates the high quality of the crystal. From the plot, we can see that there are six phonon peaks visible in the whole temperature range. At 8 K, their center frequencies are 78.7 cm$^{-1}$ ,113.0 cm$^{-1}$, 138.8 cm$^{-1}$ ,221.4 cm$^{-1}$, 236.1 cm$^{-1}$ and 297.4 cm$^{-1}$. While the small temperature induced shifts in the phonons suggests no major change in lattice constant, as discussed below, we can also search for symmetry breaking by looking at the polarization dependence.
![Temperature dependent collinear(XX) Raman spectra of Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ measured in the temperature range of 300 K $ - $ 8 K(Spectra are normalized to the mode at 138.8cm$^{-1}$).[]{data-label="XX_temp"}](XX_Temperature_newcolor.eps "fig:"){width="8cm"}\
From group theory analysis, the space group of single crystal Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ is R-3 (No.148). The point group is C$_{3i}$. There are six inequivalent irreducible representations in the C$_{3i}$ point group. They are A$_{g}$, E$_{1g}$, E$_{2g}$, A$_{u}$, E$_{1u}$ and E$_{2u}$ respectively. All irreducible representations for the C$_{3i}$ point group are one dimensional. However E$_{1g}$ and E$_{2g}$ are inequivalent conjugate representations. In this case, if the time reversal symmetry is not broken, the eigenstates of E$_{1g}$ and E$_{2g}$ representation are degenerate. This holds for E$_{1u}$ and E$_{2u}$ representations as well. In the Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ unit cell, there are 10 atoms which gives 30-phonon branches at the $\Gamma$ point of the Brillouin zone. The 30 phonon branches are $\Gamma_{acoustic}$ = A$_{u}$ + E$_{1u}$+ E$_{2u}$ and $\Gamma_{optical}$ = 5A$_{g}$ + 4A$_{u}$ + 5E$_{1g}$ + 4E$_{1u}$+ 5E$_{2g}$ + 4E$_{2u}$ respectively. Because, the space group R-3 has inversion symmetry, theoretically all the optical modes are either IR-active or Raman-active. The IR-active modes are 4A$_{u}$ + 4E$_{1u}$ + 4E$_{2u}$ and the Raman-active modes are 5A$_{g}$ + 5E$_{1g}$ + 5E$_{2g}$. Here, the letter A means the phonon is non-degenerate and E means the phonon is double-degenerate for the reason explained above. We expect to see 10 Raman-active modes, because the E$_{1g}$ and E$_{2g}$ mode are not distinguishable by energy. In the Raman spectra (Fig. \[XX\_temp\]), 6 modes were observed, the other four phonons might be too weak or out of our spectra range.[@Raman_ZnS3_modes_not_visible]
To analyze the polarization dependence, it is instructive to consider the relationship between the Raman tensor for a given mode (R) and the measured intensity I$_R$, $$\label{e}
I_{R}=|\overrightarrow{\mathbf{e}}_{o}^{T}\mathbf{R}\overrightarrow{\mathbf{e}}_{i}|^{2}$$ where $\overrightarrow{\mathbf{e_{o}}}$,$\overrightarrow{\mathbf{e_{i}}}$ are the polarization of the out-going and the incoming photon respectively. The Raman tensors of phonon of A$_{g}$, E$_{1g}$ and E$_{2g}$ symmetry are shown below. $$A_{g}=\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
a & 0 & 0 \\
0 & a & 0 \\
0 & 0 & b \\
\end{array}
\right)
E_{1g}=\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
c & d & e \\
d & -c & f \\
e & f & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right)$$ $$E_{2g}=\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
d & -c & -f \\
-c & -d & e \\
-f & e & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right)$$ From the Raman tensor, we know that all three modes should be visible in the colinear polarized(XX) geometry and the A$_{g}$ modes should vanish in crossed polarized(XY) geometry (note the absence of off diagonal elements in A$_{1g}$). To gain insight into the symmetry of the modes, we compare the spectra taken at 8 K in XX and XY configurations. As can be seen from FIG.\[XY\_temp\], only the two modes located at 138.8 cm$^{-1}$ and 297.4 cm$^{-1}$ vanish in XY configuration. Therefore these two modes are of A$_{g}$ symmetry, and the other four modes are of E$_{g}$ symmetry. Furthermore we confirmed the symmetry is maintained at all temperature measured (not shown).
![Normalized Raman Spectra of Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ in XX and XY geometry at 8 K.[]{data-label="XY_temp"}](XX_XY_8K.eps "fig:"){width="8cm"}\
In order to analyse the phonon temperature dependent behavior, we used the Lorentz model to fit each individual phonon peak at all temperatures. The mode located at 78.7 cm$^{-1}$ has relatively low intensity between 100 K to 300 K, and thus was excluded from our fitting procedure. We show the resulting phonon frequencies in FIG.\[Phonon\_Temperature\_position\], which all harden as temperature is decreased. This result is not surprising since the anharmonic interaction leads to a renormalization of the phonon self energy by both decay and fusion processes. However, the fusion process, where two or more phonons fuse into a zone-center phonon, is usually very slow due to the low population of phonons at low temperature.[@Anharmonic_phonon_scattering] This indicates that the scattering is almost exclusively governed by the decay process. Ultimately, this results in a temperature dependent renormalization of the real (frequency) and imaginary (inverse lifetime) parts of the phonon self-energy. To further quantitatively analyze the anharmonic effect, we use a simple model which takes the cubic and quartic anharmonic decay into account. In this model, the temperature dependence of the phonon frequency is described by the formula,[@PhysRevB.28.1928] $$\begin{aligned}
&\omega(T)=\omega_{0}+\Delta\omega(T) \\
&\Delta\omega(T)=C(1+\frac{2}{e^{x}-1})+D(1+\frac{3}{e^{y}-1}+\frac{3}{(e^{y}-1)^{2}})\label{Phonon_Temperature_equation}\end{aligned}$$
![Temperature dependence of the shifts of phonons. For all but the mode centered near 222 cm$^{-1}$ the temperature dependence is well explained by anharmonic effects. However, below T$_{c}$ this mode also reveals additional shifting due to magneto-elastic coupling.[]{data-label="Phonon_Temperature_position"}](phononpositionTemperaturefitdata_all.eps "fig:"){width="10cm"}\
where $\omega_{0}$ is the phonon position at 0 K, T is the temperature, C,D are constants determined by the cubic and quartic anharmonicity respectively, x = $\hbar\omega_{0}$/2$k_{B}T$ and y = $\hbar\omega_{0}$/3$k_{B}T$. The first term in equation \[Phonon\_Temperature\_equation\] describes the optical phonon decay into two phonons with opposite momenta and half the energy of the original phonon. The second term describes the optical phonon decay into three phonons with a third of the energy of the optical phonon. The results of fitting, the temperature dependence of the phonon shifts with equation \[Phonon\_Temperature\_equation\] are shown in FIG.\[Phonon\_Temperature\_position\]. From the plot we can see the anharmonic interaction model works reasonably well for all but the 212 cm$^{-1}$ mode. The resulting parameters for the anharmonic interaction are shown in Table.\[fit\_result\]. From the table we can see that the four-phonon interaction is much weaker, as is expected.[@PhysRevB.28.1928] Below T$_{c}$, the mode at 212 cm$^{-1}$ shifts more rapidly than the than the prediction of the anharmonic model. This is likely caused by magneto-elastic coupling in Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$.[@Pandey2013; @F_phonon_coupling1]
In summary, we verified the compatibility of Bi$_{2}$Te$_{3}$-Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ heterostructure by Raman spectroscopy at 10 K and 293 K. The stability of the Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ single crystal was also studied using polarized variable temperature Raman spectroscopy. Six phonons were observed and they were explained by anharmonic interaction. A weak sign of the magneto-elastic coupling has also been observed, suggesting an additional pathway for magnetic coupling between the two materials. Thus we have shown the utility of using Cr$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$Te$_{6}$ as a substrate for future devices.
Work at the University of Toronto was supported by NSERC, CFI, and ORF.
------------------ ------- -------- -------- -------------- -------
C Error D Error $\omega_{0}$ Error
\[0.5ex\] -0.835 0.138 0.032 0.0102 113.0 0.200
-1.19 0.19 0.0525 0.0168 138.9 0.250
-9.70 3.06 0.865 0.403 220.2 2.95
-1.3 0.171 0.0203 0.0097 236.5 0.300
-2.93 0.763 0.147 0.120 297.2 0.700
\[fit\_result\]
------------------ ------- -------- -------- -------------- -------
: Anharmonic interaction parameters
\[Anharmonic\_fit\_data\]
[18]{}ifxundefined \[1\][ ifx[\#1]{} ]{}ifnum \[1\][ \#1firstoftwo secondoftwo ]{}ifx \[1\][ \#1firstoftwo secondoftwo ]{}““\#1””@noop \[0\][secondoftwo]{}sanitize@url \[0\][‘\
12‘\$12 ‘&12‘\#12‘12‘\_12‘%12]{}@startlink\[1\]@endlink\[0\]@bib@innerbibempty [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/0953-8984/7/i=1/a=008) [****, ()](\doibase http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4822092) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/RevModPhys.82.3045) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.216403) [****, ()](\doibase
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4892353) [****, ()](\doibase http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3213370) [****, ()](\doibase
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3584006) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.83.125430) [****, ()](\doibase
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2168038) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.86.020403) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1063/1.4800442) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1002/pssr.201206149) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.140510) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1134/S1063782612050041) [****, ()](\doibase http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0038-1098(79)90554-4) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.50.14179) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.28.1928) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.026409)
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'An oriented hypergraph is a hypergraph where each vertex-edge incidence is given a label of $+1$ or $-1$. The adjacency and Laplacian eigenvalues of an oriented hypergraph are studied. Eigenvalue bounds for both the adjacency and Laplacian matrices of an oriented hypergraph which depend on structural parameters of the oriented hypergraph are found. An oriented hypergraph and its incidence dual are shown to have the same nonzero Laplacian eigenvalues. A family of oriented hypergraphs with uniformally labeled incidences is also studied. This family provides a hypergraphic generalization of the signless Laplacian of a graph and also suggests a natural way to define the adjacency and Laplacian matrices of a hypergraph. Some results presented generalize both graph and signed graph results to a hypergraphic setting.'
author:
- 'Nathan Reff[^1]'
title: Spectral Properties of Oriented Hypergraphs
---
Oriented hypergraph, hypergraph Laplacian, hypergraph adjacency matrix, hypergraph Laplacian eigenvalues, signless Laplacian, signed graph, hypergraph spectra
05C50, 05C65, 05C22
Introduction
============
There have been several approaches to studying eigenvalues of matrices associated to uniform hypergraphs [@MR1235565; @MR1405722; @MR1325271; @MR2842309]. More recently, Cooper and Dutle have developed a hypermatrix approach to studying the spectra of uniform hypergraphs [@MR2900714]. Rodríguez developed a version of the adjacency and Laplacian matrices for hypergraphs without a uniformity requirement on edge sizes [@MR1890984]. The work presented here does not require uniformity either, but is focused on hypergraphs with additional structure called *oriented hypergraphs*.
An oriented hypergraph is a hypergraph where each vertex-edge incidence is given a label of $+1$ or $-1$. This incidence structure can be viewed as a generalization of an oriented signed graph [@MR1120422]. In [@ReffRusnak1] the author and Rusnak studied several matrices associated with an oriented hypergraph. In this paper we study the eigenvalues associated to the adjacency and Laplacian matrices of an oriented hypergraph.
The paper is organized in the following manner. In Section \[BackgroundSection\], a background on oriented hypergraphs and their matrices is provided. In Section \[AdjEigenvaluesOH\], the adjacency matrix is further investigated. Vertex-switching is shown to produce cospectral oriented hypergraphs. Also, bounds for the spectral radius and eigenvalues of the adjacency matrix of an oriented hypergraph are derived. In Section \[LapEigenvaluesOHLapEigenvaluesOH\], results on the Laplacian eigenvalues of an oriented hypergraph are established. Vertex-switching is also shown to produce Laplacian cospectral oriented hypergraphs. Although an oriented hypergraph and its dual are not always Laplacian cospectral, they have the same nonzero Laplacian eigenvalues. A hypergraphic generalization of the signless Laplacian for graphs is mentioned, which provides an upper bound for the Laplacian spectral radius of an oriented hypergraph. Bounds for the Laplacian eigenvalues of an oriented hypergraph that depend on both the underlying hypergraphic structure and the adjacency signatures are found. In Section \[HypergraphSpectra\], a definition for the adjacency and Laplacian matrices of a hypergraph are stated.
A consequence of studying oriented hypergraphs is that signed and unsigned graphs as well as hypergraphs can be viewed as specializations. An oriented signed graph is an oriented hypergraph where all edges have size 2 (a 2-uniform oriented hypergraph). This oriented signed graph has a natural edge sign associated to it, and hence a signed graph. An unsigned graph can be thought of as a 2-uniform oriented hypergraph where all vertex-edge incidences are labeled $+1$. This is not the only way to think of an unsigned graph, since other orientations may be more suitable in certain situations, although this is the simplest description. Similarly, a hypergraph can be thought of as an oriented hypergraph where all vertex-edge incidences are labeled $+1$.
Background {#BackgroundSection}
==========
Oriented Hypergraphs
--------------------
A *hypergraph* is a triple $H=(V,E,\mathcal{I})$, where $V$ is a set, $E$ is a set whose elements are subsets of $V$, and $\mathcal{I}$ is a multisubset of $V\times E$ such that if $(v,e)\in\mathcal{I}$, then $v\in e$. Note that an edge may be empty. The set $V$ is called the *set of vertices*. The set $E$ is called the *set of edges*. We may also write $V(H)$, $E(H)$ and $\mathcal{I}(H)$ for the set of vertices, edges and multiset of incidences of $H$, respectively. Let $n:=|V|$ and $m:=|E|$. If $(v,e)\in \mathcal{I}$, then $v$ and $e$ are *incident*. An *incidence* is a pair $(v,e)$, where $v$ and $e$ are incident. If $(v_i,e)$ and $(v_j,e)$ both belong to $\mathcal{I}$, then $v_i$ and $v_j$ are *adjacent* vertices via the edge $e$. The set of vertices adjacent to a vertex $v$ is denoted by $N(v)$.
A hypergraph is *simple* if for every edge $e$, and for every vertex $v\in e$, $v$ and $e$ are incident exactly once. Unless otherwise stated, all hypergraphs in this paper are assumed to be simple. A hypergraph is *linear* if for every pair $e,f\in E$, $|e\cap f|\leq 1$.
The *degree* of a vertex $v_i$, denoted by $d_i=\deg(v_i)$, is equal to the number of incidences containing $v_i$. The *maximum degree* is $\Delta:=\max_i d_i$. The *size* of an edge $e$ is the number of incidences containing $e$. A $k$*-edge* is an edge of size $k$. A *$k$-uniform hypergraph* is a hypergraph such that all of its edges have size $k$.
Given a hypergraph $H=(V(H),E(H),\mathcal{I}(H))$, there are several different substructures that can be created. A *subhypergraph* $S$ of $H$, denoted by $S=(V(S),E(S),\allowbreak\mathcal{I}(S))$, is a hypergraph with $V(S)\subseteq V(H)$, $E(S)\subseteq E(H)$ and $\mathcal{I}(S)\subseteq \mathcal{I}(H)\cap (V(S)\times E(S))$. It is more common to define a subhypergraph as a hypergraph generated by a subset of the vertex set. However, the definition above is more suitable for our purposes. For a hypergraph $H=(V,E,\mathcal{I})$ with a vertex $v\in V$, the *weak vertex-deletion* is the subhypergraph $H\backslash v=(V\backslash\{v\},E_v,\mathcal{I}_v)$, where $$E_v=\{e\cap (V\backslash\{v\}) : e\in E\},$$ and $$\mathcal{I}_v=\mathcal{I}\cap \big((V\backslash\{v\})\times E_v\big).$$ Since edges are allowed to have size zero we do not need to add the additional condition $e\cap(V\backslash\{v\})\neq \emptyset$ to the definition of $E_v$, which is usually included in hypergraph literature. Observe that edges incident to $v$ are not deleted in $H\backslash v$, as in the vertex-deletion of a graph. That is why we call this type of deletion a weak vertex-deletion. For a hypergraph $H=(V,E,\mathcal{I})$ with an edge $e\in E$, the *weak edge-deletion* (or simply *edge-deletion*), denoted by $H\backslash e$, is the subhypergraph $H\backslash e=(V,E\backslash \{e\},\mathcal{I}_e)$, where $$\mathcal{I}_e=\mathcal{I}\cap(V\times (E\backslash \{e\})).$$ The weak edge-deletion is the same as the graph version of edge-deletion.
The *incidence dual* (or *dual*) of a hypergraph $H=(V,E,\mathcal{I})$, denoted by $H^*$, is the hypergraph $(E,V,\mathcal{I}^*)$, where $\mathcal{I}^*:=\{(e,v):(v,e)\in\mathcal{I}\}$. Thus, the incidence dual reverses the roles of the vertices and edges in a hypergraph.
The set of size 2 subsets of a set $S$ is denoted by $\binom{S}{2}$. The set of *adjacencies* $\mathcal{A}$ of $H$ is defined as $\mathcal{A}:=\{(e,\{v_i,v_j\})\in E\times \binom{V}{2}: (v_i,e)\in \mathcal{I}\text{ and }(v_j,e)\in \mathcal{I}\}$. We may also write $\mathcal{A}(H)$ for the set of adjacencies of $H$. Observe that if $\{v_i,v_j\}\in \binom{V}{2}$, then the vertices $v_i$ and $v_j$ must be distinct. Also, since $\mathcal{A}$ is a set there are no duplicate adjacencies. The *number of adjacencies containing vertex $v$* is denoted by ${\mathrm{NumAdj}}(v)$. Observe that in general $d_j$, $|N(v_j)|$ and ${\mathrm{NumAdj}}(v_j)$ may all be different. One must be careful of this fact when comparing similar graph and hypergraph bounds that will appear later in this paper.
The set of *coadjacencies* $\mathcal{A}^*$ of $H$ is defined as $\mathcal{A}^*:=
\mathcal{A}(H^*)$. We may also write $\mathcal{A}^*(H)$ for the set of coadjacencies of $H$.
An *oriented hypergraph* is a pair $G=(H,\sigma)$ consisting of an *underlying hypergraph* $H=(V,E,\mathcal{I})$, and an *incidence orientation* $\sigma :\mathcal{I}\rightarrow\{+1,-1\}$. Every oriented hypergraph has an associated *adjacency signature* ${\operatorname{sgn}}:\mathcal{A}\rightarrow \{+1,-1\}$ defined by $${\operatorname{sgn}}(e,\{v_i,v_j\})=-\sigma (v_i,e)\sigma (v_j,e).$$ Thus, ${\operatorname{sgn}}(e,\{v_i,v_j\})$ is called the *sign* of the adjacency $(e,\{v_i,v_j\})$. Instead of writing ${\operatorname{sgn}}(e,\{v_i,v_j\})$, the alternative notation ${\operatorname{sgn}}_{e}(v_i,v_j)$ will be used. See Figure \[OHEx\] for an example of an oriented hypergraph.
![A simple oriented hypergraph $G$ drawn in two ways. On the left, the incidences are labeled with $\sigma$ values. On the right, the $\sigma$ values assigned to the incidences are drawn using the arrow convention of $+1$ as an arrow going into a vertex and $-1$ as an arrow departing a vertex.[]{data-label="OHEx"}](OrientedHypergraph.eps)
If $G=(H,\sigma)$ is an oriented hypergraph and $S=(V(S),E(S),\mathcal{I}(S))$ is a subhypergraph of $H$, then the *oriented subhypergraph* $F$ of $G$ (generated by $S$) is defined by $F=(S,\sigma{\mid}_{\mathcal{I}(S)})$. That is, the incidence orientation of $F$ is restricted to those incidences in $S$, and likewise, the adjacency signature of $F$ is restricted to those adjacencies of $S$. The *weak vertex-deletion* of $G$, denoted by $G\backslash v$, is the oriented subhypergraph $G\backslash v=(H\backslash v,\sigma{\mid}_{\mathcal{I}(H\backslash v)})$. The *weak edge-deletion* of $G$, denoted by $G\backslash e$, is the oriented subhypergraph $G\backslash e=(H\backslash e,\sigma{\mid}_{\mathcal{I}(H\backslash e)})$.
As with hypergraphs, an oriented hypergraph has an incidence dual. The *incidence dual* of an oriented hypergraph $G=(H,\sigma)$ is the oriented hypergraph $G^*=(H^*,\sigma^*)$, where the *coincidence orientation* $\sigma ^{\ast }:\mathcal{I}^{\ast }\rightarrow \{+1,-1\}$ is defined by $\sigma ^{\ast }(e,v)\allowbreak=\sigma
(v,e)$, and the *coadjacency signature* ${\operatorname{sgn}}^*:\mathcal{A}^*\rightarrow \{+1,-1\}$ is defined by $${\operatorname{sgn}}^*(v,\{e_i,e_j\})=-\sigma^*(e_i,v)\sigma^*(e_j,v)=-\sigma (v,e_i)\sigma (v,e_j).$$
A *vertex-switching function* is any function $\zeta:V\rightarrow \{-1,+1\}$. *Vertex-switching* the oriented hypergraph $G=(H,\sigma)$ means replacing $\sigma$ with $\sigma^{\zeta}$, defined by $$\sigma^{\zeta}(v,e)=\zeta(v)\sigma(v,e);$$ producing the oriented hypergraph $G^{\zeta}=(H,\sigma^{\zeta})$, with an adjacency signature ${\operatorname{sgn}}^{\zeta}$ defined by $$\begin{aligned}
{\operatorname{sgn}}_e^{\zeta}(v_i,v_j)&=-\sigma^{\zeta}(v_i,e)\sigma^{\zeta}(v_j,e)\\
&=-\zeta(v_i)\sigma(v_i,e)\sigma(v_j,e)\zeta(v_j)\\
&=\zeta(v_i){\operatorname{sgn}}_e(v_i,v_j)\zeta(v_j).\end{aligned}$$
We say two oriented hypergraphs $G_1$ and $G_2$ are *vertex-switching equivalent*, written $G_1 \sim G_2$, when there exists a vertex-switching function $\zeta$, such that $G_2=G_1^{\zeta}$. The equivalence class of $G$ formed under this relation is called a *vertex-switching class*, and is denoted by $[G]$.
Matrices and Oriented Hypergraphs
---------------------------------
Let $G$ be an oriented hypergraph. The *adjacency matrix* $A(G)=(a_{ij})\in \mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ is defined by $$a_{ij}=
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle\sum_{e\in E}{\operatorname{sgn}}_{e}(v_{i},v_{j}) &\text{if $v_i$ is adjacent to $v_j$},\\
0 &\text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}$$ If $v_i$ is adjacent to $v_j$ , then $$\begin{aligned}
a_{ij}=\sum_{e\in E}{\operatorname{sgn}}_e(v_i,v_j)=\sum_{e\in E}{\operatorname{sgn}}_e(v_j,v_i)=a_{ji}.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, $A(G)$ is symmetric.
Let $G=(H,\sigma)$ be a simple oriented hypergraph. The *incidence matrix* $\mathrm{H}(G)=(\eta _{ij})$ is the $n\times m$ matrix, with entries in $\{-1,0,+1\}$, defined by $$\eta _{ij}=
\begin{cases} \sigma(v_{i},e_{j}) & \text{if }(v_{i},e_{j})\in \mathcal{I},\\
0 &\text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}$$
As with hypergraphs, the incidence matrix provides a convenient relationship between an oriented hypergraph and its incidence dual. This is immediate by the definition of the incidence matrix and the incidence dual.
\[OHIncidenceMatrixDualTranspose\] If $G$ is an oriented hypergraph, then $\mathrm{H}(G)^{\text{T}}=\mathrm{H}(G^{\ast })$.
The *degree matrix* of an oriented hypergraph $G$ is defined as $D(G):=\text{diag}(d_1,d_2,\allowbreak\ldots,d_n)$. The *Laplacian matrix* is defined as $L(G):=D(G)-A(G).$
The Laplacian matrix of an oriented hypergraph can be written in terms of the incidence matrix.
\[OHLapIncidenceRelation\] If $G$ is a simple oriented hypergraph, then
1. $L(G)=D(G)-A(G)=\mathrm{H}(G)\mathrm{H}(G)^{\text{T}}$,
2. $L(G^{\ast })=D(G^{\ast})-A(G^{\ast })=\mathrm{H}(G)^T\mathrm{H}(G).$
Vertex-switching an oriented hypergraph $G$ can be described as matrix multiplication of the incidence matrix, and as a similarity transformation of the adjacency and Laplacian matrices. For a vertex-switching function $\zeta:V\rightarrow\{+1,-1\}$, we define a diagonal matrix $D(\zeta):=\text{diag}(\zeta(v_1),\zeta(v_1),\ldots,\zeta(v_n))$. The following lemma shows how to calculate the switched oriented hypergraph’s incidence, adjacency and Laplacian matrices.
\[OHLAHSwitchingSimilarityTrans\] Let $G$ be an oriented hypergraph. Let $\zeta$ be a vertex-switching function on $G$. Then
1. ${\mathrm{H}}(G^{\zeta})=D(\zeta){\mathrm{H}}(G)$,
2. $A(G^{\zeta})=D(\zeta)^{\text{T}} A(G) D(\zeta)$, and
3. $L(G^{\zeta})=D(\zeta)^{\text{T}} L(G) D(\zeta)$.
Matrix Analysis
---------------
Since the eigenvalues of any symmetric matrix $A\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ are real we will assume that they are labeled and ordered according to the following convention: $$\lambda_n(A) \leq \lambda_{n-1}(A) \leq \cdots \leq \lambda_2(A) \leq \lambda_1(A).$$
If $A\in \mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ is symmetric, then the quadratic form $\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}A\mathbf{x}$, for some $\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^n\backslash\{\mathbf{0}\}$, can be use to calculate the eigenvalues of $A$ using the following theorem. In particular, we can calculate the smallest and largest eigenvalues using the following, usually called the Rayleigh-Ritz Theorem.
\[RRThm\] Let $A\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ be symmetric. Then $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_1(A)&=\max_{\mathbf{x}\in \mathbb{R}^n \backslash \{\mathbf{0}\}} \frac{\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}A\mathbf{x}}{\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{x}} = \max_{\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{x}=1} \mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}A\mathbf{x},\\
\lambda_n(A)&=\min_{\mathbf{x}\in \mathbb{R}^n \backslash \{\mathbf{0}\}} \frac{\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}A\mathbf{x}}{\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{x}} =\min_{\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{x}=1} \mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}A\mathbf{x}.\end{aligned}$$
An $r\times r$ *principle submatrix* of $A\in \mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$, denoted by $A_r$, is a matrix obtained by deleting $n-r$ rows and the corresponding columns of $A$. The next lemma is sometimes called the the Cauchy Interlacing Theorem, or the inclusion principle.
\[interlacinglemma\] Let $A\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ be symmetric and $r\in \{1,\ldots,n\}$. Then for all $k\in \{1,\ldots,r\}$, $$\lambda_{k+n-r}(A) \leq \lambda_{k}(A_r) \leq \lambda_{k}(A).$$
The *spectral radius* of a matrix $A=(a_{ij})\in \mathbb{C}^{n\times n}$ is defined as $\rho(A):=\max\{|\lambda_i| : \lambda_i \text{ is an eigenvalue of } A \}$.
The multiset of all eigenvalues of $A\in \mathbb{R}^{n \times n}$, denoted by $\sigma(A)$, is called the *spectrum* of $A$. The next lemma is often called the Geršgorin disc theorem.
\[GDThm\] Suppose $A=(a_{ij})\in \mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$. Then $$\sigma(A)\subseteq \bigcup_{i=1}^n \Big\{z\in\mathbb{C} : |z-a_{ii}|\leq \sum_{\substack{j=1\\j\neq i}}^n |a_{ij}|\Big\}.$$
Adjacency Eigenvalues {#AdjEigenvaluesOH}
=====================
As mentioned before, if $G$ is an oriented hypergraph, then its adjacency matrix $A(G)$ is symmetric. Therefore, $A(G)$ has real eigenvalues. In this section we study the adjacency eigenvalues in relation to the structure of $G$.
The next lemma implies that a vertex-switching class has a single adjacency spectrum. This is immediate from Lemma \[OHLAHSwitchingSimilarityTrans\]. Two oriented hypergraphs $G_1$ and $G_2$ are *cospectral* if the adjacency matrices $A(G_1)$ and $A(G_2)$ have the same spectrum. The following lemma also states that vertex-switching is a method for producing cospectral oriented hypergraphs.
\[OHAdjEigenvaluesSWITCHIN\] Let $G_1$ and $G_2$ both be oriented hypergraphs. If $G_1\sim G_2$, then $G_1$ and $G_2$ are cospectral.
The spectral radius of the adjacency matrix of an oriented hypergraph $G$ is related to the number of adjacencies in $G$. This is a generalization of a similar result known for graphs [@MR2571608 Proposition 1.1.1].
\[OHSpecRadiusandMaxDegree\] Let $G$ be an oriented hypergraph. Then $$\rho(A(G)) \leq \max_i {\mathrm{NumAdj}}(v_i).$$
The proof is inspired by the version for graphs [@MR2571608 Proposition 1.1.1]. Let $\mathbf{x}=(x_1,\ldots,x_n)\in \mathbb{R}^n$ be an eigenvector of $A(G)$ with associated eigenvalue $\lambda$. The $i^\text{th}$ entry in the equation $A(G)\mathbf{x}=\lambda\mathbf{x}$ is $$\lambda x_i = \sum_{v_j\in V} \sum_{\substack{e\in E\\ v_i,v_j\in e}} {\operatorname{sgn}}_e(v_i,v_j) x_j .$$ Let $|x_m|=\max_{k}|x_k|\neq 0$. Then, $$|\lambda||x_m| \leq \sum_{v_j\in V} \sum_{\substack{e\in E\\ v_m,v_j\in e}} |x_j| \leq \max_i {\mathrm{NumAdj}}(v_i) |x_m| .$$ The result follows.
The *number of positive adjacencies containing $v_j$* is ${\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{+}(v_j):=|\{(e,\{v_j,\allowbreak v_k\})\in\mathcal{A}: {\operatorname{sgn}}_e(v_j,v_k)=+1\}|$. The *number of negative adjacencies containing $v_j$* is ${\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{-}(v_j):=|\{(e,\{v_j,v_k\})\in\mathcal{A}: {\operatorname{sgn}}_e(v_j,v_k)=-1\}|$. Notice that ${\mathrm{NumAdj}}(v_j)={\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{+}(v_j)+{\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{-}(v_j)$. If $G$ is a simple linear 2-uniform oriented hypergraph, then ${\mathrm{NumAdj}}(v_j)={\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{+}(v_j)+{\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{-}(v_j)$ is the same as $d_j= d_j^{+}+d_j^-$ (where $d_j^{+}$ and $d_j^{-}$ are the number of positive and negative edges incident to $v_j$), as known for signed graphs. The *net number of adjacencies containing $v_j$* is ${\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{\pm}(v_j):={\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{+}(v_j)-{\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{-}(v_j)$.
The following adjacency eigenvalue bounds depend on the adjacency signs of an oriented hypergraph $G=(H,\sigma)$. This is particularly interesting since the inequalities are not solely determined by the underlying hypergraph $H$. Inequality is a generalization of a lower bound for the largest adjacency eigenvalue of an unsigned graph attributed to Collatz and Sinogowitz [@MR0087952].
\[OHAdjacencyBounds1\] Let $G=(H,\sigma)$ be an oriented hypergraph. Then $$\label{OHNeqAB1gain}
\lambda_{n}(A(G)) \leq \frac{1}{n} \sum_{j=1}^n {\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{\pm}(v_j) \leq \lambda_{1}(A(G)).$$
[*Proof.*]{} The proof method is similar to [@MR2571608 Theorem 3.2.1] and [@MR2571608 Theorem 8.1.25]. For brevity, we write $A$ for $A(G)$. Let $\mathbf{j}:=(1,\ldots,1)\in\mathbb{R}^n$. Let $M_k={\bf j}^{\text{T}} A^k {\bf j}$. From Lemma \[RRThm\] the following is clear: $$(\lambda_{n}(A))^k \leq M_k/\mathbf{j}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{j} \leq (\lambda_{1}(A))^k.$$ We will use the equation: $$\begin{aligned}
A{\bf j}&= \Big(\sum_{j=1}^n \sum_{e\in E}{\operatorname{sgn}}_e(v_1,v_j),\ldots,\sum_{j=1}^n \sum_{e\in E}{\operatorname{sgn}}_e(v_n,v_j)\Big)\notag\\
&=({\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{\pm}(v_1),\ldots, {\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{\pm}(v_n)).\label{OHnetdegeq}\end{aligned}$$ We compute $M_1$; thus, making inequality true. $$M_1 = {\bf j}^{\text{T}} A {\bf j}={\bf j}^{\text{T}}({\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{\pm}(v_1),\ldots, {\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{\pm}(v_n)) = \sum_{j=1}^n {\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{\pm}(v_j).\cvd$$
Better bounds can be found by computing $M_k$ for larger $k$ values, as was done for graphs with $k=2$ by Hoffman [@MR0140441].
The adjacency eigenvalues of an oriented hypergraph $G$ bound the adjacency eigenvalues of the weak vertex-deletion $G\backslash v$. This result is in some sense a generalization of similar bounds known for the adjacency eigenvlues of a graph $G$ and the adjacency eigenvalues of the vertex-deletion $G\backslash v$ [@liu2000matrices Theorem 1.2.6]. However, as explained in the background section, the definition of weak vertex-deletion is different than the vertex-deletion from graph theory.
\[OHAdjacencyInterlacing\] Let $G$ be an oriented hypergraph, and let $v$ be some vertex of $G$. Then $$\lambda_{k+1}(A(G)) \leq \lambda_{k}(A(G\backslash v)) \leq \lambda_{k}(A(G))\text{ for all }k \in \{1,\ldots,n-1\}.$$
In the weak vertex-deletion $G\backslash v$, the only incidences that are removed from $G$ are those that contain the vertex $v$. So the only adjacencies that are removed in the weak vertex-deletion are those that contain $v$. Thus, the adjacency matrix $A(G\backslash v)$ can be obtained from $A(G)$ by deleting both rows and columns corresponding to the vertex $v$. This shows that $A(G\backslash v)$ is an $(n-1)\times (n-1)$ principle submatrix of the adjacency matrix $A(G)$. The result follows from Lemma \[interlacinglemma\].
Laplacian Eigenvalues {#LapEigenvaluesOHLapEigenvaluesOH}
=====================
For an oriented hypergraph $G$, the Laplacian matrix $L(G)$ is symmetric by definition, and hence, has real eigenvalues. Moreover, Lemma \[OHLapIncidenceRelation\] says that $L(G)$ is positive semidefinite, and therefore, $L(G)$ has nonnegative eigevalues.
The next lemma implies that a vertex-switching class has a single Laplacian spectrum. This is immediate from Lemma \[OHLAHSwitchingSimilarityTrans\]. Two oriented hypergraphs $G_1$ and $G_2$ are *Laplacian cospectral* if the Laplacian matrices $L(G_1)$ and $L(G_2)$ have the same spectrum. The following lemma also shows that vertex-switching is a method for producing Laplacian cospectral oriented hypergraphs.
\[OHVertSwitchingClassLapSpectrum\] Let $G_1$ and $G_2$ both be oriented hypergraphs. If $G_1\sim G_2$, then $G_1$ and $G_2$ are Laplacian cospectral.
The two products ${\mathrm{H}}(G){\mathrm{H}}(G)^{\text{T}}$ and ${\mathrm{H}}(G)^{\text{T}}{\mathrm{H}}(G)$ are matrices with the same nonzero eigenvalues. This means that an oriented hypergraph and its incidence dual have the same nonzero Laplacian eigenvalues.
\[OHGandIncidenceDualLapSpectrum\] If $G$ is an oriented hypergraph, then $L(G)$ and $L(G^*)$ have the same nonzero eigenvalues.
This follows from Lemma \[OHLapIncidenceRelation\].
If the number of vertices and edges are the same in an oriented hypergraph $G$ (i.e., $n=m$), it is impossible to distinguish $G$ and $G^*$ from their Laplacian spectra. We have already seen that a vertex-switching class has a Laplacian spectrum (see Lemma \[OHVertSwitchingClassLapSpectrum\]), but vertex-switching an oriented hypergraph $G$ will produce an oriented hypergraph that is usually very different from the incidence dual $G^*$. Hence, Corollary \[OHGandIncidenceDualLapSpectrum\] provides a potential method for producing a Laplacian cospectral oriented hypergraph that does not belong to the vertex-switching class of $G$. In fact, it provides a potential method for producing two Laplacian cospectral vertex-switching classes. That is, it may be that $[G]\neq[G^*]$, but $[G]$ and $[G^*]$ are Laplacian cospectral.
\[OHGandDualLaplacianCospectralExample\] Consider the oriented hypergraph $G$ and its incidence dual $G^*$ in Figure \[OHGandDualLaplacianCospectral\].
![An oriented hypergraph $G$ and its incidence dual $G^*$.[]{data-label="OHGandDualLaplacianCospectral"}](OHGandDualLaplacianExample.eps)
The Laplacian matrices of $G$ and $G^*$ are $$\begin{aligned}
L(G)&={\mathrm{H}}(G){\mathrm{H}}(G)^{\text{T}} = \left[\begin{array}{rrrr}
2 & 1 & 1 & 0 \\
1 & 2 & 1 & 0 \\
1 & 1 & 3 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1
\end{array}\right], \\\intertext{and }
L(G^*)&={\mathrm{H}}(G^*){\mathrm{H}}(G^*)^{\text{T}} = \left[\begin{array}{rrrr}
2 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 2 & 1 & 0 \\
1 & 1 & 2 & 1 \\
1 & 0 & 1 & 2
\end{array}\right].\end{aligned}$$ Both $L(G)$ and $L(G^*)$ have the same spectrum: $$\sigma(L(G))=\sigma(L(G^*))=\left\{ 1, 2, \frac{1}{2}(5-\sqrt{17}), \frac{1}{2}(5+\sqrt{17})\right\}.$$ Therefore, $G$ and $G^*$ are Laplacian cospectral. Thus, we have produced Laplacian cospectral oriented hypergraphs which happen to be incidence duals, but are not in the same vertex-switching class since their underling hypergraphs are different.\
[**Question 1:**]{} Are there other methods to produce Laplacian cospectral oriented hypergraphs other than vertex-switching or taking duals? What if we only wanted the nonzero Laplacian eigenvalues of both oriented hypergraphs to be the same?
The following is a simplification of the quadratic form $\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}L(G)\mathbf{x}$ for an oriented hypergraph $G$.
\[OHLaplQuadFormProp\] Let $G=(H,\sigma)$ be an oriented hypergraph. Suppose $\mathbf{x}=(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n)\in \mathbb{R}^n$. Then $$\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}L(G)\mathbf{x}=\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}{\mathrm{H}}(G){\mathrm{H}}(G)^{\text{T}}\mathbf{x} = \sum_{e \in E} \left(\sum_{v_k\in e} \sigma(v_k,e)x_k \right)^2.$$
[*Proof.*]{} Let $\mathbf{x}=(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n)\in \mathbb{R}^n$. Then $$(\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}{\mathrm{H}}(G))^{\text{T}}={\mathrm{H}}(G)^{\text{T}}\mathbf{x} = \left(\sum_{k=1}^n \eta_{v_ke_1}x_k, \cdots,\sum_{k=1}^n \eta_{v_ke_m}x_k\right).$$ Therefore, $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}} L(G) \mathbf{x} = \mathbf{x}^{\text{T}} {\mathrm{H}}(G) {\mathrm{H}}(G)^{\text{T}} \mathbf{x}&= (\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}} {\mathrm{H}}(G))(\mathbf{x}^{\text{T}} {\mathrm{H}}(G))^{\text{T}} \\
&= \sum_{t=1}^m\left( \sum_{k=1}^n \eta_{v_k e_t} x_k \right)^2\\
&= \sum_{e\in E}\left( \sum_{v_k\in e} \sigma(v_k,e) x_k \right)^2.\cvd\end{aligned}$$
For a signed graph, the incidence matrix relation $\eta_{je}=-\eta_{ie}{\operatorname{sgn}}(e)$ provides a method for further simplification of the quadratic form in terms of edge signs. Since there is no analogue of an edge sign for oriented hypergraphs, further simplification is difficult.
An edge in an oriented hypergraph is [*uniformly oriented*]{} if all incidences containing that edge have the same sign. An oriented hypergraph is *uniformly oriented* if all of its edges are uniformly oriented. For example, all of the edges from both $G$ and $G^*$ in Figure \[OHGandDualLaplacianCospectral\] are uniformly oriented, and thus, both $G$ and $G^*$ are uniformly oriented. Notice that uniformly oriented hypergraphs do not need to have every incidence in the oriented hypergraph signed the same, as in Example \[OHGandDualLaplacianCospectralExample\]. Also, notice that the associated Laplacian matrices $L(G)$ and $L(G^*)$ in Example \[OHGandDualLaplacianCospectralExample\] are nonnegative.
\[nonnegLapOHReq\] Let $G$ be a linear oriented hypergraph. Then $L(G)$ is nonnegative if and only if all edges are uniformly oriented.
For a simple oriented hypergraph $G$ the $(i,j)$-entry of $L(G)$ can be written as $l_{ij}=\sum_{e\in E} \eta_{ie}\eta_{je}$, by Lemma \[OHLapIncidenceRelation\]. The linear assumption, that is, the assumption that no two adjacent vertices are incident to more than one common edge, restricts the sum $\sum_{e\in E} \eta_{ie}\eta_{je}$ to have at most one nonzero term. Therefore, $l_{ij}$ is either 0 or is exactly $\eta_{ie}\eta_{je}$ for some edge $e$ incident to $v_i$ and $v_j$. Now $$\begin{aligned}
\eta_{ie}\eta_{je}\geq 0 &\iff [\eta_{ie}\geq 0\text{ and }\eta_{je}\geq 0]\text{ or }[\eta_{ie}\leq 0\text{ and }\eta_{je}\leq 0].\end{aligned}$$ Since this statement must be true for all vertices incident to a fixed edge $e$ it follows that all incidences containing edge $e$ have the same sign (or are otherwise 0). This ensures $L(G)$ is nonnegative if and only if all edges are uniformly oriented.
For an oriented hypergraph $G=(H,\sigma)$ let $\mathcal{U}(G)$ be the set of all uniformly oriented hypergraphs with the same underlying hypergraph $H$ as $G$.
Hou, Li and Pan showed that the Laplacian spectral radius of the all negative signed graph provides an upper bound on the Laplacian spectral radius of all signed graphs with the same underlying graph [@MR1950410] . For readers familiar with the signless Laplacian, this is equivalent to saying that the signless Laplacian spectral radius of a graph $\Gamma$ provides an upper bound on the Laplacian spectral radius of all signed graphs with underlying graph $\Gamma$ . The signed graph result generalizes the same result known for graphs [@Shu2002123; @MR2401311]. Here we state a generalization to oriented hypergraphs. It turns out that for oriented hypergraphs, the analogous structure of the all negative signed graph is a uniformly oriented hypergraph.
\[UnivLapUBOrientedHypergraphs\] Let $G=(H,\sigma)$ be a linear oriented hypergraph. Then for every $U \in \mathcal{U}(G)$, $$\lambda_1(L(G))\leq \lambda_1(L(U)).$$
The use of the quadratic form is inspired by the signed graphic proof in [@MR1950410 Lemma 3.1]. Let $G=(H,\sigma_G)$ and let $U=(H,\sigma_U)$ for some $U \in \mathcal{U}(G)$. Let $\mathbf{x}=(x_1,\ldots,x_n)\in\mathbb{R}^n$ be a unit eigenvector of $L(G)$ with corresponding eigenvalue $\lambda_1(L(G))$. By Proposition \[OHLaplQuadFormProp\]: $$\lambda_1(L(G)) = \mathbf{x}^{\text{T}}L(G)\mathbf{x} = \sum_{e \in E} \left( \sum_{v_k\in e} \sigma_G(v_k,e)x_k \right)^2
\leq \sum_{e \in E} \left(\sum_{v_k\in e} |x_k| \right)^2.$$ Since $\mathbf{x}=(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n)$ is a unit vector, $\mathbf{y}=(|x_1|,|x_2|,\ldots,|x_n|)$ is also a unit vector. Hence, $$\sum_{e \in E} \left(\sum_{v_k\in e} |x_k| \right)^2 = \sum_{e \in E} \left(\sum_{v_k\in e} y_k \right)^2 \leq \max_{\mathbf{z}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{z}=1}\sum_{e \in E} \left(\sum_{v_k\in e} z_k \right)^2.$$ Since $U$ is uniformly oriented we may assume $\sigma_U(v_k,e)=\alpha_e \in \{+1,-1\}$ for all $v_k\in e$. Now, by Proposition \[OHLaplQuadFormProp\] and Lemma \[RRThm\]: $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_1(L(U)) = \max_{\mathbf{z}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{z}=1} \mathbf{z}^{\text{T}}L(U)\mathbf{z} &= \max_{\mathbf{z}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{z}=1} \sum_{e \in E} \left( \sum_{v_k\in e} \sigma_U(v_k,e)z_k \right)^2\\
&= \max_{\mathbf{z}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{z}=1} \sum_{e \in E} \left( \sum_{v_k\in e} \alpha_e z_k \right)^2\\
&= \max_{\mathbf{z}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{z}=1} \sum_{e \in E} \alpha_e^2\cdot\left( \sum_{v_k\in e} z_k \right)^2\\
&= \max_{\mathbf{z}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{z}=1} \sum_{e \in E} 1\cdot\left( \sum_{v_k\in e} z_k \right)^2\\
&= \max_{\mathbf{z}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{z}=1} \sum_{e \in E}\left( \sum_{v_k\in e} z_k \right)^2.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, $\lambda_1(L(G))\leq \lambda_1(L(U))$.
[**Question 2:**]{} When does equality hold in Theorem \[UnivLapUBOrientedHypergraphs\]? If Hou, Li and Pan’s result for signed graphs further generalizes to oriented hypergraphs, then equality holds if and only if $G$ is connected and vertex-switching equivalent to $U$.\
Just like the adjacency eigenvalues, the Laplacian eigenvalues of an oriented hypergraph can be related to underlying structural parameters. The following result generalizes the same upper bound known for the Laplacian spectral radius of a graph and the signless Laplacian spectral radius of a graph [@MR2401311].
Let $G$ be an oriented hypergraph. Then $$\lambda_1(L(G))\leq \max_{i} \{ d_i +{\mathrm{NumAdj}}(v_i) \}.$$
By Lemma \[GDThm\], it is clear that for every $i\in\{1,\ldots,n\}$, $$|\lambda_1(L(G))|-|l_{ii}|\leq \big||\lambda_1(L(G))|-|l_{ii}|\big|\leq |\lambda_1(L(G))-l_{ii}|\leq \sum_{\substack{j=1\\j\neq i}}^n |l_{ij}|.$$ Therefore, $$|\lambda_1(L(G))|\leq |l_{ii}|+\sum_{\substack{j=1\\j\neq i}}^n |l_{ij}|\leq \max_{i}\Big\{ |l_{ii}|+\sum_{\substack{j=1\\j\neq i}}^n |l_{ij}|\Big\}
\leq \max_{i} \{ d_i +{\mathrm{NumAdj}}(v_i) \}.$$ Since $L(G)$ is positive semidefinite, $|\lambda_1(L(G))|=\lambda_1(L(G))$, and the result follows.
To obtain a relationship between the Laplacian eigenvalues of an oriented hypergraph $G$ and the weak vertex-deletion $G\backslash v$ we will use the effect of weak vertex-deletion on the incidence matrix. The same is also done for weak edge-deletion. Rusnak uses these results in his thesis [@OrientedHypergraphsThesisRusnak], but are not formally stated.
\[OHWeakVertDelIncidence\] Let $G$ be an oriented hypergraph.
1. For any vertex $v$, ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash v)$ can be obtained from ${\mathrm{H}}(G)$ by deleting the row of ${\mathrm{H}}(G)$ corresponding to vertex $v$.
2. For any edge $e$, ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash e)$ can be obtained from ${\mathrm{H}}(G)$ by deleting the column of ${\mathrm{H}}(G)$ corresponding to edge $e$.
For the proof of (1) recall that the weak vertex-deletion $G\backslash v$ will result in deleting $v$ from the vertex set, removing $v$ from every edge containing $v$, and deleting all incidences containing $v$. Now by definition the incidence matrix ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash v)$ will have size $(|V|-1)\times |E|=(n-1)\times m$, and its entries are exactly the orientations assigned to the individual incidences of $G\backslash v$ or 0 otherwise. The entries of ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash v)$ are identical to that of ${\mathrm{H}}(G)$, except that, since the weak vertex-deletion of $v$ removes all incidences of $G$ containing $v$, there is no row corresponding to $v$ in ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash v)$. The result follows.
To prove (2) recall that the weak edge-deletion $G\backslash e$ will result in deleting $e$ from the edge set and removing all incidences containing $e$. Now by definition the incidence matrix ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash e)$ will have size $|V|\times (|E|-1)=n\times (m-1)$, and its entries are exactly the orientations assigned to the individual incidences of $G\backslash e$ or 0 otherwise. The entries of ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash e)$ are identical to that of ${\mathrm{H}}(G)$, except that, since the weak edge-deletion of $e$ removes all incidences of $G$ containing $e$, there is no column corresponding to $e$ in ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash e)$. The result follows.
Similar to the adjacency eigenvalue relationship presented in Theorem \[OHAdjacencyInterlacing\], the Laplacian eigenvalues of an oriented hypergraph $G$ bound the Laplacian eigenvalues of the weak vertex-deletion $G\backslash v$. This Laplacian interlacing relationship is in some sense a generalization of the bounds known for the Laplacian eigenvalues of a graph $G$ and the Laplacian eigenvalues of the vertex-deleted graph $G\backslash v$ [@1176.05047], but again, the weak vertex-deletion is not exactly the same as vertex-deletion.
\[OHLapVertInterlacing\] Let $G$ be an oriented hypergraph, and let $v$ be some vertex of $G$. Then $$\lambda_{k+1}(L(G)) \leq \lambda_{k}(L(G\backslash v)) \leq \lambda_{k}(L(G))\text{ for all }k \in \{1,\ldots,n-1\}.$$
From Lemma \[OHWeakVertDelIncidence\], ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash v)$ is obtained from ${\mathrm{H}}(G)$ by deleting the row of ${\mathrm{H}}(G)$ corresponding to vertex $v$. Therefore, ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash v){\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash v)^{\text{T}}$ is a principle submatrix of ${\mathrm{H}}(G){\mathrm{H}}(G)^{\text{T}}$. By Lemma \[OHLapIncidenceRelation\], $L(G\backslash v)={\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash v){\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash v)^{\text{T}}$ and $L(G)={\mathrm{H}}(G){\mathrm{H}}(G)^{\text{T}}$. The result follows from Lemma \[interlacinglemma\].
There is also a relationship between the Laplacian eigenvalues of an oriented hypergraph $G$ and the Laplacian eigenvalues of the weak edge-deletion $G\backslash e$. This result generalizes the same result for the Laplacian eigenvalues of a graph [@Mohar91thelaplacian], the signless Laplacian eigenvalues of a graph [@MR2401311] and the Laplacian eigenvalues of a signed graph [@MR1950410].
\[OHLapEDGEInterlacing\] Let $G$ be an oriented hypergraph, and let $e$ be some edge of $G$. Then $$\lambda_{k+1}(L(G)) \leq \lambda_{k}(L(G\backslash e)) \leq \lambda_{k}(L(G))\text{ for all }k \in \{1,\ldots,n-1\}.$$
The proof is the same as the signed graph proof [@MR1950410 Lemma 3.7]. From Lemma \[OHWeakVertDelIncidence\], ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash e)$ is obtained from ${\mathrm{H}}(G)$ by deleting the column of ${\mathrm{H}}(G)$ corresponding to edge $e$. Therefore, ${\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash e)^{\text{T}}{\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash e)$ is a principle submatrix of\
${\mathrm{H}}(G)^{\text{T}}{\mathrm{H}}(G)$. Also, both ${\mathrm{H}}(G)^T{\mathrm{H}}(G)$ and ${\mathrm{H}}(G){\mathrm{H}}(G)^{\text{T}}$ have the same nonzero eigenvalues. By Lemma \[OHLapIncidenceRelation\], $L(G\backslash e)={\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash v){\mathrm{H}}(G\backslash e)^{\text{T}}$ and $L(G)={\mathrm{H}}(G){\mathrm{H}}(G)^{\text{T}}$. The result follows from Lemma \[interlacinglemma\].
The relationship between the Laplacian eigenvalues of $G$, $G\backslash v$ and $G\backslash e$ can be used to obtain Laplacian eigenvalue bounds. The next theorem relates the largest Laplacian eigenvalue to the maximum degree of an oriented hypergraph. This generalizes a signed graphic bound that appears in [@MR1950410], which generalizes an unsigned graphic version in [@MR2571608 p.186].
![An example of the deletion process described in the proof of Theorem \[OHLapLowerBoundDegree\] of oriented hypergraphs $G$, $G_1$, $G_2$ and $G_3$ all with vertex $v$ having degree 3. Also, the tree $T_1$ described in the same proof.[]{data-label="ExampleDeletions"}](ExampleDeletions.eps)
\[OHLapLowerBoundDegree\] Let $G$ be an oriented hypergraph where all edges have size at least 2. Then $$\Delta+1 \leq \lambda_1(L(G)).$$
[*Proof.*]{} The proof uses similar techniques to those of [@MR1950410 Theorem 3.10]. Let $v$ be a vertex in $G$ with $\text{deg}(v)=\Delta$. See Figure \[ExampleDeletions\] for a guiding example to the following general argument. Let $G_1$ be the oriented hypergraph obtained by weak edge-deletion of edges not incident to $v$ in $G$. By repeated use of Lemma \[OHLapEDGEInterlacing\], $\lambda_1(L(G_1))\leq\lambda_1(L(G))$. Let $G_2$ be the oriented hypergraph obtained by weak vertex-deletion of all isolated vertices in $G_1$. By repeated use of Lemma \[OHLapVertInterlacing\], $\lambda_1(L(G_2))\leq\lambda_1(L(G_1))$. For every edge $e$ of $G_2$ with $|e|\geq 3$, perform weak vertex-deletion on $|e|-2$ vertices of $e$ that have degree 1. After all such weak vertex-deletions, pick one of the possible resulting oriented hypergraphs $G_3$. By repeated use of Lemma \[OHLapVertInterlacing\], $\lambda_1(L(G_3))\leq\lambda_1(L(G_2))$. Notice that $G_3$ is a 2-uniform oriented hypergraph. The underlying (hyper)graph is the tree $T_1$ depicted in Figure \[ExampleDeletions\] with $N=\Delta+1$. By a simple calculation (see for example [@MR2900705 Lemma 5.6]), $\lambda_1(L(T_1))=\Delta+1$. It is clear that we can perform a vertex-switching on $G_3$ so that the adjacency signature is $+1$ on all adjacencies. Since vertex-switching leaves the Laplacian eigenvalues unchanged by Lemma \[OHVertSwitchingClassLapSpectrum\], it is now clear that $\lambda_1(L(G_3))=\Delta+1$. The result follows via the string of inequalities: $$\Delta+1=\lambda_1(L(G_3))\leq \lambda_1(L(G_2))\leq\lambda_1(L(G_1))\leq\lambda_1(L(G)).\cvd$$
Here we present Laplacian eigenvalue bounds which actually depend on the adjacency signature.
\[TOHthm1\] Let $G=(H,\sigma)$ be an oriented hypergraph. Then $$\label{OHNeqLB1gain}
\lambda_{n}(L(G)) \leq \frac{1}{n} \sum_{j=1}^n \big(d_j- {\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{\pm}(v_j)\big) \leq \lambda_{1}(L(G)).$$
[*Proof.*]{} The proof method is similar to [@MR2571608 Theorem 3.2.1] and [@MR2571608 Theorem 8.1.25] that was used for the adjacency eigenvalue bounds in Theorem \[OHAdjacencyBounds1\]. Let $\mathbf{j}:=(1,\ldots,1)\in\mathbb{R}^n$. Let $N_k:={\bf j}^{\text{T}} L(G)^k {\bf j}$. From Lemma \[RRThm\] the following is clear: $$(\lambda_{n}(L(G)))^k \leq N_k/\mathbf{j}^{\text{T}}\mathbf{j} \leq (\lambda_{1}(L(G)))^k.$$ Using Equation we will compute $N_1$; thus, making inequality true. $$\begin{aligned}
N_1 = {\bf j}^{\text{T}} L(G) {\bf j}&={\bf j}^{\text{T}} (D(G)-A(G)) {\bf j} \\
&= {\bf j}^{\text{T}}\big((d_1,\ldots,d_n)-({\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{\pm}(v_1),\ldots, {\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{\pm}(v_n))\big)\\
& = \sum_{j=1}^n \big(d_j- {\mathrm{NumAdj}}^{\pm}(v_j)\big).\cvd\end{aligned}$$
Better bounds can be found by computing $N_k$ for larger $k$ values.
Hypergraph Spectra {#HypergraphSpectra}
==================
A graph can be thought of as a signed graph with all edges labeled $+1$. The oriented hypergraphic analogue of a signed graph with all edges labeled $+1$ is to have all adjacencies signed $+1$. However, if the hypergraph has an edge of size greater than 2, there is no way to assign vertex-edge incidence labels (find $\sigma$) so that all adjacencies are signed $+1$. Therefore, in general, there is no natural way to create an oriented hypergraph with all adjacencies signed $+1$.
However, it is possible to create a hypergraphic analogue of a signed graph with all edges signed $-1$. To do this we need to assign vertex-edge incidences labellings (find $\sigma$) so that all adjacencies are signed $-1$. This is accomplished if and only if all edges are uniformly oriented. This is obvious since a $+1$ adjacency is formed when an edge is contained in two incidences that are oppositely signed. Hence, a hypergraph $H$ can be thought of as an oriented hypergraph $G=(H,\sigma)$ where all edges are uniformly oriented. All such uniformly oriented hypergraphs for a fixed $H$ produce the same adjacency and Laplacian matrices. To further simplify things we can consider the two special cases where all edges are uniformly oriented the same way. That is, not only do we require a uniformly oriented hypergraph, but one where every incidence is given the same sign. In first case, all incidences of $H$ are assigned $+1$, so that all adjacencies are signed $-1$, producing the oriented hypergraph $+H=(H,+1)$. In the second case, all incidences of $H$ are assigned $-1$, so that all adjacencies are signed $-1$, producing the oriented hypergraph $-H=(H,-1)$. These two choices are the simplest possible orientations to pick and naturally define adjacency and Laplacian matrices.
Therefore, to study hypergraph spectra one could use the following definitions. The *adjacency matrix of a hypergraph $H$* is defined as $$A(H) := A(H,+1) = A(H,-1).$$ The *Laplacian matrix of a hypergraph $H$* is defined as $$L(H) := L(H,+1) = L(H,-1).$$ These choices result in adjacency and Laplacian matrices that almost resemble the adjacency and Laplacian matrices developed by Rodríguez [@MR1890984]. However, since our adjacency entries will always be negative, our definition of the adjacency matrix is actually the negative of Rodríguez’s. The Laplacian matrix can then be produced under this assumption. For these special cases the results of Rodríguez [@MR1890984] could naturally be generalized.
One advantage of these definitions for the adjacency and Laplacian matrices of a hypergraph is that there is no requirement for the hypergraph to be $k$-uniform, which has been the case for most hypergraph spectra definitions [@MR1235565; @MR1405722; @MR1325271; @MR2842309]. Another advantage is that these matrices are algebraically simpler to work with than hypermatrices, which provide an alternative version of hypergraph spectra for $k$-uniform hypergraphs [@MR2900714; @extremalspectra1; @nikiforov]. Nikiforov states in [@nikiforov] that this version of hypergraph spectra “is defined as a conditional maximum; thus, its usability in extremal problems is rooted in its very nature." None of the bounds above involve extremal problems, but it would be interesting to see if these definitions could be used to solve such problems. Cooper and Dutle’s work [@MR2900714] covers a broad range of topics and includes structural bounds similar to the results above. In particular, Theorems \[OHSpecRadiusandMaxDegree\] and \[OHAdjacencyInterlacing\] are related to Theorems 3.8 and 3.9 in [@MR2900714], but the theorems presented here are valid for all hypergraphs (including oriented hypergraphs), and not just $k$-uniform hypergraphs. Another advantage of the approach presented here is that the classic relationship between the incidence, adjacency and Laplacian matrices known for graphs and signed graphs is preserved to the hypergraph setting in Lemma \[OHLapIncidenceRelation\].
Acknowledgments
===============
The author would like to thank the referee for the helpful comments for improving the quality of this paper.
[10]{}
Fan R. K. Chung. The [L]{}aplacian of a hypergraph. In [*Expanding graphs ([P]{}rinceton, [NJ]{}, 1992)*]{}, volume 10 of [*DIMACS Ser. Discrete Math. Theoret. Comput. Sci.*]{}, pages 21–36. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1993.
Lothar Collatz and Ulrich Sinogowitz. Spektren endlicher [G]{}rafen. , 21:63–77, 1957.
Joshua Cooper and Aaron Dutle. Spectra of uniform hypergraphs. , 436(9):3268–3292, 2012.
Drago[š]{} Cvetkovi[ć]{}, Peter Rowlinson, and Slobodan Simi[ć]{}. , volume 75 of [*London Mathematical Society Student Texts*]{}. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010.
Drago[š]{} Cvetkovi[ć]{}, Peter Rowlinson, and Slobodan K. Simi[ć]{}. Eigenvalue bounds for the signless [L]{}aplacian. , 81(95):11–27, 2007.
Keqin Feng and Wen-Ch’ing Winnie Li. Spectra of hypergraphs and applications. , 60(1):1–22, 1996.
Joel Friedman and Avi Wigderson. On the second eigenvalue of hypergraphs. , 15(1):43–65, 1995.
Frank J. Hall, Kinnari Patel, and Michael Stewart. Interlacing results on matrices associated with graphs. , 68:113–127, 2009.
A. J. Hoffman. On the exceptional case in a characterization of the arcs of a complete graph. , 4:487–496, 1960.
Roger A. Horn and Charles R. Johnson. . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990. Corrected reprint of the 1985 original.
Yaoping Hou, Jiongsheng Li, and Yongliang Pan. On the [L]{}aplacian eigenvalues of signed graphs. , 51(1):21–30, 2003.
Peter Keevash, John Lenz, and Dheuv Mubayi. Spectral extremal problems for hypergraphs. preprint: [arXiv:1304.0050](http://arxiv.org/pdf/1304.0050v1.pdf).
Bolian Liu and Hong-Jian Lai. , volume 3 of [*Network Theory and Applications*]{}. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2000. With a foreword by Richard A. Brualdi.
Linyuan Lu and Xing Peng. High-ordered random walks and generalized [L]{}aplacians on hypergraphs. In [*Algorithms and models for the web graph*]{}, volume 6732 of [ *Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci.*]{}, pages 14–25. Springer, Heidelberg, 2011.
Bojan Mohar. The [L]{}aplacian spectrum of graphs. In [*Graph theory, combinatorics, and applications. [V]{}ol. 2 ([K]{}alamazoo, [MI]{}, 1988)*]{}, Wiley-Intersci. Publ., pages 871–898. Wiley, New York, 1991.
Vladimir Nikiforov. An analytic theory of extremal hypergraph problems. preprint: [arXiv:1305.1073](http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.1073v2.pdf).
Nathan Reff. Spectral properties of complex unit gain graphs. , 436(9):3165–3176, 2012.
Nathan Reff and Lucas J. Rusnak. An oriented hypergraphic approach to algebraic graph theory. , 437(9):2262–2270, 2012.
J. A. Rodr[í]{}guez. On the [L]{}aplacian eigenvalues and metric parameters of hypergraphs. , 50(1):1–14, 2002.
Lucas J. Rusnak. . ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2010. Thesis (Ph.D.)–State University of New York at Binghamton.
Jin-Long Shu, Yuan Hong, and Wen-Ren Kai. A sharp upper bound on the largest eigenvalue of the [L]{}aplacian matrix of a graph. , 347:123–129, 2002.
Thomas Zaslavsky. Orientation of signed graphs. , 12(4):361–375, 1991.
[^1]: Department of Mathematics, The College at Brockport: State University of New York, Brockport, NY 14420, USA (<[email protected]>).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'If a rectangular diagram represents the trivial knot, then it can be deformed into the trivial rectangular diagram with only four edges by a finite sequence of merge operations and exchange operations, without increasing the number of edges, which was shown by I. A. Dynnikov in [@D1] and [@D2]. Using this, Henrich and Kauffman gave in [@HK] an upper bound for the number of Reidemeister moves needed for unknotting a knot diagram of the trivial knot. However, exchange or merge moves on the top and bottom pairs of edges of rectangular diagrams are not considered in the proof of [@HK]. In this paper, we show that there is a rectangular diagram of the trivial knot which needs such an exchange move for being unknotted, and study upper bound of the number of Reidemeister moves needed for realizing such an exchange or merge move.'
author:
- 'Tatsuo Ando, Chuichiro Hayashi and Yuki Nishikawa'
title: Realizing Exterior Cromwell moves on rectangular diagrams by Reidemeister moves
---
[^1]
Introduction {#sect:introduction}
============
Birman and Menasco introduced arc-presentation of links in [@BM], and Cromwell formulated it in [@C]. Dynnikov pointed out in [@D1] and [@D2] that Cromwell’s argument in [@C] almost shows that any arc-presentation of a split link can be deformed into one which is $\lq\lq$visibly split" by a finite sequence of exchange moves. He also showed that any arc-presentation of the trivial knot can be deformed into trivial one with only two arcs by a finite sequence of merge moves and exchange moves, without using divide moves which increase the number of arcs. As is shown in page 41 in [@C], an arc-presentation is almost equivalent to a rectangular diagram.
![A rectangular diagram of the trivial knot with $8$ vertical edges[]{data-label="fig:TrivialKnot8arcs"}](s_TrivialKnot8arcs.eps){width="45mm"}
A [*rectangular diagram*]{} of a link is a link diagram in the plane ${\mathbb R}^2$ which is composed of vertical lines and horizontal lines such that no pair of vertical lines are colinear, no pair of horizontal lines are colinear, and the vertical line passes over the horizontal line at each crossing. See Figure \[fig:TrivialKnot8arcs\]. These vertical lines and horizontal lines are called [*edges*]{} of the rectangular diagram. Every rectangular diagram has the same number of vertical edges and horizontal edges. It is known that every link has a rectangular diagram (Proposition in page 42 in [@C]).
![Interior horizontal merges[]{data-label="fig:merge1"}](s_merge1.eps){width="90mm"}
Cromwell moves, which are described in the next three paragraphs, are elementary moves for rectangular diagrams of links. They do not change type of links. Moreover, Theorem in page 45 in [@C] and Proposition 4 in [@D1] state that, if two rectangular diagrams represent the same link, then one is obtained from the other by a finite sequence of these elementary moves and rotation moves, which is also introduced below.
![Exterior horizontal merges[]{data-label="fig:merge2"}](s_merge2.eps){width="70mm"}
First, we recall merge moves. If two horizontal (resp. vertical) edges connected by a single vertical (resp. horizontal) edge have no other horizontal (resp. vertical) edges between their ordinates (resp. abscissae), then we can amalgamate the three edges into a single horizontal (resp. vertical) edge. This move is called an [*interior horizontal (resp. vertical) merge*]{}. See Figure \[fig:merge1\] for examples of interior horizontal merge moves. If the top and bottom (resp. the leftmost and rightmost) horizontal (resp. vertical) edges are connected by a single vertical (resp. horizontal) edge, then we can amalgamate the three edges into a single horizontal (resp. vertical) edge. We may place the new horizontal (resp. vertical) edge either at the top height or at the bottom height (resp. either in the leftmost position or in the rightmost position). See Figure \[fig:merge2\]. We call this move an [*exterior horizontal (resp. vertical) merge*]{}. (Even when we consider rectangular link diagrams in the $2$-sphere $(\cong {\mathbb R}^2 \cup \{ \infty \})$, exterior merge moves are distinct from interior merge moves as moves on general link diagrams.) Note that a merge move decreases the number of vertical edges and that of horizontal edges by one. The inverse moves of merge moves are called [*divide moves*]{}.
![Interleaved pair and non-interleaved pairs[]{data-label="fig:interleaved"}](s_interleaved.eps){width="90mm"}
To describe exchange moves, we need a terminology. Two vertical edges are said to be [*interleaved*]{}, if the heights of their endpoints alternate. See Figure \[fig:interleaved\]. Similarly, we define interleaved two horizontal edges.
![Interior horizontal exchange moves[]{data-label="fig:exchange1"}](s_exchange1.eps){width="90mm"}
If two horizontal edges at mutually adjacent heights are not interleaved, then we can exchange their heights. See Figure \[fig:exchange1\]. This move is called an [*interior horizontal exchange*]{}. If the top horizontal edge and the bottom one are not interleaved, then we can exchange their heights. We call this move an [*exterior horizontal exchange*]{}. See Figure \[fig:ExteriorExchange\], which depicts an exterior horizontal exchange move on the rectangular diagram in Figure \[fig:TrivialKnot8arcs\]. (Even when we consider rectangular link diagrams in the $2$-sphere $(\cong {\mathbb R}^2 \cup \{ \infty \})$, exterior exchange moves are distinct from interior exchange moves as moves on general link diagrams.) Similarly, we define [*vertical exchange*]{} moves.
![An exterior horizontal exchange move[]{data-label="fig:ExteriorExchange"}](s_ExteriorExchange.eps){width="70mm"}
The next result of Dynnikov gives a finite algorithm to decide whether a given rectangular diagram represents the trivial knot or not. The original statement is in languages on arc-presentations.
\[theorem:D\][\[Dynnikov [@D1], [@D2]\]]{} Any rectangular diagram of the trivial knot can be deformed into trivial one with only two vertical edges and two horizontal edges by a finite sequence of merge moves and exchange moves.
Note that the sequence in the above theorem contains no divide moves. Hence the sequence gives a monotone simplification, that is, no move in the sequence increases the number of edges. There are only finitely many rectangle diagrams with a fixed number of edges. Thus the above theorem gives a finite algorithm for the decision problem.
A Reidemeister move is a local move of a link diagram as in Figure \[fig:Reid123\]. An RI (resp. II) move creates or deletes a monogon face (resp. a bigon face). An RIII move is performed on a $3$-gon face, deleting it and creating a new one. Any such move does not change the link type. As Alexander and Briggs [@AB] and Reidemeister [@R] showed, for any pair of diagrams $D_1$, $D_2$ which represent the same link type, there is a finite sequence of Reidemeister moves which deforms $D_1$ to $D_2$.
![[]{data-label="fig:Reid123"}](s_Reid123.eps){width="9cm"}
In [@HK], A. Henrich and L. Kauffman announced an upper bound of the number of Reidemeister moves needed for unknotting by applying Dynnikov’s theorem to rectangular diagrams. Lemma 7 in [@HK] states that no more than $n-2$ Reidemeister moves are required to perform an exchange move on a rectangular diagram with $n$ vertical edges. However, the proof of Lemma 7 in [@HK] does not consider the exterior exchange moves.
In this paper, we show the next two theorems.
\[theorem:NeedsExteriorExchange\] There is a rectangular diagram of the trivial knot which needs an exterior exchange move for being deformed into the trivial rectangular diagram with two vertical edges and two horizontal edges by a sequence of exchange moves and merge moves.
In fact, Figure \[fig:TrivialKnot8arcs\] is one of such a rectangular diagram with the smallest number of edges. Theorem \[theorem:NeedsExteriorExchange\] is shown in section \[section:NeedsExteriorExchange\].
\[theorem:RealizingExteriorCromwell\] Let $n$ be an integer with $n \ge 2$, and $\epsilon$ the integer with $\epsilon \in \{ 0,1 \}$ and $n \equiv \epsilon$ (mod $2$). If a rectangular diagram $D$ with $n$ vertical edges admits an exterior exchange move (resp. an exterior merge move), then a sequence of $3n^2-4n-4-3\epsilon$ (resp. $(3n^2-4n-4-3\epsilon)/2$) or less number of Reidemeister moves either (1) deforms $D$ into a knot diagram with no crossings, (2) deforms $D$ into a disconnected link diagram, or (3) realizes the exterior exchange move (resp. the exterior merge move).
In addition, a sequence of $(3n^2-4n-2-3\epsilon)/2$ or less number of Reidemeister moves either does (1) or (2) as above, or (3)$'$ realizes arbitrary one of the two rotation moves.
![Rectangular diagrams with the maximal number of crossings[]{data-label="fig:keen"}](s_keen.eps){width="90mm"}
![Rectangular diagrams with the maximal number of crossings[]{data-label="fig:keen2"}](keen2.eps){width="90mm"}
This theorem is proved in section \[section:RealizingExteriorCromwell\]. In the proof of the above theorem, we use two propositions below. We say that a horizontal (resp. vertical) edge is of [*length*]{} $|j-i|$ if it connects the $i$th and the $j$th vertical (resp. horizontal) edges from the left (resp. the bottom).
\[proposition:NumberOfCrossings\] Let $n$ be an integer larger than $1$. Let $R$ be a rectangular diagram of a link with $n$ vertical edges. Then $R$ has at most $(n^2-2n-1)/2$ crossings when $n$ is odd, and at most $(n^2-2n)/2$ crossings when $n$ is even. The sum of lengths of the edges of $R$ is at most $n^2-1$ when $n$ is odd, and at most $n^2$ when $n$ is even.
This estimation is keen. The rectangular diagrams with even number of vertical edges in Figure \[fig:keen\] and those with odd number of vertical edges in Figure \[fig:keen2\] give concrete examples which realize the maximal numbers. This proposition is shown in section \[section:NumberOfCrossings\].
![Jump moves[]{data-label="fig:jump"}](s_jump.eps){width="90mm"}
As will be shown in section \[section:RealizingExteriorCromwell\], an exterior exchange (resp. merge) move can be realized by a sequence of two jump moves (resp. by a single jump move). We recall the definition of a jump move. Let $D$ be a link diagram on the plane ${\mathbb R}^2$. Let $s$ be an [*overstrand*]{} of $D$, that is, $s$ is a subarc of $D$ such that $s$ does not go under any crossing of $D$ and the endpoints $\partial s$ is free from the crossings of $D$. Let $u$ be an arc with $u \cap s = \partial u = \partial s$ such that $u$ is transverse to $D$. A [*jump move*]{} bringing $s$ to $u$ is an operation on $D$ which deletes $s$ and then adds $u$ as an overstrand. Note that the resulting link diagram $D'$ represents the same link as $D$. See Figure \[fig:jump\], where the two jump moves are described, and they realize the exterior merge moves in Figure \[fig:merge2\]. We define a jump move for an understrand similarly.
\[proposition:jump\] Let $D$ be a link diagram on the plane ${\mathbb R}^2$. Suppose that $D$ admits a jump move which brings an overstrand $s$ of $D$ to another arc $u$. The circle $s \cup u$ bounds a disk, say $Q$, in ${\mathbb R}^2$. Let $\bar{D}$ be the underlying planar graph of $D$ which is obtained by deleting over-under information of crossings of $D$. Set $D_Q = {\rm cl}\,(\bar{D} \cap {\rm int}\,Q)$, where [cl]{} and [int]{} denote the closure and the interior respectively. We regard the points $D_Q \cap \partial Q$ as vertices, where $\partial Q$ denotes the boundary circle of $Q$. Then $D_Q$ forms a graph. Let $V$ be the number of vertices of $D_Q$ in [int]{}$Q$, and $E$ the number of edges of $D_Q$. Then a sequence of $V+E$ or less number of Reidemeister moves (1) deforms $D$ into a knot diagram with no crossings, (2) deforms $D$ into a disconnected link diagram, or (3) realizes the jump move.
Note that the edges in $\bar{D} \cap s$ are not contained in $D_Q$. A similar thing holds for a jump move for an understrand. The above proposition is a correction of Remark 2 in [@H], and a stronger proposition is proved in section \[section:jump\].
Proof of Theorem \[theorem:NeedsExteriorExchange\] {#section:NeedsExteriorExchange}
==================================================
In this section, we show Theorem \[theorem:NeedsExteriorExchange\]. The sequence as in Dynnikov’s theorem (Theorem \[theorem:D\]) sometimes needs to contain exterior exchange moves. In fact, the rectangle diagram shown in Figure \[fig:TrivialKnot8arcs\] represents the trivial knot. It admits no merge moves since it does not have an edge of length $1$ or $8-1$. We cannot apply any interior horizontal exchange move to the diagram because every pair of horizontal edges in adjacent levels are interleaved. Similarly, no interior vertical exchange move can be performed on this diagram. Hence every sequence as in Dynnikov’s theorem on this diagram must begin with the exterior exchange move.
A similar argument shows that the rectangle diagram of the trviail knot shown in Figure \[fig:TrivialKnot9arcs\] admits no merge moves, no vertical exchange moves and no interior horizontal exchange moves. It only admits the exterior horizontal exchange move.
![A rectangular diagram of the trivial knot with $9$ vertical edges[]{data-label="fig:TrivialKnot9arcs"}](s_TrivialKnot9arcs.eps){width="45mm"}
It can easily be confirmed by a computer that every rectangular diagram of the trivial knot with $7$ or less number of vertical edges admits a merge move or an interior exchange move, and that every rectangular diagram of the trivial knot with $8$ vertical edges admits both the exterior vertical exchange move and the extrior horizontal exchange move if it admits no merge moves and no interior exchange moves.
Proof of Proposition \[proposition:NumberOfCrossings\] {#section:NumberOfCrossings}
======================================================
In this section, we prove Proposition \[proposition:NumberOfCrossings\]. Let $D$ be a rectangular diagram of a knot or a link. We place $D$ in the $x$-$y$ plane so that the $i$th vertical line from the left is in the line $x=i$ for $i \in \{ 1,2,\cdots, n \}$ and so that the $j$th horizontal line from the bottom in the line $y=j$ for $j \in \{ 1,2,\cdots, n \}$. The [*length*]{} of a vertical (horizontal) edge $e$ is the difference of the ordinates (resp. abscissae) of the endpoints of $e$. Let $\ell(e)$ denote it. Then $e$ has at most $\ell(e)-1$ crossing points on it. We consider the sum $\Sigma$ of the length of all the horizontal edges of $D$. Let $e_i$ be the $i$th horizontal edge from the bottom, and $r_i$ and $l_i$ the abscissae of the right and left endpoints respectively. Then we have $\ell(e_i) = r_i - l_i$ and $\Sigma = \sum_{i=1}^n \ell(e_i) = \sum_{i=1}^n (r_i - l_i)$. We consider the multi-set $E=\{ r_1, r_2, \cdots, r_n, l_1, l_2, \cdots, l_n \}$, where a multi-set may contain the same element multiple times. Then $E$ contains each of the natural numbers $1,2,\cdots, n$ twice.
In the case where $n$ is even, $\Sigma$ is the largest when $\{ r_1, r_2, \cdots, r_n \} = \{ n,n,n-1,n-1,\cdots, (n/2)+1, (n/2)+1 \}$ and $\{ l_1, l_2, \cdots, l_n \} = \{ 1,1, 2,2, \cdots, n/2, n/2 \}$ as multi-sets. Hence $\Sigma$ is at most $2 \times n(n+1)/2 - 4 \times (n/2)((n/2)+1)/2
= n(n+1) - n((n/2)+1)
= n^2/2$. Thus the number of crossing of $D$ is at most $\Sigma-n \le n(n-2)/2$ when $n$ is even. This maximal number is realized by the rectangular diagrams in Figure \[fig:keen\].
In the case where $n$ is odd, $\Sigma$ is the largest when $\{ r_1, r_2, \cdots, r_n \} = \{ n,n,n-1,n-1,\cdots, (n+3)/2, (n+3)/2, (n+1)/2 \}$ and $\{ l_1, l_2, \cdots, l_n \} = \{ 1,1, 2,2, \cdots, (n-1)/2, (n-1)/2, (n+1)/2 \}$ as multi-sets. Hence $\Sigma$ is at most $2 \times n(n+1)/2 - 2 \times ((n+1)/2)(((n+1)/2)+1)/2 -2 \times ((n-1)/2)(((n-1)/2)+1)/2$ $= n(n+1) - (n+1)(n+3)/4 - (n-1)(n+1)/4
= n(n+1) - (n+1)(2n+2)/4$ $= (n+1)(2n-(n+1))/2
= (n+1)(n-1)/2$. Thus the number of crossing of $D$ is at most $\Sigma-n \le (n^2-2n-1)/2$ when $n$ is odd. This maximal number is realized by the rectangular diagrams in Figure \[fig:keen2\].
Proof of Theorem \[theorem:RealizingExteriorCromwell\] {#section:RealizingExteriorCromwell}
======================================================
In this section, we show Theorem \[theorem:RealizingExteriorCromwell\] using Proposition \[proposition:jump\]. The proof of Proposition \[proposition:jump\] is given in the next section.
![Realizing an exterior exchange move by jump moves[]{data-label="fig:ExteriorExchangeViaJump"}](s_ExteriorExchangeViaJump.eps){width="90mm"}
We first consider an exterior exchange move on a rectangular diagram $D$. Without loss of generality, we assume that it is horizontal. It can be realized by a sequence of two jump moves as in Figure \[fig:ExteriorExchangeViaJump\]. (See section \[sect:introduction\] for the definition of a jump move.) We can assume, without loss of generality, that the top edge is not shorter than the bottom one. The first jump move brings the top edge to the bottom, and the second jump move brings the edge second to the bottom, which was the bottom one before the first jump move, to the top. For the $i$th jump move with $i=1$ or $2$, the original arc $s_i$ of the rectangular diagram jumps to the arc $u_i$, and $s_i \cup u_i$ bounds a disk $Q_i$ in ${\mathbb R}^2$. Let $D'$ be the rectangular diagram obtained from $D$ by the first jump move. We define the graph $D_{Q_1}$ and $D'_{Q_2}$ as in Proposition \[proposition:jump\]. Let $D_{Q_2}$ stand for $D'_{Q_2}$ for simplicity of notation. Then int$Q_i$ contains at most $\{ n(n-2) -\epsilon \}/2$ crossings of the rectangular diagram by Proposition \[proposition:NumberOfCrossings\], where $\epsilon = 1$ when $n$ is odd, and $\epsilon=0$ when $n$ is even. Each of the two vertical edges in $\partial Q_i$ intersects at most $n-2$ horizontal edges, and such intersection points are endpoints of edges of $D_{Q_i}$. (Note that $u_1$ does not intersect the bottom edge because the top edge is not shorter than the bottom one.) Since four endpoints gather at every vertex of ${\bar D}_{Q_i}$ in int$Q_i$, the disk $Q_i$ contains at most $(4 (\{ n(n-2)-\epsilon \}/2)+2(n-2))/2= n^2-n-2-\epsilon$ edges. Hence, by Proposition \[proposition:jump\], a sequence of at most $(\{ n(n-2)-\epsilon \}/2)+(n^2-n-2-\epsilon)$ Reidemeister moves either deforms $D$ or $D'$ into a knot diagram with no crossings, deforms $D$ or $D'$ into a disconnected link diagram, or realizes the $i$th jump move. Thus a sequence of at most $2((\{n(n-2)-\epsilon\}/2)+(n^2-n-2-\epsilon))=3n^2-4n-4-3\epsilon$ Reidemeister moves either deforms $D$ into a knot diagram with no crossings, deforms $D$ into a disconnected link diagram, or realizes the exterior exchange move.
A rotation move can be realized by a single jump move as shown in the first jump move in Figure \[fig:ExteriorExchangeViaJump\]. In this case, the two vertical edges in $\partial Q$ intersects at most $n-1$ horizontal edges, where $Q$ is the rectangle bounded by the arcs before and after the jump. Hence $(3n^2-4n-2-3\epsilon)/2$ Reidemeister moves will do.
![Realizing an exterior merge move by a jump move[]{data-label="fig:ExteriorMergeViaJump2"}](ExteriorMergeViaJump2.eps){width="70mm"}
An exterior merge move on a rectangular diagram $D$ can be realized by a single jump move as in Figures \[fig:jump\] and \[fig:ExteriorMergeViaJump2\]. In each example in Figure \[fig:ExteriorMergeViaJump2\], the top edge and the bottom edge are in the same side of the vertical edge connecting them. In Figure \[fig:jump\], they are in the opposite sides. A similar argument as above shows the theorem for exterior merge moves.
Proof of Proposition \[proposition:jump\] {#section:jump}
=========================================
In this section, we prove Proposition \[proposition:jump\], which is used in the previous section. We show a little stronger proposition below.
![the pattern of $E_{svs}$[]{data-label="fig:Esvs"}](s_Esvs.eps){width="40mm"}
\[proposition:stronger\] Let $D$ be a link diagram on the plane ${\mathbb R}^2$ which admits a jump move replacing an overstrand (resp. understrand) $s$ with another overstrand (resp. understrand) $u$. Then, for an integer $\Sigma$ defined below, a sequence of at most $\Sigma$ Reidemeister moves either (1) deforms $D$ into a disconnected link diagram, (2) deforms $D$ into a knot diagram with no crossings, or (3) realizes the jump move.
The circle $s \cup u$ bounds a disk $Q$ in ${\mathbb R}^2$. Let $\bar{D}$ be a graph obtained from the link diagram $D$ by ignoring the over-under informations of crossings of $D$. The crossings of $D$ become the vertices of $\bar{D}$. Set $D_Q = {\rm cl}(\bar{D} \cap {\rm int}\,Q)$. We regard the points $D_Q \cap (\partial Q)$ as vertices of the graph $D_Q$. We set $\Sigma = V + E_i + E_{ss} + E_{\partial} + E_s + E_{svs}$, the sum of numbers defined as below. Let $V$ be the number of vertices of $D_Q$ in [int]{}$Q$. Let $E_i$ be the number of edges of $D_Q$ which do not have an endpoint in the arc $s$, $E_{ss}$ the number of edges of $D_Q$ which have both endpoints in [int]{}$s$, $E_{\partial}$ the number of edges of $D_Q$ which has a single endpoint in $\partial s$. For a vertex $v$ of $D_Q$ in [int]{}$Q$, let $E_{sv}$ denote the number of edges of $D_Q$ which have an endpoint at $v$ and the other one in [int]{}$s$. Then, let $E_s$ be the sum of [max]{}$(0, E_{sv}-2)$ over all vertices of $D_Q$ in [int]{}$Q$. Let $E_{svs}$ be the number of connected components $C$ of $D_Q$ as below. $C$ has a vertex, say $v$, with $E_{sv}=2$ in [int]{}$Q$. There are precisely two edges, say $e$ and $f$, which connect $v$ and vertices, say $v_e$ and $v_f$, in [int]{}$s$ respectively. Let $t$ be the subarc of $s$ with $\partial t = v_e \cup v_f$, and $R$ the disk bounded by the circle $e \cup f \cup t$. The other edges incident to $v$ than $e$ and $f$ are in $R$, and $t$ contains no vertices of $C$ other than $v_e$ and $v_f$. (The arc $t$ may contain vertices of $D_Q - C$.) See Figure \[fig:Esvs\].
Moreover, when $E_{\partial} = 0$, there is a sequence of at most $\Sigma' = 2V + E_i + E_{ss} + E_{\partial} + E_s + E_{svs}$ Reidemeister moves containing no RI moves which does (1), (2) or (3) above.
Note that edges with both endpoints in int$u$ and that with one endpoint in int$u$ and the other in int$Q$ are counted in $E_i$.
This proposition is a correction of Lemma 4 in [@H], where the term $E_{svs}$ is not considered. The diagram in Figure \[fig:exception\] (a)-1 gives a counter example to Lemma 4 in [@H], where $V + E_i + E_{ss} + E_{\partial} + E_s = 1 + 1 + 0 + 0 + 0 = 2$, and wee need at least three Reidemeister moves to realize the jump move. Moreover, the argument in the proof of Lemma 4 in [@H] contains several overlooks. So, we give a precise proof of the above proposition here. Before that, we prove Proposition \[proposition:jump\] using the above proposition.
We prove Proposition \[proposition:jump\]. It’s enough to show that $E \ge E_i + E_{ss} + E_{\partial} + E_s + E_{svs}$. This can be easily seen because $E_s$ is covered by the edges connecting a vertex in int$s$ and another vertex $v$ in int$Q$ with $E_{sv} \ge 3$, $E_{svs}$ is covered by the edges connecting a vertex in int$s$ and another vertex $v$ in int$Q$ with $E_{sv} = 2$, and the other terms $E_i, E_{ss}, E_{\partial}$ are covered by the edges which do not connect a vertex in int$s$ and that in int$Q$.
![These moves take first priority.[]{data-label="fig:exception"}](s_exception.eps){width="140mm"}
We prove Proposition \[proposition:stronger\]. When $\Sigma=0$, we have $V=E_i=E_{ss}=E_{\partial}=E_s=E_{svs}=0$, and hence all the edges of $D_Q$ connect int$s$ and int$u$. This means that $s$ and $u$ are parallel, and the diagram obtained by the jump move is the same as the original one. Thus we need no Reidemeister moves, and the proposition follows in this case.
We consider the case where $\Sigma > 0$. We distinguish several cases, present a sequence of Reidemeister moves in each case, and show that the number of Reidemeister moves is less than or equal to the decrease in $\Sigma$. Then the proposition is proved by induction on $\Sigma$. We can assume that $D$ is connected and has a crossing. Otherwise, we have conclusion (1) or (2).
![Moves (1) through (4)[]{data-label="fig:ordinary1"}](s_ordinary1.eps){width="80mm"}
First, when the graph $D_Q$ has the pattern described in the left of Figure \[fig:exception\] (a)-1 or (b), we perform the sequence of Reidemeister moves shown in those figures. If there is no subgraph of $D_Q$ in the pattern of Figure \[fig:exception\], then we perform a Reidemeister move shown in Figures \[fig:ordinary1\] and \[fig:ordinary2\]. For every integer $i$ with $1 \le i \le 6$, Move (i) in Figures \[fig:ordinary1\] and \[fig:ordinary2\] is applied when Moves (1) through (i-1) cannot be applied and Move (i) can. However, the move (4) must be applied to an adequate part of the link diagram, which will be described in detail later. In every move in these figures, $s$ is moved keeping that it is an overstrand. So, over-under informations at the crossings are not specified in the figures.
In the patterns described on the left side hand of Figure \[fig:exception\], there are two edges, say $e$ and $f$, connecting a vertex $v$ of $D_Q$ in int$Q$ and the arc $s$. Let $R$ be the subdisk cut off from $Q$ by the arc $e \cup f$. Then $D_Q \cap R$ consists of $e$ and $f$ and a single loop edge having its both endpoints at $v$. In Case (a), both $e$ and $f$ have an endpoint in int$s$. Move (a)-1 in Figure \[fig:exception\] is due to Kanako Oshiro, and consists of three Reidemeister moves. This seqence of Reidemeister moves decreases $\Sigma$ by three ($V$ by one, $E_i$ by one and $E_{svs}$ by one). When $E_{\partial} =0$, the sequence (a)-2 of four Reidemeister moves does not contain an RI move, and decreases $2V+E_i+E_s+E_{ss}+E_{\partial}+E_{svs}$ by four. In Case (b), precisely one of $e$ and $f$, say $e$, has an endpoint at $\partial s$. The sequence in Figure \[fig:exception\] (c) is composed of three Reidemeister moves, and decreases $\Sigma$ by three ($V$ by one, $E_i$ by one and $E_{\partial}$ by one).
![Moves (5) and (6)[]{data-label="fig:ordinary2"}](s_ordinary2.eps){width="90mm"}
Suppose that $D_Q$ does not contain a pattern as in Figure \[fig:exception\].
We consider first Move (1) in Figure \[fig:ordinary1\]. In this figure, an edge, say $e$, connecting one of the two points $\partial s$ and a vertex in int$s$ cuts off a subdisk, say $R$, from $Q$ such that $D_Q \cap R = e$. The RI move along $R$ decreases $\Sigma$ by one since it decreases $E_{\partial}$ by one.
In Figure \[fig:ordinary1\] (2), an edge, say $e$, having both endpoints in int$s$ cuts off a subdisk, say $R$, from $Q$ such that $D_Q \cap R = e$. The RII move of Move (2) along $R$ decreases $\Sigma$ by one since it decreases $E_{ss}$ by one.
![Special cases of Move (3)[]{data-label="fig:exception3"}](s_exception3.eps){width="90mm"}
We consider Move (3) in Figure \[fig:ordinary1\], where two edges, say $e$ and $f$, have an endpoint at a vertex, say $v$, in int$Q$ and reach int$s$. The arc $e \cup f$ cuts off a subdisk, say $R$, from $Q$ with $D_Q \cap R = e \cup f$. In this case, we perform an RIII move along $R$. We will show that this decreases $\Sigma$ by one or more. We must distinguish many cases. First, we consider the cases described in Figure \[fig:exception3\] (I), (II)-1, (II)-2, (III). In Case (I), a loop edge has its both endpoints at $v$. Then the RIII move decreases $\Sigma$ by one because it decreases both $V$ and $E_i$ by one and increases $E_{ss}$ by one. In Case (II), two edges incident to $v$ and other than $e$ and $f$ have the other endpoints at the same vertex. The RIII move decreases $V$ by one and $E_i$ by two. In Case (II)-1, this may increase $E_s$ by one or two. In Case (II)-2, this increases $E_{svs}$ by one. Hence, in both cases of (II)-1 and (II)-2, $\Sigma$ decreases by one or more. In Case (III), all the edges incident to $v$ reach int$s$. The RIII move decreases $\Sigma$ by one because it decreases $V$ by one, $E_s$ by two, and increases $E_{ss}$ by two.
![contribution of $g$ and $w$ to $\Sigma$[]{data-label="fig:contribution"}](s_contribution.eps){width="90mm"}
Suppose that the edges incident to $v$ are not in the patterns in Figure \[fig:exception3\]. Then the two edges, say $g$ and $h$, incident to $v$ and other than $e$ and $f$ are distinct, and do not share the other endpoints, say $w$ and $x$ respectively. Moreover, at most one of $w$ and $x$ is in int$s$. We consider arbitrary one of $g$ and $h$, say $g$. Either $w$ $(\in \partial g)$ is (i) in int$Q$, (ii) in int$u$, (iii) in $\partial s$ or (iv) in int$s$. In each case, we observe the change of the contribution of $g$ and $w$ to $\Sigma$. Precisely, we examine $E_i, E_{ss}, E_{sw}$ and $E_{svs}$. We first consider Case (i). The RIII move decreases the contribution of $g$ to $E_i$ by one. When $E_{sw} \ge 2$, the RIII move increases the contribution of $w$ to $E_{sw}$ and hence to $E_s$ by one, as shown in Figure \[fig:contribution\] (A). Hence the RIII move does not change the contribution of $g$ and $w$ to $\Sigma$. If $E_{sw} \le 1$, then the RIII move does not increase the contribution of $w$ to $E_s$. However, in case of $E_{sw} = 1$, it may increase the contribution of $g$ and $w$ to $E_{svs}$ as in Figure \[fig:contribution\] (B). Hence the RIII move does not change the contribution of $g$ and $w$ to $\Sigma$ in Case (B) in Figure \[fig:contribution\], and decreases it by one in the other cases. Next, we consider Case (ii). Before the RIII move, $g$ contributes $E_i$ by one. Hence the contribution of $g$ and $w$ to $\Sigma$ decreases by one after the RIII move. In Case (iii), the RIII move does not change the contributions of $g$ and $w$ to $\Sigma$. In Case (iv), the RIII move increases the contribution of $g$ to $E_{ss}$ by one. Hence the contribution of $g$ and $w$ to $\Sigma$ increases by one after the RIII move.
Similarly, we have four cases (i) through (iv) for the vertex $x$, which is an endpoint of the edge $h$. We consider change of $\Sigma$ under the RIII move. It decreases $V$ by one since $s$ goes over the vertex $v$. Hence, if $\Sigma$ does not decrease by the RIII move, then precisely one of $w$ and $x$ must be in the pattern (iv), i.e., in int$s$. (Note that we have already considered the case where both $w$ and $x$ is in the pattern (iv) in Figure \[fig:exception3\] (III).) In this case, $E_{sv} = 3$ before the RIII move, and this leads to decrease of $E_s$ by one. Thus, in any case, $\Sigma$ eventually decreases by one or more.
![Move (4) which shoud be first performed[]{data-label="fig:first4"}](s_first4.eps){width="90mm"}
We consider Move (4) in Figure \[fig:ordinary1\] (4)-1 and (4)-2, where the edge $e$ has an endpoint in $s$ $(=({\rm int}\,s) \cup \partial s)$, the other endpoint $v$ of $e$ is in int$Q$, an edge $f$ is incident to $v$, the two edges $e$ and $f$ are in the boundary of the same face, and $f$ has another endpoint $w$ in int$u$ ((4)-1) or int$Q$ ((4)-2) before Move (4). We must perform Move (4) at an adequate place as below.
First of all, if there is a pattern in Figure \[fig:first4\], then we immediately perform Move (4) there along an arc parallel to $g$. In Figure \[fig:first4\], the vertex $w$ is in int$Q$, another edge $g$ is incident to $w$, the edge $g$ reaches int$s$, the arc $e \cup f \cup g$ cuts off a disk, say $R$, from $Q$, the disk $R$ contains all the edges incident to $w$ and contains none of the edges incident to $v$ other than $e$ and $f$, and the edges incident to $v$ or $w$ do not reach int$s$ except $e$ and $g$. The endpoint of $e$ other than $v$ may be at $\partial s$. In this case, we perform Move (4) not along an arc parallel to $e$ but along an arc parallel to $g$ and outside of $R$. This move decreases $E_i$ by one, and hence $\Sigma$ by one. (Note that $E_{svs}$ may increase if we perform Move (4) along an arc parallel to $e$ and inside of $R$.)
![The graph $G_D$[]{data-label="fig:GD"}](s_GD.eps){width="90mm"}
We consider the case where $D_Q$ does not contain the pattern in Figure \[fig:first4\]. We observe the subgraph $G_D$ of $D_Q$ as shown in Figure \[fig:GD\] (1). Precisely, let $V_1$ be the set of vertices $v$ of $D_Q$ in int$Q$ such that there are two or more edges connecting $v$ and $s \,(= ({\rm int}\,s) \cup \partial s)$. Let $E_1$ be the set of edges of $D_Q$ which are incident to a vertex of $V_1$ and reach $s$, $E_2$ the set of edges of $D_Q$ which have both endpoints in $s$, and $V_2$ the set of vertices of $D_Q$ with $V_2 = (\cup (E_1 \cup E_2)) \cap s$. Then we define $G_D$ to be the subgraph of $D_Q$ with $V_1 \cup V_2$ being the set of vertices of $G_D$ and $E_1 \cup E_2$ the set of edges of $G_D$. Note that $G_D$ does not consist of a single edge, say $e_{\partial}$, connecting the two points $\partial s$ when int$s$ contains no vertex of $D_Q$. See Figure \[fig:GD\] (2). If it did, then the link diagram $D$ would have a component $e_{\partial} \cup s$ with no crossing, and hence, $D$ would be either a disconnected link diagram or a knot diagram with no crossing, which contradicts our assumption.
![We cannot perform Move (4).[]{data-label="fig:cannot4"}](s_cannot4.eps){width="110mm"}
When $G_D = \emptyset$, we perform Move (4) anywhere if it is applicable. Let $v, e, f$ be as in Figure \[fig:ordinary1\] (4)-1 or 2. We first consider Move (4)-2 where the edge $f$ has an endpoint in a vertex, say $w$, in int$Q$. Note that $E_{sv} \le 1$ and $E_{sw} \le 1$ because of the condition $G_D = \emptyset$ before the move. Hence $E_{sv} \le 2$ and $E_{sw} \le 2$ after the move. Thus the move decreases $E_i$ by one and does not change $E_s$, and hence decreases $\Sigma$ by one. (It may increase $E_{svs}$ by one if there is a single edge, say $g$, connecting $w$ and int$s$ and all the edges incident to $w$ is contained in the subdisk of $Q$ bounded by the arc $e \cup f \cup g$ and a subarc of $s$. However, we have already considered such a pattern in Figure \[fig:first4\].) Next, we consider Move (4)-1 where the edge $f$ has an endpoint in int$u$. The move decreases $E_i$ by one, and hence $\Sigma$ by one, again. Note that $f$ contributes to $E_i$ before the move.
When $G_D \ne \emptyset$, we will prove that Move (4) can be applicable if $G_D$ does not contain edges $e$ and $f$ as in one of the patterns in Figure \[fig:cannot4\], where $e$ has an endpoint at $\partial s$, $f$ has an endpoint in $s$, and the arc $e \cup f$ cuts off a disk $R$ from $Q$ with $G_D \cap R = e \cup f$. In addition, $E_{sv} \le 1$ in Case (B). We consider the outermost component of $G_D$ as below. Among the disks obtained from $Q$ by cutting along $G_D$, one which contains a single subarc of int$s$ or the whole of $s$ is called an [*outermost disk*]{}. Let $R$ be an outermost disk. If $R \cap D_Q$ consists of exactly two edges one of which connects a vertex, say $v$, in int$Q$ and a point of $\partial s$ and the other does $v$ and a point in $s$ as in Figure \[fig:cannot4\], then we cannot perform Move (4), and go forth to Move (5) in Figure \[fig:ordinary2\]. We take $R$ so that it does not contain any point of $\partial s$ if there is such an outermost disk. We call this Condition (\*).
![the case where int$t$ intersects $D_Q$[]{data-label="fig:inttIntersectsDQ"}](s_inttIntersectsDQ.eps){width="90mm"}
![$y_1 = y_2 = v$[]{data-label="fig:Esyge2"}](s_Esyge2.eps){width="35mm"}
First, we consider the case where the arc $t=R \cap s$ contains a vertex of $D_Q$ other than $\partial t$. Let $w$ be an arbitrary one of it. There is an edge, say $g$, of $D_Q$ incident to $w$. Let $x$ be the other endpoint of $g$, and $h_1, h_2$ the edges of $D_Q$ incident to $x$ and in the boundary of the same face of $D_Q (\subset Q)$ with $g$. See Figure \[fig:inttIntersectsDQ\]. Since we have taken the disk $R$ to be outermost, the endpoint of $h_i$ other than $x$, say $y_i$ is in int$Q$, and $E_{sy_i} \le 1$ for $i=1$ or $2$. (If this were not the case, then for $i=1$ and $2$, $E_{sy_i} \ge 2$, and the outermost disk $R$ would be a triangle cut from $Q$ by two edges, say $e$ and $f$, sharing the same vertex, say $v$, in int$Q$, and $y_i = v$. See Figure \[fig:Esyge2\]. Then a circle obtained by slightly shrinking the circle $h_1 \cup h_2$ would intersect the link digaram $D$ in a single point in the edge incident to $x$ other than $g, h_1, h_2$, a contradiction.) Hence we can assume that $E_{sy_1} \le 1$. We perform Move (4) along an arc parallel to the edge $g$ and connecting int$s$ and the edge $h_1$. See Figure \[fig:inttIntersectsDQ\]. Then we can confirm that the move decreases $\Sigma$ by one in a similar way as in the case of $G_D = \emptyset$.
![the case where int$t$ does not intersect $D_Q$[]{data-label="fig:inttFree"}](s_inttFree.eps){width="80mm"}
Thus we can assume that int$t = R \cap s$ does not contain a vertex of $D_Q$. Then, $R \cap G_D$ cannot be an arc with its both endpoints in $s$, since we are under the assumption that $D$ is connected and that Moves (1)-(3) cannot be applied and that Move (4) can be applied. Hence the outermost disk is cut from $Q$ by the union of two edges, say $e$ and $f$, sharing a vertex, say $v$, in int$Q$. Then all the edges incident to $v$ other than $e$ and $f$ are contained in the outermost disk $R$. (If precisely one of them were in $R$, then a circle obtained by shrinking the circle $e \cup f \cup t$ would intersect $D$ in a single point. If both of them were in cl$(Q-R)$, the Move (3) would be applicable when $\partial t \in$ int$s$, there would be a pattern as in Figure \[fig:cannot4\] (B) when precisely one of the point of $\partial t$ is in $\partial s$ (we can see $E_{sv}=1$ because of Condition (\*)), and $G_D$ would be of type in Figure \[fig:cannot4\] (A) when $\partial t = \partial s$.) We perform Move (4) along an arc parallel to $e$ and contained in $R$. See Figure \[fig:inttFree\]. This move does not increase $E_{svs}$ (we have already considered Figure \[fig:first4\]) and decreases $E_i$ by one since int$t$ is free from a vertex of $D_Q$. This move may increase $E_{sv}$. If it did by two, then we would have the pattern in Figure \[fig:exception\] (a) before the move, which we have considered. If the move increases $E_{sv}$ by one, then $\partial t \subset$ int$s$, and the move decreases $E_{svs}$ by one, since $e \cup f$ forms a subgraph of the pattern in Figure \[fig:Esvs\] before the move. (Otherwise, $\partial t \cap \partial s$ would consist of a single point, and we would have the pattern in Figure \[fig:exception\] (b) before the move.) In any way, $\Sigma$ decreases by one.
We consider Move (5) in Figure \[fig:ordinary2\]. We are under the assumption that the moves in Figures \[fig:exception\] and \[fig:ordinary1\] cannot be applicable. Note that either $G_D = \emptyset$ or $G_D$ is one of the patterns in Figure \[fig:cannot4\]. Otherwise, we could perform Move (1), (2), (3) or (4). If there is an edge, say $e$, of $D_Q$ with one of its endpoints in $\partial s$, then we can apply Move (5). The other endpoint, say $v$, of $e$ is not contained in $s$, and hence this move decreases $E_{\partial}$ by one and does not increase $E_{ss}$. Because of the above condition on $G_D$, we have either $E_{sv}=0$ or the pattern in Figure \[fig:cannot4\] (B) before the move, which implies that the move increases none of $E_s$ and $E_{svs}$. Thus Move (5) decreases $\Sigma$ by one.
Finally, we consider Move (6) in Figure \[fig:ordinary2\] (6)-1, (6)-2 and (6)-3. We are under the assumption that Moves (1) through (5) cannot be applicable and $\Sigma > 0$. We will show that Move (6) is applicable, and the move decreases $\Sigma$. There are no edge with its endpoint in $\partial s$ because Move (5) is not applicable. We show that every edge, say $e$, having an endpoint in int$s$ has the other endpoint, say $v$, in int$u$. By the condition on $G_D$, the vertex $v$ is not in $s$. If $v$ is contained in int$Q$, then there is an edge, say $f$ incident to $v$ such that $e$ and $f$ are in the boundary of the same face of $D_Q$ in $Q$. By the condition on $G_D$, the edge $f$ does not reach $s$. Hence we can apply Move (4) along an arc parallel to $e$ and connecting $s$ and $f$, which is a contradiction. Therefore, the endpoint $v$ is in int$u$. This means that every edge of $D_Q$ which reaches int$s$ also does int$u$.
Since we are assuming that $\Sigma >0$ and that $D$ is connected, there is an edge which is incident to a vertex in int$u$ and does not reach $s$. Hence we can perform Move (6) as below. Among such edges, let $e$ be the one having an endpoint, say $w$, in int$u$ such that $w$ is the nearest to a point, say $p$, of $\partial s$. Let $\gamma$ be the subarc of $u$ between $p$ and $w$. We perform Move (6) along an arc parallel to $\gamma$ when int$\gamma$ does not contain a vertex of $D_Q$. See Figure \[fig:ordinary2\] (6)-3. When it does, let $v$ be the vertex of $D_Q$ lying in the subarc of $u$ between $p$ and $w$, and the nearest to $w$. The edge, say $f$, incident to $v$ reaches int$s$. Let $\delta$ be the subarc of $\gamma$ between $v$ and $w$. We perform Move (6) along an arc parallel to $f \cup \delta$. See Figure \[fig:ordinary2\] (6)-1 and (6)-2. These moves decrease $E_i$, and hence $\Sigma$ by one. This completes the proof.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
The authors thank Kanako Oshiro for helpful comments.
[30]{} J.W. Alexander and G.B. Briggs, *On types of knotted curves.* Ann. of Math. [**28**]{} (1926/27), 562–586.
J.S. Birmann and W.W. Menasco, *Special positions for essential tori in link complements*, Topology [**33**]{} (1994) 525–556.
P.R. Cromwell, *Embedding knots and links in an open book I: Basic properties*, Topology and its Applications [**64**]{} (1995), 37–58.
I.A. Dynnikov, *Arc-presentations of links: Monotone simplification*, Fundamenta Mathematicae [**190**]{} (2006), 29–76.
I.A. Dynnikov, *Recognition algorithms in knot theory*, Uspekhi Mat. Nauk [**58**]{} (2003), 45–92; translation in Russian Math. Surveys [**58**]{} (2003), 1093–1139.
C. Hayashi, *The number of Reidemeister moves for splitting a link*, Math. Ann. [**332**]{} (2005), 239–252.
A. Henrich and L. Kauffman, *Unknotting Unknots*, preprint (arXiv:1006.4176v4 \[math.GT\] 4Nov2011).
K. Reidemeister, *Elementare Beründang der Knotentheorie.* Abh. Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg [**5**]{} (1926), 24–32.
Tatsuo Ando: Department of Mathematics, Graduate School of Science, Rikkyo University, 3-34-1 Nishi-ikebukuro, Toshima-ku, Tokyo, 171-8501, Japan.\
[email protected] (T. Ando),\
Chuichiro Hayashi and Yuki Nishikawa: Department of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Faculty of Science, Japan Women’s University, 2-8-1 Mejirodai, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 112-8681, Japan.\
[email protected] (C. Hayashi) and [email protected] (Y. Nishikawa)
[^1]: The second author is partially supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 25400100.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The effect of the frame dragging on the equation of motions, depends on the approaches that have been considered. Accordingly, additional force terms may appear or disappear. To understand the effect of radial and non-radial perturbations that may exist in the case of mass distribution of spherical shell form, modifications should be predicted to the approaches of the components of elastic tensor $E^{\mu\nu}$ given in Bass and Pirani[@Bass1955]. Different relations between $\omega$ and $\omega''$ have been discussed.'
author:
- |
İsmail Özbak[i]{}r$^1$ and Kadri Yakut$^1$\
$^1$ University of Ege, Faculty of Science, Department of Astronomy and Space Science, İzmir, Turkey
date: 'February 15, 2016'
title: '**Comments on the Effect of Frame Dragging**'
---
Introduction
============
Einstein’s general theory of relativity (GR) predicts many astronomical phenomena (Einstein, 1916a, 1916b, 1918). Frame dragging effect is one of the prediction of GR and first studied by J. Lense and H. Thirring [@LT1918][@Thirring1918][@Thirring1921] This effect is mainly deform and drag the spacetime around rotating massive objects. Gravity Probe B gyroscopes have detected frame dragging effect around the Earth [@Everitt2011] By using a linear approach method Hans Thirring [@Thirring1918][@Thirring1921] gives the effect of spherical mass distribution with a radius $\textit{a}$ that rotates with a constant $\omega$ speed around an axis, on the equation of motions as
$$g_{\mu\nu}=-\delta_{\mu\nu}+\gamma'_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}\delta_{\mu\nu}\gamma'_{\alpha\alpha}$$
$$\gamma'_{\mu\nu}=-\frac{\chi}{4\pi}\int\frac{T_{\mu\nu}(x,y,z,t-r)}{R}dV_0$$
where $\chi=8\pi k$; k is the gravity constant and $dV_0$ is the spatial volume element. There is an inconsistency, on the other hand, between Thirring’s assumptions because of the violation of energy -– momentum conservation law:
$$T^{\mu\nu}_{;\nu}=0$$
Bass and Pirani [@Bass1955] add the elastic term $E^{\mu\nu}$ to the energy–momentum tensor to solve this inconsistency.
$$T^{\mu\nu}=\rho v^{\mu}v^{\nu}+E^{\mu\nu}$$
In their calculation they used the approach that Thirring applied on the metric tensor components. In addition, they define the mass density of the spherical shell in the form of $\rho(\theta)=\rho_0(1+Na^2\omega^2\sin^2 \theta)$ which depends on the latitude. When the constant term *N* assumed to be *N=−1*, then this corresponds to a mass distribution that compansates for the spherial relativistic mass increase and represents a uniform mass distribution in the reference frame where the shell is rotating.
A new additional term in the solution
=====================================
In the work of Bass and Pirani [@Bass1955] the approaches on the elastic energy–momentum terms $E^{\mu\nu}$ can be modified. Energy-momentum conservation equation, $T^{\mu\nu}_{;\nu}=0$, estimations examiations reveal that only the $E^{\mu\nu}$ components lattitude depended partial derivation have been taken into consideration. This means that the frame dragging effects, that may arise due to radial and non–radial mass fluctuations on the spherical shell have been neglected. In addition, the estimation of the $\gamma'_{44}$ and $\gamma'_{24}$ perturbation terms in the metric components, the value of $(\frac{dx^4}{ds})^2$ according to the $\omega$ term for different series approaches cause variations in the equation of motion. When $\gamma'_{44}$ and $\gamma'_{24}$ terms are estimated with second order (*S2*) and first order (*S1*) approaches (which is Thirring’s approach) than the equation of motions are found as
$$\begin{gathered}
\ddot{x}=-\frac{8kM}{3a}\omega\dot{y}+\frac{2kM(1+N)}{15a}\omega^2x\\
\ddot{y}=\frac{8kM}{3a}\omega\dot{x}+\frac{2kM(1+N)}{15a}\omega^2y\\
\ddot{z}=\frac{4kM(1+N)}{15a}\omega^2z
\end{gathered}$$
If *S1* and *S2* approaches are applied to the $\gamma'_{44}$ and $\gamma'_{24}$ terms; respectively, then
$$\begin{gathered}
\ddot{x}=-\frac{8kM}{3a}\omega\dot{y}\\
\ddot{y}=\frac{8kM}{3a}\omega\dot{x}\\
\ddot{z}=0
\end{gathered}$$
If on the other hand, *S1* and *S2* approaches are applied to the $\gamma'_{44}$ and $\gamma'_{24}$ terms then one can get the equations
$$\begin{gathered}
\ddot{x}=-\frac{8kM}{3a}\omega\dot{y}\ {\color{red}{-\frac{4kMa\omega^2(7+2N)}{45}\omega\dot{y}}}+\frac{2kM(1+N)}{15a}\omega^2x \\
\ddot{y}=-\frac{8kM}{3a}\omega\dot{x}\ {\color{red}{-\frac{4kMa\omega^2(7+2N)}{45}\omega\dot{x}}}+\frac{2kM(1+N)}{15a}\omega^2y \\
\ddot{z}=-\frac{4kM(1+N)}{15a}\omega^2z
\end{gathered}$$
The relation of $\omega'$ angular velocity of a particle with the $\omega$ that has been presented in Thirring [@Thirring1918] has not ben considered in the work of Bass and Pirani [@Bass1955]. We can get this relation without changing any conditions that have been applied to the elastic tensor $E^{\mu\nu}$ as
$$\begin{gathered}
\ddot{x}=2\left[ \omega'\left(1+\frac{2kM}{a} \right)-\omega\frac{4kM}{3a}+\frac{2kM}{3}a\omega^2\omega'\left( 1+\frac{2}{5a^2}(1+N)(x^2+y^2-z^2) \right) \right]\dot{y}\\
+\left\{ \omega'^2\left(1+\frac{2kM}{a} \right)-\omega\omega'\frac{8kM}{3a}+\omega^2\frac{2kM(1+N)}{15a}+\frac{2kM}{3}a\omega^2\omega'\left( 1+\frac{2}{5a^2}(1+N)(x^2+y^2-z^2) \right) \right\}x \\
-\frac{8kM(1+N)}{15a}y\omega^2z\omega'\dot{z}\end{gathered}$$
$$\begin{gathered}
\ddot{y}=-2\left[ \omega'\left(1+\frac{2kM}{a} \right)-\omega\frac{4kM}{3a}+\frac{2kM}{3}a\omega^2\omega'\left( 1+\frac{2}{5a^2}(1+N)(x^2+y^2-z^2) \right) \right]\dot{x}\\
+\left\{ \omega'^2\left(1+\frac{2kM}{a} \right)-\omega\omega'\frac{8kM}{3a}+\omega^2\frac{2kM(1+N)}{15a}+\frac{2kM}{3}a\omega^2\omega'\left( 1+\frac{2}{5a^2}(1+N)(x^2+y^2-z^2) \right) \right\}y\\
+\frac{8kM(1+N)}{15a}x\omega^2z\omega'\dot{z}\end{gathered}$$
$$\begin{gathered}
\ddot{ z }=-\frac{4kM(1+N)}{15a}\omega^2z-\frac{8kM(1+N)}{15a}\omega^2\omega'(x\dot{ y }-\dot{ x }y)z-\frac{4kM(1+N)}{15a}(x^2+y^2)\omega^2\omega'^2z\end{gathered}$$
When we apply the approach of $\omega^2\omega'\sim0$ in Thirring [@Thirring1918] work to the above equations (cf. [@Thirring1921] eq. (25)) we obtain the equation of motions that depends on the mass density term N as
$$\begin{aligned}
{2}
\ddot{x}=2\left[ \omega'\left(1+\frac{2kM}{a} \right)-\omega\frac{4kM}{3a} \right]\dot{ y }+\left\{ \omega'^2\left(1+\frac{2kM}{a} \right)-\omega\omega'\frac{8kM}{3a}+\omega^2\frac{2kM(1+N)}{15a} \right\}x\\
\ddot{y}=-2\left[ \omega'\left(1+\frac{2kM}{a} \right)-\omega\frac{4kM}{3a} \right]\dot{ x }+\left\{ \omega'^2\left(1+\frac{2kM}{a} \right)-\omega\omega'\frac{8kM}{3a}+\omega^2\frac{2kM(1+N)}{15a} \right\}y\\
\ddot{z}=-\frac{4kM(1+N)}{15a}\omega^2z\end{aligned}$$
Numerical solutions can be applied to these equations for the condition *N=−1* most interesting case that appears in [@Bass1955].
####
Results
=======
In this work, we study the partial derivation of the elastic tensor $E^{\mu\nu}$ that appears in the energy–momentum conservation equations, $T^{\mu\nu}_{;\nu}=0$, and in other relations that depends on it. We also aim to study other coordinate derivatives in addition to the latitude dependence that has been studied in [@Bass1955]. Therefore, radial and non–radial perturbation fluctuations that may occur in the shell mass distribution will be studied. Moreover, we will work on the posible solutions of equation of motion by taking different approaches into account. Therefore, the relation of space–time frame dragging with different types of pulsations will be analysed in details. In the work of [@Bass1955], $\omega$ and $\omega'$ dragging coefficient relation presented in [@Thirring1918] has been investigated. In this study, different relations between $\omega$ and $\omega'$ have been discussed. In our future work, we plan to study the effect of frame dragging on the neutron star interiors, binary stars with a neutron star and on the gravitational waves which is recently detected by LIGO [@LIGO2016a].
####
**Acknowledgments**\
This study was supported by the Turkish Scientific and Research Council (TÜBİTAK 113F097). The current study is a part of PhD thesis by İ Özbak[i]{}r.
####
[99]{} Einstein, A., 1916a, Annalen der Physik, 49, 769 Einstein, A., 1916b, Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, Sitzungsberichte der physikalisch-mathematischen Klasse , 688 Einstein, A., 1918, Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, Sitzungsberichte der physikalisch-mathematischen Klasse, 15 Lense J., Thirring H., 1918, PhyZ, 19, Thirring, H. (1918) Physikalische Zeitschrift 19, 33 Thirring, H. (1921) Physikalische Zeitschrift 22, 29 Everitt C. W. F., et al., 2011, PhRvL, 106, 221101 Bass, L., and Pirani, F. A. E. (1955) Phil. Mag. 46(379), 850 $\--$ 856 Abbott B. P., et al., 2016, PhRvL, 116, 061102
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
A private data federation is a set of autonomous databases that share a unified query interface offering *in-situ* evaluation of SQL queries over the union of the sensitive data of its members. Owing to privacy concerns, these systems do not have a trusted data collector that can see all their data and their member databases cannot learn about individual records of other engines. Federations currently achieve this goal by evaluating queries obliviously using secure multiparty computation. This hides the intermediate result cardinality of each query operator by exhaustively padding it. With cascades of such operators, this padding accumulates to a blow-up in the output size of each operator and a proportional loss in query performance. Hence, existing private data federations do not scale well to complex SQL queries over large datasets.
We introduce [Shrinkwrap]{}, a private data federation that offers data owners a differentially private view of the data held by others to improve their performance over oblivious query processing. [Shrinkwrap]{}uses computational differential privacy to minimize the padding of intermediate query results, achieving up to 35X performance improvement over oblivious query processing. When the query needs differentially private output, [Shrinkwrap]{}provides a trade-off between result accuracy and query evaluation performance.
author:
- |
Johes Bater\
\
Xi He\
\
William Ehrich\
\
- |
Ashwin Machanavajjhala\
\
Jennie Rogers\
\
title: '[Shrinkwrap]{}: Efficient SQL Query Processing in Differentially Private Data Federations'
---
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Synthetic data has been a critical tool for training scene text detection and recognition models. On the one hand, synthetic word images have proven to be a successful substitute for real images in training scene text recognizers. On the other hand, however, scene text detectors still heavily rely on a large amount of manually annotated real-world images, which are expensive. In this paper, we introduce UnrealText, an efficient image synthesis method that renders realistic images via a 3D graphics engine. 3D synthetic engine provides realistic appearance by rendering scene and text as a whole, and allows for better text region proposals with access to precise scene information, e.g. normal and even object meshes. The comprehensive experiments verify its effectiveness on both scene text detection and recognition. We also generate a multilingual version for future research into multilingual scene text detection and recognition. The code and the generated datasets are released at: <https://jyouhou.github.io/UnrealText/>.'
author:
- |
Shangbang Long\
Carnegie Mellon University\
[[email protected]]{}
- |
Cong Yao\
Megvii (Face++) Technology Inc.\
[[email protected]]{}
bibliography:
- 'egbib.bib'
title: 'UnrealText: Synthesizing Realistic Scene Text Images from the Unreal World'
---
{width="100.00000%"}
Introduction
============
With the resurgence of neural networks, the past few years have witnessed significant progress in the field of scene text detection and recognition. However, these models are data-thirsty, and it is expensive and sometimes difficult, if not impossible, to collect enough data. Moreover, the various applications, from traffic sign reading in autonomous vehicles to instant translation, require a large amount of data specifically for each domain, further escalating this issue. Therefore, synthetic data and synthesis algorithms are important for scene text tasks. Furthermore, synthetic data can provide detailed annotations, such as character-level or even pixel-level ground truths that are rare for real images due to high cost.
Currently, there exist several synthesis algorithms [@wang2012end; @jaderberg2014synthetic; @gupta2016synthetic; @zhan2018verisimilar] that have proven beneficial. Especially, in scene text recognition, training on synthetic data [@jaderberg2014synthetic; @gupta2016synthetic] alone has become a widely accepted standard practice. Some researchers that attempt training on both synthetic and real data only report marginal improvements [@li2018show; @long2019alchemy] on most datasets. Mixing synthetic and real data is only improving performance on a few difficult cases that are not yet well covered by existing synthetic datasets, such as seriously blurred or curved text. This is reasonable, since cropped text images have much simpler background, and synthetic data enjoys advantages in larger vocabulary size and diversity of backgrounds, fonts, and lighting conditions, as well as thousands of times more data samples.
On the contrary, however, scene text detection is still heavily dependent on real-world data. Synthetic data [@gupta2016synthetic; @zhan2018verisimilar] plays a less significant role, and only brings marginal improvements. Existing synthesizers for scene text detection follow the same paradigm. First, they analyze background images, e.g. by performing semantic segmentation and depth estimation using off-the-shelf models. Then, potential locations for text embedding are extracted from the segmented regions. Finally, text images (foregrounds) are blended into the background images, with perceptive transformation inferred from estimated depth. However, the analysis of background images with off-the-shelf models may be rough and imprecise. The errors further propagate to text proposal modules and result in text being embedded onto unsuitable locations. Moreover, the text embedding process is ignorant of the overall image conditions such as illumination and occlusions of the scene. These two factors make text instances outstanding from backgrounds, leading to a gap between synthetic and real images.
In this paper, we propose a synthetic engine that synthesizes scene text images from 3D virtual world. The proposed engine is based on the famous *Unreal Engine 4 (UE4)*, and is therefore named as *UnrealText*. Specifically, text instances are regarded as planar polygon meshes with text foregrounds loaded as texture. These meshes are placed in suitable positions in 3D world, and rendered together with the scene as a whole.
As shown in Fig. \[fig:demo\], the proposed synthesis engine, by its very nature, enjoys the following advantages over previous methods: (1) Text and scenes are rendered together, achieving realistic visual effects, e.g. illumination, occlusion, and perspective transformation. (2) The method has access to precise scene information, e.g. normal, depth, and object meshes, and therefore can generate better text region proposals. These aspects are crucial in training detectors.
To further exploit the potential of UnrealText, we design three key components: (1) A view finding algorithm that explores the virtual scenes and generates camera viewpoints to obtain more diverse and natural backgrounds. (2) An environment randomization module that changes the lighting conditions regularly, to simulate real-world variations. (3) A mesh-based text region generation method that finds suitable positions for text by probing the 3D meshes.
The contributions of this paper are summarized as follows: (1) We propose a brand-new scene text image synthesis engine that renders images from 3D world, which is entirely different from previous approaches that embed text on 2D background images, termed as **UnrealText**. The proposed engine achieves realistic rendering effects and high scalability. (2) With the proposed techniques, the synthesis engine improves the performance of detectors and recognizers significantly. (3) We also generate a large scale multilingual scene text dataset that will aid further research.
Related Work
============
Synthetic Images
----------------
The synthesis of photo-realistic datasets has been a popular topic, since they provide detailed ground-truth annotations at multiple granularity, and cost less than manual annotations. In scene text detection and recognition, the use of synthetic datasets has become a standard practice. For scene text recognition, where images contain only one word, synthetic images are rendered through several steps [@wang2012end; @jaderberg2014synthetic], including font rendering, coloring, homography transformation, and background blending. Later, GANs [@goodfellow2014generative] are incorporated to maintain style consistency for implanted text [@zhan2019spatial], but it is only for single-word images. As a result of these progresses, synthetic data alone are enough to train state-of-the-art recognizers.
To train scene text detectors, SynthText [@gupta2016synthetic] proposes to generate synthetic data by printing text on background images. It first analyzes images with off-the-shelf models, and search suitable text regions on semantically consistent regions. Text are implanted with perspective transformation based on estimated depth. To maintain semantic coherency, VISD [@zhan2018verisimilar] proposes to use semantic segmentation to filter out unreasonable surfaces such as human faces. They also adopt an adaptive coloring scheme to fit the text into the artistic style of backgrounds. However, without considering the scene as a whole, these methods fail to render text instances in a photo-realistic way, and text instances are too outstanding from backgrounds. So far, the training of detectors still relies heavily on real images.
Although GANs and other learning-based methods have also shown great potential in generating realistic images [@wang2017adversarial; @lin2018st; @kar2019meta], the generation of scene text images still require a large amount of manually labeled data [@zhan2019spatial]. Furthermore, such data are sometimes not easy to collect, especially for cases such as low resource languages.
More recently, synthesizing images with 3D graphics engine has become popular in several fields, including human pose estimation [@varol2017learning], scene understanding/segmentation [@papon2015semantic; @mccormac2016scenenet; @richter2016playing; @ros2016synthia; @saleh2018effective], and object detection [@peng2015learning; @tremblay2018falling; @hinterstoisser2019annotation]. However, these methods either consider simplistic cases, e.g. rendering 3D objects on top of static background images [@peng2015learning; @varol2017learning] and randomly arranging scenes filled with objects [@papon2015semantic; @mccormac2016scenenet; @ros2016synthia; @hinterstoisser2019annotation], or passively use off-the-shelf 3D scenes without further changing it [@richter2016playing]. In contrast to these researches, our proposed synthesis engine implements active and regular interaction with 3D scenes, to generate realistic and diverse scene text images.
Scene Text Detection and Recognition
------------------------------------
Scene text detection and recognition, possibly as the most human-centric computer vision task, has been a popular research topic for many years [@ye2015text; @long2018scene]. In [scene text detection]{}, there are mainly two branches of methodologies: [Top-down]{} methods that inherit the idea of region proposal networks from general object detectors that detect text instances as rotated rectangles and polygons [@Liu2017Deep; @Zhou_2017_CVPR; @jiang2017r2cnn; @zhang2019look; @wang2019arbitrary]; [Bottom-up]{} approaches that predict local segments and local geometric attributes, and compose them into individual text instances [@Shi_2017_CVPR; @long2018textsnake; @baek2019character; @tian2019learning]. Despite significant improvements on individual datasets, those most widely used benchmark datasets are usually very small, with only around $500$ to $1000$ images in test sets, and are therefore prone to over-fitting. The generalization ability across different domains remains an open question, and is not studied yet. The reason lies in the very limited real data and that synthetic data are not effective enough. Therefore, one important motivation of our synthesis engine is to serve as a stepping stone towards general scene text detection.
Most [scene text recognition]{} models consist of CNN-based image feature extractors and attentional LSTM [@hochreiter1997long] or transformer [@vaswani2017attention]-based encoder-decoder to predict the textual content [@cheng2017arbitrarily; @shi2018aster; @li2018show; @lyu20192d]. Since the encoder-decoder module is a language model in essence, scene text recognizers have a high demand for training data with a large vocabulary, which is extremely difficult for real-world data. Besides, scene text recognizers work on image crops that have simple backgrounds, which are easy to synthesize. Therefore, synthetic data are necessary for scene text recognizers, and synthetic data alone are usually enough to achieve state-of-the-art performance. Moreover, since the recognition modules require a large amount of data, synthetic data are also necessary in training **end-to-end text spotting** systems [@liu2018fots; @he2018end; @qin2019towards].
Scene Text in 3D Virtual World {#sec:engine}
==============================
Overview
--------
In this section, we give a detailed introduction to our scene text image synthesis engine, *UnrealText*, which is developed upon UE4 and the UnrealCV plugin [@qiu2016unrealcv]. The synthesis engine: (1) produces **photo-realistic** images, (2) is **efficient**, taking about only $1$-$1.5$ second to render and generate a new scene text image and, (3) is **general and compatible** to off-the-shelf 3D scene models. As shown in Fig. \[fig:pipeline\], the pipeline mainly consists of a *Viewfinder* module (section \[sec:view\]), an *Environment Randomization* module (section \[sec:env\]), a *Text Region Generation* module (section \[sec:reg\]), and a *Text Rendering* module (section \[sec:ren\]).
Firstly, the viewfinder module explores around the 3D scene with the camera, generating camera viewpoints. Then, the environment lighting is randomly adjusted. Next, the text regions are proposed based on 2D scene information and refined with 3D mesh information in the graphics engine. After that, text foregrounds are generated with randomly sampled fonts, colors, and text content, and are loaded as planar meshes. Finally, we retrieve the RGB image and corresponding text locations as well as text content to make the synthetic dataset.
{width="0.9\linewidth"}
\[fig:pipeline\]
Viewfinder {#sec:view}
----------
The aim of the viewfinder module is to automatically determine a set of camera locations and rotations from the whole space of 3D scenes that are reasonable and non-trivial, getting rid of unsuitable viewpoints such as from inside object meshes (e.g. Fig. \[fig:viewfinder\] bottom right).
Learning-based methods such as navigation and exploration algorithms may require extra training data and are not guaranteed to generalize to different 3D scenes. Therefore, we turn to rule-based methods and design a *physically-constrained 3D random walk* (Fig. \[fig:viewfinder\] first row) equipped with *auxiliary camera anchors*.
### Physically-Constrained 3D Random Walk
Starting from a valid location, the physically-constrained 3D random walk aims to find the next valid and non-trivial location. In contrast to being valid, locations are invalid if they are inside object meshes or far away from the scene boundary, for example. A non-trivial location should be not too close to the current location. Otherwise, the new viewpoint will be similar to the current one. The proposed 3D random walk uses ray-casting [@Roth1982Ray], which is constrained by physically, to inspect the physical environment to determine valid and non-trivial locations.
In each step, we first randomly change the pitch and yaw values of the camera rotation, making the camera pointing to a new direction. Then, we cast a ray from the camera location towards the direction of the viewpoint. The ray stops when it hits any object meshes or reaches a fixed maximum length. By design, the path from the current location to the stopping position is free of any barrier, i.e. not inside of any object meshes. Therefore, points along this ray path are all valid. Finally, we randomly sample one point between the $\frac{1}{3}$-th and $\frac{2}{3}$-th of this path, and set it as the new location of the camera, which is non-trivial. The proposed random walk algorithm can generate diverse camera viewpoints.
### Auxiliary Camera Anchors
The proposed random walk algorithm, however, is inefficient in terms of exploration. Therefore, we manually select a set of $N$ camera anchors across the 3D scenes as starting points. After every $T$ steps, we reset the location of the camera to a randomly sampled camera anchor. We set $N=150$-$200$ and $T=100$. Note that the selection of camera anchors requires only little carefulness. We only need to ensure coverage over the space. It takes around $20$ to $30$ seconds for each scene, which is trivial and not a bottleneck of scalability. The manual but efficient selection of camera is compatible with the proposed random walk algorithm that generates diverse viewpoints.
![ In the first row (1)-(4), we illustrate the *physically-constrained 3D random walk*. For better visualization, we use a camera object to represent the viewpoint (marked with ). In the second row, we compare viewpoints from the proposed method with randomly sampled viewpoints. []{data-label="fig:viewfinder"}](img/fig3_view.jpg){width="1.0\linewidth"}
Environment Randomization {#sec:env}
-------------------------
To produce real-world variations such as lighting conditions, we randomly change the intensity, color, and direction of all light sources in the scene. In addition to illuminations, we also add fog conditions and randomly adjust its intensity. The environment randomization proves to increase the diversity of the generated images and results in stronger detector performance. The proposed randomization can also benefit sim-to-real domain adaptation [@tobin2017domain].
Text Region Generation {#sec:reg}
----------------------
In real-world, text instances are usually embedded on well-defined surfaces, e.g. traffic signs, to maintain good legibility. Previous works find suitable regions by using estimated scene information, such as gPb-UCM [@arbelaez2011contour] in SynthText [@gupta2016synthetic] or saliency map in VISD [@zhan2018verisimilar] for approximation. However, these methods are imprecise and often fail to find appropriate regions. Therefore, we propose to find text regions by probing around object meshes in 3D world. Since inspecting all object meshes is time-consuming, we propose a 2-staged pipeline: (1) We retrieve ground truth surface normal map to generate initial text region proposals; (2) Initial proposals are then projected to and refined in the 3D world using object meshes. Finally, we sample a subset from the refined proposals to render. To avoid occlusion among proposals, we project them back to screen space, and discard regions that overlap with each other one by one in a shuffled order until occlusion is eliminated.
### Initial Proposals from Normal Maps
In computer graphics, normal values are unit vectors that are perpendicular to a surface. Therefore, when projected to 2D screen space, a region with similar normal values tends to be a well-defined region to embed text on. We find valid image regions by applying sliding windows of $64\times64$ pixels across the surface normal map, and retrieve those with *smooth* surface normal: the minimum cosine similarity value between any two pixels is larger than a threshold $t$. We set $t$ to $0.95$, which proves to produce reasonable results. We randomly sample at most $10$ non-overlapping valid image regions to make the initial proposals. Making proposals from normal maps is an efficient way to find potential and visible regions.
### Refining Proposals in 3D Worlds
As shown in Fig. \[fig:refine\], rectangular initial proposals in 2D screen space will be distorted when projected into 3D world. Thus, we need to first rectify the proposals in 3D world. We project the center point of the initial proposals into 3D space, and re-initialize *orthogonal* squares on the corresponding mesh surfaces around the center points: the horizontal sides are *orthogonal* to the gravity direction. The side lengths are set to the shortest sides of the quadrilaterals created by projecting the four corners of initial proposals into the 3D space. Then we enlarge the widths and heights along the horizontal and vertical sides alternatively. The expansion of one direction stops when the sides of that direction get off the surface[^1], hit other meshes, or reach the preset maximum expansion ratio. The proposed refining algorithm works in 3D world space, and is able to produce natural homography transformation in 2D screen space.
{width="1.0\linewidth"}
\[fig:refine\]
Text Rendering {#sec:ren}
--------------
**Generating Text Images:** Given text regions as proposed and refined in section \[sec:reg\], the text generation module samples text content and renders text images with certain fonts and text colors. The numbers of lines and characters per line are determined by the font size and the size of refined proposals in 2D space to make sure the characters are not too small and ensure legibility. For a fairer comparison, we also use the same font set from Google Fonts [^2] as SynthText does. We also use the same text corpus, Newsgroup20. The generated text images have zero alpha values on non-stroke pixels, and non zero for others.
**Rendering Text in 3D World:** We first perform triangulation for the refined proposals to generate planar triangular meshes that are closely attached to the underlying surface. Then we load the text images as texture onto the generated meshes. We also randomly sample the texture attributes, such as the ratio of diffuse and specular reflection.
Implementation Details
----------------------
The proposed synthesis engine is implemented based on UE4.22 and the UnrealCV plugin. On an ubuntu workstation with an 8-core Intel CPU, an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 GPU, and 16G RAM, the synthesis speed is $0.7$-$1.5$ seconds per image with a resolution of $1080\times720$, depending on the complexity of the scene model.
We collect $30$ scene models from the official UE4 marketplace. The engine is used to generate $600K$ scene text images with English words. With the same configuration, we also generate a multilingual version, making it the largest multilingual scene text dataset.
Experiments on Scene Text Detection
====================================
Settings
--------
We first verify the effectiveness of the proposed engine by training detectors on the synthesized images and evaluating them on real image datasets. We use a previous yet time-tested state-of-the-art model, EAST [@Zhou_2017_CVPR], which is fast and accurate. EAST also forms the basis of several widely recognized end-to-end text spotting models [@liu2018fots; @he2018end]. We adopt an opensource implementation[^3]. In all experiments, models are trained on $4$ GPU with a batch size of $56$. During the evaluation, the test images are resized to match a short side length of $800$ pixels.
**Benchmark Datasets** We use the following scene text detection datasets for evaluation: (1) *ICDAR 2013 Focused Scene Text* (IC13) [@karatzas2013icdar] containing horizontal text with zoomed-in views. (2) *ICDAR 2015 Incidental Scene Text* (IC15) [@karatzas2015icdar] consisting of images taken without carefulness with Google Glass. Images are blurred and text are small. (3) *MLT 2017* [@nayef2017icdar2017] for multilingual scene text detection, which is composed of scene text images of $9$ languages.
Experiments Results
-------------------
**Pure Synthetic Data** We first train the EAST models on different synthetic datasets alone, to compare our method with previous ones in a direct and quantitative way. Note that ours, SynthText, and VISD have different numbers of images, so we also need to control the number of images used in experiments. Results are summarized in Tab. \[tab:PSD\].
Firstly, we control the total number of images to 10K, which is also the full size of the smallest synthetic dataset, VISD. We observe a considerable improvement on IC15 over previous state-of-the-art by $+0.9\%$ in F1-score, and significant improvements on IC13 ($+3.5\%$) and MLT 2017 ($+2.8\%$). Secondly, we also train models on the full set of SynthText and ours, since scalability is also an important factor for synthetic data, especially when considering the demand to train recognizers. Extra training images further improve F1 scores on IC15, IC13, and MLT by $+2.6\%$, $+2.3\%$, and $+2.1\%$. Models trained with our UnrealText data outperform all other synthetic datasets. Besides, the subset of $10K$ images with our method even surpasses $800K$ SynthText images significantly on all datasets. The experiment results demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed synthetic engine and datasets.
Training Data IC15 IC13 MLT 2017
----------------------- -------------- -------------- --------------
SynthText 10K 46.3 60.8 38.9
VISD 10K (full) 64.3 74.8 51.4
Ours 10K [**65.2**]{} [**78.3**]{} [**54.2**]{}
SynthText 800K (full) 58.0 67.7 44.8
Ours 600K (full) **67.8** **80.6** **56.3**
*Ours 5K + VISD 5K* *66.9* *80.4* *55.7*
: Detection results (F1-scores) of EAST models trained on different synthetic data. []{data-label="tab:PSD"}
**Complementary Synthetic Data** One unique characteristic of the proposed UnrealText is that, the images are generated from 3D scene models, instead of real background images, resulting in potential domain gap due to different artistic styles. We conduct experiments by training on both UnrealText data ($5K$) and VISD ($5K$), as also shown in Tab. \[tab:PSD\] (last row, marked with *italics*), which achieves better performance than other $10K$ synthetic datasets. This result demonstrates that, our UnrealText is complementary to existing synthetic datasets that use real images as backgrounds. While UnrealText simulates photo-realistic effects, synthetic data with real background images can help adapt to real-world datasets.
**Combining Synthetic and Real Data** One important role of synthetic data is to serve as data for pretraining, and to further improve the performance on domain specific real datasets. We first pretrain the EAST models with different synthetic data, and then use domain data to finetune the models. The results are summarized in Tab. \[tab:finetune\]. On all domain-specific datasets, models pretrained with our synthetic dataset surpasses others by considerable margins, verifying the effectiveness of our synthesis method in the context of boosting performance on domain specific datasets.
[|c|c|c|c|]{}\
Training Data & P & R & F1\
IC15 & 84.6 & 78.5 & 81.4\
IC15 + SynthText 10K & 85.6 & 79.5 & 82.4\
IC15 + VISD 10K & 86.3 & 80.0 & 83.1\
IC15 + Ours 10K & **86.9** & **81.0** & **83.8**\
*IC15 + Ours 600K (full)* & *88.5* & *80.8* & *84.5*\
\
Training Data & P & R & F1\
IC13 & 82.6 & 70.0 & 75.8\
IC13 + SynthText 10K & 85.3 & 72.4 & 78.3\
IC13 + VISD 10K & 85.9 & 73.1 & 79.0\
IC13 + Ours 10K & **88.5** & **74.7** & **81.0**\
*IC13 + Ours 600K (full)* & *92.3* & *73.4* & *81.8*\
\
Training Data & P & R & F1\
MLT 2017 & 72.9 & 67.4 & 70.1\
MLT 2017 + SynthText 10K & 73.1 & 67.7 & 70.3\
MLT 2017 + VISD 10K & 73.3 & 67.9 & 70.5\
MLT 2017 + Ours 10K & **74.6** & **68.7** & **71.6**\
*MLT 2017 + Ours 600K (full)* & *[82.2]{}* & *[67.4]{}* & *[74.1]{}*\
**Pretraining on Full Dataset** As shown in the last rows of Tab. \[tab:finetune\], when we pretrain the detector models with our full dataset, the performances are improved significantly, demonstrating the advantage of the scalability of our engine. Especially, The EAST model achieves an F1 score of $74.1$ on MLT17, which is even better than recent state-of-the-art results, including $73.9$ by CRAFT[@baek2019character] and $73.1$ by LOMO [@zhang2019look]. Although the margin is not great, it suffices to claim that the EAST model revives and reclaims state-of-the-art performance with the help of our synthetic dataset.
Module Level Ablation Analysis
------------------------------
One reasonable concern about synthesizing from 3D virtual scenes lies in the scene diversity. In this section, we address the importance of the proposed view finding module and the environment randomization module in increasing the diversity of synthetic images.
**Ablating Viewfinder Module** We derive two baselines from the proposed viewfinder module: (1) *Random Viewpoint + Manual Anchor* that randomly samples camera locations and rotations from the norm-ball spaces centered around auxiliary camera anchors. (2) *Random Viewpoint Only* that randomly samples camera locations and rotations from the whole scene space, without checking their quality. For experiments, we fix the number of scenes to $10$ to control scene diversity and generate different numbers of images, and compare their performance curve. By fixing the number of scenes, we compare how well different view finding methods can exploit the scenes.
**Ablating Environment Randomization** We remove the environment randomization module, and keep the scene models unchanged during synthesis. For experiments, we fix the total number of images to $10K$ and use different number of scenes. In this way, we can compare the diversity of images generated with different methods.
We train the EAST models with different numbers of images or scenes, evaluate them on the $3$ real datasets, and compute the arithmetic mean of the F1-scores. As shown in Fig. \[fig:ablation\] (a), we observe that the proposed combination, i.e. *Random Walk + Manual Anchor*, achieves significantly higher F1-scores consistently for different numbers of images. Especially, larger sizes of training sets result in greater performance gaps. We also inspect the images generated with these methods respectively. When starting from the same anchor point, the proposed random walk can generate more diverse viewpoints and can traverse much larger area. In contrast, the *Random Viewpoint + Manual Anchor* method degenerates either into random rotation only when we set a small norm ball size for random location, or into *Random Viewpoint Only* when we set a large norm ball size. As a result, the *Random Viewpoint + Manual Anchor* method requires careful manual selection of anchors, and we also need to manually tune the norm ball sizes for different scenes, which restricts the scalability of the synthesis engine. Meanwhile, our proposed random walk based method is more flexible and robust to the selection of manual anchors. As for the *Random Viewpoint Only* method, a large proportion of generated viewpoints are invalid, e.g. inside other object meshes, which is out-of-distribution for real images. This explains why it results in the worst performances.
From Fig. \[fig:ablation\] (b), the major observation is that environment randomization module improves performances over different scene numbers consistently. Besides, the improvement is more significant as we use fewer scenes. Therefore, we can draw a conclusion that, the environment randomization helps increase image diversity and at the same time, can reduce the number of scenes needed. Furthermore, the random lighting conditions realize different real-world variations, which we also attribute as a key factor.
![Results of ablation tests: (a) ablating viewfinder module; (b) ablating environment randomization module. []{data-label="fig:ablation"}](img/ablation.jpg){width="0.9\linewidth"}
Experiments on Scene Text Recognition
=====================================
In addition to the superior performances in training scene text detection models, we also verify its effectiveness in the task of scene text recognition.
Recognizing Latin Scene Text {#rec-latin}
----------------------------
### Settings
**Model** We select a widely accepted baseline method, ASTER [@shi2018aster], and adopt the implementation[^4] that ranks top-1 on the ICDAR 2019 ArT competition on curved scene text recognition (Latin) by [@long2019alchemy]. The models are trained with a batch size of $512$. A total of $95$ symbols are recognized, including an End-of-Sentence mark, $52$ case sensitive alphabets, $10$ digits, and $32$ printable punctuation symbols.
**Training Datasets** From the $600K$ English synthetic images, we obtain a total number of $12M$ word-level image regions to make our training dataset. Also note that, our synthetic dataset provide character level annotations, which will be useful in some recognition algorithms.
**Evaluation Datasets** We evaluate models trained on different synthetic datasets on several widely used real image datasets: *IIIT* [@mishra2012scene], *SVT* [@wang2011end], *ICDAR 2015 (IC15)* [@karatzas2015icdar], *SVTP* [@quy2013recognizing], *CUTE* [@risnumawan2014robust], and *Total-Text*[@kheng2017total].
Some of these datasets, however, have *incomplete* annotations, including IIIT, SVT, SVTP, CUTE. While these datasets contain punctuation symbols, digits, upper-case and lower-case characters, the aforementioned datasets only provide case-insensitive annotations and ignore all punctuation symbols. In order for more comprehensive evaluation of scene text recognition, we re-annotate these $4$ datasets in a case-sensitive way and also include punctuation symbols. We also publish the new annotations and we believe that they will become better benchmarks for scene text recognition in the future.
### Experiment Results
Experiment results are summarized in Tab. \[tab:reg\]. First, we compare our method with previous synthetic datasets. We have to limit the size of training datasets to $1M$ since VISD only publishes $1M$ word images. Our synthetic data achieves consistent improvements on all datasets. Especially, it surpasses other synthetic datasets by a considerable margin on datasets with diverse text styles and complex backgrounds such as SVTP ($+2.4\%$). The experiments verify the effectiveness of our synthesis method in scene text recognition especially in the complex cases.
Since small scale experiments are not very helpful in how researchers should utilize these datasets, we further train models on combinations of Synth90K, SynthText, and ours. We first limit the total number of training images to $9M$. When we train on a combination of all $3$ synthetic datasets, with $3M$ each, the model performs better than the model trained on $4.5M\times2$ datasets only. We further observe that training on $3M\times3$ synthetic datasets is comparable to training on the whole Synth90K and SynthText, while using much fewer training data. This result suggests that the best practice is to combine the proposed synthetic dataset with previous ones.
Recognizing Multilingual Scene Text
-----------------------------------
### Settings
Although MLT 2017 has been widely used as a benchmark for detection, the task of recognizing multilingual scene text still remains largely untouched, mainly due to lack of a proper training dataset. To pave the way for future research, we also generate a multilingual version with $600K$ images containing $10$ languages as included in MLT 2019 [@nayef2019icdar2019]: *Arabic*, *Bangla*, *Chinese*, *English*, *French*, *German*, *Hindi*, *Italian*, *Japanese*, and *Korean*. Text contents are sampled from corpus extracted from the Wikimedia dump[^5].
**Model** We use the same model and implementation as Section \[rec-latin\], except that the symbols to recognize are expanded to all characters that appear in the generated dataset.
**Training and Evaluation Data** We crop from the proposed multilingual dataset. We discard images with widths shorter than $32$ pixels as they are too blurry, and obtain $4.1M$ word images in total. We compare with the multilingual version of SynthText provided by *MLT 2019* competition that contains a total number $1.2M$ images. For evaluation, we randomly split $1500$ images for each language (including *symbols* and *mixed*) from the training set of [MLT 2019]{}. The rest of the training set is used for training.
### Experiment Results
Experiment results are shown in Tab. \[tab:reg-mlt\]. When we only use synthetic data and control the number of images to $1.2M$, ours result in a considerable improvement of $1.6\%$ in overall accuracy, and significant improvements on some scripts, e.g. *Latin* ($+7.6\%$) and *Mixed* ($+21.6\%$). Using the whole training set of $4.1M$ images further improves overall accuracy to $39.5\%$. When we train models on combinations of synthetic data and our training split of MLT19, as shown in the bottom of Tab. \[tab:reg-mlt\], we can still observe a considerable margin of our method over SynthText by $3.2\%$ in overall accuracy. The experiment results demonstrate that our method is also superior in multilingual scene text recognition, and we believe this result will become a stepping stone to further research.
Limitation and Future Work
==========================
There are several aspects that are worth diving deeper into: (1) Overall, the engine is based on rules and human-selected parameters. The automation of the selection and search for these parameters can save human efforts and help adapt to different scenarios. (2) While rendering small text can help training detectors, the low image quality of the small text makes recognizers harder to train and harms the performance. Designing a method to mark the illegible ones as *difficult* and excluding them from loss calculation may help mitigate this problem. (3) For multilingual scene text, scripts except *Latin* have much fewer available fonts that we have easy access to. To improve performance on more languages, researchers may consider learning-based methods to transfer *Latin* fonts to other scripts.
Conclusion
==========
In this paper, we introduce a scene text image synthesis engine that renders images with 3D graphics engines, where text instances and scenes are rendered as a whole. In experiments, we verify the effectiveness of the proposed engine in both scene text detection and recognition models. We also study key components of the proposed engine. We believe our work will be a solid stepping stone towards better synthesis algorithms.
Acknowledgement {#acknowledgement .unnumbered}
===============
This research was supported by National Key R&D Program of China (No. 2017YFA0700800).
A. Scene Models {#a.-scene-models .unnumbered}
===============
In this work, we use a total number of $30$ scene models which are all obtained from the Internet. However, most of these models are not free. Therefore, we are not allowed to share the models themselves. Instead, we list the models we use and their links in Tab. \[tab:scenes\].
B. New Annotations for Scene Text Recognition Datasets {#b.-new-annotations-for-scene-text-recognition-datasets .unnumbered}
======================================================
During the experiments of scene text recognition for English scripts, we notice that among the most widely used benchmark datasets, several have incomplete annotations. They are IIIT5K, SVT, SVTP, and CUTE-80. The annotations of these datasets are case-insensitive, and ignore punctuation marks.
The common practice for recent scene text recognition research is to convert both prediction and ground-truth text strings to lower-case and then compare them. This means that the current evaluation is flawed. It ignores letter case and punctuation marks which are crucial to the understanding of the text contents. Besides, evaluating on a much smaller vocabulary set results in over-optimism of the performance of the recognition models.
To aid further research, we use the Amazon mechanical Turk (AMT) to re-annotate the aforementioned $4$ datasets, which amount to $6837$ word images in total. Each word image is annotated by $3$ workers, and we manually check and correct images where the $3$ annotations differ. The annotated datasets are released via GitHub at <https://github.com/Jyouhou/Case-Sensitive-Scene-Text-Recognition-Datasets>.
B.1 Samples {#b.1-samples .unnumbered}
-----------
We select some samples from the $4$ datasets to demonstrate the new annotations in Fig. \[fig:new\].
B.2 Benchmark Performances {#b.2-benchmark-performances .unnumbered}
--------------------------
As we are encouraging case-sensitive (also with punctuation marks) evaluation for scene text recognition, we would like to provide benchmark performances on those widely used datasets. We evaluate two implementations of the ASTER models, by Long *et al.*[^6] and Baek *et al*[^7] respectively. Results are summarized in Tab. \[tab:reg\].
The two benchmark implementations perform comparably, with Baek’s better on straight text and Long’s better at curved text. Compared with evaluation with *lower case + digits*, the performance drops considerably for both models when we evaluate with all symbols. These results indicate that it may still be a challenge to recognize a larger vocabulary, and is worth further research.
![ Examples of the new annotations. []{data-label="fig:new"}](img/new_ann.pdf){width="1.0\columnwidth"}
[^1]: when the distances from the rectangular proposals’ corners to the nearest point on the underlying surface mesh exceed certain threshold
[^2]: <https://fonts.google.com/>
[^3]: <https://github.com/argman/EAST>
[^4]: <https://github.com/Jyouhou/ICDAR2019-ArT-Recognition-Alchemy>
[^5]: <https://dumps.wikimedia.org>
[^6]: <https://github.com/Jyouhou/ICDAR2019-ArT-Recognition-Alchemy>
[^7]: <https://github.com/clovaai/deep-text-recognition-benchmark>
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this paper, we have described a denotational model of Intuitionist Linear Logic which is also a differential category. Formulas are interpreted as Mackey-complete topological vector space and linear proofs are interpreted by bounded linear functions. So as to interpret non-linear proofs of Linear Logic, we have used a notion of power series between Mackey-complete spaces, generalizing the notion of entire functions in ${\mathbb{C}}$. Finally, we have obtained a quantitative model of Intuitionist Differential Linear Logic, where the syntactic differentiation correspond to the usual one and where the interpretations of proofs satisfy a Taylor expansion decomposition.'
author:
- Marie Kerjean and Christine Tasson
bibliography:
- 'biblioMC.bib'
title: 'spaces and power series – A topological model of Differential Linear Logic'
---
\[firstpage\]
Introduction
============
Logic is by nature discrete, and linear logic is not different. The interpretation of linearity in terms of resource consumption still manipulates discrete notions, [i.e.]{}proofs are seen as operators on multisets of formulas. Many denotational models of linear logic are also discrete, for example, based on graphs such as coherent spaces [@systemflater], on games [@ho; @ajm], or on sets and relations which can also be endowed with an additive structure giving rise to vector spaces with bases [@Ehr02; @Ehr05]. Furthermore, Ehrhard and Regnier explain in [@ER06diff] and [@ER03] how it is possible to add a differentiation rule to Linear Logic, constructing this way Differential Linear Logic (DiLL). In this work, differentiation is seen as a way to transform a non-linear proof $ f : A \Rightarrow B$ into a linear proof $ Df: A \multimap (A\Rightarrow B)$. In some models such as the relational model, differentiation has a combinatorial interpretation. Continuous models of DiLL, where non-linear proofs are interpreted by differentiable functions, are even more appealing, as the synctactical differentiation corresponds to the mathematical one. In [@Ehr02] and [@Ehr05], for instance, non-linear proofs are interpreted by power series between Köthe spaces and Finiteness spaces respectively, that are sequence spaces. One could even ask for an interpretation of the differentiation rule in more general spaces.
#### Bornologies. {#bornologies. .unnumbered}
The search for topological models of Linear Logic relies on some fundamental mathematical issues. Indeed, having a cartesian closed category of topological spaces is not straightforward. Several answers exists (see [@escardo] for a past account), and among them is the definition of convenient spaces and smooth functions by Frölicher, Kriegl and Michor in [@FroKri] and [@KriMi]. Those are the smooth functions used in [@BET10] for modelling DiLL. Moreover, as explained by Girard in the introduction of [@Gir96], if the proofs are interpreted by continuous functions, then, notably, the interpretations of the proofs of $A, A \Rightarrow B \vdash B$ and of $A \vdash (A \Rightarrow B) \Rightarrow B$ are also continuous. That is, $ x, f \mapsto f(x) $ and $ x \mapsto (\delta_x : f \mapsto f(x)) $ must be continuous. This would be the case if linear function spaces bore both a uniform convergence and a pointwise convergence topology. We believe that this is solved by the use of bounded sets, [i.e.]{}by using the advantages of the theory of bornologies (see [@Hogbe] for an overview of this theory). Indeed, the Banach-Steinhauss theorem says that between Banach spaces, the topology of uniform convergence on bounded sets and the pointwise convergence topology on a space of linear functions give rise to the same bounded sets. This theorem is generalized in [@KriMi], where the authors use Mackey-complete spaces (complete spaces for a specific version of Cauchy sequences) and [[bounded]{}]{}linear maps (linear maps preserving bounded sets). This observation was exploited in [@FroKri] and [@KriMi] where [[bounded]{}]{}linear functions replace continuous ones.
#### Quantitative semantics. {#quantitative-semantics. .unnumbered}
Introduced by Girard in [@Gir88], quantitative semantics refine the analogy between linear functions and linear programs (consuming exactly one times its input). Indeed, programs consuming exactly $n$-times their resources are seen as monomials of degree $n$. General programs are seen as the disjunction of their executions consuming $n$-times their resources. Mathematically, this means that non-linear programs are interpreted by potentially infinite sums of monomials, that are power series. This analogy can be found in many denotational models of variant of Linear Logic such as Fock spaces [@Fock94] Köthe spaces [@Ehr02], Finiteness spaces [@Ehr05], Probabilistic Coherent spaces [@danosehrhard], or, in a more categorical setting, in analytic functors [@2aaf] and generalised species [@Gspecies].
#### spaces and Power series. {#spaces-and-power-series. .unnumbered}
In this article, we have brought to light a model of Intuitionist Differential Linear Logic, whose objects are *locally convex topological vector spaces* that are (see Definition \[def:mackey\]). The ingredients of the model have been chosen with care so that they correspond cleanly to the constructions of Differential Linear Logic: for instance, vector spaces are used to interpret linearity, and topology to interpret differentiation.
We use the notion of bounded set when we ask *linear functions* not to be continuous but *[[bounded]{}]{}*, that is to send a bounded set on a bounded set. The two notions are closely related, but distinct. As a consequence, the interpretation of the *negation* is based on the bounded dual and not on the usual continuous dual.
The *multiplicative conjunction* $ \otimes$ of Linear Logic is interpreted by the *[[bounded]{}]{}* tensor product of topological vector spaces which has then to be Mackey-completed.
The *additive conjunction* $\with$ and *disjunction* $\oplus$ are interpreted respectively by the cartesian product and the coproduct in the category of spaces and [[bounded]{}]{}linear functions. Finite products and coproducts coincide, so that the category is equipped with finite biproducts. Notice that if we wanted to ensure that the bounded dual of infinite products are coproducts (the reverse comes automatically), we would need to work with spaces whose cardinals are not strongly inaccessible [@Jar81 13.5.4]. This assumption is not restrictive as it is always possible to construct a model of ZFC with non accessible cardinals. Non-linear proofs of DiLL are interpreted by *power series*, that are sums of [[bounded]{}]{}$n$-monomials. In order to work with these functions, we must make use of the theory of holomorphic maps developed in the second chapter of [@KriMi]. This is made possible since the spaces we consider are in particular Mackey-complete. We have proven that the category of spaces and power series is cartesian closed, by generalizing the Fubini theorem over distributions ${S}(E\times F,{\mathbb{C}})\simeq {S}(E,{S}(F,{\mathbb{C}}))$ and by using interchange of converging summations in ${\mathbb{C}}$. The exponential modality is interpreted as a subspace of the [[bounded]{}]{}dual of the space of scalar power series. Indeed, any space can be embedded in its [[bounded]{}]{}bidual $!E\subset (!E)^{\times\times}=(!E\multimap \bot)^\times$ and using the key decomposition $!E \multimap \bot \simeq E \Rightarrow \bot={S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})$ of Linear Logic gives us that $!E\subseteq {S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^\times$. Finally, because we are working with topological vector spaces, the interpretation of the co-dereliction rule of DiLL is the operator taking the directed derivative at $0$ of a function.
#### Related works. {#related-works. .unnumbered}
Our model follows a long history of models establishing connections between analyticity and computability.
Fock spaces [@Fock94] and Coherent Banach spaces [@Gir96] were the first step towards a continuous semantics of Linear Logic. More precisely, Fock spaces are Banach spaces and Coherent Banach spaces are dual pairs of Banach spaces (see [@Jar81 Chap. 8] for an overview of the theory of dual pairs). In Fock spaces, linear programs are interpreted as contractive bounded linear maps and general programs as holomorphic or analytic functions. Similarly, in Coherent Banach spaces, linear programs are interpreted as continuous linear functions and general programs as bounded analytic functions defined on the open unit ball. Yet, it is easy to guess that neither Fock spaces nor Coherent Banach spaces are completely a model of the entire linear logic, but they are a model of a linear exponential, that is of weakening. However, it is remarkable that both works were already using bounded sets ([e.g.]{}bounded linear forms and continuous linear forms correspond on Banach spaces) and we take advantage of replacing Banach spaces norms by bornologies.
With Köthe spaces [@Ehr02] and then Finiteness spaces [@Ehr05], Ehrhard designed two continuous semantics of Linear Logic. The objects of the two models are sequence spaces equipped with a structure of topological vector spaces. Köthe spaces are locally convex spaces over the usual real or complex fields, whereas Finiteness spaces are endowed with a linearised topology over a field (potentially of reals or complexes) endowed with discrete topology. The linear proofs are interpreted by continuous linear functions and the non-linear ones by analytic mappings. Even if the interpretation of linear logic formula enjoys an intrinsic characterization, these models are related to the relational semantics. Indeed, a Linear Logic formula is interpreted by a space of sequences whose indices constitute its relational interpretation. Furthermore, the interpretation of a proof is a sequence whose support (the indices of non zero coefficients) is its relational interpretation. Although interpretations of formulas may differ, proofs are identically interpreted in Köthe or Finiteness models (and in the model presented in the present article). The main difference between our model and these Köthe or Finiteness spaces models is precisely that spaces do not have to be sequence spaces. They digress from the discrete setting of the relational model. Since Köthe spaces and spaces are both endowed with locally convex topology, one could think that the first are a special case of the last. However, the function spaces are endowed with the compact open topology for Köthe spaces and with the bounded open topology for the spaces. In particular, the dual $E_X^{\bot}$ of a Köthe Space $E_X$ is isomorphic to the topological dual of $E_X$, which is in general a strict subset of the bornological dual (all Köthe spaces are not bornological). It raises an interesting question about whether a description with bounded subsets would help having an intrinsic description of Köthe spaces. On the contrary, although Finiteness spaces do not have the same kind of topology, their use of bounded sets is central and our model borrows a lot of Finiteness spaces constructions.
The present work is thought as a restriction of Convenient spaces [@BET10], that is spaces and smooth maps. In this model of Intuitionist Linear Logic, which is a differential category, non-linear proofs are interpreted with some specific smooth maps. No references are made to a discrete setting, but as in Finiteness spaces, the topology and the bornology are dually related. Although this bornological condition facilitates the proofs, it is not necessary to interpret Intuitionnist Linear Logic. Thus, in our model, we release the bornological condition on the topology
Remember that in many Quantitative models of Linear Logic, as in Normal functors [@Gir88; @2aaf], Fock spaces [@Fock94] or Finiteness spaces [@Ehr05; @Ehr07] non-linear proofs are interpreted as analytic functions. In our model, we refine smooth maps into analytic ones. On the way, we consider topological vector spaces over ${\mathbb{C}}$ to be able to handle holomorphic functions. This is another difference with Convenient Vector spaces as presented in [@BET10].
#### Content of the paper.
We begin the paper by laying down the bornological setting (Subsection \[subsec:borno\]) and by defining the central notion of spaces (Subsection \[subsec:mco\]). Then, in Section \[sec:lin\], we begin the definition of the model by the linear category of spaces and [[bounded]{}]{}linear maps that is cartesian and symetric monoidal closed. This linear part is the base of the present work, but also of the model of spaces and smooth functions introduced in [@BET10]. We have given an overview of this work in a slightly different setting in Section \[sec:smooth\] in order to properly describe the landscape of our work. Finally, in Section \[sec:pws\], we introduce the power series, their definition and properties that are useful in demonstrating that spaces and power series constitute a quantitative model of Intuitionistic Differential Linear Logic.
#### Acknowledgements.
The authors thank Rick Blute and Thomas Ehrhard for the inspiration and the lively conversations.
Preliminaries
=============
Topologies and Bornologies {#subsec:borno}
--------------------------
Let us first set the topological scene. We will handle *complex* topological vector spaces. We denote by ${\mathbb{C}}$ the field of complex and by ${\mathbb{C}^\ast}={\mathbb{C}}\setminus \{0\}$.
The monoidal structure could have been described either with complex or real vector spaces. However, in section \[sec:pws\], we work with power series and make an extensive use of their holomorphic properties.
More precisely, we will work with *locally convex separated topological vector spaces* (see [@Jar81] I.2.1) and refer to them as *lctvs*. From now on, $E$ and $F$ denote . A set $C$ in a $ {\mathbb{C}}$-vector space is said to be *absolutely convex* when for all $x, y \in C$, for all $\lambda , \mu \in {\mathbb{C}}$, if $|\lambda|+|\mu| < 1$ then $\lambda x + \mu y \in C$. By definition, the topology of an is generated by a basis of neighbourhood of $0$ made of absolutely convex subsets. We will use that if $C$ is an absolutely convex subset of an , then $\bar{C} \subset 3 C$, and $\lambda C + \mu C \subset (\lambda + \mu) C$ for all $\lambda , \mu\in {\mathbb{C}}$.
#### Bounded sets.
We will also work with *bornologies*, that is collections of bounded sets with specific closure properties. A *subset* $b$ of an is *bounded* when it is absorbed by every $0$-neighbourhood $U$, that is there is $\lambda \in {\mathbb{C}}$ such that $b \subseteq \lambda U$. A *disk* is a bounded absolutely convex set. A *function* is *[[bounded]{}]{}* when it sends a bounded set of its domain on a bounded set of its codomain. Two spaces are *[[bounded]{}]{}equivalent*, noted $E\simeq F$, when there is a bijection $\phi:E\rightarrow F$ such that $\phi$ and $\phi^{-1}$ are both linear and bounded.
Let us denote $E'$ the space of linear *continuous* forms on $E$, ${E^{\times}}$ the space of linear *[[bounded]{}]{}* forms on $E$, and $E^{\star}$ the space of linear forms on $E$. Remark that any linear continuous function is bounded and so $E' \subset {E^{\times}}\subset E^\star$.
#### The Mackey-Arens Theorem.
It is a fundamental theorem for the theory of bornologies. It states that bounded subsets can be characterized as the one that are sent to a bounded ball by any continuous linear form. We state it for bounded linear forms.
\[scalbound\] A subset $b \subset E$ is bounded if and only if it is scalarly bounded, that is: $$\forall \ell \in {E^{\times}},\ \exists \lambda>0,\ |\ell(b)|<\lambda.$$
By definition of the bounded linear forms, the image of a bounded set is bounded. For the reverse implication, we use the Mackey-Arens theorem (see for example [@Sch71 IV.3.2]). Indeed, since for any $l\in E'$, $l\in {E^{\times}}$, we have $l(b)$ is bounded, and so $b$ is bounded.
#### The Hahn-Banach Theorem.
Usually, the Hahn-Banach separation theorem is stated for continuous linear forms (see [@Jar81 proposition 7.2.2.a]). We adapt it to bounded linear forms as $E'\subseteq{E^{\times}}$. The principal flaw to the theory of vectorial spaces and bornologies is that there is no version of the Hahn-Banach extension theorem for bounded linear maps [@Hog70] .
\[HBsep\] Let $C$ be a closed convex subset of $E$. If $x \in E\setminus C$, then there is $ \ell \in E'\subset{E^{\times}}$ such that $|\ell(x)|= 1 $ and for all $y \in C $ $|\ell(y)| =0 $.
#### Bornivorous subsets.
We introduced bounded sets as a definition depending of the topology. It is also possible to define $0$-neighbourhood from a bornology.
A *bornivorous* is a subset $U\subseteq E$ absorbing any bounded up to dilatation: $\forall b\subset E\text{ bounded},\ \exists\lambda \in {\mathbb{R}^+},\ \lambda b \subseteq U.$
The *bornological topology* $\tau_b$ of $E$ is the topology generated by the bornivorous disks of $E$.
Note that any neighbourhood of $0$ in the topology of $E$ is bornivorous, but the converse is false, [i.e.]{}the bornivorous topology $\tau_b$ is finer than the topology of $E$. The point of the bornologification of an is precisely to enrich $E$ with all the bornivourous subsets as $0$-neighbourhood, so that we get better relations between continuity and boundedness (see [@Jar81 13.1] for details on this notion).
\[prop:topoborno\]
1. The bounded sets of $E$ and ${\tau_b(E)}$ are the same.
2. A linear function $f : E \rightarrow F$ is bounded if and only if $ f: {\tau_b(E)} \rightarrow F$ is continuous.
The first item stems from definition handling. For the second one, if $f: {\tau_b(E)} \rightarrow F$ is continuous, it is bounded and because $E$ and ${\tau_b(E)}$ bears the same bounded sets $f : E \rightarrow F$ is bounded. Conversely, suppose that $f : E \rightarrow F$ is bounded. Then one see that when $V$ is a $0$-neighbourhood in $F$, $f^{-1}(V)$ is a bornivorous subset of $E$, hence a $0$-neighbourhood in ${\tau_b(E)}$. Thus ${f} : {\tau_b(E)} \rightarrow F$ is continuous.
Mackey-complete spaces {#subsec:mco}
----------------------
Mackey-complete spaces are very common spaces in mathematics as Mackey-completeness is a very weak completeness condition. For example, every complete space, quasi-complete, or weakly complete space is Mackey-complete. Mackey-complete spaces are called locally complete spaces in [@Jar81], or convenient spaces in [@KriMi]. Although it is not a very restraining notion, Mackey-completeness suffices to speak about smoothness between , in the meaning of Kriegl and Michor [@KriMi].
\[def:mackey\] Consider $E$ an . A *Mackey-Cauchy net* in $E$ is a net $(x_{\gamma})_{\gamma \in \Gamma}$ such that there is a net of scalars $\lambda_{\gamma, \gamma'}$ decreasing towards $0$ and a bounded set $b$ of $E$ such that: $$\forall \gamma, \gamma' \in \Gamma, x_{\gamma} - x_{\gamma'} \in \lambda_{\gamma, \gamma'} b.$$ A space where every Mackey-Cauchy net converges is called *Mackey-complete*.
Note that a converging Mackey-Cauchy net does in fact *Mackey-converge*, [i.e.]{}there is a net of scalars $\lambda_{\gamma}$ decreasing towards $0$ such that $x_{\gamma} - \lim_\gamma x_{\gamma} \in \lambda_{\gamma} b$. Note also that a Mackey-converging net is always a converging net, by definition of boundedness in an .
Notice that the convergence of Mackey-cauchy nets and the convergence of Mackey-cauchy sequences are equivalent (see [@KriMi I.2.2]). Mackey-converging sequences and bounded functions behave particularly well together. Indeed, a bounded function is not continuous in general, so it does not preserve converging sequences but it preserves Mackey-Cauchy nets.
\[bounded\_Mackey\] Bounded linear functions preserves Mackey-convergence and Mackey-Cauchy nets.
There is a nice characterization of the Mackey-completeness, through a decomposition into a collection of Banach spaces.
\[E\_b\] Consider $b$ an absolutely convex and bounded subset of an $E$. We write $E_b$ for the linear span of $b$ in $E$, and we endow it with the Minkowski functional defined as: $$p_b (x) = \inf\{ \lambda\in{\mathbb{R}}^+\ |\ x \in \lambda b \}.$$ It is a normed space.
As a Mackey-Cauchy net is nothing but a Cauchy net in some specific $E_b$, we have :
[[@KriMi I.2.2]]{} \[E\_b\_mco\] An $E$ is Mackey-complete if and only if for every bounded and absolutely convex subset $b$, $E_b$ is a Banach space.
Similarly to what happens in the more classical theory of complete spaces, we have a *Mackey-completion* procedure. This one is slightly more intricate than the completion procedure, as it consists of the right completion of each of the $E_b$.
[[@KriMi I.4.29]]{} \[mcompletion\] For every $E$ there is a unique (up to bounded isomorphism) $\tilde{E}$ and a bounded embedding $ \iota : E \rightarrow \tilde{E}$ such that for every $F$, for every bounded linear map $f : E \rightarrow F$ there is a unique bounded linear map $\tilde{f} : \tilde{E} \rightarrow F $ extending $f$ such that $ f = \tilde{f} \circ \iota$.
The Mackey-completion procedure can be decomposed in three steps. First, one bornologizes the space $E_{born}$, so that $E_{born}$ bears a topology where the $0$-neighbourhoods are exactly the bornivorous ones. Then one Cauchy-completes this space into a space $\widetilde{E_{born}}$. The Mackey-completion of $E$ is the Mackey-closure of $E$ in $\widetilde{E_{born}}$.
Beware that the *Mackey-closure* procedure does not behave as simply as the closure procedure. Indeed, the Mackey-closure of a subset $B$ is the smallest Mackey-closed (i.e. closed for Mackey-convergence) set containing $X$. It does not coincide in general with the Mackey-adherence of $X$, that is the set of all limits of Mackey-converging sequences of elements of $X$, see [@KriMi I.4.32].
Let us describe finally a few preservation properties of Mackey-complete spaces.
[[@KriMi I.2.15]]{}\[prop:stability\_mco\] Mackey-completeness is preserved by limits, direct sums, strict inductive limits of sequences of closed embeddings. It is not preserved in general by quotient nor general inductive limits.
#### Spaces of bounded maps.
Let us write $\mathcal{B}(E,F)$ for the space of bounded maps from $E$ to $F$ (not necessarily linear), endowed with the topology of uniform convergence on bounded sets of $E$. As in the linear case (see below), bounded sets of $\mathcal{B}(E,F)$ are the *equibounded* ones, that is the sets $B\subset\mathcal{B}(E,F)$ such that for any $b\subset E$ bounded, $B(b)=\{f(x)\ |\ f\in B,\, x\in b\}$ is bounded in $F$.
\[prop:B(E,F)mco\][@KriMi I.2.15] Let $E$ and $F$ be . If $F$ is , then so is $\mathcal{B}(E,F)$.
Consider $(f_{\gamma})_{(\gamma \in \Gamma)}$ a [[Mackey-cauchy]{}]{}net in $\mathcal{B}(E,F)$, [i.e.]{}there is $(\lambda_{\gamma, \gamma'})\subset {\mathbb{R}}$ decreasing towards $0$ and an equibounded ${B}$ in $\mathcal{B}(E,F)$ such that
$$f_{\gamma} - f_{\gamma'} \in \lambda_{\gamma, \gamma'}{B}.$$
For all $ x \in E$, because $B(\{x\})$ is bounded in $F$, $(f_{\gamma} (x))_{\gamma \in \Gamma}$ is also a [[Mackey-cauchy]{}]{}net. Besides, $F$ is , so each of these [[Mackey-cauchy]{}]{}nets converges towards $f(x) \in F$. Let us show that $f$ is bounded. Indeed, consider $b$ a closed bounded set in $E$, and $U$ a $0$-neighbourhood in $F$. As $ B$ is equibounded, there is $\lambda \in {\mathbb{C}}$ such that $B(b) \subset \lambda U$. Consider $\gamma_0 \in \Gamma$ such that, if $ \gamma , \gamma'\geq \gamma_0$ then $| \lambda_{\gamma, \gamma'} | < \lambda$. Consider $\mu \in {\mathbb{C}}$ such that $f_{\gamma_0} (b) \subset \mu U$. Then for all $ \gamma \geq \gamma_0$, $f_\gamma (b) \subseteq \mu U + \lambda U$. Thus $f(b)$ is in $(\lambda + \mu) \bar{U}$, thus in $3(\lambda + \mu) \bar{U}$. We proved that $f(b)$ is a bounded set, and so $f$ is [[bounded]{}]{}.
A symmetric monoidal closed and cartesian category {#sec:lin}
==================================================
Let us write ${\mathbf{Lin}}$ for the category whose objects are spaces, and whose morphisms are linear bounded maps. In this setting, the additives are interpreted by the product and the coproduct, while the multiplicative connectives are interpreted by the tensor product and its dual. The only tricky point is to find a good tensor product in our category : this is possible thanks to the Mackey-completion procedure.
The (co)cartesian structure
---------------------------
#### Topological products and coproducts. {#topological-products-and-coproducts. .unnumbered}
The cartesian product of a countable family of spaces is when endowed with the product topology [@KriMi I.2.15]. Then, a subset is bounded if and only if it is bounded in each direction. The terminal object $\top$ is the $\{0\}$ space.
The coproduct of a countable family of spaces is when endowed with the coproduct topology. The coproduct topology is the finest topology on $\bigoplus_i E_i$ for which the injections $ E_i \rightarrow \bigoplus_i E_i$ are continuous.
Then, $ B \subset \bigoplus_i E_i$ is bounded if and only if $\{ i\ |\ \exists x \in B \cap E_i \}$ is finite and if for every $i$, $B \cup E_i $ is bounded in $E_i$. The $\{0\}$ vector space is also the unit $0$ of the coproduct.
Notice that in the finite case, the product and the coproduct coincide algebraically and topologically. In the infinite case, the distinction between product and coproduct corresponds to the disctinction between the space of complex sequences ${\mathbb{C}}^{{\mathbb{N}}} = \prod_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}} {\mathbb{C}}$ and the space of complex finite sequences ${\mathbb{C}}^{({\mathbb{N}})}=\bigoplus_{n\in{\mathbb{N}}}{\mathbb{C}}$. In ${\mathbb{C}}^{{\mathbb{N}}}$ bounded sets are the one included in a product of disks, whereas in ${\mathbb{C}}^{({\mathbb{N}})}$ bounded sets are included in a finite product of disks.
#### Duality. {#duality. .unnumbered}
The [[bounded]{}]{}isomorphism $(\oplus_{i\in I}E_i)^\times =\prod_{i\in I}{E^{\times}}_i$ always holds. Indeed, the restriction to each $E_i$ of a morphism $f \in (\oplus_{i\in I}E_i)^\times$ gives a family $(f_i) \in \prod_{i\in I}{E^{\times}}_i$. Conversely, any family $(f_i) \in \prod_{i\in I}{E^{\times}}_i$ transforms into a sum $\sum_i f_i \in (\oplus_{i\in I}E_i)^\times$ which is pointwise convergent as it is applied to finite sequences of terms. The dual isomorphism $(\prod_{i\in I}E_i)^\times =\oplus_{i\in I}{E^{\times}}_i$ holds only in certain cases, and in particular when $I$ is countable.
\[prop:infiniteprod\] We have $(\prod_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} E_i)^{\times} = \oplus_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} {E^{\times}}_i$.
Let us first consider $ h \in \oplus_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} {E^{\times}}_i$, we can define $h_i\in{E^{\times}}_i$ the $i$th components of $h$, so that $h=\sum_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}}h_i$. As a finite sum, $h \in (\prod_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} E_i)^{\times}$.
Now, consider $f \in (\prod_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} E_i)^{\times}$ and let us write $f_i: E_i \rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ for $f_{\mid\{0\} \times \dots \{0\} \times E_i\times \{0\} \times\dots}$, that is the restriction of $f$ to $E_i$. $f_i$ is [[bounded]{}]{}. Let us show that there is only a finite number of $i$ such that $f_i$ is not null. Indeed, if this is not the case, there is a non decreasing sequence $(i_k) \in {\mathbb{N}}^{\mathbb{N}}$ and for any $k \in \mathbb{N}$, $x_k \in E_{i_k}$ such that $f(0,\dots,0,x_k,0,\dots)=f_{i_k} (x_k) > k$. Remark that the set $\{(0,\dots,0, x_k,0,\dots)\ |\ k \in \mathbb{N} \}$ is bounded in $\prod_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} E_i$, since $f$ is [[bounded]{}]{}, we get a contradiction.
Let $h= \sum_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} f_i$. We have just proved that $h \in \oplus_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} {E^{\times}}_i$, so that $h$ is [[bounded]{}]{}as a finite sum of [[bounded]{}]{}functions. Notice that $h=\sum_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} f_i \in (\prod_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} E_i)^{\times}$. Let us now show that $g = f-h$ is null. Remark that for any $ i\in {\mathbb{N}}$, the restriction of $g$ to $E_i$ is null. Suppose that $g \neq 0$. There is $x \in \prod_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} E_i$ such that $g(x)=0$. Consider $i$ maximal such that there is $x \in \{0\} \times \dots \{0\} \times \prod_{k \geq i} E_k$ such that $g(x) = 0$. Then $g(x) = g_i (x_i) + g_{| \prod_{k > i} E_k} ((x_k)_{k > i})$. As $g_i (x_i)= 0$ we have $g_{| \prod_{k > i} E_k} ((x_k)_{k > i}) =0$, and thus $g(0, \dots, 0, x_{i+1}, x_{i+2}, \dots ) = 0$. This contradicts the maximality of $i$. Then $g=0$, and $f = h \in \oplus_{i \in {\mathbb{N}}} {E^{\times}}_i$.
There is a generalization of this proposition. Thanks to the Mackey-Ulam theorem [@Ula], when the cardinal $I$ indexing the family is not strongly inaccessible, then the [[bounded]{}]{}dual of the product is the coproduct of the [[bounded]{}]{}duals.
The monoidal structure {#lin_mono}
----------------------
The *[[bounded]{}]{}tensor product* [@KriMi I.5.7] $E\otimes_\beta F$ is the algebraic tensor product with the finest locally convex topology such that $E\times F\rightarrow E\otimes F$ is bounded. The *complete* [[bounded]{}]{}tensor product $E{\hat\otimes}F$ is the Mackey-completion of $E\otimes_\beta F$. The tensor product is associative.
The bounded sets associated with this topology are generated by $b_E\otimes b_F$ for $b_E$ and $b_F$ respectively bounded in $E$ and $F$. The unit ${1}$ is the base field ${\mathbb{C}}$ endowed with its usual topology.
The space of linear bounded functions ${\mathcal{L}}(E,F)$ is endowed with the *bounded open* topology, generated by ${\mathcal{W}}(b,V)=\{f\in{\mathcal{L}}(E,F)\,|\, f(b)\subset V\}$ where $b$ is bounded in $E$ and $V$ is open in $F$.
The associated bornology is generated by the *equibounded* sets, that is the $B\subset{\mathcal{L}}(E,F)$ such that for any bounded $b$ in $E$, $B(b)$ is bounded in $F$. Indeed, consider $B\subset{\mathcal{L}}(E,F)$ bounded for the topology of uniform convergence on bounded set. Consider $b \subset E$ a bounded set and $V \subset F$ a $0$-neighbourhood in $F$. As $B$ is bounded, there is $\lambda \in {\mathbb{C}}$ such that $B \subset \lambda {\mathcal{W}}(b,V)$, that is $B(b) \subset \lambda V$. Thus $B(b)$ is bounded in $F$. Conversely, consider $B\subset{\mathcal{L}}(E,F)$ an equibounded set, $b$ a bounded in $E$ and $V \subset F$ a $0$-neighbourhood in $F$. Then there is $\lambda \in {\mathbb{C}}$ such that $B(b) \subset \lambda V$, that is $B \subset \lambda {\mathcal{W}}(b,V)$. Thus $B$ is bounded in ${\mathcal{L}}(E,F)$.
\[lin\_mco\] Let $E$ and $F$ be . If $F$ is , then so is ${\mathcal{L}}(E,F)$.
Thanks to Proposition \[prop:B(E,F)mco\], a Mackey-cauchy net in ${\mathcal{L}}(E,F)$ converges into a bounded mapping from $E$ to $F$. Moreover, the limit of a net of linear functions is also linear.
Let $E,F,G$ be locally convex spaces. Endowed with the bounded open topology, the space of *bounded bilinear mappings*, denoted as ${\mathcal{L}}(E,F;G)$, is locally convex.
The bornological tensor product is the solution of the universal problem of linearizing bounded bilinear mappings. More precisely, for any $h\in{\mathcal{L}}(E,F;G)$, there is a unique $h_\beta\in{\mathcal{L}}(E\otimes_\beta F,G)$ such that $$\xymatrix{
E\times F \ar[d]^h \ar[r]& E\otimes_\beta F \ar@{-->}[dl]^{h_\beta}\\
G&
}$$
Consider $E,F,G$ and $h$ as in the proposition. Let us define $h_{\beta}: x \otimes y \mapsto h(x,y)$. we see that $h_{\beta}$ is linear and [[bounded]{}]{}. The uniqueness of $h_\beta$ follows from the universal property of $E \otimes F$ in the category of vector spaces and linear map.
If moreover $G$ is , then so is ${\mathcal{L}}(E,F;G)$ (for the same reason as in the proof of Proposition \[lin\_mco\]). Then the universal property diagram can be extended through the Mackey-completion universal property, for any $h\in{\mathcal{L}}(E,F;G)$, there is a unique $\hat h\in{\mathcal{L}}(E{\hat\otimes}F,G)$ such that $$\xymatrix{
E\times F \ar[d]^h \ar[r]& E\otimes_\beta F \ar@{-->}[dl]_{h_\beta}\ar[r]& E{\hat\otimes}F \ar@{-->}[dll]^{\hat h}\\
G&
}$$
\[prop:iso\_tens\_bilin\] $E\otimes_\beta -$ is left adjoint to ${\mathcal{L}}(E,-)$, [i.e.]{}for any locally convex spaces $E,F$ and $G$, there are natural isomorphism $${\mathbf{Lin}}(E,{\mathcal{L}}(F,G)) \simeq {\mathcal{L}}(E,F;G) \simeq {\mathbf{Lin}}(E\otimes_\beta F,G) .$$ This property extends to the complete case by the universal property of the Mackey-completion. If $E$, $F$ and $G$ are , then $${\mathbf{Lin}}(E,{\mathcal{L}}(F,G)) \simeq {\mathcal{L}}(E,F;G) \simeq {\mathbf{Lin}}(E{\hat\otimes}F,G) .$$
(See Kriegl and Michor [@KriMi I.5.7]) The bijection ${\mathbf{Lin}}(E\otimes_\beta F,G) \simeq {\mathcal{L}}(E,F;G)$ follows from the preceding Theorem. As ${\mathcal{L}}(E,F;G)$ bears the topology of uniform convergence on products of bounded sets, the bijection and its inverse are bounded isomorphisms. The morphism $ f \mapsto ( x,y \mapsto f(x)(y))$ is a bijection from ${\mathbf{Lin}}(E,{\mathcal{L}}(F,G))$ to ${\mathcal{L}}(E,F;G)$ which inverse if $g \mapsto (x \mapsto (y \mapsto g(x,y)))$. Both are bounded. These bijections are natural in every elements $E$, $F$ and $G$.
The next theorem follows from the symmetry and the associativity of the tensor product, and from Propositions \[lin\_mco\] and \[prop:iso\_tens\_bilin\]:
The category ${\mathbf{Lin}}$ of spaces endowed with the Mackey-completed tensor product ${\hat\otimes}$ is symmetric monoidal closed.
${\mathbf{Smooth}}$ maps in topological vector spaces {#sec:smooth}
=====================================================
spaces are already at the heart of a model of the differential extension of the Intuitionist Linear Logic [@BET10], inspired by the work of Frölicher, Kriegl and Michor [@FroKri; @KriMi]. In this model, spaces are interpreted as *bornological* spaces, [i.e.]{}spaces such that topologies and bornologies are mutually induced. Non-linear proofs are interpreted by smooth maps.
Actually, the bornological of [@FroKri; @BET10] condition can be released as in [@KriMi]. In particular, the characterization of open sets as bornivorous sets is never used. So that, we can get rid of this condition as in the overview below. Nevertheless, constructions such as tensor product or exponential use Mackey-completion and hence give rise to bornological spaces.
In this paragraph, we use ${\mathbb{C}}$ as base field instead of ${\mathbb{R}}$ which was used in [@BET10] and in the first chapter of [@KriMi]. However, as underlined in [@KriMi II.7.1], any complex locally convex space can be seen as a real convex space endowed with a linear complex structure $J:E\rightarrow E$ defined by $J(x)=i\,x$ and the complex scalar multiplication is then given by $(\lambda+i\,\mu)\,x =\lambda\,x+\mu\,J(x)$. The only adaptation consists in replacing absolutely convex sets by ${\mathbb{C}}$-absolutely convex ones. Moreover, a ${\mathbb{C}}$-linear functional $l$ is characterized by its real part $\mathrm{Re}\circ l$, since $l(x)=(\mathrm{Re}\circ l)(x)+i (\mathrm{Re}\circ l)(J(x))$. Thus, considerations on smooth curves as well as concepts used in [@KriMi; @BET10] still hold in the complex setting.
Smooth curves and smooth maps {#subsec:smooth_maps}
-----------------------------
Let $E$ be a space. As in any a topological space and for any curve $c:{\mathbb{R}}\rightarrow E$, the derivative can be defined as usual: $$c'(t)=\lim_{s\to 0} \frac{c(t+s)-c(t)}{s}.$$ Then such a curve is *smooth* whenever it is infinitely derivable. Let us write ${\mathcal C}_E$ for the set of smooth curves into $E$. It is endowed with the topology of uniform convergence on bounded sets of each derivative separately.
$E$ is if and only if so is ${\mathcal C}_E$.
(See [@KriMi I.3.7]) Suppose that $E$ is complete. By considering the set of all its derivative, one can map a smooth curve on $E$ to an element of $\prod_n \mathcal{B} ( {\mathbb{R}}, E)$. This mapping is bounded. The image of ${\mathcal C}_E$ in $\prod_n \mathcal{B} ( {\mathbb{R}}, E)$ is closed when the last one is endowed by the product topology (see Lemma [@KriMi I.3.5]), and $\prod_n \mathcal{B} ( {\mathbb{R}}, E)$ is complete as $E$ is (see Propositions \[prop:stability\_mco\] and \[prop:B(E,F)mco\]). Thus ${\mathcal C}_E$ is .
Suppose now that ${\mathcal C}_E$ is . E can be identified with the closed subspace of ${\mathcal C}_E$ given by the constant curves, and thus is .
A set of curves $C\subset{\mathcal C}_E$ is bounded whenever each derivative is uniformly bounded on bounded subsets of ${\mathbb{R}}$ (see [@KriMi I.3.9]): $$\forall i, \forall b\subset{\mathbb{R}}\text{ bounded},\ \exists b_E\text{ bounded in }E, \text{ such that } \{c^{(i)}(x)\ |\ c\in C,\ x\in b\}\subset b_E.$$
Let ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$ denote the space of smooth maps between $E$ and $F$, [i.e.]{}functions $f:E\to F$ which preserve smooth curves: $\forall c\in{\mathcal C}_E,\ f\circ c\in{\mathcal C}_F$. This definition of smoothness is a generalization (see [@Bom]) of the usual definition for finite dimension topological vector spaces.
When $F$ is , then ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$ is also .
We explain a proof of Kriegl and Michor [@KriMi I.3.11]. By definition, ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$ bears the topology induced by the product topology.$ \prod_{c\in{\mathcal C}_E} {\mathcal C}_F$. Moreover, smooth maps corresponds exactly to elements $(f_c)_c$ of $\prod_{c\in{\mathcal C}_E} {\mathcal C}_F$ such that for every $g \in \mathcal{C}^{\infty}({\mathbb{R}}, {\mathbb{R}})$, $f_{c \circ g} = f_c \circ g$. This set is closed for the product topology, so ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$ is .
A subset $B$ of ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$ is bounded whenever, for any curve $c\in{\mathcal C}_E$, its image $c^\ast(B)=\{f\circ c\ |\ c\in B\}$ is bounded in ${\mathcal C}_F$.
There is a strong link between boundedness and smoothness. First, smoothness only depend on the bounded subsets (see [@KriMi I.1.8]). So that, if two different topologies on $E$ induce the same bounded subsets, then the set of smooth curves into $E$ are identical. Moreover, the space of bounded linear maps can be embedded in the space of smooth ones:
[[@KriMi I.2.11]]{} \[bounded\_lin\_smooth\] The linear [[bounded]{}]{}maps between $E$ and $F$ are exactly the smooth linear ones.
This is not the case for continuity and boundedness. Indeed, a [[bounded]{}]{}linear map has not to be continuous. Consider for example an infinite dimensional Banach space $B$, and the same space but endowed with its weak topology $B_w$. By Lemma \[scalbound\], the identity function $\mathrm{id} : B_w \rightarrow B$ is bounded. But as the weak topology is strictly coarser than the norm topology, $\mathrm{id}$ is not continuous. Though, any continuous linear map is bounded and so smooth.
Notice that the bounded open topology of ${\mathcal{L}}(E,F)$ coincide with the topology induced by ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$ (see [@KriMi I.5.3]), so that ${\mathcal{L}}(E,F)$ can be seen as a closed linear subspace of ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$ (see [@KriMi I.3.17]).
A model of Differential Linear Logic {#subsec:DiLL}
------------------------------------
One of the great interest of smooth maps as defined above is that they lead to a cartesian closed category [@KriMi I.3.12]. Let ${\mathbf{Smooth}}$ denote the cartesian closed category of *spaces* and *smooth maps*. The authors of [@BET10] show that between ${\mathbf{Lin}}$ and ${\mathbf{Smooth}}$ can be defined a linear non-linear adjunction, thus defining a model of Intuitionistic Linear Logic. The exponential of this model carries a structure rich enough to interpret Intuitionistic Differential Linear Logic (Intuitionistic DiLL), thus giving a smooth interpretation to the syntactic differentiation of DiLL.
#### An adjunction between ${\mathbf{Lin}}$ and ${\mathbf{Smooth}}$.
Models of linear logic stems from a linear non-linear adjunction (see [@Mell08] for an overview). This adjunction relates a category of spaces and linear maps, and a category of spaces and non-linear maps. One way of constructing such a model of Linear Logic, is first to consider a monoidal closed category of linear proofs, while the other is the cartesian closed category of non-linear proofs. So as to get closer to the intuitions of DiLL, [@BET10] construct a non-linear category of smooth maps, using the specific terminology of Frölicher, Kriegl and Michor [@FroKri; @KriMi]. The adjunction stems from an exponential modality constructed thanks to basic tools of Distribution theory. Let us describe these constructions as they were introduced in [@BET10].
Let us introduce the *Dirac delta distribution* $\delta$. For any space $E$ and $x\in E$, we define $$\delta :
\left\lbrace
\begin{split}
E & \rightarrow {\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E, {\mathbb{C}})^\times \\
x & \mapsto \delta_x : f \mapsto f(x)
\end{split}
\right.$$ $\delta$ is bounded and linear, and well defined [@BET10 Lem.5.1].
The use of the Dirac delta function to construct the exponential can be explained. The goal in [@BET10] is to construct a model of Intuitionist Linear Logic with a smooth interpretation of the non-linear proofs. Smoothness must then be captured in the exponential $!E$. $\delta$ is typically the chameleon function in analysis, as it is smooth when applied to smooth function, bounded when applied to bounded functions, or analytic when applied to analytic functions. The construction of [@BET10] is based on the fact that $\delta$ is smooth. In Section \[sec:holo\] we construct a function $\delta$ from $E$ to the dual of a space of power series, $\delta$ will be a power series too.
In [@BET10], the Dirac delta distributions are linearly independent (see [@BET10 Lem.5.3]). Hence, they form a basis of the linear span of the set $\delta(E)=\{\delta_x\ |\ x\in E\}$. The authors then consider the Mackey-closure of this linear subspace of ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^\times$ and get a space that they denote $!E$. We will apply the same methods here.
Let $f\in{\mathbf{Lin}}(E,F)$ be a smooth map. Its exponential $!f\in{\mathbf{Lin}}(!E,!F)$ is defined on the set $\delta(E)$ by $$!f(\delta_x)=\delta_{f(x)}.$$ It is then extended to the linear span of $\delta(E)$ by linearity and to $!E$ by the universal property of the Mackey-completion.
The exponential functor $!$ enjoys a structure of comonad, which is defined on the Dirac delta distributions and then extended: the counit $\epsilon$ is the natural transformation given by the linear map $\epsilon_E\in{\mathbf{Lin}}(!E,E)$, defined by $\epsilon(\delta_x)=x$, the comultiplication $\rho$ has components $\rho_E\in{\mathbf{Lin}}(!E,!!E)$ given by $\rho_E(\delta_x)=\delta_{\delta_x}$.
[[@BET10]]{} The cokleisli category of the comonad $!$ over ${\mathbf{Lin}}$ is the category ${\mathbf{Smooth}}$. In particular, for any spaces $E$ and $F$, $${\mathbf{Lin}}(!E,F)\simeq {\mathbf{Smooth}}(E,F).$$
#### A differential category.
Working with smooth functions allows the author of [@BET10] to introduce a notion of differentiation, which coincides with the usual notion. This makes ${\mathbf{Lin}}$, endowed with $!$, a differential category [@BCS06], and a model of the Intuitionistic part of Differential Linear Logic [@Ehr11] (DiLL). Indeed, Differential Linear Logic differs from linear logic by a more symmetric exponential group, where the usual promotion rule is replaced by three new rules: co-weakening, co-dereliction, and co-contraction (see Figure \[fig:exp\_group\]). Differential categories, and their co-kleisli counterpart, the cartesian differential categories [@BCS09], are thought of as axiomatizing the structure necessary to perform differential calculus. Models of Differential Linear Logic are basically differential categories which are also models of differential calculus, and whose exponential is endowed with a bialgebraic structure.
- The Exponential Group of Linear Logic :
- The Exponential Group of Differential Linear Logic:
Let us present the structure of bialgebra of $!$ in ${\mathbf{Smooth}}$, and how the differentiation is interpreted in this category. In ${\mathbf{Smooth}}$, finite products coincide with finite coproducts. This biproduct structure is transported by the strong monoidal functor $!$ to a bialgebra structure: $\Delta: ! E\rightarrow ! E{\hat\otimes}! E$ is defined on Dirac distributions by $\Delta(\delta_x)=\delta_x \otimes \delta_x$, $e: ! E\rightarrow {\mathbb{C}}$ is defined as $e(\delta_x)=1$, $\nabla: ! E{\hat\otimes}! E\rightarrow ! E$ is given by $\nabla(\delta_x \otimes \delta_y)=\delta_{x+y}$ and $m^0: {\mathbb{C}}\rightarrow! E$ is defined as $m^0(1)=\delta_0$.
Differentiation can be constructed from the bialgebra structure and from a more primitive differentiation operator, denoted as $\mathrm{coder} \in{\mathbf{Lin}}(E, !E)$. This operator is the interpretation of the codereliction rule of DiLL. It corresponds to the differentiation at $0$ of a smooth map :
$$\mathrm{coder}(v)=\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}\frac{\delta_{tv}-\delta_0}{t}$$
The differential operator is then interpreted as the usual one in analysis:
$$d: {\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)\rightarrow {\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,{\mathbf{Lin}}(E,F))$$ $$df(x)(v)=\lim_{t\rightarrow 0} \frac{f(x+tv)-f(x)}{t}$$
A quantitative model of Linear Logic {#sec:pws}
====================================
The purpose of this paper is to define a new quantitative model of DiLL, with a strong analytical flavour. Indeed, one of the characteristic of the quantitative models [@Gir88; @2aaf; @danosehrhard; @Ehr02; @Ehr05] is that the morphisms in the cokleisli enjoy a Taylor expansion. The authors of [@BET10] constructed a smooth interpretation of DiLL, that we would like to refine into a quantitative model. We could have used a study of holomorphic and real analytic maps by Kriegl and Michor [@KriMi Chapter II]: the construction of a model of holomorphic or real analytic maps should be easily done by following the constructions of [@BET10]. However, these maps corresponds only locally to their Taylor development. As the interpretation of locality in denotational semantics remains unclear, we want to interpret the non-linear proofs of DiLL as functions corresponding in every point with their Taylor development in $0$.
We take advantage of the fact that our spaces are so as to define a very general notion of power series which are in particular smooth (see Proposition \[bounded\_incl\_pws\_smo\]). A power series is a converging sum of monomials. Indeed a power series in ${\mathbb{C}}$ is represented by a sum $ \sum_n a_n x^n $ converging pointwise on some disk. We are going to use power series between topological vector spaces, thus the description has to be a little bit more involved and a power series will be a sum $ \sum_n f_n $ where $f_n$ is $n$-homogeneous and $\sum_n f_n (x)$ converges for every $x \in E$. Moreover, we need a stronger notion than pointwise convergence, so as to compose power series and to get a cartesian closed category. This is the uniform convergence on bounded sets of the partial sums $\sum_{n=0}^N f_n$, which will allow us to deeply relate weak, strong and pointwise convergence of power series (see Proposition \[wcv\_pointwise\_pws\]). As the space of power series between spaces is (see Proposition \[prop:compl\_series\]), we obtain a cartesian closed category of spaces and power series between them.
To get to this point, we use a description of power series as functions sending holomorphic maps on holomorphic maps, and for this, proofs of [@KriMi] are adapted. This study gives us a Cauchy inequality on power series, and equivalences between weak convergence and strong convergence of power series, inspired from [@BS71]. Finally, using weak convergence, we obtain the cartesian closedeness of the category.
The part on holomorphic maps between is not needed at first reading, as it only results into Proposition \[Cauchy\_ineq\_pws\]. The reader may then skip Section \[sec:holo\].
Due to the connection between power series and holomorphic maps, we consider vector spaces over ${\mathbb{C}}$. In the following, ${\mathbb{D}}$ denotes the closed unit ball in ${\mathbb{C}}$ and $E$, $F$, and $G$ range over spaces.
Monomials and power series
--------------------------
A function $f_n: E \rightarrow F$ is an *$n$-monomial* when there is $\tilde{f_n}$ an $n$-linear [[bounded]{}]{}function from $E$ to $F$ such that for each $ x \in E$ $$f_n(x) = \tilde{f_n} \underbrace{(x,...,x)}_{n \text{ times}}.$$
We write ${{\mathcal{L}}^n}(E,F)$ for the space of $k$-monomials from $E$ to $F$, and ${\mathcal{L}}(E^{\otimes^n}, F)$ for the space of [[bounded]{}]{}$n$-linear maps from $E$ to $F$. We endow ${\mathcal{L}}(E^{\otimes^n}, F)$ with the locally convex topology of uniform convergence on bounded sets of $E$. As in the linear case (see Section \[lin\_mono\]), bounded sets of ${{\mathcal{L}}^n}(E,F)$ are the equibounded ones.
The following formula relates the values of a monomial with the values of the unique multilinear map it comes from.
\[polarization\_formula\] Consider $f_n \in {\mathcal{L}}^n(E,F)$, and consider $\tilde{f_n}$ an $n$-linear map such that $\tilde{f_n}(x, \dots, x) = f_n (x)$. Then for every $x_1,\dots, x_n\in E$: $$\tilde f_n(x_1,\dots,x_n)= \tfrac 1{n!} \sum_{\epsilon_1,\dots,\epsilon_n =0}^1 (-1)^{n-\sum_{j=1}^n \epsilon_j} f_n\left(\sum_{j=1}^n\epsilon_jx_j\right).$$
The proof relies on the expansion of the right hand side by multilinearity and symmetry of $\tilde f_n$ (see [@KriMi II.7.13]).
As in the case of bounded linear functions (see Proposition \[bounded\_Mackey\]) monomials behave particularly well with respect to Mackey-convergence.
\[lem:lbdd-MC\] Consider $(x_{\gamma})_{\gamma \in \Gamma}$ a Mackey-converging net in $E$ and $f_k : E \rightarrow F$ a $k$-monomial. Then $f_k(x_{\gamma})$ is a Mackey-converging net, thus a converging net.
Let us write $\tilde{f}_k$ for the symmetric bounded $k$-linear map corresponding to $f_k$. Let $b \subset E$ be a bounded set, $x \in E$ and $(\lambda_{\gamma \in \Gamma}) \in {\mathbb{C}}^{\mathbb{N}}$ be a sequence decreasing towards $0$ such that for every $\gamma$ :
$$x_{\gamma} -x \in \lambda_{\gamma} b.$$
Let us write $b'= \tilde{f_{k}} (b \times ... \times b)$. Then for every $\gamma\in \Gamma$, we have can factorize $f_k(x_{\gamma}) -f_k(x)$ following the classical equality $x^k - y^k = (x-y)(x^{k-1} + x^{k-2}y + ... + y^{k-1})$. Indeed: $$f_k(x_{\gamma}) -f_k(x) = \tilde{f_k}(x_{\gamma} -x ,x_{\gamma},..., x_{\gamma}) + \tilde{f_k}(x_{\gamma} -x ,..,x_{\gamma},..., x_{\gamma},x) + \tilde{f_k}(x_{\gamma}-x, x, ..., x) .$$
As $\tilde{f_k}$ is bounded, and as for every $\gamma \in \Gamma$ $x_\gamma$ belongs to the bounded set $M b+\{x\}$ for some M, there is a bounded $b'$ in $F$ such that, for every $\gamma$: $$f_k(x_{\gamma}) -f_k(x) \in \lambda_{\gamma} b'.$$
An *$n$-homogeneous* function is a map $f$ such that $f ( \lambda x) = \lambda^n f(x)$ for any scalar $\lambda$.
[[@KriMi I.5.16.1]]{} \[lem:monom\_smooth\] A function $f$ from $E$ to $F$ is an $n$-monomial if and only if it is a smooth $n$-homogeneous map.
As bounded $n$-linear functions are smooth by Proposition \[bounded\_lin\_smooth\], $n$-monomials are smooth $n$-homogeneous functions. The converse is also true. Indeed, by deriving at $0$ an $n$-homogeneous smooth function along the curve $t\mapsto tx$, we can show that it is equal to its $n^{th}$-derivative which is $n$-linear.
\[nlinmco\] If $F$ is , then so is ${{\mathcal{L}}^n}(E,F)$.
There is a bounded isomorphism between the space ${{\mathcal{L}}^n}(E,F)$ and the space of all $n$-linear symmetrical morphisms from $E$ to $F$, when the last one is endowed with the topology of uniform convergence on bounded sets of $E \times ... \times E$. Indeed, one associate an $n$-monomial to an $n$-linear symmectric morphism by applying the last one $n$-times to the same argument. Thanks to the Polarization Formula \[polarization\_formula\], we can obtain an $n$-linear symmetric morphism $\tilde{f_n}$ from an $n$-monomial $f_n$: $$\tilde f_n(x_1,\dots,x_n)= \tfrac 1{n!} \sum_{\epsilon_1,\dots,\epsilon_n =0}^1 (-1)^{n-\sum_{j=1}^n \epsilon_j} f_n\left(\sum_{j=1}^n\epsilon_jx_j\right).$$
The mappings $(f_n \mapsto \tilde{f_n})$ and $(\tilde{f_n} \mapsto f_n)$ preserves uniformly bounded sets, thus ${{\mathcal{L}}^n}(E,F)$ and the space of all $n$-linear symmetrical morphisms from $E$ to $F$ are isomorphic. By definition of the symmetrized $n$-th product $E^{\otimes^n_s}$, the space ${{\mathcal{L}}^n}(E,F)$ is also isomorphic to ${\mathcal{L}}(E^{\otimes^n_s},F)$. This space is as $F$ is (see Proposition \[lin\_mco\]), and thus ${{\mathcal{L}}^n}(E,F)$ is also .
A polynomial function is a finite sum of monomials : $$\forall x,\ P(x) = \sum_{n=0}^N f_n(x).$$
We write ${\mathcal{P}}(E,F)$ for the space of all polynomial functions between $E$ and $F$, and endow it with the topology of uniform convergence on bounded subsets of $E$.
\[def:powerseries\] A function $f$ from $E$ to $F$ is a *power series* when $f$ is *pointwise* equal to a converging sum of $k$-monomials: $$\forall x, \ f(x)= \sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty} f_k(x),$$ and when this sum converges *uniformly on bounded* sets of $E$.
We write ${S}(E,F)$ for the space of power series between $E$ and $F$ and endow it with the topology of uniform convergence on bounded subsets of $E$.
\[pws\_borno\] A power series is [[bounded]{}]{}.
Consider $ f = \sum_k f_k \in {S}(E,F)$, $b$ a bounded set in $E$, and $U$ an absolutely convex $0$-neighbourhood in $F$. We know that $\sum_k f_k$ converges uniformly on b. Hence, there is an integer $N$ such that $( f - \sum_{k=1}^N f_k ) (b) \subset U$. Besides, each $f_k$ sends $b$ on a bounded sets, thus $(\sum_{k=1}^N f_k ) (b)$ is bounded as a finite sum of bounded sets. So there is $\lambda\in{\mathbb{C}}$ such that $(\sum_{k=1}^N f_k ) (b)\subset \lambda U$. Finally, $ f (b) \subset (\lambda+1) U$.
Power series and holomorphy {#sec:holo}
---------------------------
We need to study the power series we defined more deeply. We are going to show that if $f = \sum_n f_n : E \rightarrow F$ is a power series converging uniformly on bounded sets, it is holomorphic, according to the specific definition of Kriegl and Michor [@KriMi II.7.19]. This definition is a generalisation of the well known definition of holomorphy for complex functions of a complex variable, and leads to a Cauchy inequality for $f$ (see Proposition \[Cauchy\_ineq\_pws\]). This Cauchy inequality will turn to be essential in showing cartesian closedeness and the composition results in Section \[subsec:cv\_pws\].
This formula will in particular result in the Mackey-convergence of power series (see Proposition \[MC\_pws\]), and will allow us to compose [[bounded]{}]{}linear forms with power series (see Proposition \[comp\_lin\_pws\]). For now on, we are going to work with linear continuous forms $l\in E'$ in order to be able write $ l \circ ( \sum_n f_n) = \sum_n l \circ f_n$.
#### Holomorphic curves in $\mathbb{C}$. {#holomorphic-curves-in-mathbbc. .unnumbered}
Remember that an holomorphic curve $c: \mathbb{C} \rightarrow \mathbb{C} $ is a complex everywhere derivable function. It is then infinitely many times differentiable, and verifies the Cauchy formula and the Cauchy inequality. For any $z'\in{\mathbb{C}}$ and any sufficiently small $r$: $$\begin{gathered}
\frac{c^{(n)}(z')}{n!} = \frac{1}{2 \pi i } \int\limits_{|z-z'|=r} \frac{c(z)}{(z-z')^{n+1}} d z\label{eq:CF} \\
\intertext{and hence :}
\left| \frac{c^{(n)}(z')}{n !} \right| \leq \left| \frac{sup \{ c(z)\ |\ |z-z'| = r \} }{ r ^n } \right|. \label{eq:CI}\end{gathered}$$
Moreover, it can be uniquely decomposed as a power series: $$\forall a \in {\mathbb{C}}, \forall z\in {\mathbb{C}},\ c(z+a)=\sum_n \frac{c^{(n)}(a)}{n!}z^n.$$
#### Holomorphic curve in an . {#holomorphic-curve-in-an-. .unnumbered}
This part on holomorphic curve is inspired by Part 7 of the book of Kriegl and Michor [@KriMi] on spaces and holomorphic functions and by the first theorem of [@Gro53]. We give two different approaches to holomorphic curves, that we then show equivalent.
A *strong holomorphic* curve $c: \mathbb{C} \rightarrow E$ is an everywhere complex derivable function. A *weak holomorphic* curve $c: \mathbb{C} \rightarrow E$ is a function such that for every $ l \in E'$, $l \circ c $ is holomorphic.
\[lem:properties-holomorphic\] Let $c:{\mathbb{C}}\rightarrow E$ be a curve.
1. \[property:bounded\] If $c$ is strong holomorphic, then
$\forall l\in E'$, $l\circ c$ is complex derivable and $\forall z\in{\mathbb{C}},\ (l\circ c)'(z)= l (c'(z))$.
2. \[property:whbdd\] If $c$ is weak holomorphic, then $c$ is bounded.
3. \[property:whMC\] If $c$ is weak holomorphic, then for all $z\in{\mathbb{C}}$, the difference quotient $(\frac{c(z+h)-c(z)}{h})_{h\in \mathbb D}$ is a Mackey-Cauchy net.
Let $c$ be a strong holomorphic curve.
\[property:bounded\]. Let $l\in E'$. Since $l$ is linear and continuous, we have: $$\lim\limits_{h \rightarrow 0} \frac{l \circ c (z + h) - l \circ c (z)}{h} = l(c'(z)).$$ Then, $l\circ c$ is complex derivable and $\forall z\in{\mathbb{C}},\ (l\circ c)'(z)= l (c'(z))$.
Now, let $c$ be a weak holomorphic curve.
\[property:whbdd\]. Let $b$ be a bounded set in $\mathbb{C}$ and $\bar b$ its closed absolutely convex closure. For every $ l \in E'$, $(l\circ
c)( \bar{b})$ is compact as the image in $ \mathbb{C}$ of a compact set by a continuous function ($l\circ c$ is complex holomorphic and thus continuous). Then, $c(b)$ is weakly bounded and so bounded by Proposition \[scalbound\].
\[property:whMC\] This proof is adapted from [@KriMi I.2.1]. By translating $c$, we may assume that $z=0$. For any $l\in E'$, $l\circ c$ is holomorphic in ${\mathbb{C}}$, hence infinitely complex-derivable and $l\circ c$ is Lipschitz continuous. Then, we have
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{z_1-z_2}\left(\frac{l \circ c(z_1)- l \circ c(0)}{z_1}- \frac{l \circ c(z_2)- l \circ c(0)}{z_2} \right)
& =& \int_0^1 \frac{(l \circ c)'(rz_1)-(l \circ c)'(rz_2)}{z_1-z_2} dr \\
& =& \int_0^1 \frac{(l \circ c)'(rz_1)-(l \circ c)'(rz_2)}{rz_1-rz_2} rdr
\end{aligned}$$
Moreover the curve $r\mapsto \frac{(l \circ c)'(rz_1)-(l \circ c)'(rz_2)}{rz_1-rz_2}$ is locally bounded as $(l \circ c)$ is holomorphic. The set $\left\{ \frac{1}{z_1-z_2}\left(\frac{ c(z_1)- c(0)}{z_1}- \frac{ c(z_2)- c(0)}{z_2}) \right)\mid z_1,z_2\in \mathbb D \right\} $ is then scalarly bounded and thus bounded by Proposition \[scalbound\]. This is equivalent to show that the difference quotient is Mackey-Cauchy (see Definition \[def:mackey\]).
\[weak\_cont\_strong\_holocurve\] \[strong\_weak\_holo\] The strong holomorphic curves into a space are exactly the weak holomorphic curves.
A strong holomorphic curve is weak holomorphic by the first property of the preceding lemma.
Now, let $c:{\mathbb{C}}\rightarrow E$ be a weak holomorphic curve into a space $E$. Then by the third property of the preceding lemma, for all $z\in{\mathbb{C}}$, the difference quotient $(\frac{c(z+h)-c(z)}{h})_{h\in\mathbb D}$ is Mackey-Cauchy and thus converges in $E$, since it is . Hence, $c$ is complex derivable and its derivative $c'(z)$ is the limit of the difference quotient.
From now on, an *holomorphic* curve is either a weak or strong holomorphic curve.
\[lem:int-abs-conv\] Let $b$ be an absolutely convex and closed subset of $E$, $\gamma$ be a path in ${\mathbb{C}}$ and $f: {\mathbb{C}}\to E$ be continuous. If for any $z\in\gamma([0;1])$, $f(z)\in b$, then the integral of $f$ on the path $\gamma$ is in $b$.
As $\int_{\gamma} f = \int_0^1 f(\gamma(t)) dt$, this integral can be computed as the limit of the Riemann sums over $[0;1]$ of $f \circ \gamma$. As $b$ is absolutely convex, each of these sums is in $b$. As it is closed, we have also $\int_{\gamma} f \in b $.
\[Cauchy\_ineq\_curves\] Let $c:{\mathbb{C}}\rightarrow E$ be a holomorphic curve. There is $b$ absolutely convex, closed bounded subset of $E$ such that:
$c ( \mathbb{D} ) \subset b $ and $\forall n\in\mathbb N$, $ c^{(n)}(\mathbb{D}) \subset n ! b $.
Thanks to Property \[property:bounded\] of Lemma \[lem:properties-holomorphic\], $c$ is bounded. This justifies the existence of $b$ such that $c ( \mathbb{D} ) \subset b $. Moreover for every $l \in E' $, the curve $l \circ c $ is holomorphic in ${\mathbb{C}}$ according to Proposition \[strong\_weak\_holo\]. Thus for every $z \in {\mathbb{C}}$, $$\frac{(l \circ c)^{(n)}(z)}{n!} = \frac{ l (c^{(n)}(z))}{n!} = \frac{1}{2 \pi i } \int\limits_{|h|=1} \frac{l(c(h z))}{h^{n+1}} d h .$$ Thus $l \circ c^{(n)} ( \mathbb{D}) \subset l (n! b)$ (see Lemma \[lem:int-abs-conv\]). By the Hahn-Banach separation theorem applied to $b$ and to every $\{z\}$ for $z \in \mathbb{D}$, we get that $c^{(n)} ( \mathbb{D}) \subset n! b$.
\[prop:holo\_curve\_dec\] Let $c:\mathbb C\to E$ be a holomorphic curve. For any $z \in \mathbb{C}$, $c^{(n)} (z) \in E$ and $c$ can be uniquely decomposed as a series uniformly converging on bounded disks of ${\mathbb{C}}$: $$c: z\mapsto \sum\limits_n \frac{1}{n!}c^{(n)}(0) z^n .$$ Moreover, this series is Mackey-converging at each point of ${\mathbb{C}}$.
For every $l \in E'$, $l \circ c$ is a holomorphic function from ${\mathbb{C}}$ to ${\mathbb{C}}$. It does thus correspond in every point to its Taylor series in $0$, and as $c^{(n)} (z) \in E$ for every $z$ we have
$$l \circ c (z) = \sum\limits_n \frac{(l \circ c )^{(n)}(0)}{n!} z^n
= \sum\limits_n \frac{l (c ^{(n)}(0))}{n!} z^n
= l (\sum\limits_n \frac{ c ^{(n)}(0)}{n!} z^n)$$
As $E'$ is point separating, we have for every $z \in {\mathbb{C}}$ : $$c(z) = \sum\limits_n \frac{1}{n!}c^{(n)}(0) z^n .$$
Moreover, for any $r > 0$, the closed and absolutely convex closure $b_r$ of the set $\{ \frac{1}{n!}c^{(n)}(0) r^n \ |\ n \in \mathbb{N} \}$ is bounded. It is indeed weakly bounded as the power series $ \sum\limits_n \frac{l (c ^{(n)}(0))}{n!} z^n$ converges uniformely on the open disk of center $0$ and radius $r$. Thus for every ${\mathopen{|}z\mathclose{|}} <r$, we have: $$\sum_{n \geq N} \frac{1}{n!}c^{(n)}(0) z^n \in \sum_{n \geq N} \left(\frac{{\mathopen{|}z\mathclose{|}}}{r}\right) b_r \subset \left(\frac{{\mathopen{|}z\mathclose{|}}}{r}\right)^N \frac{1}{1-\frac{{\mathopen{|}z\mathclose{|}}}{r}} b_r$$ and the series $\sum_n \frac{1}{n!}c^{(n)}(0) z^n$ does Mackey-converge towards $c(z)$.
#### Power series and holomorphy. {#power-series-and-holomorphy. .unnumbered}
The goal of this paragraph is to prove that power series, as presented in Definition \[def:powerseries\], preserve holomorphic curves (see Theorem \[powerseries\_holo\]). This will show that they follow the same pattern as smooth functions that preserve smooth curves. As mentioned in [@KriMi II.7.19.6], functions preserving holomorphic curves on ${\mathbb{D}}$ are locally power series, but we do not know if the preservation of holomorphic curves characterizes our power series.
The following property is adapted from [@KriMi II.7.6].
\[fact\_Banach\_holocrv\] A holomorphic curve into $E$ locally factors through a Banach space $E_b$ generated by a bounded set $b\subset E$ (see Definition \[E\_b\]).
Consider $c$ a holomorphic curve, $z \in \mathbb{C}$ and $w$ a compact neighbourhood of $z$. Let us denote $b$ the absolutely convex closed closure of $c(w)$. For any $l\in E'$, the Cauchy inequality gives us for $r$ small enough $$\frac{r^k}{k!}(l\circ c)^{(k)}(z) \in l(b).$$ Thus for $z'$ close enough to $z$ in $\mathbb{C}$, $$(l\circ c)(z')=\sum\limits_{k \geq 0} \left(\frac{z-z'}{r} \right)^k \frac{r^k}{k!}(l\circ c)^{(k)}(z)\ \in\ \sum\limits_{k \geq 0} \left(\frac{z-z'}{r} \right)^k l(b).$$ Then, as E’ is point separating, we get that $$c(z') \in \sum\limits_{k \geq 0} \left(\frac{z-z'}{r} \right)^k b.$$ And for $z'$ close enough to $z$, $ c(z') \in E_b$.
Now, we want to show that for every holomorphic curve $c$, if $f : E \rightarrow F$ is a power series, then $f \circ c$ is again a holomorphic curve (see Theorem \[powerseries\_holo\]). Mainly, this is shown by working on the $E_b$, so as to use Banach spaces properties. Remember that we are working in spaces, and that a space is if and by only if each $E_b$ is a Banach space (see Proposition \[E\_b\_mco\]). This is a generalization of a result by Kriegl and Michor [@KriMi II.7.17].
\[lem:bdd-monom\] Let $f = \sum_k f_k$ be a power series from $E$ to $F$. For any bounded set $b$ of $E$, the set $\{ f_k(x)\ |\ x\in b \}$ is bounded in $F$.
Let us write $S_n = \sum_{k \leq n} f_k$, and fix $b$ any bounded set of $E$. Then, by definition of power series, $S_n$ converges uniformly on bounded sets, hence for every $U$ neighbourhood of $0$ in $E$, there is $p$ such that if $n , m \geq p$ we have $(S_n - S_m )(b) \subset U$. In particular, for $k \geq p+1$, $f_k (b) \subset U$. Because the $f_0,\dots, f_p$ are [[bounded]{}]{}, then there are $\lambda_0, \dots, \lambda_k \in \mathbb{C}$ such that $ f_j(b) \in \lambda_j U$. Finally, we get $\{f_k\, |\, k \in \mathbb{N}\} (b) \subset \max\{1,\lambda_0,\dots, \lambda_k \} U$.
\[powerseries\_holo\] Power series send holomorphic curves on holomorphic curves.
Let $ f = \sum_k f_k: E \rightarrow F$ be a power series, and $c: \mathbb{C} \rightarrow E$ be a holomorphic curve. Let $\tilde f_k$ be the $k$-linear bounded map associated to the $k$-monomial $f_k$.
Let us show that the curve $ f \circ c: \mathbb{C} \rightarrow F$ is holomorphic. Thanks to Proposition \[weak\_cont\_strong\_holocurve\], it is enough to show that for every $l \in F'$, $ l \circ f \circ c: \mathbb{C} \rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ is holomorphic. Let us fix $z_0 \in \mathbb{C}$ and show that locally around $z_0$, $l \circ f \circ c $ is complex derivable. By translating $c$, we can assume [w.l.o.g.]{}that $c(z_0) = 0$, and $z_0 =0$. Besides, by Proposition \[fact\_Banach\_holocrv\] we can assume [w.l.o.g.]{}that $E$ is a Banach space.
Thanks to Propostion \[prop:holo\_curve\_dec\], we can write locally $c$ as a Mackey-converging power series in $E$. For every $z \in {\mathbb{C}}$ we have: $$c(z) = \sum\limits_n a_n z^n .$$ Moreover, this series converges uniformely on ${\mathbb{D}}$.
Because $l$ is linear and continuous, we have $l \circ f = \sum_k l \circ f_k $. Besides, for any $k\in \mathbb N$, $l\circ \tilde f_k$ is $k$-linear and bounded. Thanks to Lemma \[lem:lbdd-MC\], $\sum\limits_{n_1} \dots \sum\limits_{n_k} l \circ \tilde f_k( a_{n_1}, \dots, a_{n_k}) z^{n_1+\dots+n_k}$ converges to $l\circ f_k(c(z))=l\circ \tilde f_k(c(z),\dots,c(z))$. We thus have: $$l \circ f(c(z)) = \sum\limits_k \sum\limits_{n_1} \dots \sum\limits_{n_k} l \circ \tilde f_k( a_{n_1}, \dots ,a_{n_k}) z^{n_1+\dots+ n_k}$$
Let us now apply Lemma \[lem:bdd-monom\] to the unit disk $U$, which is bounded, in the Banach space $E$. We get that $\{l \circ \tilde f_k(x_1, \dots, x_k)\ |\ k \in \mathbb{N}, x_j \in U \}$ is bounded. Since $\sum_n a_n z^n$ converges, for any ${\mathopen{|}z\mathclose{|}}<1$ and $n$ big enough, $a_nz^n\in U$. Thus, for $r < 1 $, we have for all $n \geq N $ $ a_n r^n \in U$, thus the following set is bounded: $$b=\left\{ l \circ \tilde f_k(a_{n_1}r^{n_1}, \dots , a_{n_k}r^{n_k}) | n_i \geq N \right\}.$$
Following [@KriMi II.7.17], consider $z$ and $r$ such that $|z|< \frac{1}{2}$ and $ 2 |z |< r < 1$, then $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:absc}
\sum\limits_k \sum\limits_{n_1} \dots \sum\limits_{n_k} l \circ \tilde f_k( a_{n_1}, \dots, a_{n_k}) z^{n_1+\dots +n_k} \\
\begin{split}
& = \sum\limits_k \sum\limits_{n_1} \dots \sum\limits_{n_k} l \circ \tilde f_k(a_{n_1}r^{n_1}, \dots , a_{n_k}r^{n_k}) \frac{z^{n_1+\dots +n_k}}{r^{n_1+\dots +n_k}}, \\
& = \sum\limits_n \sum\limits_k \sum\limits_{n_1+\dots+n_k = n} l \circ \tilde f_k(a_{n_1}r^{n_1}, \dots , a_{n_k}r^{n_k}) \frac{z^{n_1+\dots +n_k}}{r^{n_1+\dots +n_k}}.
\end{split}\end{gathered}$$ Now, we look at the last sum and get: $$\sum\limits_n \sum\limits_k \sum\limits_{n_1+\dots+n_k = n} l \circ \tilde f_k(a_{n_1}r^{n_1}, \dots , a_{n_k}r^{n_k}) \frac{z^{n_1+\dots +n_k}}{r^{n_1+\dots +n_k}} \in \sum_n (2^n - 1) \left( \frac{z}{r} \right)^n b.$$ This is an absolutely converging sum, and the permutation of the sums in is justified by Fubini’s thereom. Finally, $l\circ f\circ c$ is holomorphic in ${\mathbb{C}}$, as the sum of an absolutely converging power series.
.
Another proof of this theorem uses Hartog’s theorem [@KriMi II.7.9], and the fact that a [[bounded]{}]{}$k$-monomial sends a holomorphic curve on a holomorphic curve.
\[derivatives\_pws\] Let $f = \sum_k f_k$ be a power series between $E$ and $F$. Then, for every $x \in E $ and $n \in \mathbb{N}$, $c:z\mapsto f(z x)$ is a holomorphic curve into $F$ whose $n$-th derivative in $0$ is $ n! f_n (x)$.
The curve $c:z\mapsto f(z x)$ is holomorphic thanks to Theorem \[powerseries\_holo\]. Since the scalar multiplication on $E$ is continuous, the set $\{ z x\ |\ |z|< 1\}$ is bounded. By Definition \[def:powerseries\] of power series, $\sum_k f_k ( z x) = \sum_k f_k(x)\,z^k$ converges uniformly on the unit disk $\mathbb D$ of ${\mathbb{C}}$. Thanks to the uniqueness of the decomposition (see Lemma \[prop:holo\_curve\_dec\]), its $n$-th derivative is $n!f_n(x)$.
\[unique\_dvp\_pws\] The $k$-monomials in the development of a power series are unique.
\[Cauchy\_ineq\_pws\] Every power series $f \in {S}(E,F)$ verifies a Cauchy inequality: if $b$ is an absolutely convex set in $E$ and if $b'$ is an absolutely convex and closed set in $E$ such that $f(b) \subset b'$, then for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$ we have also : $$f_n(b) \subset b'$$
For every $x \in E$, $c: z \mapsto f(zx)$ is a holomorphic curve into $F$ whose $n$-th derivative is $n!f_n(x)$ by Lemma \[derivatives\_pws\]. For every $l \in F'$, $l\circ c$ is holomorphic and satisfies a Cauchy Formula: $$\tfrac{1}{n!}(l\circ c)^{(n)}(0)= l( \frac{c^{(n)}(0)}{n!})= l (f_n(x)) = \frac{1}{2i \pi } \int\limits_{|h|=1} \frac{l(f(h x))}{h^{n+1}} d h .$$
As $b$ is absolutely convex, we conclude thanks to the Hahn-Banach separation theorem that for every $z \in b$, for every $n \in \mathbb{N}$, $f_n(z) \in b'$ (see Lemma \[lem:int-abs-conv\]).
Convergence of power series {#subsec:cv_pws}
---------------------------
Thanks to the Cauchy inequality, we will show the Mackey-convergence of the partial sums of a power series. This property is fundamental in the construction of the cartesian closed category of spaces and power series. It will allow for example to ensure well-composition of power series and bounded functions.
\[MC\_pws\] If $f = \sum_n f_n$ is a power series, then its partial sums Mackey-converge towards $f$ in ${\mathcal B}(E,F)$.
Let $b$ be an absolutely convex and bounded subset of $E$ and $b'$ be the absolutely convex and closed closure of $f(b)$. By Proposition \[Cauchy\_ineq\_pws\], for all $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$, $f_n(b)\subset b'$. As $f_n$ is $n$-homogeneous, we also have $f_n (\tfrac 12 b) \subset \tfrac 1{2^n}b'$.
If $B$ denotes the equibounded set $\{f\in{\mathcal B}(E,F)\ \mid\ f(\tfrac{1}2 b)\subset b'\}$, then $f \in B$ as $\tfrac 12b \subset b$, $f_0 \in B$ and for every $n$, $f_n \in \tfrac 1{2^n}B$. Thus for every $N\in{\mathbb{N}}$, $$f- \sum_0^{N} f_n \in \sum_{n > N} \tfrac{1}{2^n} B$$ and the partial sums do Mackey-converge towards $f$.
#### Simple and weak convergence
Our definition of power series allows us to make nice connection between their weak, strong and simple convergence. This will allow us to prove the cartesian closedeness of the category of spaces and power series between them.
\[wcv\_pointwise\_pws\] Let $\{f_k\,\mid\, k\in{\mathbb{N}}\}$ be a family of $k$-monomials from $E$ to $F$. If for every $l\in {F^{\times}}$ (resp. $l\in F'$) and $x\in E$, $\sum_k l\circ f_k(x)$ converges in ${\mathbb{C}}$, then for any $x\in E$, $\sum_k f_k(x)$ converges in $F$.
Let us fix $x\in E$. By assumption, for any $l\in {F^{\times}}$, $\sum_k l \circ f_k (2 x)$ converges in ${\mathbb{C}}$, so $\{l\circ f_k(2x) \, \mid\, k\in {\mathbb{N}}\}$ is bounded in ${\mathbb{C}}$. By Proposition \[scalbound\] (resp. by the Mackey-Ahrens Theorem), $\{f_k(2x) \,\mid\, k\in {\mathbb{N}}\}$ is bounded in $F$, its closure denoted $b'$ is also bounded. We get that, for all $N\in {\mathbb{N}}$, $$\sum_{k\ge N} f_k(x)\subset \sum_{n\ge N}\tfrac 1{2^n}b'.$$ Hence, $\sum_k f_k(x)$ is [[Mackey-cauchy]{}]{}and so converges in $F$.
\[wcv\_unif\_pws\] Let $f: E \rightarrow F$ be a [[bounded]{}]{}function and let $f_k$ be $k$-monomials such that for every $ l \in F' $, $\sum_k l \circ f_k$ converges towards $ l \circ f$ uniformly on bounded sets of $E$. Then, $f=\sum_k f_k$ is also a power series.
Let $b$ be a bounded set and $b'$ be the absolutely convex and closed closure of $f(2b)$. For any $l\in F'$, since $l\circ f$ is a power series, it satisfies a Cauchy Inequality thanks to Proposition \[Cauchy\_ineq\_pws\] (notice that $l(b')$ is absolutely convex and that $(l\circ f)(2b)\subset l(b')$). Therefore, for any $k\in{\mathbb{N}}$, $(l\circ f_k) (2b) \subset l(b')$. By the Hahn-Banach Separation theorem and since $f_k$ is $k$-linear, we get that $f_k(b)\subset \tfrac{1}{2^k}b'$. Thus, $\sum_k f_k$ Mackey-converges uniformly to $f$ on bounded sets of $E$. Since Mackey-convergence entails convergence, we get that $f=\sum_k f_k$ is a power series.
The two last propositions helped us to infer strong convergence from weak convergence, the following will allow us to deduce uniform convergence from pointwise convergence.
\[simply\_unif\_cv\] Let $\sum_k f_k: E \rightarrow F $ be a pointwise converging series of $k$-monomials. If the sum converges pointwise towards a [[bounded]{}]{}function $f:E\rightarrow F$, then $f$ is a power series.
\[lem:cvs-cvu\] Consider $E$ a Fréchet space and for every $ k \in {\mathbb{N}}$ $f_k \in \mathcal{L}^k(E, {\mathbb{C}})$. Then $\sum f_k$ converges pointwise on $E$ if and only if it converges uniformly on every bounded set of $E$.
(see [@KriMi I.7.14] for details) The reverse implication is straightforward. Let us prove the direct implication, and suppose $\sum f_k$ converges pointwise. Consider a $0$-neighbourhood $U$ in $E$. We want to show that $\{\tilde f_k(x_1,\dots, x_k)\ |\ k \in {\mathbb{N}}, x_i \in U\}$ is bounded. If this is true, then $\sum f_k$ converges uniformly on $\lambda U$ for $\lambda <1 $, and thus on every bounded set of $E$.
Since the domain of the $f_k$ is $\mathbb{C}$, their boundedness implies their continuity. Hence, the sets $$A_{K,r} = \{ x \in E\ |\ \forall k\in{\mathbb{N}},\ |f_k(x^k)| \leq Kr^k\}$$ are closed. Moreover, they do recover $E$ by hypothesis. Then, by Baire property, there is an $A_{K,r}$ whose interior is nonempty. Consider $x_0 \in A_{K,r}$ and $V$ a neighbourhood of $0$ such that $ x_0 - U \subseteq A_{K,r}$. By the polarization formula (see Lemma \[polarization\_formula\]), there is $\lambda>0$ such that for all $x \in U$ and $k\in{\mathbb{N}}$, $ | f(x^k)| \leq K \lambda^k$ for some $\lambda > 0$. Then $\{ f_k(x^k)\ |\ k\in{\mathbb{N}}\}$ is bounded on $\frac{U}{\lambda}$.
Let us fix $l \in F'$. For every $x \in E$, $\sum_k l \circ f_k (x)$ converges towards $l \circ f(x)$ in ${\mathbb{C}}$, and $l\circ f$ is bounded. Let $b$ be a bounded set. Then, according to Lemma \[lem:cvs-cvu\] which relates pointwise convergence and uniform convergence of power series on Banach spaces, the power series $\sum_k l \circ f_k (x)$ converges uniformly on $E_b$ (as it is a Banach space, see Proposition \[E\_b\_mco\]), hence on $b$. We have proved that $\sum_k f_k$ converges weakly uniformly on bounded sets. By Proposition \[wcv\_unif\_pws\], we know that it converges (strongly) uniformly on bounded subsets.
\[comp\_lin\_pws\] Let $l$ be a linear [[bounded]{}]{}function from $F$ to $G$ and $f= \sum_k f_k$ a power series from $E$ to $F$. Then $ l \circ f $ is a power series and $ l \circ f = \sum_n l \circ f_n$.
According to Proposition \[MC\_pws\], there is a sequence of scalars $(\lambda_n)$ decreasing towards $0$ and a bounded set $ B \subset {S}(E,F)$ such that, for all $n$ : $$f- \sum_0^{n} f_k \in \lambda_n B.$$
Thus for every $n$, $l\circ f - \sum_0^{n} l \circ f_k \in \lambda_n l(B)$. Thus, applying this equation to every $x \in E$, we get that the partial sums of $\sum_k l \circ f_k(x)$ Mackey-converge towards $l \circ f(x)$. As $l \circ f$ is a bounded function, we have that $l \circ f$ is a power series thanks to Proposition \[simply\_unif\_cv\].
A cartesian closed category {#subsec:ccc}
---------------------------
Let us denote as ${S}(E,F)$ the space of all power series between $E$ and $F$. We endow it with the topology of uniform convergence on bounded subsets of $E$. The bounded sets resulting from this topology are the equibounded sets of functions.
Holomorphic maps, as defined in [@KriMi] are in particular smooth [@KriMi II.7.19.8]. Thus according to Proposition \[powerseries\_holo\], power series as defined here are smooth.
\[bounded\_incl\_pws\_smo\] We have a bounded inclusion of ${S}(E,F)$ into ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$.
Let $B$ be a bounded set in ${S}(E,F)$. Let us prove that $B$ is bounded in ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$, [i.e.]{}for every smooth curve $c \in {\mathcal C}_E$, every bounded set $b \subset {\mathbb{R}}$ and every $j \in {\mathbb{N}}$, the following set is bounded in $F$:
$$\{ (f \circ c )^{(j)} (x)\ |\ f \in B,\ x \in b\}.$$
Let us fix $c\in {\mathcal C}_E$ and $j\in{\mathbb{N}}$.
Let $C_j$ be the set made of $c$ and its derivatives of order at most $j$. Since $c$ and its up to $j$th derivatives are smooth, they are bounded and send $b$ on a common absolutely convex bounded set $b'$ of $E$, [i.e.]{}$C_j(b)\subset b'$.
As a power series $f=\sum_n f_n$ converges uniformly on bounded sets of $E$, we can derivate under the sum. Thus, $(f \circ c )^{(j)} (x) = \sum_n (f_n \circ c )^{(j)} (x)$. It is possible to show by induction on $j$ that $(f_n \circ c )^{(j)}(x)=\left(\tilde{f_n}(c(\cdot),\dots,c(\cdot))\right)^{(j)}(x) = \sum_{l=1}^{j^n}\alpha_j^l \tilde{f_n}(c^l_1(x),\dots,c^l_n(x))$ with $c_k^l\in C_j$ and $\alpha_j^l\le n^j$ an integer, where $\tilde f_n$ is the symmetric $n$-linear map from which $f_n$ results. Therefore, we have: $$(f_n \circ c )^{(j)} (b) \subset n^j j^n\tilde{f_n}(b').$$ Now, let $b_E=4je\, b'$. According to Proposition \[Cauchy\_ineq\_pws\], as $f(b_E)\subset B(b_E)$, we get: $$f_n(b') \subset \tfrac 1{(4je)^n}B(b_E).$$ Thanks to the polarization formula (see Lemma \[polarization\_formula\]), for any $x_1,\dots, x_n\in b'$: $$\tilde f_n(x_1,\dots,x_n)= \tfrac 1{n!} \sum_{\epsilon_1,\dots,\epsilon_n =0}^1 (-1)^{n-\sum_{j=1}^n \epsilon_j} f_n\left(\sum_{j=1}^n\epsilon_jx_j\right).$$ Then, for any $l\in F^\times$, we get: $$\begin{aligned}
\left|l\circ\tilde f_n(x_1,\dots,x_n)\right|&\le& \frac 1{n!} \sum_{\epsilon_1,\dots,\epsilon_n =0}^1 \left|l\circ f_n\left(\sum_{j=1}^n\epsilon_jx_j\right)\right|\\
&= & \frac 1{n!} \sum_{\epsilon_1,\dots,\epsilon_n =0}^1 (\textstyle\sum_{i=1}^n \epsilon_i)^n \left|l\circ f_n\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^n\epsilon_jx_j}{\sum_{j=1}^n\epsilon_j}\right)\right|\\\end{aligned}$$
Note that in the last sum, $\sum_j \epsilon_j$ can be supposed to be strictly positive, as when all $\epsilon_j$ equals $0$ then $ \left|l\circ f_n\left(\sum_{j=1}^n\epsilon_jx_j\right)\right| =0$. Now there is exactly $ \binom nj$ ways of having $\sum_{i=1}^n \epsilon_i =j$ :
$$\left|l\circ\tilde f_n(x_1,\dots,x_n)\right| \le \frac 1{n!} \sum_{j=0 }^n\binom nj j^n \left|l\circ f_n\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^n\epsilon_jx_j}{\sum_{j=1}^n\epsilon_j}\right)\right|$$
However, by differentiating $n$ times the binom formula $(1+x)^n = \sum_{j=0}^n \binom nj x^j$, one gets $$\sum_{k=1}^n n \dots (n-k-1) x^{n-k}x^{k-1} = \sum_{j=0}^n j^n \binom nj x^j.$$
Taking $x =1$ thus implies $ \sum_{k=1}^n \frac{n !}{(n-k)!} 2^{n-k} = \sum_{j=0 }^n\binom nj j^n $. We have then $$\frac 1{n!} \sum_{j=0 }^n\binom nj j^n = \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \frac{1}{(k)!} 2^{k} \leq 2^n e.$$
Therefore :
$$\begin{aligned}
\left|l\circ\tilde f_n(x_1,\dots,x_n)\right| &\le & (2e)^n\left|l\circ f_n\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^n\epsilon_jx_j}{\sum_{j=1}^n\epsilon_j}\right)\right|
\\ &\le & (2e)^n \frac{1}{(4ie)^n} |l\circ B(b_E)|\\
& \le & \frac{1}{(2i)^n}|l\circ B(b_E)|\end{aligned}$$
Thanks to Lemma \[scalbound\], $b_F=n!(2i)^n \left\{\tilde f_n(x_1,\dots,x_n) \ \mid\ \forall f\in B,\ \forall x_1,\dots, x_n\in b'\right\}$ is bounded.
To conclude, for every $f \in B$, $$(f_n \circ c )^{(i)} (b) \subset n^i\,i^n \tilde{f_n}(b') \subset \frac{n^i\,i^n}{n!(2i)^n} b_F\subset \frac{n^i}{n!\,2^n}b_F,$$ so that, $$(f \circ c )^{(i)} (b) \subset\sum_n (f_n\circ c)^{(i)}(b)\subset \sum_{n} \frac{n^{i}}{n!\,2^n}b_F.$$
Let us note that any subset of $S(E,F)$ which is the restriction to $S(E,F)$ of a bounded set in ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$ is bounded. Indeed, according to [@KriMi 4.4.7], the bornology on ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$ is the coarsest one making all pointwise evaluations $ev_x : {\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F) \rightarrow F$ bounded. But when we artificially consider on ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$ the bornology of all uniformly bounded set, all pointwise evaluation are bounded. So this bornology is finer than the one resulting from the topology of ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$, that is bounded sets of ${\mathcal{C}^{\infty}}(E,F)$ are uniformly bounded.
\[prop:compl\_series\] When $F$ is so is ${S}(E,F)$.
Consider $(f_{\gamma})_{\gamma \in \Gamma}$ a [[Mackey-cauchy]{}]{}net in ${S}(E,F)$. There is a positive real net $(\lambda_{\gamma, \gamma'})_{\gamma,\gamma'\in \Gamma}$ converging towards $0$ and an equibounded set $B$ in ${S}(E,F)$ such that
$$\label{eq:CN}
f_{\gamma} - f_{\gamma'} \in \lambda_{\gamma, \gamma'} B.$$
We can suppose [w.l.o.g.]{}that $B$ is absolutely convex and closed and that $B=\{f\ \mid\ \forall b\text{ bounded in }E,\ f(b)\subset B(b)\}$. For all $ x \in E$, $B(\{x\})$ is bounded in $F$, and $(f_{\gamma }(x))_{\gamma \in \Gamma}$ is a [[Mackey-cauchy]{}]{}net in $F$. Since $F$ is , for each $x\in E$, $f_\gamma(x)$ converges towards $f(x)$ in F.
Let us show that $f : E \rightarrow F$ is a power series. Since $f_\gamma\in {S}(E,F)$, we can write $f_{\gamma} = \sum_n f_{\gamma,n}$. Now, we fix $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and prove that $$f_{\gamma,n} - f_{\gamma',n} \in \lambda_{\gamma, \gamma'} B.$$ From Equation , we have that, for any $b$ absolutely convex and bounded in $E$, $(\sum_n f_{\gamma,n}-f_{\gamma',n})(b)\in\lambda_{\gamma,\gamma'}B(b)$. Thus, by Proposition \[Cauchy\_ineq\_pws\], for all $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$, $(f_{\gamma,n}-f_{\gamma',n})(b)\in\lambda_{\gamma,\gamma'}B(b)$. We conclude by our assumption on the shape of $B$.
Then, $(f_{\gamma,n})_{\gamma \in \Gamma}$ is a [[Mackey-cauchy]{}]{}net in ${{\mathcal{L}}^n}(E,F)$, which is according to Proposition \[nlinmco\]. Thus $(f_{\gamma,n})_{\gamma \in \Gamma}$ converges in ${{\mathcal{L}}^n}(E,F)$ and we denote as $f_n$ its limit.
Let us show that $\sum_n f_n$ converges pointwise towards $f$. Let us fix $x \in E$ and $V$ an absolutely convex neighborhood of $0$ in $F$. We denote as ${\mathbb{D}}x$ the set $\{z x \ \mid z\in{\mathbb{C}}, |z|<1\}$. We will show that each part of the following expression is small enough: $$f(x)-\sum_{n<N}f_n(x) = \left( \lim_{\gamma'\to\infty} f_{\gamma'}(x)- f_\gamma(x)\right) +\left(f_\gamma(x)-\sum_{n<N}f_{\gamma,n}(x)\right) + \sum_{n<N}\left( f_{\gamma,n}(x)-f_n(x)\right)$$
Since $2{\mathbb{D}}x$ is bounded, then so is $B(2{\mathbb{D}}x)$ and there is $\mu>0$ such that $B(2 {\mathbb{D}}x) \subset \mu V $. Let $\gamma_0 \in \Gamma$ be such that when $\gamma, \gamma' \geq \gamma_0$, we have $ | \lambda_{\gamma, \gamma'} \mu |<1 $, and so $B( {\mathbb{D}}x) \subset \lambda_{\gamma, \gamma'} B(2 {\mathbb{D}}x) \subset V$. Then, $$\forall\gamma',\gamma \geq \gamma_0,\ f_{\gamma'}(x) - f_{\gamma}(x) \in \lambda_{\gamma, \gamma'} B( {\mathbb{D}}x)
\quad\text{and}\quad \lim_{\gamma'\to\infty} f_{\gamma'}(x)- f_\gamma(x)\in V.$$
By convergence, for $N \in \mathbb{N}$ big enough, $$f_{\gamma}(x)- \sum_{n < N} f_{\gamma,n}(x) \in V .$$
Moreover, for every $n$ we have $ f_{\gamma,n}(2x) - f_{\gamma',n}(2x) \in \lambda_{\gamma,\gamma'} B( 2 {\mathbb{D}}x )$, and since they are $n$-monomials, $f_{\gamma,n}(2x) - f_{\gamma',n}(2x)= 2^n(f_{\gamma,n}(x) - f_{\gamma',n}(x)) $. Finally, by taking the limit $\gamma' \rightarrow \infty$, we get
$$f_{\gamma,n}(x) - f_{n}(x) \in \frac{1}{2^n} \overline{V}$$
To sum up, $\sum_n f_n$ converges pointwise towards f, for $N$ big enough, $$f(x)- \sum_{n < N} f_{n}(x) \in V + V +\left( \sum_{n < N} \frac{1}{2^n} \right) \overline V \subset 5 V.$$
Now, we apply Proposition \[simply\_unif\_cv\], to show that $\sum
f_k$ does converge uniformly on bounded sets of $E$ towards $f$ and therefore $f\in {S}(E,F)$. It is sufficient to show that $f$ is bounded since we have already shown the simple convergence. Let $b$ be an absolutely convex and bounded set $b$ of $E$. Consider $\gamma \in \Gamma$. Then we get $$f(x)= f_\gamma(x) + (f(x) - f_\gamma(x)) = f_\gamma(x) +
\lim_{\gamma'\rightarrow\infty} \sum_n (f_{\gamma', n}(x)-f_{\gamma,n}(x)).$$ If $M$ is an upper bound of the net $(\lambda_{\gamma,\gamma'})$, we get that $f(b) \subset f_{\gamma}(b) + M
\overline{B(b)}$.
In order to prove that the composite of two power series is also a power series, we need to use Fubini’s theorem and permute sums. We will have to embed our series in ${\mathbb{C}}$ and to use Propositions \[wcv\_pointwise\_pws\] and \[simply\_unif\_cv\] that relates weak, strong, pointwise and uniform convergences.
The composition of two power series is a power series.
Consider $ f = \sum_n f_n: E \rightarrow F$ and $g = \sum_k g_k: G \rightarrow E$ two power series. Let us show that $f \circ g: G \rightarrow F$ is a sum $\sum_m h_m$ of $m$-monomials converging uniformly on bounded sets of $G$. Let us use $\tilde{f_n}$ (resp. $\tilde{g_k}$) for the $n$-linear (resp. $k$-linear) function corresponding to $f_n$ (resp. $g_k$).
Because the series $\sum_k g_k$ Mackey-converges (see Proposition \[MC\_pws\]), and because, for each $n \in \mathbb{N}$, $f_n$ is an $n$-monomial, we have: $$\forall x \in G, \tilde{f_n}(g(x)) = \sum\limits_{k_1,\dots k_n \geq 0} f_n (g_{k_1} (x), \dots,g_{k_n} (x) ) .$$ Notice that $\tilde{f_n} (g_{k_1} (x), \dots,g_{k_n} (x) )$ is a $(k_1 + \dots + k_n)$-monomial in $x$.
Let us write $$\label{eq:hm}
h_m: x \mapsto \sum\limits_{n \geq 0} \sum\limits_{k_1 + \dots + k_n = m \atop k_i \geq 0 } \tilde{f_n} (g_{k_1} (x), \dots,g_{k_n} (x) )$$
and show that $h_m$ is a well defined [[bounded]{}]{}$m$-monomial such that $f \circ g = \sum_m h_m$.
Let us consider $x \in G$ and fix $l \in F'$. The power series $$\label{eq:lfg}
l \circ f \circ g = \sum\limits_{k_1,\dots,k_n \geq 0} l( \tilde{f_n} (g_{k_1} (x), \dots,g_{k_n} (x) ) )$$ is convergent on $3 {\mathbb{D}}x $, hence absolutely convergent on $ 2 {\mathbb{D}}x $ where ${\mathbb{D}}$ stands for the unit ball of ${\mathbb{C}}$. Thus, we can permute coefficients in the converging sum above. Therefore, the general term $l\circ h_m(x)$ of the series $\sum_{m\ge 0} l \circ h_m (x)$, which is obtained from by permuting indices of the sum, is also the sum of an absolutely converging series. By Proposition \[wcv\_pointwise\_pws\], since for any $l\in F'$ and any $x\in G$, $l\circ h_m(x)$ is the limit of a converging sum in ${\mathbb{C}}$, then for any $x\in E$, $h_m(x)$ is well-defined in $F$. Moreover, for any $l\in F'$, we have proved that $l\circ f\circ g(x)=\sum_{m\ge 0}l\circ h_m(x)=l\circ \sum_{m\ge 0}h_m(x)$, so by Hahn-Banach Separation theorem: $$\forall x\in G,\ f\circ g(x)=\sum_m h_m(x).$$
Let $b$ be a bounded set in $G$. Since $g$ is [[bounded]{}]{}, $g(2b)$ is a bounded set in $E$, and we set $b'$ its absolutely convex and closed closure which is also bounded. Let $b''$ be the absolutely and closed closure of the bounded set $f(2 g(2b))$ of $F$. Now, by Proposition \[Cauchy\_ineq\_pws\], if $x \in b$, then $g_{k} (2x) \in b'$ and $\tilde{f_n} (2g_{k_1} (2x), \dots,2g_{k_n} (2x) ) \in b'' $. Since $g_{k_i}$ and $f_n$ are monomials, for $x \in b$ we get $g_{k_i}(x) \in \frac{1}{2^{k_i}} b'$ and $\tilde{f_n} (g_{k_1} (x), \dots,g_{k_n} (x) ) \in \frac{1}{2^n} \frac{1}{2^{\sum k_i}} b''$. Since there is exactly ${m + n -1 \choose m}$ ways of choosing $n$ natural numbers whose sum is $m$, we get from formula \[eq:hm\] : $$h_m (x) \in \frac{1}{2^m} \sum_n {m + n -1 \choose m} \frac{1}{2^n} b'.$$ Moreover, we have: $${m + n -1 \choose m} \sim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \tfrac{n^m}{m!}.$$ Thus, $\sum_n {m + n -1 \choose m} \frac{1}{2^n}$ is absolutely converging. We have $$h_m (b) \subset \sum_n {m + n -1 \choose m} \frac{1}{2^n} b'$$ so $h_m$ is [[bounded]{}]{}. As it is a converging sum of $m$-monomials, $h_m$ is also an $m$-monomial.
We conclude that $f\circ g$ is a power series by Proposition \[simply\_unif\_cv\], as $\sum_m h_m$ is a series of bounded $m$-monomials pointwise converging to $f\circ g$ which is also bounded.
We can finally address the problem of cartesian closedeness, which is solved by getting back to the scalar case and by using Fubini’s theorem.
\[cart\_closed\] When $E$, $F$ and $G$ are spaces, then $${S}(E , {S}(F,G) ) \simeq {S}(E \times F , G).$$
Let us first notice that if the stated equality is true, then the topologies on these spaces are the same. Indeed, sending $B_1 \times B_2$ on a weak $0$-neighborhood $U$ is equivalent to sending $B_1$ on a function which will send $B_2$ on $U$. This will give us a homeomorphism, thus a [[bounded]{}]{}isomorphism, between the two spaces.
Let us define the two maps inverse of one another, as shown by direct computation: $$\phi:
\left\lbrace
\begin{split}
{S}( E \times F, G) & \rightarrow {S}(E, {S}(F,G)) \\
\sum_k f_k & \mapsto \left( x \mapsto \left( y \mapsto \sum\limits_n \sum\limits_m \binom{n+m}{n} \tilde{f}_{n+m} (\underbrace{(x,0),\dots,(x,0)}\limits_{n \text{ times}},\overbrace{(0,y),\dots,(0,y)}\limits^{m \text{ times}}) \right) \right)
\end{split}
\right.,$$ and $$\psi:
\left\lbrace
\begin{split}
{S}(E, {S}(F,G)) & \rightarrow {S}( E \times F, G) \\
\sum\limits_n ( f_n: x \mapsto \sum\limits_m f^x_{n,m}) & \mapsto \left( (x,y) \mapsto \sum\limits_k \sum\limits_{n+m = k} f^x_{n,m} (y) \right)
\end{split}
\right..$$ We need to show that they are well defined, linear and [[bounded]{}]{}. The difficulty is in showing that their image is indeed made of power series. We will do it on $\psi$, the proof for $\phi$ using the same tools and being easier.
Consider a function $f \in {S}(E, {S}(F,G))$. Then $f$ can be written as $\sum_n ( f_n: x \mapsto \sum_m f^x_{n,m})$, each $f_n$ being a [[bounded]{}]{}$n$-monomial from $E$ to ${S}(F,G)$, and each $f^x_{n,m}$ being a [[bounded]{}]{}$m$-monomial from $F$ to $G$. The function $ (x,y) \mapsto \sum_{n+m = k} f^x_{n,m} (y)$ is a [[bounded]{}]{}$k$-monomial.
Let us fix $l \in G^{\times}$, $y\in F$ and define $\chi^y:\, {S}(F, G) \to {\mathbb{C}},\: g\mapsto l\circ g(y)$. If ${\mathcal B}$ is bounded in ${S}(F,G)$, then ${\mathcal B}(y)$ is bounded in $G$ and $\chi^y(g)$ is bounded in ${\mathbb{C}}$, hence $\chi^y\in {S}(F,G)^\times$. Moreover, because $f$ is a power series, we know from Proposition \[MC\_pws\] that its partial sums are Mackey-convergent and from Proposition \[bounded\_Mackey\] that $\chi^y$ preserves Mackey-convergence. Thus, for any $x\in E$, we have that $$\sum_n \chi^{y} \left( \sum_m f^x_{n,m} \right) = \sum_n \sum_m l \circ f^x_{n,m}(y).$$ In particular, let us fix $x$ and $y$, then $\sum_n \sum_m l \circ f^{2x}_{n,m}(2y)$ Mackey-converges in ${\mathbb{C}}$. Therefore, $l \circ f^{2x}_{n,m}(2 y)=2^n2^ml \circ f^x_{n,m}(y)$ is the general term of a bounded double sequence and the radius of convergence of the ${\mathbb{C}}$-power series $\sum_n \sum_m l \circ f^x_{n,m}(y) z^{n+m} $ is at least $2$. Finally, $\sum_n \sum_m l \circ f^x_{n,m}(y)$ converges absolutely in ${\mathbb{C}}$. Thanks to Fubini theorem, we know that we can permute absolutely converging double series in $\mathbb{C}$. Then $\sum_k \sum_{n+m = k} l \circ f^x_{n,m} (y)$ converges and is equal to $\sum_n \sum_m l \circ f^x_{n,m}(y) $. Thanks to Proposition \[wcv\_pointwise\_pws\], for any $x\in E$ and $y\in F$, $\psi(f)(x,y)\in G$, that is $\psi(f)$ is pointwise convergent.
We now prove that $\psi (f)$ converges uniformly on bounded subsets of $E$. First, notice that $\psi(f)$ is [[bounded]{}]{}. Indeed, $f$ is [[bounded]{}]{}thanks to Proposition \[pws\_borno\], and $\psi (f)$ sends $B_1 \times B_2$ on $f(B_1)(B_2)$. Proposition \[simply\_unif\_cv\] states that a pointwise converging power series which converges towards a [[bounded]{}]{}function converges uniformly on bounded subsets of its codomain. We conclude that $\psi (f) \in {S}( E \times F, G)$.
From ${\mathbf{Lin}}$ to ${\mathbf{Quant}}$
-------------------------------------------
So far, we have proven that the category ${\mathbf{Lin}}$ of spaces and [[bounded]{}]{}linear maps is symmetric monoidal closed and cartesian (see Section \[sec:lin\]). We have also proven that the category ${\mathbf{Quant}}$ of spaces and smooth functions is cartesian closed (see Section \[subsec:ccc\]). We will now prove that there is a Linear-Non linear adjunction between ${\mathbf{Lin}}$ and ${\mathbf{Quant}}$ that comes from an exponential modality constructed exactly as in convenient spaces (see [@BET10][@FroKri 5.1.1] and Section \[subsec:DiLL\]).
Let $E$ be a space. For any $x\in E$, the Dirac delta distribution $\delta$ can be seen as a function on power series: $$\delta:\left\lbrace
\begin{array}{rcl}
E&\rightarrow&{S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^\times\\
x&\mapsto&\delta_x:f\mapsto f(x)
\end{array}
\right.$$
#### Exponential modality.
For any space $E$, we construct a space $!E$ from $\delta(E)$ by applying the Mackey-completion procedure described in Proposition \[mcompletion\].
Let us use $ ! E$ for the Mackey-completion of the linear span of $\delta (E) $ in ${S}(E,\mathbb{C})^{\times}$ endowed with the topology of uniform convergence on bounded subsets of ${S}(E,\mathbb{C})$.
$\delta$ is clearly linear, and as it acts on [[bounded]{}]{}functions (see Proposition \[pws\_borno\]) it is itself [[bounded]{}]{}.
Thanks to Mackey-completion, in order to define a linear function on $!E$, it is sufficient to define it on $\delta_x$ for any $x\in E$. Let $f \in {\mathcal{L}}(E,F)$ be a [[bounded]{}]{}linear map. We define $!f:!E\to !F$ as the linear extension of: $$!f: \left\lbrace
\begin{split}
\delta (E) & \rightarrow !F \\
\delta_x & \mapsto \delta_{f(x)}
\end{split}
\right.$$ This function is linear by construction. Let us check that it is bounded. If $B$ is an equibounded set in ${S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^{\times}$, then $\{\delta_{f(x)} \ |\ \delta_x \in B \} $ is equibounded. Indeed, if $B$ is bounded in ${S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})$, then $$\{\delta_{f(x)}(B) \ |\ \delta_x \in B \} = \{ B(\{f(x)\}) \ |\ \delta_x \in B \} = \{ \delta_x (B \circ f) \} \ |\ \delta_x \in B \}$$ is bounded, as $f$ bounded makes $B \circ f = \{ g \circ f \ |\ g \in B \}$ bounded. Hence $ !f $ is well defined, and is a bounded linear function. So we have indeed $ ! f \in {\mathcal{L}}( !E,! F)$.
We write $ ! : {\mathbf{Lin}}\rightarrow {\mathbf{Lin}}$ for the functor sending a space $E$ on $!E$, and a [[bounded]{}]{}linear map $f\in{\mathcal{L}}(E,F)$ on $!f\in{\mathcal{L}}(!E,!F)$.
The functor $!$ is an exponential modality:
- $(!,\rho,\epsilon)$ is a comonad, with $$\epsilon_E :
\left\lbrace
\begin{split}
!E & \rightarrow E\\
\delta_x & \mapsto x
\end{split}
\right.
\qquad\qquad\qquad
\rho_E :
\left\lbrace
\begin{split}
!E & \rightarrow !!E\\
\delta_x & \mapsto \delta_{\delta_x}
\end{split}
\right. .$$
- $!:({\mathbf{Lin}}, \times,\top)\rightarrow ({\mathbf{Lin}},{\hat\otimes}, {1})$ is a strong and symmetric monoidal functor, with $$m^0:
\left\lbrace
\begin{split}
1 & \rightarrow !\top=!\{0\}\\
1 & \mapsto \delta_0
\end{split}
\right.
\qquad\qquad\qquad
m^2_{E,F} :
\left\lbrace
\begin{split}
!E{\hat\otimes}!F&\rightarrow !(E\times F)\\
\delta_x \otimes \delta_y& \mapsto \delta_{(x,y)}
\end{split}
\right. .$$
- the following diagram commute: $$\xymatrix{
!E{\hat\otimes}!F \ar[r]^{m^2_{E,F}} \ar[d]_{\rho_E{\hat\otimes}\rho_F} & !(E\times F) \ar[r]^{\rho_{E\times F}} & !!(E\times F) \ar[d]^{!\langle!\pi_1,!\pi_2\rangle}\\
!!E{\hat\otimes}!!F\ar[rr]_{m^2_{!E,!F}} &&!(!E\times !F)
}$$
Notice that the natural transformations $\epsilon$, $\rho$ and $m^2$ are defined by linearity and Mackey-complete extension. Then, it is enough to check the diagrams for comonad and symmetric monoidality on Dirac delta distributions. The morphisms $m^0$ and $m^2_{E,F}$ are isomorphisms with inverse: $$(m^0)^{-1}:
\left\lbrace
\begin{split}
!\top=!\{0\} & \rightarrow {1}\\
\delta_0 & \mapsto 1
\end{split}
\right.
\qquad\qquad\qquad
(m^2_{E,F})^{-1} :
\left\lbrace
\begin{split}
!(E\times F)&\rightarrow !E{\hat\otimes}!F\\
\delta_{z}& \mapsto \delta_{\pi_1 z} \otimes \delta_{\pi_2 z}
\end{split}
\right. .$$
#### Distributions.
The distribution space ${S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^\times$ is equipped with a convolution product defined as follow. Notice that when restricted to $!E$, the convolution product can be obtained from the cartesian structure of ${\mathbf{Lin}}$ and from $m^2$.
\[prop:convo\] For any $D_1$ and $D_2$ in ${S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^\times$, the convolution $D_1\ast D_2$ is in ${S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^\times$ and acts on $f\in{S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})$ as: $$(D_1{\ast}D_2) f = D_1(x \mapsto (D_2 (y \mapsto f(x+y)))).$$ Moreover, if $D_1$ and $D_2$ are in $!E$, then $D_1{\ast}D_2$ is in $!E$.
Let $f\in {S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})$ and $x\in E$. Since $(x,y)\mapsto x+y$ is linear and [[bounded]{}]{}(and so a power series), the function $(x,y)\mapsto f(x+y)$ is a power series. Then, by cartesian closedness (Theorem \[cart\_closed\]), $ x \mapsto ( y \mapsto f(x+y)) \in{S}(E,{S}(E,{\mathbb{C}}))$. Since $D_2$ is [[bounded]{}]{}and linear, we get by postcomposition that $x \mapsto D_2 ( y \mapsto f(x+y)) \in{S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})$, thus we can apply $D_1$ to compute $(D_1\ast D_2) f$. Notice that $D_1{\ast}D_2$ is linear and [[bounded]{}]{}since all the involved operations are both [[bounded]{}]{}and linear.
Let $D_1$ and $D_2$ be in $!E$. Then the convolution operator ${\ast}$ is the morphism: $$\xymatrix@R=3pt@C=50pt{
!E{\hat\otimes}!E \ar[r]^{m^2_{E,E}} & !(E\times E) \ar[r]^{!((x,y)\mapsto x+y)} &!E\\
\delta_x \otimes \delta_y \ar@{|->}[r] & \delta_{(x,y)} \ar@{|->}[r]& \delta_{x+y}}$$ Indeed, it is sufficient to prove it on Dirac delta distributions as they generate the space $!E$.
In general $\delta$ reflects the shape of the functions of its codomain (see [@BET10] where $\delta$ is smooth). In Proposition \[prop:deltaseries\], we show that $\delta$ is a power series by following the scheme introduced in [@Ehr05]. First, we focus on the maps $\theta_n:E\rightarrow {S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^\times$ that will be the components of the power series $\delta$.
Let $\theta_n: E\rightarrow {S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^\times$ be defined by induction on $n$ by: $$\theta_0(x)=\delta_0,\qquad\qquad
\theta_1(x)= \lim\limits_{t\to 0} \frac{\delta_{tx}-\delta_0}t,\qquad\qquad
\forall n\in\mathbb N,\ \theta_{n+1}(x)= \theta_1(x){\ast}\theta_n(x).$$
\[theta\] For any $n\in\mathbb N$, $\theta_n$ is a [[bounded]{}]{}$n$-monomial from $E$ to $ !E$. Besides, for any $x\in E$ and $f=\sum_n f_n\in{S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})$, we have $\theta_n(x)f=n!\,f_n(x)$.
We prove this proposition by induction on $n\in\mathbb N$. Let $x\in E$ and $f=\sum_n f_n\in{S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})$.
First, $\theta_0$ is constant, $\theta_0(x)=\delta_0$ in $!E$ and $\theta_0(x)f=f(0)=f_0(x)$.
Then, $\theta_1(x)(f)= \lim_{t\rightarrow 0}\frac{f(tx)-f(0)}t=f_1(x)$. Indeed, by Lemma \[derivatives\_pws\], the derivative of $c:z\in{\mathbb{C}}\mapsto f(zx)$ at $0$ is $f_1(x)$. Besides, $\theta_1$ is linear as for $h\in{\mathbb{C}}$, $\theta_1(x+h y)f =f_1(x+hy)=f_1(x)+hf_1(y)$ by linearity of $f_1$. Finally, notice that $t\mapsto \delta_{tx}$ is locally lipschitzian as for any $a\in{\mathbb{R}}$ and $B\subset {S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})$ equibounded, the set $\{\frac{f(tx)-f(0)}t\ |\ 0<t<a, f\in B\}\subset 2B(\{tx \ |\ 0<t<a\})$ is bounded. Thus, as proved in [@KriMi Prop. I.1.7], the net $\left(\frac{\delta_{tx}-\delta_0}t\right)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}}$ is Mackey-convergent and its limit $\theta_1(x)$ is in the space $!E$.
Assume that $\theta_n(x)$ is in $!E$ and for any $g=\sum_n g_n$, $\theta_n(x)g=n!\,g_n(x)$. Then thanks to Proposition \[prop:convo\], $\theta_{n+1}(x)=\theta_1(x){\ast}\theta_n(x)$ is in $!E$ and $$\theta_{n+1}(x)(f)=\theta_1(x)( y \mapsto \theta_n(x)( z \mapsto f(y+z))).$$ By induction hypothesis, $$\theta_n(x)(z\mapsto f(y+z))=n!\,\sum_{m\ge n} \binom mn \tilde f_m(\underbrace{y,\dots,y}\limits_{m-n},\underbrace{x,\dots,x}\limits_{n}),$$ where we denote by $\tilde f_m$ the symmetric $m$-linear [[bounded]{}]{}map from which the $m$ monomial $f_m$ is constructed. So that, $$\theta_{n+1}(x)(f)=n!\,\binom {n+1}n \tilde f_{n+1}(x,\underbrace{x,\dots,x}\limits_{n})=(n+1)!\,f_{n+1}(x).$$
As in [@BET10], the differential structure comes from the codereliction. Besides in this setting, this operator extracts the first coefficient of the power series.
The category ${\mathbf{Lin}}$ is equipped with a codereliction: $$\mathrm{coder_E}=\theta_1:
\left\lbrace
\begin{split}
E & \rightarrow !E \\
y & \mapsto \lim\limits_{t \rightarrow 0} \frac{\delta(ty) - \delta(0)}{t}
\end{split}
\right.$$
The strength and comonad diagrams of [@Fiore]: $$\xymatrix@C=50pt{
E {\hat\otimes}! F \ar[r]^{{\sf coder}_E{\hat\otimes}1}
\ar[dr]_{1{\hat\otimes}\epsilon_E}&
! E {\hat\otimes}! F \ar[r]^\phi&
! (E{\hat\otimes}F)\\
& E{\hat\otimes}F \ar[ur]_{{\sf coder}_{E{\hat\otimes}F}}
}$$ $$\xymatrix@C=10pt{
& ! E \ar[dr]^\epsilon& \\
E \ar[ur]^{{\sf coder}_E} \ar[rr]_1&&E
}
\qquad
\xymatrix@C=40pt{
E \ar[d]|{\simeq} \ar[r]^{{\sf coder}_E}& ! E\ar[r]^{\rho}
&!! E\\
E{\hat\otimes}I \ar[r]_{{\sf coder}_E{\hat\otimes}\nu}&
! E {\hat\otimes}! E\ar[r]_{{\sf coder}{\hat\otimes}\rho}
& !! E {\hat\otimes}!! \ar[u]_{\nabla}
E}$$ are shown exactly as in [@BET10] since the actions of the involved natural transformations are defined similarly on the Dirac delta distributions.
\[prop:deltaseries\] The map $\delta$ is a power series in ${S}(E,{S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^\times)$: $$\delta=\sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty \frac{\theta_n}{n!}.$$
In order to show that $\delta$ is a power series, we apply Proposition \[simply\_unif\_cv\].
First, notice that $\delta$ is [[bounded]{}]{}from $E$ to ${S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^\times$. Indeed, let $b$ be bounded in $E$, then $\delta(b)$ is equibounded in ${S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})^\times$, since if $B$ is equibounded in ${S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})$, $\delta(b)(B)=B(b)$ is bounded.
Now, let us prove that $\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{\theta_n}{n!}$ converges pointwise to $\delta$. Let $x\in E$, we need to prove that $\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{\theta_n(x)}{n!}$ converges to $\delta_x$ uniformly on bounded sets of ${S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})$. We apply the Cauchy Inequality of Proposition \[Cauchy\_ineq\_pws\]. Let $b$ be absolutely convex such that $2x\in b$ and $B\in{S}(E,{\mathbb{C}})$ be equibounded, then $B(b)$ is bounded in ${\mathbb{C}}$, [i.e.]{}there is $M$ such that $| f(y)| \leq M$ for every $ f \in B$ and $y\in b$. Thus, for any $f\in B$, $|\frac{\theta_n(x)}{n!}(f)|=\frac 1{2^n}|f_n(2x)|\le \frac M{2^n}$ and the series $ \sum_n \frac{\theta_n(x)}{n!}$ converges uniformly on $B$. Its limit is $\delta_x$ as for every $f \in {S}(E,\mathbb{C})$ and $x \in E$, we have $\delta_x(f) = f(x)= \sum\limits_{n=0}^\infty f_n (x) =\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{\theta_n (x)}{n!} (f) $. From this we conclude that pointwise, we have $\delta = \sum \theta_k$.
As $\delta$ is bounded, Proposition \[simply\_unif\_cv\] implies that the sum uniformly converges on bounded subsets of $E$. Thus $\delta$ is a power series.
We just proved that we have a model of Intuitionist Linear Logic and thus, that the cokleisli category ${\mathbf{Lin}}_{!}$ is cartesian closed. We want now to show that the category ${\mathbf{Quant}}$ of spaces and power series is isomorphic to ${\mathbf{Lin}}_!$, that is:
\[adjunctioncomp\] For every space $E$ and $F$, we have the following bounded isomorphism $${S}(E,F) \simeq {\mathcal{L}}( ! E, F).$$
Consider $ f \in {S}(E,F)$. Then define $\hat{f} : ! E \rightarrow F $ as $\hat{f} ( \delta_x) = f(x)$, extended linearly and Mackey-completed. We can define this function on $!E$ as $\hat{f}_{| \delta (E )}$ is [[bounded]{}]{}: $\hat{f}_{| \delta (E )}^{-1} (U) = U_{\{ f\}, U} \cap \delta (E)$. By definition of the Mackey-completion of a lctvs, $ ! f$ is linear and [[bounded]{}]{}.
Now consider $ g \in {\mathcal{L}}( ! E, F)$ and define $\check{g} : E \rightarrow F$ by $\check{g}(x) = g (\delta_x) = g \circ \delta$. As $g$ is bounded, we have by Proposition \[comp\_lin\_pws\] that $\check{g} = \sum_k \tfrac{1}{k!}g (\theta_k)$. We check that $\hat{\check{g}} = g$, $\check{\hat{f}} = f $, that $ g \mapsto \check{g}$ and $f \mapsto \hat{f}$ are both linear and [[bounded]{}]{}as $\delta$ is, and this induces a bounded isomorphism which is natural in $E$ and $F$ and so the wanted adjunction.
This concludes our construction of our denotational model of Linear Logic.
\[quantmodelILL\] The category ${\mathbf{Lin}}$, equipped with the comonad $ !$, is a quantitative model of intuitionist Linear Logic whose cokleisli category is ${\mathbf{Quant}}$, and a differential category.
Quant is not \*-autonomous
==========================
One of the limits of the approach with bornologies is the extension to \*-autonomous categories [@Bar79]. Indeed, one could transform this model into a model of (classical) Differential Linear Logic by considering pairs $(E,{E^{\times}})$ of Mackey-complete spaces, where ${E^{\times}}$ denotes the spaces of all bounded linear forms on $E$. This would be a construction alike the Chu construction.
It is however difficult to have a more intrinsic approach. One could define a notion of b-reflexive space, as a space which equals its bounded bidual ${E^{\times \times}}$. However, there is no handy Hahn-Banach theorem for bounded linear maps (see [@Hog70]), and one cannot prove that the symmetric monoidal category of b-reflexive Mackey-complete spaces and [[bounded]{}]{}maps is closed. Let us point out that this problem is not simpler with usual reflexive spaces, as the category of reflexive topological spaces and linear continuous maps is notoriously not closed. For example if we consider the bi-dimensional reflexive Hilbert space $l^2$, the space $\mathcal{B}(l^2)$ of bounded (equivalently continuous) endomorphisms in not reflexive (nor b-reflexive).
Conclusion {#conclusion .unnumbered}
==========
This paper may be seen as a quantitative adaptation of [@BET10]. It also brings a smooth and general point of view on quantitative semantics. One can try to understand the computing meaning of this structure of power series, as some refinement to quantitative semantics. Indeed, many constructions of the present work relies on the Cauchy formula that power series satisfy. The same phenomenon happens in Girard’s Coherent Banach spaces [@Gir96].
The next step now in understanding smooth models of Differential Linear Logic would be to go towards differentiation in manifolds. The first step in this direction would be to work on the logic underneath the theory of diffeology.
\[lastpage\]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- 'Niek J.J. de Klerk'
- Alexandros Vasileiadis
- 'Raymond B. Smith'
- 'Martin Z. Bazant'
- Marnix Wagemaker
bibliography:
- 'bib\_anatase\_phase\_field.bib'
title: 'Supplemental Material: Explaining key properties of lithiation in -anatase Li-ion battery electrodes using phase-field modelling'
---
Many particle effect at 0.01C
=============================
In Figure 3 the voltage profile at C/100 tilts slightly upwards. This is caused by the simulation being performed on a single particle, repeating the same simulation with 10 particles gives a flat voltage profile, as shown in Figure \[fig:10\_particles\_001C\]. The difference is caused by the fact that a single particle will always follow the spinodal line, which is inherently unstable [@Bai_2011], but a single particle cannot depart from the spinodal line. A simulation with multiple particles does allow departure from the spinodal line, giving the flat voltage profile as shown in Figure \[fig:10\_particles\_001C\].
![Voltage profiles for simulations with 1 and 10 particles at 0.01C. \[fig:10\_particles\_001C\] ](10particles_001C){width="75.00000%"}
Charge transfer coefficient
===========================
The charge transfer coefficient ($k_0$) used for the simulations is based on the diffusion coefficient between anatase and electrolyte as measured by NMR experiments [@Ganapathy_2009]. The measured diffusion coefficient is between 1\*10$^{-12}$ and 5\*10$^{-12}$ cm$^2$/sec at room temperature, depending on the electrolyte. The diffusivity can be related to jump rates using the Einstein-Smulochowski relation: $D = \frac{\tau a^2}{2d}$. Assuming a diffusion distance ($a$) equal to the particle size of 40 nm., and 1 dimensional diffusion ($d$) perpendicular to the surface, leads to a Li-jump frequency ($\tau$) between 0.125 and 0.625 sec$^{-1}$. Combining this with the Li-density of 2.45\*10$^{18}$ Li/m$^{2}$ for at (101)-surfaces, which are the most stable facets of anatase crystals [@Olson_2006], this gives a charge transfer between 0.31\*10$^{18}$ and 1.53\*10$^{18}$ Li sec$^{-1}$ m$^{-2}$, which is equal to 0.049 and 0.245 A/m$^2$, respectively. To be on the safe side the lower value of 0.049 A/m$^2$ is chosen for the simulations. However, as shown in Figure \[fig:better\_charge\_transfer\] the difference between the voltage profiles for $k_0$-values of 0.049 and 0.245 is negligible. In the first plateau there is a tiny difference in voltage, smaller as 0.01 V, and during the second phase transformation no differences are visible.
![Voltage profiles with high (0.245 A/m$^2$) and low (0.049 A/m$^2$) values for the charge transfer coefficient at 0.5C.[]{data-label="fig:better_charge_transfer"}](charge_transfer_1particle){width="75.00000%"}
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Consider the blow-up $X$ of ${\mathbb{P}}^3$ at $6$ points in very general position and the $15$ lines through the $6$ points. We construct an infinite-order pseudo-automorphism $\phi_X$ on $X$, induced by the complete linear system of a divisor of degree $13$. The effective cone of $X$ has infinitely many extremal rays and hence, $X$ is not a Mori Dream Space. The threefold $X$ has a unique anticanonical section which is a Jacobian K3 Kummer surface $S$ of Picard number 17. The restriction of $\phi_X$ on $S$ realizes one of Keum’s 192 infinite-order automorphisms of Jacobian K3 Kummer surfaces. In general, we show the blow-up of ${\mathbb{P}}^n$ ($n\geq 3$) at $(n+3)$ very general points and certain $9$ lines through them is not Mori Dream, with infinitely many extremal effective divisors. As an application, for $n\geq 7$, the blow-up of ${\overline{M}_{0,n}}$ at a very general point has infinitely many extremal effective divisors.'
address:
- 'Department of Mathematics, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Ave, Boston MA'
- 'Department of Mathematics, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Ave, Boston MA'
author:
- Zhuang He
- Lei Yang
bibliography:
- 'mybib.bib'
title: 'Birational geometry of blow-ups of projective spaces along points and lines'
---
Introduction {#Intro}
============
[[^1]]{} We consider the blow-ups of the projective space ${\mathbb{P}}^3$ at points and lines. We work over the complex numbers. Define:
- $u:Y{\to}{\mathbb{P}}^3$ to be the successive blow-up of ${\mathbb{P}}^3$ at $6$ points $p_0,\cdots, p_5$ in (very) general position, and the proper transforms of the $9$ lines $\overline{p_i p_j}$ labeled by $$(ij)\in\mathcal{I}=\{03,04,34,12,15,25,05,13,24\};$$
- $v:X{\to}{\mathbb{P}}^3$ to be the successive blow-up of ${\mathbb{P}}^3$ at $p_0,\cdots,p_5$ and the proper transforms of all the $15$ lines $\overline{p_i p_j}$.
The configuration of the $9$ lines blown-up to get $Y$ is best shown in Figure \[fig:prism\].
A birational map $f:Y\dashrightarrow Y$ is called a pseudo-automorphism if there are open sets $U$ and $V$ in $Y$ such that $f:U{\to}V$ is an isomorphism, and the codimensions of $Y\backslash U$ and $Y\backslash V$ in $Y$ are at least $2$. The main construction of this paper is an infinite-order pseudo-automorphism $\phi$ of $Y$. Let $E_i$ and $E_{ij}$ be the exceptional divisors of the blow-ups $Y$ and $X$ over the points $p_i$ and lines $\overline{p_i p_j}$. Let $H:=u^*{\mathcal{O}}_{{\mathbb{P}}^3}(1)$. Then the Picard group of $Y$ is freely generated by $H, E_i$ and $E_{ij}$. Consider the following divisor class over $Y$ (and $X$): $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Dclass}
\begin{split}
D:=\quad & 13H-7(E_1+E_2+E_5)-5(E_0+E_3+E_4)\\
&-3(E_{03}+E_{04}+E_{34})
-4(E_{05}+E_{13}+E_{24})-(E_{12}+E_{15}+E_{25}).
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ We point out $D$ is fixed by the action of $\mathcal{S}_3$ on the ordered pairs of the six points $\{ (5,0),(1,3),(2,4)\}$. That is, the action which permutes the vertical edges of the prism in Figure \[fig:prism\] while keeping their directions. Let $\phi_D$ be the rational map $Y\dashrightarrow{\mathbb{P}}^{N}$ induced by the complete linear system ${\lvertD\rvert}$, where $N=\dim {\lvertD\rvert}$.
Recall that Mori Dream Spaces are introduced by [@Hu2000] (See Section \[prebm\] for definition and properties). The effective cone of a Mori Dream Space is rational polyhedral, with a chamber decomposition which determines its birational geometry. We have the following results:
\[main\] For very general six points $p_0,\cdots, p_5$:
1. The linear system ${\lvertD\rvert}$ has dimension $3$; hence $\phi_D:Y\dashrightarrow {\mathbb{P}}^3$.
2. There exist $6$ points $q_0,\cdots, q_5$ in the target copy of ${\mathbb{P}}^3$ which are projectively equivalent to $p_0,\cdots, p_5$. That is, there exists $M\in \operatorname{PGL}(4)$ such that $M p_i=q_i$ for $i=0,\cdots, 5$. Blowing up the $6$ points $q_i$ and the corresponding $9$ lines $\overline{q_i q_j}$ for $(ij)\in \mathcal{I}$ induces a pseudo-automorphism $\phi:Y\dashrightarrow Y$. Blowing up $q_i$ and all the $15$ lines $\overline{q_i q_j}$ induces a pseudo-automorphism $\phi_X:X\dashrightarrow X$.
3. The pseudo-automorphisms $\phi$ and $\phi_X$ are of infinite order.
4. The effective cone $\operatorname{\overline{Eff}}(Y)$ of $Y$ has infinitely many extremal rays, including the rays spanned by $F_k:=(\phi{^{-1}})^k(E_{03})$, $k\geq 1$. Hence $\operatorname{\overline{Eff}}(Y)$ is not rational polyhedral, and $Y$ is not Mori Dream. Same results for $X$.
We note that the question whether $X$ is a Mori Dream Space was proposed by John Ottem.
The divisor class $D$ and the pseudo-automorphism $\phi$ are related to Keum’s automorphisms of Jacobian K3 Kummer surfaces. A Kummer surface $\operatorname{Kum}(A)$ is the quotient of an abelian surface $A$ under the involution $\iota:A{\to}A, a{\mapsto}-a$. The set of order-$2$ points on $A$, denoted by $A[2]$, has $16$ elements. The surface $\operatorname{Kum}(A)$ is singular with $16$ nodes over $A[2]$. The minimal desingularization of $\operatorname{Kum}(A)$ is a K3 surface $K(A)$, which we refer to as the K3 Kummer surface associated with $A$. We say $K(A)$ is of Jacobian type if $A\cong J(C)$ is the Jacobian variety of a smooth genus $2$ curve $C$.
In our context, the key fact is that $X$ has a unique anticanonical section $S$ which is a smooth K3 Kummer surface of Jacobian type, with Picard rank $\rho(S)=17$, for very general six points $p_i$ in ${\mathbb{P}}^3$. Keum [@Keum1997] first constructed $192$ infinite-order automorphisms of a Jacobian K3 Kummer surface $S$ of Picard rank $17$, each associated with one of $192$ Weber Hexads, which are certain $6$-element subsets of $A[2]$ . If we denote by $PsAut(X)$ the group of pseudo-automorphisms of $X$, then restricting to $S$ induces a group homomorphism $s:PsAut(X) {\to}\operatorname{Aut}(S)$, for the reason that $S$ is K3 and is the unique anticanonical section of $X$. In fact, $s(\phi_X)$ is one of these $192$ automorphisms:
\[k3KeumAuto\] For very general six points $p_0,\cdots, p_5$:
1. $X$ has a unique anticanonical section $S$, which is a Jacobian K3 Kummer surface with $\rho(S)=17$.
2. The restriction of $\phi_X$ to $S$ equals Keum’s automorphism $\kappa:S{\to}S$ associated with the Weber Hexad $\mathcal{H}=\{1,2,5,12,14,23\}$ (See Section \[k192\]).
3. The inverse $\phi_X{^{-1}}$ (and $\phi{^{-1}}$) is induced by the complete linear system of $D'$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Dprimeclass}
\begin{split}
D':=\quad & 13H-5(E_1+E_2+E_5)-7(E_0+E_3+E_4)\\
&-(E_{03}+E_{04}+E_{34})-4(E_{05}+E_{13}+E_{24})-3(E_{12}+E_{15}+E_{25}).
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$
In particular, the restriction $s(\phi_X)$ of $\phi_X$ to $S$ is a different construction of Keum’s automorphism $\kappa$.
We consider the birational automorphism $\psi:{\mathbb{P}}^3\dashrightarrow{\mathbb{P}}^3$ induced by ${\lvertD\rvert}$. It turns out that $\psi$ contracts exactly $9$ distinct irreducible rational quartics $Q_\alpha$, indexed by $\alpha\in \mathcal{A}:=\{0,3,4,12,15,25,05,13,24\}$. We refer to Section \[9Q\] for their divisor classes. Here we summarize the key features of these quartics and the divisor class $D$:
1. Each $Q_\alpha$ is unique in its divisor class when considered over $Y$ or $X$ (See Theorem \[pencilsQ\]).
2. $\phi$ maps $Q_\alpha$ birationally onto the exceptional divisor $E_\alpha$ (Section \[imageQ\] and Theorem \[psdautoY\]).
3. The restrictions of $Q_\alpha$ to $S$ are all $(-2)$-curves (See Theorem \[pencilsQ\]).
4. The restriction of $D$ to $S$ equals $\kappa ^* H_S$, where $H_S$ is a hyperplane class of $S$ (See Formula (\[rel4\]) and Theorem \[pencilsQ\]).
The birational map $\psi$ also has a surprising interaction with the structure theory of $\operatorname{Bir}({\mathbb{P}}^3)$, the birational automorphism group of ${\mathbb{P}}^3$. A classical result by Max Noether and Castelnuovo [@Castelnuovo1901] says that $\operatorname{Bir}({\mathbb{P}}^2)$ is generated by $\operatorname{PGL}(3)$ and the standard Cremona $\sigma_2:[x:y:z]{\mapsto}[1/x:1/y:1/z]$. The analogue is false for $n\geq 3$, where $\operatorname{Bir}({\mathbb{P}}^n)$ is strictly larger than the subgroup $G_n:={\langle\operatorname{PGL}(n+1),\sigma_{n}\rangle}$ [@Hudson1927][@Pan1999], and $\sigma_n$ is the standard Cremona of ${\mathbb{P}}^n$. One of the interesting subsets of the large group $\operatorname{Bir}({\mathbb{P}}^n)$ is the set $H_n$ of all $f\in \operatorname{Bir}({\mathbb{P}}^n)$ which only contracts rational hypersurfaces. It is known that $G_n\subset H_n$ (See [@Blanc2014 §1]). On the other direction, [@Blanc2014] proved that $G_n\neq H_n$ when $n\geq 3$ is odd over any field $\mathbf{k}$, by giving examples of monomial birational maps which only contract rational hypersurfaces but not in $G_n$ when $n$ is odd. They further gave a criterion [@Blanc2014 Thm. 1.4] (See Theorem \[BH\]) characterizing elements in $G_n$, which we can apply to $\psi$ and find:
Over ${\mathbb{C}}$, $\psi\in H_3$ but $\psi\not\in G_3$. \[psinotG3\]
In general, we consider the successive blow-up of ${\mathbb{P}}^n$ at points and lines. By [@Mukai2001] and [@Castravet2006], the blow-up of ${\mathbb{P}}^n$ at $r$ very general points $p_1,\cdots, p_r$ is a Mori Dream Space if and only if its effective cone is rational polyhedral, which in turn is equivalent to $$\frac{1}{n+1}+\frac{1}{r-n-1}>\frac{1}{2}.$$
In particular, the last inequality translates to $r\leq 8$ for $n=2,4$, $r\leq 7$ for $n=3$ and $r\leq n+3$ for $n\geq 5$. There are many further results on the birational geometry of ${\mathbb{P}}^n$ blown-up at points and lines, including [@Sturmfels2010][@Araujo2015][@Coskun2016][@Dumitrescu2017][@Pintye2018].
\[n3Q\] Let $X'$ be the blow-up of ${\mathbb{P}}^n$ ($n\geq 3$) at $(n+3)$ points in general position and certain lines through the $(n+3)$ points. For what configuration of the lines is $\operatorname{\overline{Eff}}(X')$ rational polyhedral?
We shed light upon Question \[n3Q\] by showing that as soon as we blow up $9$ lines in a very special configuration, the effective cone of the blow-up is no longer rational polyhedral.
For $n\geq 3$, we define $Y_n$ to be the blow-up of ${\mathbb{P}}^n$ at $(n+3)$ points in very general position and $9$ lines through six of them, such that when the six points are indexed by $0$ to $5$, the $9$ lines are labeled by $\mathcal{I}$ (See Figure \[fig:prism\]). In particular, $Y_3=Y$ as defined above.
\[main2\] For each $n\geq 4$ there is a small ${\mathbb{Q}}$-factorial modification (SQM) (See Section \[prebm\] for definition) $\tilde{Y}_n$ of $Y_n$ such that $\tilde{Y}_n$ is a ${\mathbb{P}}^1$-bundle over $Y_{n-1}$. For $n\geq 3$, $\operatorname{\overline{Eff}}(Y_n)$ has infinitely many extremal rays. Hence $Y_n$ are not Mori Dream for $n\geq 3$.
Let $\overline{M}_{g,n}$ be the Deligne-Mumford compacification of the moduli space of stable curves of genus $g$ with $n$ marked points. One of the questions of the birational geometry of $\overline{M}_{0,n}$ is to determine whether they are Mori Dream Spaces. Castravet and Tevelev [@Castravet2015] first proved that ${\overline{M}_{0,n}}$ is not Mori Dream for $n>133$, which was later improved by [@Gonzalez2016] and [@Hausen2018] to $n\geq 10$. On the other hand, for $n\leq 6$, $\overline{M}_{0,n}$ are of Fano type, and hence Mori Dream Spaces.
Is ${\overline{M}_{0,n}}$ Mori Dream for $n=7,8$ and $9$?
Recall Kapranov’s blow-up construction of ${\overline{M}_{0,n}}$ [@Kapranov1993] which realizes ${\overline{M}_{0,n}}$ as the successive blow-up of linear subspaces of ${\mathbb{P}}^{n-3}$ of codimensions at least $2$ passing through points among $(n-1)$ points in linearly general position, in increasing order. Now the blow-up at one more point of the Kapranov’s blow-up model of ${\overline{M}_{0,n}}$ factors through $Y_{n-3}$ if $n\geq 7$. We have the following result.
\[mzbblowup\] For $n\geq 7$, the effective cone of the blow-up of ${\overline{M}_{0,n}}$ at a very general point has infinitely many extremal rays. Hence the blow-up of ${\overline{M}_{0,n}}$ at a very general point is not a Mori Dream Space.
We note that when $n=6$, the one-point blow-up of ${\overline{M}_{0,6}}$ is not a blow-up of $Y_3=Y$, so Theorem \[mzbblowup\] does not extend to $n=6$. The not Mori Dream part of Theorem \[mzbblowup\] is new for $n=7,8$ and $9$, and for $n\geq 10$ it follows from that ${\overline{M}_{0,n}}$ is not Mori Dream Space and Okawa’s result [@Okawa2016] (See Section \[prebm\]).
Structure of this paper: in Section \[prebm\] we review generalities on birational maps, pseudo-isomorphisms and Mori Dream Spaces. Section \[JKK\] and \[uniquekk\] show that $X$ has a unique anticanonical section $S$, which is a Jacobian K3 Kummer surface of Picard rank $17$ when the six points are very general. This proves Theorem \[k3KeumAuto\] (1) (2). Section \[uniquekk\] also identifies the Picard lattice of $S$ with the description which comes from the Jacobian Kummer structure.
Section \[k192\] discusses the relations among the divisors over $S$, and then reviews Keum’s $192$ automorphisms. Sections \[9Q\] and \[dD\] define the $9$ quartics $Q_\alpha$ and use them to build various sections of $D$. Section \[BIR\] proves that the six points $\{q_i\}$ are projectively equivalent to $\{p_i\}$, and the rational map $\psi$ induced by ${\lvertD\rvert}$ is birational. Section \[imageQ\] shows that $\phi$ contracts none of the quartics $Q_\alpha$, and Section \[imageE\] shows that $\phi$ does not contract any exceptional divisors. Thus we finish the proofs of Theorem \[main\] and \[k3KeumAuto\] in Theorems \[psdautoY\], \[inforder\], \[restrict\] and Corollary \[psdautoX\]. Section \[Cremona\] relates $\psi$ to the birational automorphism group of ${\mathbb{P}}^3$ and proves Theorem \[psinotG3\]. Section \[SQMpn\] is the application to the blow-up of ${\mathbb{P}}^n$ and ${\overline{M}_{0,n}}$, where we prove Theorem \[main2\] and \[mzbblowup\].
[**Acknowledgement**]{} We are grateful to our advisor Ana-Maria Castravet for suggesting this question, and for her constant support and countless discussions on this project. We thank Frederic Han, Antonio Laface, Yucheng Liu, Emanuele Macrì and Karl Schwede for their helpful discussions and suggestions. We used [*Macaulay2*]{} [@M2] and the [*RationalMaps*]{} package [@RationalMapsSource] to verify some of our results. Zhuang thanks University of Versailles for the hospitality during the visit when part of the paper was written.
Preliminary on Birational maps and Mori Dream Spaces {#prebm}
====================================================
Birational maps and pseudo-automorphisms
----------------------------------------
We work over ${\mathbb{C}}$. Let $X$, $Y$ be normal projective varieties. We say $f$ is a pseudo-isomorphism (See [@Cantat2017 2.2]) if $f$ is birational and there exist Zariski open subsets $U\subset X$ and $V\subset Y$ such that (1) $f_{\mid_U} :U{\to}V$ is an isomorphism and (2) $X\backslash U$ and $Y\backslash V$ have codimension at least $2$. For the case $X=Y$ we say $f$ is a pseudo-automorphism of $X$. \[prebp\]
The indeterminacy locus $\operatorname{Ind}(f)$ of $f$ is defined to be $X-U_{0}$ where $U_{0}$ is the largest open subset of $X$ on which $f$ is defined. When $X$ and $Y$ are normal and projective, $\operatorname{Ind}(f)$ of $f$ has codimension $\geq 2$. Then we can define the image $f(Z)$ of a codimension $1$ subvariety $Z\subset X$ as the Zariski closure of $f(Z\backslash \operatorname{Ind}(f))$. We say $f$ contracts $Z$ if the codimension of $f(Z)$ in $Y$ is at least $2$. We recall the following result from [@Cantat2017]:
[@Cantat2017 Prop. 2.1]\[psdhyp\] Let $X$, $Y$ be normal projective varieties. Let $f:X\dashrightarrow Y$ be a birational map. Then the following are equivalent:
1. $f$ is a pseudo-isomorphism.
2. $f$ and $f{^{-1}}$ do not contract any divisors.
Given a birational map $f:X\dashrightarrow Y$, the Jacobian determinant $\det J(f)(x)$ of $f$ at a point $x\in X$ can be defined as the determinant of $d f_x$ in some local coordinates. The value $\det J(f)(x)$ depends on the local coordinates, but whether $\det J(f)(x)=0$ does not. Furthermore, $\det J(f)(x)\neq 0$ if and only if $f$ is locally an isomorphism at $x$, or equivalently, $f$ is étale at $x$. Therefore we can define the exceptional set of $f$ as the subset of $X$ where $f$ is not defined or locally not an isomorphism.
In the special case when $f:{\mathbb{P}}^n \dashrightarrow {\mathbb{P}}^n$ is a birational automorphism of ${\mathbb{P}}^n$, $f$ is defined by $[f_0:\cdots:f_n]$ for homogeneous degree $d$ polynomials $f_i\in {\mathbb{C}}[x_0,\cdots,x_n]$, with $\gcd(f_0,\cdots, f_n)=1$. In this case we have $\det J(f)=\det \left( \partial f_i/\partial x_j\right)_{0\leq i,j\leq n}$. Since $f$ is birational, we must have $\det J(f)\not\equiv 0$ is a nonzero polynomial of degree at most $m=(d-1)(n+1)$. When $m\geq 1$, $\det J(f)$ defines the exceptional set of $f$ [@Dolgachev2012 7.1.4], which is a hypersurface of degree at most $m$, and is the union of all the irreducible hypersurfaces contracted by $f$.
Mori Dream Spaces
-----------------
A variety $X$ is ${\mathbb{Q}}$-factorial if for any Weil divisor $D$ on $X$, there exists some integer $m$ such that $mD$ is Cartier. For instance, smooth varieties are ${\mathbb{Q}}$-factorial. A small ${\mathbb{Q}}$-factorial modification (SQM) of $X$ is a rational map $g:X\dashrightarrow X'$ such that $X'$ is ${\mathbb{Q}}$-factorial and $g$ is an isomorphism in codimension $1$.
By [@Hu2000], A normal projective ${\mathbb{Q}}$-factorial variety $X$ is a Mori Dream Space (MDS) if
1. $\operatorname{Pic}(X)$ is finitely generated;
2. $\operatorname{Nef}(X)$ is spanned by finitely many semiample divisors.
3. There are finitely many SQMs $g_i:X\dashrightarrow X_i$ such that each $X_i$ satisfies (1) and (2) above, and the movable cone $\operatorname{Mov}(X)$ is the union of $g_i^* \operatorname{Nef}(X_i)$.
By definition, if $X$ is a Mori Dream Space, then any SQM $X_i$ of $X$ is a Mori Dream Space. Later we will use the following result by Okawa [@Okawa2016]. Suppose $X$ and $Y$ are normal, projective, ${\mathbb{Q}}$-factorial varieties and $f:X{\to}Y$ is a surjective morphism. If $X$ is a Mori Dream Space, then $Y$ is also a Mori Dream Space.
Cremona Transformation that only contracts rational hypersurfaces {#Cremona}
=================================================================
The linear system ${\lvertD\rvert}$ in (\[Dclass\]) induces the birational transformation $\psi:{\mathbb{P}}^3\dashrightarrow {\mathbb{P}}^3$ (Definition \[psi\]). Here we show $\psi$ contracts rational hypersurfaces only but is not generated by the standard Cremona $\sigma_3$ and $\operatorname{PGL}(4)$. Recall that in [@Blanc2014], the authors defined $G_n(\mathbf{k})$ as the subgroup of $\operatorname{Bir}({\mathbb{P}}^n)$ generated by the standard Cremona $\sigma_n$ and $\operatorname{PGL}(n+1)$ over the field $\mathbf{k}$. They also defined $H_n$ to be the subset $\operatorname{Bir}({\mathbb{P}}^n)$ of elements which contracts rational hypersurfaces only. It is shown that $G_n\subset H_n$. On the other direction, the authors gave examples of birational transformations in odd dimensions that lie in $H_n$ but not $G_n$, hence showing $G_n\neq H_n$ when $n$ odd. In particular, they proved:
[@Blanc2014 Thm. 1.4] Let $\mathbf{k}$ be any field and $n>2$ be odd. Suppose $H$ is an irreducible hypersurface which is sent by an element $g \in G_n(\mathbf{k})$ onto the exceptional divisor of an irreducible closed subset $Z$ (that is, the lift of $g$ to ${\mathbb{P}}^3 \dashrightarrow \operatorname{Bl}_Z {\mathbb{P}}^3$ maps $H$ birationally onto $E_Z$). Then $Z$ has even dimension. \[BH\]
Let $\psi:{\mathbb{P}}^3\dashrightarrow {\mathbb{P}}^3$ be the birational map in Definition \[psi\]. Then $\psi\in H_3$ but $\psi\not\in G_3({\mathbb{C}})$. \[notG3\]
[[*Proof*]{}]{}. By Proposition \[exc\], $\psi$ only contracts the hypersurfaces $Q_\alpha'$. Each $Q_\alpha'$ is rational because they are birationally mapped to $E_\alpha$ which are rational (Also see Remark \[qrmk\](4)). Hence $\psi\in H_3$. Now consider the rational hypersurface $Q_{12}'$. Here $Z:=l_{12}$ is a line, irreducible of dimension $1$, which is odd. By Theorem \[psdautoY\] and Proposition \[QtoE\], $Q_{12}'$ is birationally mapped by $\psi$ onto $E_Z=E_{12}$, by Theorem \[BH\], $\psi\not\in G_3({\mathbb{C}})$.
[^1]: [This project was partially supported by the NSF grant DMS-1701752.]{}
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We study the extent to which D=11 supergravity can be deformed and show in two very different ways that, unlike lower D versions, it forbids an extension with cosmological constant. Some speculations about other invariants are made, in connection with the possible counterterms of the theory.'
author:
- |
S. Deser\
Department of Physics\
Brandeis University\
Waltham, MA 02254, USA
title: Uniqueness of D=11 Supergravity
---
ł Ł ¶ § ø Ø
ULB-TH-97/07\
BRX-TH-424\
It is a pleasure to report here on work done jointly with K. Bautier, M. Henneaux, and D. Seminara, one of whom is closely connected with this Center and all of whom I thank for their contribution to this paper. The completed aspects of our research have also just appeared in print [@00a].
Anyone studying supergravities cannot fail to marvel at how the interplay of Lorentz invariance, Clifford algebra and gauge field properties conspire to limit their dimensionality. In particular not only is D=11 maximal if gravity is to remain the highest spin of the supermultiplet, but only one configuration of fields, the N=1 graviton plus vector-spinor and 3-form potential combination is permitted[^1][@001]. There is some “fine print" involved as well. For example, I will be talking solely about actions whose gravitational component is Einstein, rather than say Chern–Simons – where very recent work at this Center [@00c] has revealed other supersymmetric D=11 possibilities. Beyond D=11, one would require the appearance of spin $>$2 fields and/or more than one graviton, both of which are known [@00d; @00e] to lead to inconsistencies.
Despite the magic of D=11, the theory was for many years neglected (if never forgotten – as an inspiration for KK descents to lower dimensions, if nothing else), because superstrings had their own magic number, D=10. Faith in the importance of D=11 was revived when it was seen to be the low energy sector of M-theory unification, and that “dimensional enhancement" was as interesting as dimensional reduction. So this is a good time to understand more deeply just how unique a theory it really is – within the framework I have indicated, requiring that it have an Einstein term to describe the graviton. Now there is one other question in physics that is on an equally mysterious footing as what is so special about D=11, namely why is $\Lambda$=0 – the cosmological constant problem. Early hopes that supersymmetry would solve it in the matter sector, through vacuum energy cancellations, were made to some extent irrelevant by the perfect consistency of cosmological constant extensions of supergravity. A cosmological term (of anti deSitter type) $\sim -|\Lambda | \sqrt{-g}$ could be added to a masslike term for the fermion $\sim \sqrt{|\L |} \:
\bar{\psi}_\m \G^{\m\n} \,\psi_\n$ in a supersymmetric way, as was first realized for D=4 [@Townsend; @deszum] and then extended all the way to D=10 [@Roman]. Things got rather elaborate on the way up, with scalars for example decorating the cosmological term, but it was there. At D=11, however, there seemed to be a snag; surprisingly, there were only a couple of papers directed at this question at the time. To our knowledge, there have been two previous approaches to this result. One [@Nahm] consists in a classification of all graded algebras and consideration of their highest spin representations. Although we have not found an explicit exclusion of the cosmological extension in this literature, it is undoubtly implied there under similar assumptions. The second [@sagnotti] considers the properties of a putative “minimal" graded Anti de Sitter algebra and shows it to be inconsistent in its simplest form. While one may construct generalized algebras that still contract to super-Poincaré, these can also be shown to fail, using for example some results of [@Fre]. In [@sagnotti], a Noether procedure, starting from the full theory of [@001], was also attempted; as we shall show below, there is an underlying cohomological basis for that failure. A careful reconsideration of the problem, resulting in a no-go theorem is the main result to be reported here. To be sure, this does not exorcise the cosmological constant problem: it can reappear under dimensional reduction (as in fact discovered again recently [@West]) as well of course as through supersymmetry breaking. Still, it should be appreciated that there is now one model–and a very relevant one it is–of a QFT that includes gravity and really excludes a $\L$ term, through the magic of supersymmetry. Although we have no “deep" physical selection rule to account for this, we can point to the mysterious 3-form field as the immediate cause. We also mention that current investigations of lower dimensional (brane) models also have a stake in the outcome (see eg. [@002].)
We will proceed from two complementary starting points. The first will be the Noether current approach, in which we attempt—and fail!—to find a linearized, “globally" supersymmetric model about an Anti de Sitter (AdS) background upon which to construct a full locally supersymmetric theory. Since a Noether procedure is indeed a standard way to obtain the full theory, in lower dimensions, the absence of a starting point for it effectively forbids the extension. In contrast, the second procedure will begin with the full (original) theory of [@001] and attempt, using cohomology techniques, to construct—also unsuccessfully—a consistent deformation of the model and of its transformation rules that would include the desired fermion mass term plus cosmological term extensions. In both cases, the obstruction is due to the $4-$ (or $7-$) form field necessary to balance degrees of freedom.
First, we recall some general features relevant to the linearized approach. It is well-known that Einstein theory with cosmological term linearized about a background solution of constant curvature retains its gauge invariance and degree of freedom count, with the necessary modification that the vielbein field’s gauge transformation is the background covariant $\d h^a_\m = D_\m\xi^a$. Similarly it is also known that the free spin 3/2 field’s gauge invariance in this space is no longer $\d \psi_\m = \pa_\m \a (x)$ or even $D_\m \a (x)$, but rather the extended form [@deszum] \_= [D]{}\_ (x) (D\_+ m\_) (x) where ${\cal D}_\m$ has the property that $[{\cal D}_\m , {\cal D}_\n ] =0$ when the mass $m$ is “tuned” to an AdS cosmological constant: $2 m= \sqrt{-\Lambda}$ (in $D=11$). The modified transformation (1) then keeps the degree of freedom count for $\psi_\m$ the same as in flat space, provided—as is needed for consistency—that the $\psi$’s action and field equations also involve ${\cal D}_\m$ rather than $D_\m$. \[This is of course the reason for the “mass" term $m \bar{\psi}_\m \G^{\m\n} \psi_\n$ acquired by the spinor field to accompany the cosmological one for gravity.\] Given the above facts, the 3-form potential $A_{\m\n\rho}$ still balances fermi/bose degrees of freedom here. \[For now, we keep the same field content as in the flat limit.\] Unlike the other two fields, its action only involves curls and so it neither needs nor can accomodate any extra terms in the background to retain its gauge invariance and excitation count; indeed, the only possible quadratic addition would be a – true – mass term $\sim \L \, A^2$ that would destroy both (there would be 120, instead of the 84 massless, excitations). One can therefore expect, with reason, that the problem will lie in the form (rather than gravity) sector’s transformation rules. In the AdS background, the desired “globally" supersymmetric free field starting point involves the Killing spinor $\e (x)$, ${\cal D}_\m \e (x) =0$, which is unrelated to the general gravitino gauge spinor $\a (x)$ in (1). \[Note that we can neither use $\pa_\m \e = 0$ because space is curved, nor $D_\m \e =0$ because only ${\cal D}_\m$’s commute.\] The rules are essentially fixed from the known flat background ones (to which they must reduce for $\L = 0$), $$\begin{aligned}
\d \, \psi_\m & = & \d_h \psi_\m +
\d_A \psi_\m =
\left( \frac{1}{4} X_{\m ab} (h) \G^{ab} -
m \g^a h_{\m a} \right) \e
+ i/144 \:
(\G^{\a\b\g\d}~_\m - 8 \, \G^{\b\g\d}
\d^\a_\m ) \e \, F_{\a\b\g\d} \; \nonumber\\
\d \, h_{\m a} & = & -i \, \, \bar{\e} \,
\G_a\psi_\m \hspace{.4in}
\d \, A_{\m\n\rho} = 3/2 \, \bar{\e} \,
\G_{[\m\n} \psi_{\rho ]}.\end{aligned}$$ The linearized connection $X(h)$ is derived by a linearized “vanishing torsion" condition $D_\m h_{\n a} + X_{\m ab}
e_\n^b - (\n\m ) = 0$; throughout, the background vielbein is $e_{\m a}$ and its connection is $\o_{\m ab} (e)$. Now vary the spinorial action $I[\psi]=-1/2\int (dx) \psi_\m
\G^{\m\a\b} {\cal D}_\a \psi_\b$ (world $\G$ indices are totally antisymmetric and $\G^\m = e^\m~\!_a \g^a$ etc.). It is easily checked that although $[\G , {\cal D}]
\neq 0$, varying $\bar{\psi}$ and $\psi$ does yield the same contribution, and using (2) we find $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{\d I[\psi ] = \d_h I[\psi ] + \d_A
I [\psi ] =} \nonumber \\
& - & i/8 \int (dx) E^{\m b} (-i\k \bar{\e} \G_a
\psi_\m ) - i/8 \int (dx)
[ D_\a F^{\a\m\rho\s} (\bar{\e}
\G_{[\m\n} \psi_{\rho ]} )
+ m \bar{\psi}_\m (\Gamma^{\mu\alpha\beta\rho\sigma}
F_{\alpha\beta \rho\sigma} ) \e ] \; .\end{aligned}$$ Here $E^{\m b} $ is the variation of the Einstein cosmological action linearized about AdS. The form-dependent piece of (3) has a first part that behaves similarly, namely it is proportional to the form field action’s variation $D_\a F^{\a\mu\rho \s}$ (the Chern–Simons term, being cubic, is absent at this level). With the transformation choice (2), the variation of the Einstein plus form actions almost cancels (3). There remains $\bar \psi F\epsilon$, the $A-$variation of the gravitino mass term. What possible deformations of the transformation rules (2) and of the actions might cancel this unwanted term? The only dimensionally allowed change in (2) is a term $ \bar{\d} \psi_\m \sim m A\!\!\!/_\m
\e$; however, it will give rise to unwanted gauge-variant contributions from the $m \bar{\psi} \G\psi$ term $\sim m^2 \bar{\psi}
\G A\e$, that would in turn require a true mass term $I_m{[A]} \sim m^2 \int (dx) A^2$ to cancel, thereby altering the degree of freedom count. Indeed these two deformations, $\bar{\d} \psi_\m$ and $I_m [A]$, are the only ones that have nonsingular $m\rightarrow 0$ limits. A detailed calculation reveals, however, that even with these added terms, the action’s invariance cannot be preserved. In particular, there are already variations of the $A^2$ term that cannot be compensated. A completely parallel calculation starting with a dual, 7-form, model yields precisely the same obstruction[^2]: defining the $4-$form dual of the $7-$form, we have the same structure as the $4-$form case, up to normalizations, and face the same non-cancellation problem; also here a mass term is useless.
Our second approach analyses the extension problem in the light of the master equation and its consistent deformations [@BH; @Julia; @Stasheff]; see [@HT] for a review of the master equation formalism appropriate to the subsequent cohomological considerations. One starts with the solution of the master equation $(S,S) = 0$ [@HT; @ZJ] for the action of an undeformed theory (for us that of [@001]). One then tries to perturb it, $
S \rightarrow S'=S + g \Delta S^{(1)} + g^2
\Delta S^{(2)} + .....$, where $g$ is the deformation parameter, in such a way that the deformed $S'$ still fulfills the master equation $
(S', S') = 0. \label{masterdefo}
$ As explained in [@BH] any deformation of the action of a gauge theory and of its gauge symmetries, consistent in the sense that the new gauge transformations are indeed gauge symmetries of the new action, leads to a deformed solution $S'$ of the master equation. Conversely, any deformation $S'$ of the original solution $S$ of the master equation defines a consistent deformation of the original gauge invariant action and of its gauge symmetries. In particular, the antifield–independent term in $S'$ is the new, gauge-invariant action; the terms linear in the antifields conjugate to the classical fields define the new gauge transformations [@BH; @GW] while the other terms in $S'$ contain information about the deformation of the gauge algebra and of the higher-order structure functions. To first order in $g$, $(S^\prime , S^\prime)=0$ implies $(S,\Delta S^{(1)})=0$, [*i.e.*]{}, that $\Delta S^{(1)}$ (which has ghost number zero) should be an observable of the undeformed theory or equivalently $\Delta S^{(1)}$ is “BRST-invariant" - recall that the solution $S$ of the master equation generates the BRST transformation in the antibracket. To second order in $g$, then, we have $
(\Delta S^{(1)},\Delta S^{(1)}) + 2
(S, \Delta S^{(2)}) = 0, \label{obstru}
$ so the antibracket of $\Delta S^{(1)}$ with itself should be the BRST variation of some $\Delta S^{(2)}$.
Let us start with the full nonlinear 4-dimensional $N=1$ case, where a cosmological term [*can*]{} be added, for contrast with $D=11$. The action is [@DZ1] I\_4\[e\^a\_, \_\] =- (dx) ( e e\^[a ]{} e\^[b ]{} R\_[a b]{} + \_\^ D\_ \_), \[action40\] where $e \equiv \det(e_{a \mu})$ and $D_\mu$ here is of course with respect to the full vierbein; it is invariant under the local supersymmetry (as well as diffeomorphism and local Lorentz) transformationse\^a\_= - i| \^a \_ , \_= D\_ł(x) , \[var1\] and under those of the spin connection $\omega^{ab}_\mu$. The solution of the master equation takes the standard form S = I\_4 + (dx)(dy)\^\*\_i(x) R\^i\_A (x,y) C\^A (y) + X, \[solmaster1\] where the $\varphi^*_i$ stand for all the antifields of antighost number one conjugate to the original ( antighost number zero) fields $e_{a \mu}$, $\psi_\lambda$, and where the $C^A$ stand for all the ghosts. The $R^i_A (x,y)$ are the coefficients of all the gauge transformations leaving $I_4$ invariant. The terms denoted by $X$ are at least of antighost number two, [*i.e.*]{}, contain at least two antifields $\varphi^*_i$ or one of the antifields $C^*_\alpha$ conjugate to the ghosts. The quadratic terms in $\varphi^*_i$ are also quadratic in the ghosts and arise because the gauge transformations do not close off-shell [@Kallosh]. We next recall some cohomological background [@HT] related to the general solution of the “cocycle" condition $
(S,A) \equiv sA = 0
\label{cocycle}
$ for $A$ with zero ghost number. If one expands $A$ in antighost number $
A = A_0 + \bar A,
\label{expansion}
$ where $\bar A$ denotes antifield-dependent terms, one finds that the antifield-independent term $A_0$ should be on-shell gauge-invariant. Conversely, given an on-shell invariant function(al) $A_0$ of the fields, there is a unique, up to irrelevant ambiguity, solution $A$ (the “BRST invariant extension" of $A_0$) that starts with $A_0$. Below we shall obtain the required $A_0$. The relevant property that makes the introduction of a cosmological term possible in four dimensions is the fact that a gravitino mass term $ m \int (dx) e \overline{\psi}_\lambda
\Gamma^{\lambda \rho} \psi_\rho \, $ defines an observable; one easily verifies that it is on-shell gauge invariant under (\[var1\]). Hence, one may complete it with antifield-dependent terms, to define the initial deformation $m\Delta S^{(1)}$ that satisfies $(\Delta S^{(1)},S) = 0$. The antifield-dependent contributions are fixed by the coefficients of the field equations in the gauge variation of the mass term. Specifically, since one must use the [*undeformed*]{} equations for the gravitino and the spin connection in order to verify the invariance of the mass term under supersymmetry transformations, these contributions will be of the form $\psi^* C$ and $\omega^* C$, where $C$ is the commuting supersymmetry ghost. They then lead to the known [@Townsend] modification of the supersymmetry transformation rules for the gravitino and the spin connection when the mass term is turned on[^3]. Having obtained an acceptable first order deformation, $m \Delta S^{(1)}$, we must in principle proceed to verify that $(\Delta S^{(1)}, \Delta S^{(1)})$ is the BRST variation of some $\Delta S^{(2)}$; indeed it is , with $\Delta S^{(2)}=
3/2 \int (dx) e $, as expected. There are no higher order terms in the deformation parameter $m$ because the antibracket of $\Delta S^{(1)}$ with $\Delta
S^{(2)} $ vanishes ($\Delta S^{(1)}$ does not contain the antifields conjugate to the vierbeins), so the complete solution of the master equation with cosmological constant is $
S + m \Delta S^{(1)} + m^2 \Delta S^{(2)}
$, the action of [@Townsend; @deszum]. \[The possibility of introducing the gravitino mass term as an observable deformation hinged on the availability of a dynamical curved geometry in the sense that while $(S,\Delta S^{(1)})=0$ is always satisfied, only then is $(\Delta S^{(1)}, \Delta S^{(1)})$ BRST exact, i.e. is there a second order –gravitational– deformation.\]
To summarize the analysis of the four-dimensional case, we stress that the cosmological term appears, in the formulation without auxiliary fields followed here, as the second order term of a consistent deformation of the ordinary supergravity action whose first order term is the gravitino mass term, with the mass as deformation parameter; it is completely fixed by the requirement that the deformation preserve the master equation and hence gauge invariance. This means, in particular, that the cosmological constant itself must be fine-tuned to the value $-4 m^2$, as explained in [@deszum].[^4]
Let us now turn to the action $I_{CJS}$ of [@001] in $D=11$. The solution of the master equation again takes the standard form[^5] S = I\_[CJS]{} + (dx)(dy)\^\*\_i(x) R\^i\_A (x,y) C\^A (y) + (dx)C\^[\*]{} \_\_ + (dx)\^[\* ]{} \_+ Z, \[solmaster2\] where the $\eta_\nu$ and $\rho$ are the ghosts of ghosts and ghost of ghost of ghost necessary to account for the gauge symmetries of the $3$-form $A_{\lambda \mu \nu}$, and where $Z$ (like $X$ in (6)) is determined from the terms written by the $(S,S) = 0$ requirement. As in $D=4$, we seek a first-order deformation analogous to S\^[(1)]{} = m(dx) e \_\^ \_ + \[mass2\] However, contrary to what happened at $D=4$, the mass term no longer defines an observable, as its variation under local supersymmetry transformations reads ( e \_\^ \_) -\_\^ F\_ + O(\^3) \[fail\] where $\approx$ means equal on shell up to a divergence. Indeed, the condition that the r.h.s. of (\[fail\]) also weakly vanish is easily verified to imply, upon expansion in the derivatives of the gauge parameter $\e$, that $\overline{\psi_\mu} \Gamma^{\mu\alpha
\beta \gamma \delta}
\e F_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta}$ must vanish on shell, which it does [*not*]{} do.
Can one improve the first-order deformation (\[mass2\]) to make it acceptable? The cosmological term will not help because it does not transform into $F$. The only possible candidates would be functions of the 3-form field. In order to define observables, these functions must be invariant under the gauge transformations of the 3-form, at least on-shell and up to a total derivative. However, in 11 dimensions, the only such functions can be redefined so as to be off-shell (and not just on-shell) gauge invariant, up to a total derivative. This follows from an argument that closely patterns the analysis of [@pform], defining the very restricted class of on-shell invariant vertices that cannot in general be extended off-shell. \[The above result actually justifies the non-trivial assumption of [@sagnotti], that “on–” implies “off–”.\] Thus, the available functions of $A$ may be assumed to be strictly gauge invariant, i.e., to be functions of the field strength $F$ (which eliminates $A^2$; also, changing the coefficient of the Chern-Simons term in the original action clearly cannot help). But it is easy to see that no expression in $F$ can cancel the unwanted term in (\[fail\]), because of a mismatch in the number of derivatives. Hence, there is no way to improve the mass term to turn it into an observable in 11 dimensions. It is the $A$-field part of the supersymmetry variation of the gravitino that is responsible for the failure of the mass term to be an observable, just as it was also responsible for the difficulties described in the first, linearized, approach. Since the cohomology procedure saves us from also seeking modifications of the transformations rules, we can conclude that the introduction of a cosmological constant is obstructed already at the first step in $D=11$ supergravity from the full theory end as well.
In our discussion, we have assumed (as in lower dimensions) both that the limit of a vanishing mass $m$ is smooth[^6] and that the field content remains unchanged in the cosmological variant. Any “no-go” result is of course no stronger than its assumptions, and ours are shared by the earlier treatments [@Nahm; @sagnotti] that we surveyed. There is one (modest) loosening that can be shown not to work either, inspired by a recent reformulation [@Green] of the $D=10$ cosmological model [@Roman]. The idea is to add a deformation involving a nonpropagating field, here the 11-form $G_{11}\equiv
d A_{10}$, through an addition $\Delta I \sim
\int (dx) [G_{11}+b \bar\psi
\Gamma^9\psi]^2$. The $A_{10}$-field equation states that the dual, $\epsilon^{11} [ G_{11}+b
\bar\psi \Gamma^9\psi]$ is a constant of integration, say $m$. The resulting supergravity field equations look like the “cosmological” desired ones. However, while this “dualization” works for lower dimensions, in $D=11$ we are simply back to the original inconsistent model with supersymmetry still irremediably lost, as can be also discovered –without integrating out– in the deformation approach.
I will end this account with a rather different set of “uniqueness" questions that we are currently attempting to settle, but that are considerably more speculative. Here the invariants whose existence, or rather absence, we would like to establish are all the possible infinite counterterms in a perturbative loop expansion of the theory. It is of course well-known that all supergravities in D$\geq$4 are power counting nonrenormalizable [*a priori*]{}, since the underlying Einstein models are, so the question is whether supersymmetry can save the day. But already for D=4, N=1 it was shown early on [@00x] that at three loops and higher, suitable supersymmetric invariants existed, and it would be very unlikely if their coefficients precisely vanished in (impossible to perform!) explicit calculations. Now strictly speaking, before talking about candidate terms, one must first exhibit a regularization scheme that preserves the supersymmetry, something notoriously difficult in odd dimensions (due to the Levi–Civita symbol, for example). So we cannot point to dimensional regularization as a legitimate scheme, but let us nevertheless carry on formally within it and seek terms that are a) supersymmetric, b) dimensionally correct in a loop expansion in the sole dimensional constant of the theory, the gravitational one. Recall that the Einstein term $\k^{-2}R$ in D=11 fixes the dimension of $\k^2$ to be $L^9$. The constant $\k$ also appears in front of the form field’s famous Chern–Simons term, $\kappa \e FFA$ (here parity preserving!), as is clear by comparing its dimension with the kinetic term $F^2$.
Since already the gravitational parts of local counterterms, being of the form $R^n$ (possibly involving an even number of covariant derivatives) are even-dimensional, only odd powers of $\k^2$ and hence only [*even*]{} loops can contribute to a local integral over $(d^{11}x)$. This “counting" fact has long been known ([*e.g.*]{}, [@Duff]) although strictly speaking there exists a gravitational Chern–Simons term of the form $\e^{1...11}R_1 ..R_5 \omega$ that has odd dimensions. However, it has odd parity and so should not arise in this parity even model (unless there are anomalies). Optimistically, then, one need only worry about 2k-loop invariants, and then indeed only about the subset of invariants that fail to vanish on-shell; those that do vanish there can always be absorbed by a harmless field-redefinition [@00y]. The simplest, two-loop, contribution would presumably begin as $\k^{+2} \int d^{11}x \, \D L_2$, with the leading gravitational parts $\D L_2 \sim R^{10} + (DR)^2R^7
+ .. (D^8R)^2$ in a very schematic notation; the $R$’s are all Weyl tensors and $D$ represents a covariant derivative. Likewise the $F$-field would enter through invariants of suitable powers of $F$ and their derivatives, in addition to dimensionally relevant fermionic and mixed terms. To test the hypothesis that (as in the cosmological case) it is the $F$ field that is the culprit, one can begin with candidate polynomials in $F$ alone and vary them, looking for obstructions to supersymmetry. There are some indications that such obstructions are present, but we don’t yet have a systematic way to classify: the simple (?) combinatorial preliminary, exhibiting the local invariants that can be constructed from a 4-form in D=11, is not yet systematically known. The idea of our procedure is that the supersymmetric variations of some initial $F^n$ term is $\sim F^{n-1} \bar{\a} \G f$ where $f_{\m\n} \equiv
D_\m \psi_\n -D_\n \psi_\m$ is the fermionic field strength. To cancel this variation requires a companion term $\sim \bar{f}
\G f \; F^{n-2}$, which will in turn also vary into gravity, and one may hope that – as we saw with our cosmological construction – the process cannot be completed. Although the above idea may not be easy to test without some deeper understanding of the theory, it is bound to teach us more about this one QFT that survives at our present level of post-string unification!
The work of S. D. and D. S. was supported by NSF grant PHY 93-15811
[99]{} K. Bautier, S. Deser, M. Henneaux, and D. Seminara, Phys. Lett. [**B406**]{} (1997) 49.
E. Cremmer, B. Julia and J. Scherk, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B76**]{}, (1978) 409. We use this paper’s conventions.
W. Nahm, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B135**]{} (1978) 145 and references therein.
R. Troncoso and J. Zanelli, [*New Gauge Supergravity in Seven and Eleven Dimensions*]{}, hep-th/9710180.
C. Aragone and S. Deser, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**86B**]{} (1979) 161; [*Nuov. Cim.*]{} [**57B**]{} (1980) 33.
D. Boulware and S. Deser, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D6**]{} (1972) 3368.
P. K. Townsend, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D15**]{} (1977) 2802.
S. Deser and B. Zumino, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**38**]{} (1977) 1433.
L. Romans, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B169**]{} (1986) 374.
A. Sagnotti and T. N. Tomaras, [*Properties of 11-Dimensional Supergravity*]{}, Caltech preprint CALT-68-885 (1982) unpublished.
R. D’Auria and P. Fre, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B201**]{} (1982) 101.
P.S. Howe, N.D. Lambert, and P.C. West, [*A New Massive Type IIA Supergravity from Compactification*]{}, hep-th/9707139.
O. Bergmann, M.R. Gaberdiel and G. Lifschytz, hep-th/9705130; C.M. Hull, hep-th/9705162.
H. Nicolai, P.K. Townsend and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, [*Lett. Nuov. Cim.*]{} [**30**]{} (1981) 315 .
G. Barnich and M. Henneaux, [*Phys.Lett.*]{} [**B311**]{} (1993) 123.
The usefulness of the deformation point of view (but not in the general framework of the antifield formalism, which allows off-shell open deformations of the algebra) has been advocated in B. Julia, in [*Recent Developments in Quantum Field Theory*]{}, J. Ambjorn, B.J. Durhuus and J.L. Petersen eds, Elsevier (1985) pp 215-225; B. Julia, in [*Topological and Geometrical Methods in Field Theory*]{}, J. Hietarinta and J. Westerholm eds, World Scientific (1986) pp 325-339.
J. Stasheff, [*Deformation Theory and the Batalin-Vilkovisky Master Equation*]{}, q-alg/9702012.
M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim, [*Quantization of gauge systems*]{}, (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1992).
J. Zinn-Justin, [*Renormalization of Gauge Theories*]{}, in: Trends in Elementary Particle Theory, Lecture Notes in Physics 37, Springer, Berlin 1975; I. A. Batalin and G. A. Vilkovisky, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B102**]{} (1981) 27; [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D28**]{} (1983) 2567; J. Gomis, J. Paris and S. Samuel, [*Phys. Rep.*]{} [**259**]{} (1995) 1.
J. Gomis and S. Weinberg, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B469**]{} (1996) 473.
S. Deser and B. Zumino, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B62**]{} (1976) 335; D.Z. Freedman, P. van Nieuwenhuizen and S. Ferrara, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D13**]{} (1976) 3214.
R. Kallosh, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B141**]{} (1978) 141.
F. Brandt, [*Ann. Phys.*]{} [**259**]{} (1997) 253.
B. de Wit, P. van Nieuwenhuizen and A. Van Proeyen, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B104**]{} (1981) 27.
M. Henneaux, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B368**]{} (1996) 83; M. Henneaux, B. Knaepen and C. Schomblond, [*Commun. Math. Phys.*]{} [**186**]{} (1997) 137.
E. Bergshoeff, M. de Roo, G. Papadopoulos, M.B. Green and P.K. Townsend, [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**B470**]{} (1996) 113.
S. Deser, J.H. Kay, and K.S. Stelle, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**38**]{} (1977) 527.
M.J. Duff in [*Unification of the Fundamental Particle Interactions*]{} (eds. Ellis and Ferrara, Plenum 1982).
G. ’t Hooft in [*Acta Univ. Wratislavensis No. 368*]{}, Proc. of XII Winter School, Karpacz.
[^1]: For a quick counting, recall that graviton excitations are described by transverse traceless spatial components $g^{TT}_{ij}$, hence there are (D-2)(D-1)/2 -1 = D(D-3)/2; the spatial three-form $A^T_{ijk}$ are also transverse hence (D-2)(D-3)(D-4)/3!, while the vector-spinors have (D-3) 2$^{[D/2]-1}$ excitations.
[^2]: The $7-$ form variant was originally considered by [@Nicolai], who argued that it was excluded in the non-cosmological case, but the possibility for a cosmological extension was not entirely removed; the latter was considered and rejected at the Noether level in [@sagnotti].
[^3]: A complete investigation of the BRST cohomology of $N=1$ supergravity has been recently carried out in [@Brandt].
[^4]: We emphasize that in this procedure, one cannot start with the cosmological term as a $\Delta S^{(1)}$. Indeed, the variation of the cosmological term under the gauge transformations of the undeformed theory is algebraic in the fields and hence does not vanish on-shell, even up to a surface term. Hence it is not an observable of the undeformed theory, and so cannot be a starting point for a consistent deformation: adding the cosmological term (or the sum of it and the mass term) as a $\Delta S^{(1)}$ to the ordinary supergravity action is a much more radical (indeed inconsistent !) change than the gravitino mass term alone.
[^5]: Many of the features of (\[solmaster2\]) were anticipated in [@deWit].
[^6]: This restriction is not necessarily stringent: in cosmological $D=10$ supergravity [@Roman], there is $m^{-1}$ dependence in a field transformation rule, but that is an artefact removable by introducing a Stuckelberg compensator.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- |
[^1]\
Kennesaw State University, USA\
E-mail:
title: 'Two-loop resummation for QCD hard scattering'
---
Resummation
===========
Soft-gluon corrections are important in many QCD processes, particularly near threshold. The calculation of these corrections is needed at higher orders for increased accuracy in theoretical predictions. Terms of the form $[\ln^k(s_4/M^2)/s_4]_+$, where $s_4\rightarrow 0$ at threshold, arise from incomplete cancellations of infrared divergences between virtual diagrams and real diagrams with soft (low-energy) gluons. These soft-gluon corrections exponentiate. The resummation follows from factorization properties of the cross section. At next-to-leading-logarithm (NLL) accuracy resummation requires one-loop calculations in the eikonal approximation; at next-to-next-to-leading-logarithm (NNLL) accuracy it requires two-loop calculations.
The resummation is performed in moment space, with $N$ the moment variable conjugate to $s_4$. We use renormalization group evolution (RGE) to evolve the soft-gluon function associated with soft-gluon emission. The resummed cross section is \^[res]{}(N)= {H() S() } \[resHS\] where the exponent $E$ resums universal collinear and soft gluon emission [@GS87; @CT89] from the incoming and outgoing partons, $H$ is the $N$-independent hard-scattering function, and $S$ is the soft-gluon function whose RGE is governed by $\Gamma_S$, the soft anomalous dimension [@NKGS; @NKNNNLO]. The functions $H$, $S$, and $\Gamma_S$ are matrices in color-exchange space.
We calculate $\Gamma_S$ in the eikonal approximation, in which the Feynman rules for the quark-gluon vertex give $g_s T_F^c \, (v^{\mu}/v\cdot k)$, with $g_s^2=4\pi\alpha_s$, $v$ a dimensionless velocity vector, $k$ the gluon momentum, and $T_F^c$ the generators of SU(3). We perform the calculations in momentum space and Feynman gauge. We expand the soft anomalous dimension as $\Gamma_S=(\alpha_s/\pi) \Gamma_S^{(1)}+(\alpha_s/\pi)^2 \Gamma_S^{(2)}+\cdots$, and determine it through two loops for a number of processes.
Massive soft (cusp) anomalous dimension
=======================================
![Two-loop vertex-correction graphs.[]{data-label="loopg2"}](loopg2.eps){width="50.00000%"}
We begin with two-loop results for the soft (cusp [@KorRad]) anomalous dimension for $e^+ e^- \rightarrow t {\bar t}$ [@NK2l]. Calculations with massive quarks present considerable complications in addition to those with massless quarks [@ADS]. The two-loop vertex-correction eikonal diagrams are shown in Fig. 1; there are additional diagrams with top-quark self energies [@NK2l]. We include counterterms for all graphs and multiply with corresponding color factors. Ultraviolet (UV) and infrared (IR) singularities are separated, and we determine the two-loop soft anomalous dimension from the UV poles of the sum of the graphs. In terms of the cusp angle [@KorRad] $\gamma=\ln[(1+\beta)/(1-\beta)]$, with $\beta=\sqrt{1-4m^2/s}$ and $m$ the heavy quark mass, we get $\Gamma_S^{(1)}=C_F (\gamma \coth\gamma-1)$ and [@NK2l] \_S\^[(2)]{}&=& \_S\^[(1)]{} +C\_F C\_A {++ -\^2.\
&& . - } \[Gamma2\] where $K=C_A (67/18-\zeta_2)-5n_f/9$. $\Gamma_S^{(2)}$ vanishes at $\beta=0$, the threshold limit, and diverges at $\beta=1$, the massless limit. In the case where one quark is massive and one is massless the result simplifies and we find $\Gamma_S^{(2)}=(K/2) \Gamma_S^{(1)}+C_F C_A (1-\zeta_3)/4$.
Single top quark processes
==========================
The color structure gets more complicated with more than two colored partons in a hard-scattering process. The cusp anomalous dimension, presented in the previous section, is an essential component of calculations for other processes. Next, we compute two-loop soft anomalous dimensions for single top production via the $s$-channel, and for associated production of a top quark with a $W$ boson or a charged Higgs.
$s$-channel single top quark production
---------------------------------------
For $s$-channel single-top production the diagrams involve different pairings of the two-loop diagrams for the cusp anomalous dimension. We find the one-loop result for the soft anomalous dimension [@NKst; @NKs] \_[S, [top s-ch]{}]{}\^[(1)]{}=C\_F and the two-loop [@NKs] expression \_[S, [top s-ch]{}]{}\^[(2)]{}= \_[S, [top s-ch]{}]{}\^[(1)]{} +C\_F C\_A .
Using this result in Eq. (\[resHS\]) and expanding the resummed cross section to next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) in the strong coupling, we derive an approximate NNLO cross section. As shown in [@NKs; @POSDIS] the NNLO approximate corrections enhance the NLO cross section by about 15% at the Tevatron and about 13% at LHC energies.
Associated production of a top quark with a $W^-$ or $H^-$
----------------------------------------------------------
![Eikonal two-loop graphs for $tW^-$ or $tH^-$ production.[]{data-label="eiktW"}](tW2loopv1c.eps "fig:"){width="31.00000%"} ![Eikonal two-loop graphs for $tW^-$ or $tH^-$ production.[]{data-label="eiktW"}](tW2loopv12.eps "fig:"){width="31.00000%"} ![Eikonal two-loop graphs for $tW^-$ or $tH^-$ production.[]{data-label="eiktW"}](tW2loopvc2.eps "fig:"){width="31.00000%"}
For the processes $bg \rightarrow tW^-$ or $bg \rightarrow tH^-$ the two-loop vertex-correction eikonal diagrams are shown in Fig. 2 (there are additional top-quark self-energy graphs not shown here). Note that graphs with gluons attached to all three eikonal lines, not shown here, either vanish or do not contribute to the two-loop soft anomalous dimension. The one-loop result for the soft anomalous dimension for $bg \rightarrow tW^-$ is \_[S, tW\^-]{}\^[(1)]{}=C\_F + () and at two loops we find \_[S, tW\^-]{}\^[(2)]{}= \_[S, tW\^-]{}\^[(1)]{} +C\_F C\_A . The NNLO approximate corrections for $tW^-$ production enhance the NLO cross section by about 8% at LHC energies [@POSDIS].
The same analytical result for $\Gamma_S$ holds for $bg\rightarrow tH^-$ [@POSDIS; @NKchiggs]. The NNLO approximate corrections for $tH^-$ production provide around 15% to 20 % enhancement over NLO at LHC energies [@POSDIS].
Related results can also be derived for direct photon production.
Top-antitop pair hadroproduction
================================
Resummation for $t{\bar t}$ production at hadron colliders at NLL accuracy was presented in [@NKGS] where the one-loop soft anomalous dimension matrix was first calculated. Detailed numerical studies including the NLL terms and sets of subleading terms [@NKRV] have shown that threshold resummation increases the cross section of $t{\bar t}$ production and significantly reduces the scale dependence at both Tevatron and LHC energies.
The two-loop results of [@NK2l] are an essential ingredient in determining the complete two-loop matrix result for $t{\bar t}$ hadroproduction. If we rewrite Eq. (\[Gamma2\]) as $\Gamma_S^{(2)}=(K/2)\Gamma_S^{(1)}+C_F C_A M_{\beta}$ (i.e. $M_{\beta}$ denotes the terms inside the curly brackets in Eq. (\[Gamma2\]), with the cusp angle $\gamma$ expressed explicitly in terms of $\beta$), then the diagonal elements of the two-loop soft anomalous dimension matrix, for both $q{\bar q}\rightarrow t{\bar t}$ and $gg \rightarrow t{\bar t}$ channels, can be written as a multiple of the one-loop result (in Feynman gauge) plus a multiple of $M_{\beta}$. For example, in a singlet-octet basis for the $q{\bar q}\rightarrow t{\bar t}$ channel we have \_[q[|q]{} 11]{}\^[(2)]{}&=& \_[q[|q]{} 11]{}\^[(1)]{} +C\_F C\_A M\_ ,\
\_[q[|q]{} 22]{}\^[(2)]{}&=& \_[q[|q]{} 22]{}\^[(1)]{} +C\_A(C\_F-) M\_ . \[Gamma2qqtt\] Similar results are found for the $gg$ channel. The off-diagonal elements obey a similar relation in terms of a function $N_{\beta}$ which involves a subset of the terms in $M_{\beta}$. Complete results will appear in a forthcoming paper. It is important to note that the inclusion of the complete two-loop expressions for the soft anomalous dimension matrix do not change the results of [@NKRV] by more than [*O*]{}(per mille), thus showing the robustness of those earlier results and proving that they captured the dominant subleading terms as was explained in detail in [@NKRV].
[99]{}
G. Sterman, *Summation of Large Corrections to Short Distance Hadronic Cross-Sections*, *Nucl. Phys. B* [**281**]{}, 310 (1987).
S. Catani and L. Trentadue, *Resummation of the QCD Perturbative Series for Hard Processes*, *Nucl. Phys. B* [**327**]{}, 323 (1989).
N. Kidonakis and G. Sterman, *Subleading logarithms in QCD hard scattering*, *Phys. Lett. B* [**387**]{}, 867 (1996); *Resummation for QCD hard scattering*, *Nucl. Phys. B* [**505**]{}, 321 (1997) \[hep-ph/9705234\].
N. Kidonakis, *Next-to-next-to-next-to-leading-order soft-gluon corrections in hard-scattering processes near threshold*, *Phys. Rev. D* [**73**]{}, 034001 (2006) \[hep-ph/0509079\].
G.P. Korchemsky and A.V. Radyushkin, *Loop-Space Formalism And Renormalization Group For The Infrared Asymptotics Of QCD*, *Phys. Lett. B* [**171**]{}, 459 (1986); *Renormalization of the Wilson Loops Beyond the Leading Order*, *Nucl. Phys. B* [**283**]{}, 342 (1987).
N. Kidonakis, *Two-Loop Soft Anomalous Dimensions and Next-to-Next-to-Leading-Logarithm Resummation for Heavy Quark Production*, *Phys. Rev. Lett.* [**102**]{}, 232003 (2009), arXiv:0903.2561 \[hep-ph\]; *Two-loop soft anomalous dimensions with massive and massless quarks*, in proceedings of *DPF 2009*, eConf C090726, arXiv:0910.0473 \[hep-ph\].
S.M. Aybat, L.J. Dixon, and G. Sterman, *Two-loop soft anomalous dimension matrix and resummation at next-to-next-to-leading poles*, *Phys. Rev. D* [**74**]{}, 074004 (2006) \[hep-ph/0607309\].
N. Kidonakis, *Single top quark production at the Fermilab Tevatron: Threshold resummation and finite-order soft gluon corrections*, *Phys. Rev. D* [**74**]{}, 114012 (2006) \[hep-ph/0609287\]; *Higher-order soft gluon corrections in single top quark production at the CERN LHC*, [*P*hys. Rev. D]{} [**75**]{}, 071501(R) (2007) \[hep-ph/0701080\].
N. Kidonakis, *Next-to-next-to-leading logarithm resummation for $s$-channel single top quark production*, *Phys. Rev. D* [**81**]{}, 054028 (2010), arXiv:1001.5034 \[hep-ph\].
N. Kidonakis, *Single top quark production cross section at hadron colliders*, in these proceedings, , arXiv:1005.3330 \[hep-ph\]; and in preparation.
N. Kidonakis, *Charged Higgs production via $bg \rightarrow tH^-$ at the LHC*, *JHEP* [**05**]{} (2005) 011 \[hep-ph/0412422\].
N. Kidonakis and R. Vogt, *Next-to-next-to-leading order soft-gluon corrections in top quark hadroproduction*, *Phys. Rev. D* [**68**]{}, 114014 (2003) \[hep-ph/0308222\]; *Theoretical top quark cross section at the Fermilab Tevatron and the CERN LHC*, *Phys. Rev. D* [**78**]{}, 074005 (2008), arXiv:0805.3844 \[hep-ph\].
[^1]: This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY 0855421.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
Generalized bent (gbent) functions is a class of functions $f: \Z_2^n \rightarrow \Z_q$, where $q \geq 2$ is a positive integer, that generalizes a concept of classical bent functions through their co-domain extension. A lot of research has recently been devoted towards derivation of the necessary and sufficient conditions when $f$ is represented as a collection of Boolean functions. Nevertheless, apart from the necessary conditions that these component functions are bent when $n$ is even (respectively semi-bent when $n$ is odd), no general construction method has been proposed yet for $n$ odd case. In this article, based on the use of the well-known Maiorana-McFarland (MM) class of functions, we give an explicit construction method of gbent functions, for any even $q >2$ when $n$ is even and for any $q$ of the form $q=2^r$ (for $r>1$) when $n$ is odd. Thus, a long-term open problem of providing a general construction method of gbent functions, for odd $n$, has been solved. The method for odd $n$ employs a large class of disjoint spectra semi-bent functions with certain additional properties which may be useful in other cryptographic applications.
**Keywords:** Generalized bent functions, Walsh-Hadamard transform, (generalized) Marioana-McFarland class, Gray maps.
author:
- 'S. Hodžić [^1]'
- 'E. Pasalic[^2]'
title: Construction methods for generalized bent functions
---
Introduction
============
A generalization of Boolean functions was introduced in [@Kum85] for considering a much larger class of mappings from $\mathbb{Z}_q^n$ to $\mathbb{Z}_q$ which naturally induced generalized concepts of the well known class of Boolean [*bent functions*]{} introduced by Rothaus [@RO76]. Nevertheless, due to a more natural connection to cyclic codes over rings, functions from $\mathbb{Z}_2^n$ to $\mathbb{Z}_q$, where $q \geq 2$ is a positive integer, have drawn even more attention [@KUSchm2007]. This class of mappings $\mathbb{Z}_2^n$ to $\mathbb{Z}_q$ will be called [*generalized Boolean functions*]{} throughout this article and in particular its subclass possessing similar properties as standard bent functions will be named [*generalized bent (gbent) functions*]{}. The relations between generalized bent functions, constant amplitude codes and $\mathbb{Z}_4$-linear codes ($q=4$) were studied in [@KUSchm2007]. There are also other generalizations of bent functions such as bent functions over finite Abelian groups for instance [@Solod2002]. A nice survey on different generalizations of bent functions can be found in [@Tokareva].
There are several reasons for studying generalized bent functions. In the first place there is a close connection of these objects to classical bent functions when $n$ is even. Indeed, using a suitable representation of $f: \mathbb{Z}_2^n \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}_q$ as a collection of its component Boolean functions (whose number depends on 2-adic representation of $q$), it turns out that the necessary condition for these component functions is that some of their linear combinations are bent if $f$ is supposed to be gbent. The quaternary $q=4$ and octal case $q=8$ were investigated in [@Tok] and [@Octal], respectively. Also, in many other recent works [@SecCon; @OnCross; @BentGbent] the authors mainly consider the case $q=2^h$ and the bent properties of the component functions for a given prescribed form of a gbent function. On the other hand, when $n$ is odd and $q=2^h$, the necessary (but not sufficient) condition that $f$ is gbent is that some linear combinations of the component functions are semi-bent Boolean functions with the three valued Walsh spectra $\{0,\pm 2^{\frac{n+1}{2}}\}$. The main reason, from an applicative point of view, for the interest in these objects is a close relationship between certain objects used in the design of orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) modulation technique, which in certain cases suffers from relatively high peak-to-mean envelope power ratio (PMEPR), and gbent functions. To overcome the issues of having large PMEPR, the $q$-ary sequences lying in complementary pairs [@Golay] (also called Golay sequences) having a low PMEPR can be easily determined from the gbent function associated with this sequence, see [@KUGenRM] and the references therein. Another motivation for studying these objects comes from the fact that Gray maps of gbent functions are plateaued functions, see [@SHWM Propositions 6-7]. The possibility of obtaining plateaued functions from gbent functions through Gray maps has an independent cryptographic significance. Thus, a generic construction of gbent functions also provides a generic methods for designing plateaued functions by using the results in [@SHWM].
As mentioned above, general construction methods of gbent functions are not known apart from a few special cases for some particular (small) valued $q$. When $q=4$ and $n$ is even, from [@Tok] we have that a function $f:\mathbb{Z}^n_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}_4$, given in the form $f(x)=a_0(x)+2a_1(x)$, is gbent if and only if $a_1$ and $a_1\oplus a_0$ are Boolean bent functions. Several other results related to the case $q=4$ and $n$ even are given in [@KUSchm2007], where some of them involve the trace forms of Galois rings whose employment is also discussed in [@XZ]. For the octal case $q=8$ both necessary and sufficient conditions for the component functions of $f:\Z_2^n \rightarrow \Z_8$, representing uniquely $f$ as $f(x)=a_0(x)+2a_1(x)+2^2a_2(x)$ where $a_0,a_1,a_2$ are Boolean functions, were given in [@BentGbent]. Some recent results on gbent functions related to the case $q=8$ can be found in [@Octal; @WM]. Once again, it is necessary (but not sufficient) that certain linear combinations of these Boolean functions are bent when $n$ is even, respectively semi-bent when $n$ is odd. In addition, the Walsh spectra of these functions must satisfy certain conditions related to Hadamard matrices which makes the design methods rather involved, cf. Theorem \[th1\]. Several other more general classes of gbent functions were described in [@BentGbent], such as generalized Maiorana-McFarland class (GMMF) [@BentGbent Theorem 8], generalized Dillon class (GD)[@BentGbent Theorem 9], partial spread class (PS) [@TM3] and generalized spread class (GS) [@BentGbent Theorem 10]. It has been shown that the GD and GMMF classes are both contained in the GS class [@BentGbent Theorem 12]. The construction of these gbent functions was also considered in [@OnCross] though form the cross-correlation point of view. Apart from the generic construction method of gbent functions inherent to the GMMF class though only for even $n$, the other classes only provide sufficient gbent conditions which are not easy to satisfy in an efficient manner. Gbent functions of the form $g(x)=\frac{q}{2}a(x)+kb(x),$ $k\in \{\frac{q}{4},\frac{3q}{4}\}$, $q=4s$ ($s\in \mathbb{N}$), were analyzed in [@SH], where it has been shown that certain constructions of gbent functions for $q\in\{4,8\}$ [@OnCross; @Octal; @BentGbent] belong to this class of functions (see [@SH Section 5]). One may notice that many coordinate functions of the function $g$, when $g$ is written in the form (\[eq:1\]), are equal to each other or possibly are zero functions. In difference to this approach our construction method can generate gbent functions for any even $q$ whose pairwise coordinate functions are different (see Remark \[tau\_i\]), which implies that many gbent functions which are not of the form $\frac{q}{2}a(x)+kb(x)$ can be generated.
However, the first general characterization of gbent functions, in terms of the choice of component functions for any even $q$ and regardless of the parity of $n$, was given in [@SH2 Theorem 4.1]. Based on the necessary and sufficient conditions, which are derived in [@SHWM], in this article we present the fist generic method for construction of gbent functions for any even $q$ when $n$ is even and for $q=2^r$ when $n$ is odd. The method is based on the use of the Maiorana-McFarland (MM) class of functions which contains both semi-bent and bent functions. Nevertheless, the difficulty lies in the fact that the component functions (more precisely certain linear combinations of them) apart from being bent or semi-bent (depending on the parity of $n$) must satisfy additional constraints. More precisely, when $n$ is odd certain linear combinations of the component functions must be disjoint spectra semi-bent functions and apart from that the signs of their Walsh coefficients are supposed to satisfy certain Hadamard recursion, for more details see Section \[sec:descr\]. Therefore, the selection of component functions turns out to be a rather nontrivial task. We efficiently solve this problem by using suitable permutations for deriving disjoint spectra semi-bent functions from the MM class that satisfy the gbent conditions. The question of finding another generic methods for the same purpose is left as an interesting open problem. We emphasize that the case $n$ even which is also briefly discussed is of minor importance (due to the generic method provided through the GMMF class) and the main contribution is a novel and efficient method of satisfying rather demanding gbent conditions when $n$ is odd. The rest of this article is organized as follows. Some basic definitions and notions related to gbent functions are given in Section \[sec:pre\]. In Section \[sec:descr\] we describe the problem of constructing gbent functions in terms of the sufficient conditions imposed on their component functions. A method of deriving disjoint spectra semi-bent functions from the MM class, needed in the design of gbent functions for odd $n$, is given in Section \[sec:semibent\], where the case $n$ even is also briefly discussed. In Section \[sec:genconc\], we illustrate construction details for $n$ odd case. Some concluding remarks are found in Section \[sec:conc\].
Preliminaries {#sec:pre}
=============
The set of all Boolean functions in $n$ variables, that is the mappings from $\mathbb{Z}_2^n$ to $\mathbb{Z}_2$ is denoted by $\mathcal{B}_n$. Especially, the set of affine functions in $n$ variables we define as $\mathcal{A}_n=\{a\cdot x\oplus b\;|\;a\in\mathbb{Z}_2^n,\; b\in\{0,1\}\}$, where “$\cdot$” stands for the standard inner (dot) product of two vectors. A function $f:\mathbb{Z}^n_2 \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}_2$ is commonly represented using its associated algebraic normal form (ANF) as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ANF}
f(x_1,\ldots,x_n)=\sum_{u\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2}\lambda_u\displaystyle\prod_{i=1}^n{x_i}^{u_i},\end{aligned}$$ where the variables $x_i\in \mathbb{Z}_2$, $(i=1, \ldots, n)$, ${\lambda_u \in \mathbb{Z}_2}$, $u=(u_1, \ldots,u_n)\in \mathbb{Z}_2^n$. The *Walsh-Hadamard transform* (WHT) of $f\in\mathcal{B}_n$ at any point $\omega\in\mathbb{Z}^n_2$ is defined by $$W_{f}(\omega)=\sum_{x\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2}(-1)^{f(x)\oplus \omega\cdot x}.$$
[@CCA]\[def2\] Two Boolean functions $f, g\in \mathcal{B}_{n}$ are said to be a pair of *disjoint spectra functions* if $$W_f(\omega) W_g(\omega)=0, \hspace{0.2cm} \emph {for all} \hspace{0.2cm} \omega\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2.$$
An $n$-variable function $f$ from $\mathbb{Z}^n_2$ to $\mathbb{Z}_q$, where $q\geq 2$ a positive integer, is called a *generalized Boolean function* [@Tok]. We denote the set of such functions by $\mathcal{GB}^n_q$ and for $q=2$ the classical Boolean functions in $n$ variables are obtained. Let $\zeta=e^{2\pi i/q}$ be a complex $q$-primitive root of unity. The [*generalized Walsh-Hadamard transform*]{} (GWHT) of $f\in \mathcal{GB}^q_n$ at any point $\omega\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2$ is the complex valued function $$\mathcal{H}_{f}(\omega)=\sum_{x\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2}\zeta^{f(x)}(-1)^{\omega\cdot x}.$$ A function $f\in \mathcal{GB}^q_n$ is called *generalized bent (gbent)* function if $|\mathcal{H}_f(\omega)|=2^{\frac{n}{2}}$, for all $\omega\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2.$ Clearly, when $q=2$, we obtain the Walsh transform $W_f$ of $f\in\mathcal{B}_n$. A $(1,-1)$-matrix $H$ of order $p$ is called a *Hadamard* matrix if $HH^{T}=pI_p,$ where $H^{T}$ is the transpose of $H$, and $I_p$ is the $p\times p$ identity matrix. A special kind of Hadamard matrix is the *Sylvester-Hadamard* or *Walsh-Hadamard* matrix, denoted by $H_{2^{k}},$ which is constructed using the Kronecker product $H_{2^{k}}=H_2\otimes H_{2^{k-1}},$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\label{HM}
H_1=(1);\hskip 0.4cm H_2=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 1 \\
1 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right);\hskip 0.4cm H_{2^k}=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
H_{2^{k-1}} & H_{2^{k-1}} \\
H_{2^{k-1}} & -H_{2^{k-1}} \\
\end{array}
\right).\end{aligned}$$
We take that $\mathbb{Z}^n_2$ is ordered as $$\{(0,0,\ldots,0),(1,0,\ldots,0),(0,1,\ldots,0),\ldots,(1,1,\ldots,1)\},$$ and the vector $z_i=(i_0,\ldots,i_{n-1}) \in \mathbb{Z}^n_2$ is uniquely identified by $i \in \{0,1,\ldots,2^n-1\}$. For a function $g\in \mathcal{B}_n$, the $(1,-1)$-sequence defined by $((-1)^{g(z_0)},(-1)^{g(z_1)},\ldots,(-1)^{g(z_{2^{n}-1})})$ is called the *sequence* of $g$, where $z_i=(i_0,\ldots,i_{n-1}),$ $i=0,1,\ldots,2^{n}-1,$ denotes the vector in $\mathbb{Z}^n_2$ whose integer representation is $i$, that is, $i=\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}i_j 2^j.$
If $2^{p-1}<q\leq 2^p,$ to any generalized function $f:\mathbb{Z}^n_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}_q,$ we may associate a unique sequence of Boolean functions $a_i\in \mathcal{B}_n$ ($i=0,1,\ldots,p-1$) such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:1}
f(x)=a_0(x)+2a_1(x)+2^2a_2(x)+\ldots+2^{p-1}a_{p-1}(x),\; \forall x\in \mathbb{Z}^n_{2}.\end{aligned}$$ Throughout the article, we will use the well-known fact $$\begin{aligned}
\label{fact}
\sum_{x\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2}(-1)^{w\cdot x}=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
2^n, & \text{if}\;\;\; w=\textbf{0}_{n} \\
0, & \text{otherwise}
\end{array}
\right.,\end{aligned}$$ where $\textbf{0}_{n}$ denotes the all-zero vector in $\mathbb{Z}^n_2.$
Problem description {#sec:descr}
===================
An intensive study of gbent functions has recently resulted in their complete characterization when $q$ is a power of two [@SHWM] (some partial results are also given in [@CT; @TM; @TM2]). Since the analysis of gbent functions provided in [@SHWM] is far more extensive than those given in [@CT; @TM; @TM2], in this section we will mainly refer to the results given there. More precisely, using the approach based on Hadamard matrices, it has been shown that gbent functions from $\mathbb{Z}^n_2$ to $\mathbb{Z}_{2^k}$ in algebraic sense correspond to affine spaces of bent or semi-bent functions with certain properties, when $n$ is even or odd, respectively (cf. [@SHWM Section 4]). The problem of providing generic construction methods of gbent functions is therefore closely related to fulfilling these conditions efficiently. We recall the characterization of gbent functions given in [@SHWM] (which can also be found in [@CT]).
[@SHWM]\[th1\] Let $f(x) = a_0(x)+\cdots+2^{p-2}a_{p-2}(x)+2^{p-1}a_{p-1}(x) \in\mathcal{GB}_n^{2^p}$, and let $h_i(x)=a_{p-1}(x) \+ z_i\cdot (a_0(x),\ldots,a_{p-2}(x))$, $i\in[0,2^{p-1}-1]=\{0,1,\ldots,2^{p-1}-1\}$, where $z_i=(i_0,\ldots,i_{p-2})\in \mathbb{Z}^{p-1}_2$.
- If $n$ is even, then $f$ is gbent if and only if $h_i$ is bent for all $0\le i\le 2^{p-1}-1$, such that for all $u\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2$, $$\label{H1}
\mathbf{\mathcal{W}}(u) = (W_{h_0}(u),W_{h_1}(u),\ldots,W_{h_{2^{p-1}-1}}(u)) = \pm 2^{\frac{n}{2}}H_{2^{p-1}}^{(r)}$$ for some $r$, $0\le r\le 2^{p-1}-1$, depending on $u$.
- If $n$ is odd, then $f$ is gbent if and only if $h_i$ is semi-bent for all $0\le i\le 2^{p-1}-1$, such that for all $u\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2$, $$\label{H2}
\mathbf{\mathcal{W}}(u) = (\pm 2^{\frac{n+1}{2}}H^{(r)}_{2^{p-2}},\textbf{0}_{2^{p-2}})\quad\mbox{or}\quad
\mathbf{\mathcal{W}}(u) = (\textbf{0}_{2^{p-2}},\pm 2^{\frac{n+1}{2}} H^{(r)}_{2^{p-2}})$$ for some $r$, $0\le r\le 2^{p-2}-1$, depending on $u$ ($\textbf{0}_{2^{p-2}}$ is the all-zero vector of length $2^{p-2}$).
In Theorem \[th1\] the condition $(\ref{H1})$ ($n$ is even) means that any vector $\mathcal{W}(u)=(W_{h_0}(u),\ldots,W_{h_{2^{p-1}-1}}(u))$ must be equal to some row (vector) $H^{(r)}_{2^{p-1}}$ of the Hadamard matrix $H_{2^{p-1}}$ multiplied with $\pm 2^{\frac{n}{2}},$ for all $u\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2.$ For odd $n$, the condition $(\ref{H2})$ implies that the first (alternatively the second) half of the vector $\mathcal{W}(u)$ is equal to some row of the Hadamard matrix $H_{2^{p-2}}$ multiplied by $\pm 2^{\frac{n+1}{2}}$, whereas the second (alternatively the first) half equals to all-zero vector $\textbf{0}_{2^{p-2}}$.
The above result implies that the problem of constructing gbent functions is equivalent to finding an affine space of the coordinate functions $\Lambda=a_{p-1}(x)\+ \langle a_0(x),\ldots,a_{p-2}(x)\rangle$ (corresponding to $h_i(x)$) which are all bent (or semi-bent if $n$ is odd) functions and in addition satisfying the relation (\[H1\]) (alternatively (\[H2\]) if $n$ is odd). The analysis given in [@SHWM] indicates that these properties are not easy to satisfy and a trivial approach is to select most of the coordinate functions to be constant or affinely related to each other. In the extreme case, one may, for even $n$, specify $a_0(x)=\ldots =a_{p-2}(x)=0$ so that $\Lambda=a_{p-1}(x)$, thus reducing the dimension of $\Lambda$ to be zero. The difficulty of constructing gbent functions, thus satisfying (\[H1\]) or (\[H2\]), is closely related to certain equivalent conditions given recently in [@SHWM]. According to [@SHWM Corollary 2] the relation (\[H1\]), for even $n$, can be equivalently stated as follows: for any three distinct integers $i,j,k\in \{0,\ldots,2^{p-1}-1\}$, it must hold that $h_i h_j\+ h_i h_k\+ h_j h_k$ is a bent function [^3], where $h_i,h_j,h_k\in \Lambda$ and the functions $h_l$ are defined as in Theorem \[th1\]. Then, the fact that $h_i h_j\+ h_i h_k\+ h_j h_k$ is bent if and only if $h^*_i\+ h^*_j\+h^*_k=(h_i\+h_j\+h_k)^*$ [@Sihem Theorem 4] clearly indicates the hardness of the imposed conditions. Indeed, the dual of a sum of bent functions is in general not equal to the sum of duals of these functions, except in the cases when these functions are affinely related to each other (thus $h_i=h_j \+ g$, where $g$ is an affine function) [@Decom Proposition 3]. A trivial method for satisfying these conditions, as indicated in [@SH2 Example 3], is to select certain functions to be constant which then significantly limits the number of choices and consequently the cardinality of $\mathcal{GB}^n_q$ is quite small. The case $n$ being odd appears to be even harder since apart from finding an affine space $\Lambda$ of semi-bent functions, the condition (\[H2\]) also implicitly involves the disjoint spectra property. More precisely, for any two integers $i\in[0,2^{p-2}-1]$ and $j\in[2^{p-2},2^{p-1}-1]$ it must hold that $W_{h_i}(u)W_{h_j}(u)=0,$ for any $u\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2,$ that is, $h_i=a_{p-1}\oplus z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2})$ and $h_j=a_{p-1}\oplus z_j\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2})$ are disjoint spectra semi-bent functions. Moreover, as observed in [@SH2 Example 3], a trivial selection of coordinate semi-bent functions is not possible in this case since specifying some of these coordinate functions to be constant would violate the equality $W_{h_i}(u)W_{h_j}(u)=0,$ which needs to be satisfied for any two integers $i\in[0,2^{p-2}-1]$ and $j\in[2^{p-2},2^{p-1}-1]$. The above discussion demonstrates the hardness of the underlying problem and also motivates the need for some efficient and generic construction methods of gbent functions, which is the main objective of this article. Since the $n$ odd case appears to be more difficult then the $n$ even case, we focus on the construction of semi-bent functions $h_i=a_{p-1}\oplus z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2}),$ $i\in[0,2^{p-1}-1],$ satisfying the condition (\[H2\]) along with the mentioned disjoint spectra property. Even though our proposed construction method for odd $n$ can be easily adopted to cover the $n$ even case, the latter case is just briefly mentioned because the GMMF class provides an efficient and generic construction method.
Construction of gbent functions using MM class {#sec:semibent}
==============================================
In this section, we describe an efficient method (based on a subtle employment of the MM class) for specifying disjoint spectra semi-bent functions satisfying the gbent conditions given by (\[H2\]).
Disjoint spectra semi-bent functions in the MM class
----------------------------------------------------
Since our method utilizes the well-known MM-class of functions, we start with the definition of this class. For $x\in \mathbb{Z}^{s}_2$ and $y\in \mathbb{Z}^v_2$, let $g:\mathbb{Z}^{s+v}_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}_2$ be defined as $$g(x,y)=\phi (x)\cdot y\oplus d(x),$$ where $\phi:\mathbb{Z}^s_2 \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^v_2$ and $d\in \mathcal{B}_v$ is an arbitrary function. Then, the function $g$ belongs to the MM-class which can also be represented as a concatenation of affine functions ($g$ is an affine function for any fixed $x$). It is well-known that if $\phi:\mathbb{Z}^s_2 \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^v_2$ is injective then the Walsh spectra of $g$ is three-valued and $W_g(u) \in \{0,\pm 2^{v}\}$, for any $u \in \mathbb{Z}^{v+s}_2$. In particular, when $n=2k+1$ is odd then for $v=k$ and $s=k+1$ the function $g$ is a semi-bent function.
For our purpose, we are interested in finding a set of semi-bent functions such that certain linear combinations of these have the property of being disjoint spectra semi-bent functions. Therefore, we introduce a useful classification of these functions in terms of disjoint image sets of the mapping $\phi$. Let $n=2k+1$ be an odd positive integer and $\pi:\mathbb{Z}^k_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^k_2$ be an arbitrary mapping. We can define $\phi : \mathbb{Z}^k_2 \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2$ so that one coordinate is fixed, where without loss of generality (and to avoid complicated notation) we assume that the first coordinate is fixed so that $\phi_j:\mathbb{Z}^k_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2$, for $j=0,1$, is defined as: $$\label{eq:phi}
x \stackrel{\phi_0}\mapsto (0,\pi(x)), \;\;\;x \stackrel{\phi_1}\mapsto (1,\pi(x)),$$ where $\pi:\mathbb{Z}^k_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^k_2$. Then, if $\pi$ is a permutation the function $$\label{eq:gsemi}
g^{(j)}_{\pi}(x,y)=\phi_j(x)\cdot y \oplus d(x),\;\;\; x \in \Z_2^k, \;\;\; y \in \Z_2^{k+1},$$ is a semi-bent function (since $\phi_j$ is injective), for $j=0,1$. Having defined $\phi_j,$ $j\in\{0,1\},$ through the mapping $\pi$ we now introduce two sets that distinguish the semi-bent property with respect to $\pi$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Pi}
P^{(j)}_{n}=\{g^{(j)}_{\pi}:\mathbb{Z}^{k}_2\times\mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}_2\; \mid d(x)=0\;\;\text{and}\;\; \pi \;\;\text{is a permutation on}\;\;\mathbb{Z}^{k}_2\},\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Ri}
R^{(j)}_{n}=\{g^{(j)}_{\pi}:\mathbb{Z}^{k}_2\times\mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}_2\; \;\mid d(x)=0\;\;\text{and}\;\; \pi\;\;\text{is not a permutation on}\;\;\mathbb{Z}^{k}_2\}.\end{aligned}$$ In the sets $P^{(j)}_{n}$ and $R^{(j)}_{n}$ the functions $g^{(j)}_{\pi}$ are defined by (\[eq:gsemi\]), where (for simplicity of notation used later) we assign $d(x)=0$ so that $g^{(j)}_{\pi}=\phi_j(x)\cdot y,$ for $j\in\{0,1\}.$ For more clarity, we illustrate this method in the following example.
\[ex1\] Let us for $n=2k+1=5$ ($k=2$) construct a semi-bent function in $P_5^{(1)}$. We define the mapping $\phi_1(x)=(1,\pi(x))$ for $x\in \mathbb{Z}^2_2$ as $$\phi_1(00)=(\textnormal{\bf{1}},0,1), \; \phi_1(10)=(\textnormal{\bf{1}},0,0),\; \phi_1(01)=(\textnormal{\bf{1}},1,0),\; \phi_1(11)=(\textnormal{\bf{1}},1,1),$$ where $\pi$ is obviously a permutation on $\mathbb{Z}^2_2$. Taking $d(x)=0$ in (\[eq:gsemi\]), the four subfunctions (obtained by fixing $x \in \mathbb{Z}_2^2$) are then: $$g^{(1)}_{\pi}(0,0,y)=y_0\oplus y_2; \; \;g^{(1)}_{\pi}(1,0,y)=y_0; \; \; g^{(1)}_{\pi}(0,1,y)=y_0\oplus y_1; \; \;g^{(1)}_{\pi}(1,1,y)=y_0\oplus y_1 \oplus y_2.$$ Thus, the function $g^{(1)}_{\pi}(x,y)=\phi_1(x)\cdot y$ belongs to the set $P^{(1)}_{5}.$
However, the signs of Walsh coefficients in linear combinations of the coordinate functions are also of great importance due to the fact that, for any $u \in \mathbb{Z}^{n}_2$, in relation (\[H2\]) for either the first half of the vector $\mathcal{W}(u)$ it holds that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{e1}
(W_{h_0}(u),\ldots,W_{h_{2^{p-2}-1}}(u))=\pm 2^{\frac{n+1}{2}}H^{(r)}_{2^{p-2}},\;\;\; r\in[0,2^{p-2}-1],\end{aligned}$$ or alternatively for the second half we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{e2}
(W_{h_{2^{p-2}}}(u),\ldots,W_{h_{2^{p-1}-1}}(u))=\pm 2^{\frac{n+1}{2}}H^{(r)}_{2^{p-2}},\;\;\; r\in[0,2^{p-2}-1].\end{aligned}$$ The following result is proved useful in determining the signs of non-zero Walsh coefficients for semi-bent functions in $P^{(j)}_n.$
\[pp0\] Let $g^{(j)}_{\pi}=\phi_j(x)\cdot y,$ be an arbitrary semi-bent function in $P^{(j)}_n,$ where $j\in\{0,1\}$, $n=2k+1$, and $\phi_j$ is given by (\[eq:phi\]). Then, denoting $\omega_2 \in \Z_2^{k+1}$ by $(t,\omega_2') \in \Z_2 \times \Z_2^k$, for $t\in \{0,1\}$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{DS}
W_{g^{(j)}_{\pi}}(\omega_1,\omega_2)=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
(-1)^{\omega_1\cdot \pi^{-1}(\omega_2')}\;2^{\frac{n+1}{2}}, & t=j \\
0, & t \neq j
\end{array}
\right.,\;\;\; \forall (\omega_1,\omega_2)\in \mathbb{Z}^{k}_2\times \mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2.\end{aligned}$$
For any $(\omega_1,\omega_2)\in \mathbb{Z}^{k}_2\times\mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2$, the coefficient $W_{g^{(j)}_{\pi}}(\omega_1,\omega_2)$ can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{walsh}
W_{g^{(j)}_{\pi}}(\omega_1,\omega_2)&=&\sum_{(x,y)\in \mathbb{Z}^{k}_2\times\mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2}(-1)^{g^{(j)}_{\pi}(x,y)\oplus (x,y)\cdot (\omega_1,\omega_2)}=\sum_{x\in \mathbb{Z}^{k}_2}(-1)^{x\cdot\omega_1}\sum_{y\in \mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2}(-1)^{g^{(j)}_{\pi}(x,y)\oplus y\cdot\omega_2} \\
&=& \sum_{x\in \mathbb{Z}^{k}_2}(-1)^{x\cdot\omega_1}\sum_{y\in \mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2}(-1)^{(j,\pi(x))\cdot y \oplus y\cdot\omega_2}=\sum_{x\in \mathbb{Z}^{k}_2}(-1)^{x\cdot\omega_1}\sum_{y\in \mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2}(-1)^{((j,\pi(x)) \oplus \omega_2)\cdot y}.\end{aligned}$$ The last sum equals zero for any $x \in \Z_2^k$, unless $(j,\pi(x)) \oplus \omega_2=0$ in which case the sum equals $2^{k+1}=2^{\frac{n+1}{2}}$. Using the fact that $\pi$ is a permutation, the condition $(j,\pi(x)) \oplus \omega_2=(j \oplus t,\pi(x) \oplus \omega_2')={\bf 0}$ is satisfied for $t=j$ and a unique $x$ given by $x=\pi^{-1}(\omega_2')$.
\[permutation\] Notice that taking two functions $g^{(j)}_{\pi}, g^{(j)}_{\sigma} \in R^{(j)}_{n}$ so that $\pi,\sigma$ are not permutations, we may still have the property that $\pi \oplus \sigma$ is a permutation in which case $g^{(j)}_{\pi}\oplus g^{(j)}_{\sigma}$ is a semi-bent function.
Apart from Proposition \[pp0\], one can easily construct disjoint spectra semi-bent functions as follows.
\[pp2\] Let $f_{\pi}\in P^{(j)}_{n},$ $j\in\{0,1\}$, and $g_{\sigma}$ belong either to $P^{(1)}_{n}$ or to $R^{(1)}_{n}$. If $\pi\oplus \sigma$ is a permutation on $\mathbb{Z}^k_2$, then $f_{\pi}\oplus g_{\sigma}$ is a semi-bent function and the functions $f_{\pi}$ and $f_{\pi}\oplus g_{\sigma}$ are disjoint spectra semi-bent functions.
If $\pi\oplus \sigma$ is a permutation on $\mathbb{Z}^k_2$, then clearly functions $f_{\pi}$ and $f_{\pi}\oplus g_{\sigma}$ are semi-bent functions, since $f_{\pi}\in P^{(j)}_{n}$ and $f_{\pi}\oplus g_{\sigma}$ is given as $$f_{\sigma}(x,y)\oplus g_{\pi}(x,y)=((i,\sigma(x)) \oplus (j,\pi(x))) \cdot y= ((i \oplus j,\sigma(x) \oplus \pi(x)) \cdot y,$$ for $i,j \in \{0,1\}$. Furthermore, if $f_{\pi}\in P^{(j)}_{n},$ $j\in\{0,1\}$, and $g_{\sigma}\in P^{(1)}_{n}$ or $g_{\sigma}\in R^{(1)}_{n}$, then $f_{\pi}\oplus g_{\sigma}\in P^{(1\oplus j)}_n.$ The disjoint spectra property follows trivially from Proposition \[pp0\].
The primary condition in Theorem \[th1\]-(ii) is that the component functions $a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2},a_{p-1}\in \mathcal{B}_n$ are selected so that $h_i=a_{p-1}\oplus z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2})$ is a semi-bent function, for any $i\in[0,2^{p-1}-1].$ Especially, when $i=0$ this implies that $a_{p-1}$ has to be a semi-bent function, hence it can be chosen from the set $P^{(j)}_{n}$. Recall that the vector $\mathcal{W}(u)$ at point $u\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2$ is given as $$\mathcal{W}(u)=(W_{h_0}(u),\ldots,W_{h_{2^{p-2}-1}}(u),W_{h_{2^{p-2}}}(u),\ldots,W_{h_{2^{p-1}-1}}(u)),$$ and accordingly the WHTs of $h_i$, for $i\in[0,2^{p-1}-1],$ constitute the first half of $\mathcal{W}(u),$ more precisely $(W_{h_0}(u),\ldots,W_{h_{2^{p-2}-1}}(u))$ which does not involve the function $a_{p-2}$. Nevertheless, this function cannot be arbitrary chosen (for instance cannot be constant) since its presence in $h_j$ when $j\in[2^{p-2},2^{p-1}-1]$ directly affects the disjoint spectra property through $W_{h_i}(u)W_{h_j}(u)=0$.
Non-trivial selection of component functions, $n$ odd {#sec:nontrivial}
-----------------------------------------------------
We now discuss a suitable selection of the coordinate functions $a_{p-1},a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2}$ from the sets $P^{(j)}_n$ and/or $R^{(j)}_n$. These sets being closely related to mappings over $\mathbb{Z}^k_2$, to every coordinate function $a_{p-1},a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2}$ we associate the mappings $\sigma,\tau_0,\ldots,\tau_{k-2}: \mathbb{Z}^k_2 \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^k_2$ as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{a}
a_{p-1}(x,y)=(j_{p-1},\sigma(x))\cdot y,\; \; a_l(x,y)=(j_l,\tau_l(x))\cdot y,\;\;\;(x,y)\in \mathbb{Z}^k_2\times \mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2,\end{aligned}$$ where $j_l\in\{0,1\}$ and $l\in[0,p-2]$. Furthermore, let $$\begin{aligned}
\label{pi}
\pi_i=\sigma\oplus z_i\cdot (\tau_0,\ldots,\tau_{p-2}),\end{aligned}$$ denote linear combinations of $\sigma, \tau_0,\ldots,\tau_{p-2}$, for $i\in[0,2^{p-1}-1]$, where $\pi_i :\mathbb{Z}^k_2 \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^k_2$. Henceforth, instead of using the notation $h_i$, we will use a more precise notation $h^{(j)}_{\pi_i}$ which specifies the function $a_{p-1}\oplus z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2})$ with respect to relation (\[a\]), i.e., the functions $h^{(j)}_{\pi_i}=a_{p-1}\oplus z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2})$ are given as $$h^{(j)}_{\pi_i}(x,y)=(j_{p-1}\+z_i\cdot (j_0,\ldots,j_{p-2}),\sigma(x)\+z_i\cdot (\tau_0(x),\ldots,\tau_{p-2}(x)))\cdot y=(j,\pi_i(x))\cdot y,$$ where $(x,y)\in \mathbb{Z}^k_2\times \mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2$ and $j=j_{p-1}\+z_i\cdot (j_0,\ldots,j_{p-2})\in\{0,1\}$ ($z_i\in \mathbb{Z}^{p-1}_2$).
In order to fulfill the primary condition of Theorem \[th1\]-(ii), i.e., to have an affine space of semi-bent functions $\Lambda=a_{p-1}\+z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2}),$ we will assume that $h^{(j)}_{\pi_i}$ belongs to $P^{(j)}_n$ for all $i\in[0,2^{p-1}-1]$ ($j\in\{0,1\}$).
\[diffj\] For arbitrary (fixed) integers $j_0,\ldots,j_{p-1}\in \{0,1\}$, notice that for two different vectors $z_i$ and $z_{i'}$ from $\mathbb{Z}^{p-1}_2$, we may have that $a_{p-1}\oplus z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2})\in P^{(j)}_n$ and $a_{p-1}\oplus z_{i'}\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2})\in P^{(j')}_n$ with $j\neq j',$ since vectors $z_i$ and $z_{i'}$ are directly employed in $j=j_{p-1}\+ z_i\cdot (j_0,\ldots,j_{p-2})$ and $j'=j_{p-1}\+ z_{i'}\cdot (j_0,\ldots,j_{p-2}).$
Recall that in relation (\[H2\]) for any input vector $u\in \mathbb{Z}^n_2$ we have that half of the vector $\mathcal{W}(u)$ is a non-zero vector, and the remaining half is equal to the zero vector $\textbf{0}_{2^{p-2}}.$ Therefore, to satisfy further the relation (\[H2\]), Proposition \[pp0\] implies that the integer $j$ in function $h^{(j)}_{\pi_i}$ must be fixed for all $i\in[0,2^{p-2}-1]$ or for all $i\in[2^{p-2},2^{p-1}-1]$ (unlike the case mentioned in Remark \[diffj\]), depending on vector $u\in\mathbb{Z}^n_2.$ More precisely, let us assume that $j=j_{p-1}\+z_i\cdot (j_0,\ldots,j_{p-2})\in\{0,1\}$ is fixed (the same) in functions $h^{(j)}_{\pi_i}\in P^{(j)}_n$ for all $i\in[0,2^{p-2}-1]$ (with some $j_0,\ldots,j_{p-1}\in \{0,1\}$). For an arbitrary vector $u=(\omega_1,\omega_2)\in \mathbb{Z}^{k}_2\times \mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2$, where $\omega_2=(t,\omega_2')\in\mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2,$ $t\in\{0,1\}$, Proposition \[pp0\] implies that the first half of the vector $\mathcal{W}(u)$ (in relation (\[H2\])) is given as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{piinverz}
(W_{h^{(j)}_{\pi_0}}(u),\ldots,W_{h^{(j)}_{\pi_{2^{p-2}-1}}}(u))=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
\pm 2^{\frac{n+1}{2}}((-1)^{\omega_1\cdot \pi^{-1}_{0}(\omega_2')},\ldots,(-1)^{\omega_1\cdot \pi^{-1}_{2^{p-2}-1}(\omega_2')}), & t=j\\
\textbf{0}_{2^{p-2}} & t\neq j
\end{array}
\right..\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, fixing $j'=j_{p-1}\+z_i\cdot (j_0,\ldots,j_{p-2})\in\{0,1\}$ for all the remaining indices $i\in[2^{p-2},2^{p-1}-1],$ the second half of the vector $\mathcal{W}(u)$ is given as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{piinverz2}
(W_{h^{(j')}_{\pi_{2^{p-2}}}}(u),\ldots,W_{h^{(j')}_{\pi_{2^{p-1}-1}}}(u))=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
\pm 2^{\frac{n+1}{2}}((-1)^{\omega_1\cdot \pi^{-1}_{2^{p-2}}(\omega_2')},\ldots,(-1)^{\omega_1\cdot \pi^{-1}_{2^{p-1}-1}(\omega_2')}), & t=j'\\
\textbf{0}_{2^{p-2}} & t\neq j'
\end{array}
\right..\end{aligned}$$ The disjoint spectra property in relation (\[H2\]) is described through equality $W_{h^{(j)}_{\pi_i}}(u)W_{h^{(j')}_{\pi_l}}(u)=0$, for any two integers $i\in[0,2^{p-2}-1]$ and $l\in [2^{p-2},2^{p-1}-1].$ Obviously, this property is satisfied in relations (\[piinverz\]) and (\[piinverz2\]) if and only if it holds that $j'=j\+ 1,$ due to Proposition \[pp2\]. However, notice that $j'$ depends on $j$ and the function $a_{p-2}$, due to the fact that $a_{p-2}$ is present in all functions $h^{(j')}_{\pi_l}$, for $l\in[2^{p-2},2^{p-1}-1]$. In particular, writing the index $l$ as $l=i+2^{p-2}$ it holds that $$h^{(j')}_{\pi_l}=h^{(j')}_{\pi_{i+2^{p-2}}}=h^{(j)}_{\pi_i}\+ a_{p-2},\;\;\forall i\in[0,2^{p-2}-1],$$ due to the lexicographic ordering of $\mathbb{Z}^{p-1}_2.$ Hence, the disjoint spectra property is fulfilled if and only if $h^{(j)}_{\pi_i}\in P^{(j)}_n$ for all $i\in[0,2^{p-2}-1]$, when $j$ is fixed, and in addition it is necessary to select $a_{p-2}\in P^{(j\+1)}_n$ or $a_{p-2}\in R^{(j\+1)}_n$ so that $h^{(j')}_{\pi_{i+2^{p-2}}}=h^{(j)}_{\pi_i}\+ a_{p-2}$ belongs to $P^{(j\+1)}_n$ ($j'=j\+1$), for all $i\in[0,2^{p-2}-1].$
Assuming that the disjoint spectra property is satisfied (through a proper selections of $\sigma,\tau_0,\ldots,\tau_{k-2}$), the condition (\[H2\]) will be fully satisfied if permutations $\pi_0,\ldots,\pi_{2^{p-1}-1}$ (defined by (\[pi\])) satisfy the relations (\[e1\]) and (\[e2\]). In other words, we need to provide a method of construction of these permutations for which in relations (\[piinverz\]) and (\[piinverz2\]) it holds that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{HC}
((-1)^{\omega_1\cdot \pi^{-1}_{0+z\cdot 2^{p-2}}(\omega_2')},\ldots,(-1)^{\omega_1\cdot \pi^{-1}_{2^{p-2}-1+z\cdot 2^{p-2}}(\omega_2')})=\pm H^{(r_z)}_{2^{p-2}},\end{aligned}$$ for both $z=0,1$ and some $0\leq r_z\leq 2^{p-2}-1.$ Firstly, with the following result we constrain the choice of permutations $\pi_i$ satisfying the relations (\[piinverz\]) and (\[piinverz2\]).
\[Hrow\] Let $\delta_i:\mathbb{Z}^k_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}_2,$ for $i=0,\ldots,2^m-1.$ If for a fixed $x\in \mathbb{Z}^k_2$ the equality $$((-1)^{\delta_0(x)},\ldots,(-1)^{\delta_{2^m-1}(x)})=\pm H^{(r)}_{2^m},$$ holds for some $r\in\{0,\ldots,2^m-1\},$ then there exist $a,b\in \mathbb{Z}^m_2$ so that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{hadamard}
(\delta_0(x),\ldots,\delta_{2^m-1}(x))=(a\cdot (z_0\oplus b),\ldots,a\cdot (z_{2^m-1}\oplus b)).\end{aligned}$$
The proof follows from the fact that any row of $H_{2^m}$ corresponds to a linear function $l_a\in \mathcal{B}_m$, say $l_a(z)=a\cdot z,$ and the minus sign “$-$” is valid for any $b$ such that $a \cdot b=1$.
The result below gives a general method for constructing permutations $\pi_i$ defined by (\[pi\]) for which (\[HC\]) holds for both $z=0,1$.
\[const\] Let the mappings $\sigma,\tau_0,\ldots,\tau_{p-2}:\mathbb{Z}^k_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^k_2$ used in (\[a\]) and (\[pi\]) be defined as $$\sigma(x)=xS\oplus d,\;\;\tau_c(x)=v^{(c)},\;\;c\in[0,p-2],\;\;\forall x\in \mathbb{Z}^k_2,$$ where $S\in GL(\mathbb{Z}^k_2)$ is an arbitrary matrix in the group of all invertible $k \times k$ binary matrices and $d,v^{(c)}\in\mathbb{Z}^k_2$ are arbitrary (fixed) vectors. Then, the relation (\[HC\]) holds for both $z=0,1$.
Let $d,v^{(c)}\in\mathbb{Z}^k_2$ be arbitrary (fixed) vectors and $S\in GL(\mathbb{Z}^k_2)$ be any invertible matrix. Let also $u=(\omega_1,\omega_2)\in \mathbb{Z}^k_2\times \mathbb{Z}^{k+1}_2$ be an arbitrary vector, where $\omega_2=(t,\omega'_2)$ ($t\in\{0,1\}$). W.l.o.g. we only consider the case $z=0$ in (\[HC\]) (which corresponds to (\[e1\])), since the same arguments apply to the case $z=1$ (which corresponds to (\[e2\])). Equivalently, $z=0$ means that we are considering the case when $t=j$ (the first equation in (\[piinverz\])).
Being linear permutations on $\mathbb{Z}^k_2,$ the inverse of $\pi_i(x)=xS\oplus d\+ z_i\cdot (v^{(0)},v^{(1)},\ldots,v^{(p-2)})$ is given as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{piinv}
\pi^{-1}_i(x)=(x\+d\oplus z_i\cdot (v^{(0)},v^{(1)},\ldots,v^{(p-2)}))S^{-1},\;\;\;\forall i\in[0,2^{p-1}-1],\;\;\forall x\in \mathbb{Z}^k_2.\end{aligned}$$ Hence, using (\[piinv\]) and denoting by $a=(\omega_1\cdot v^{(0)}S^{-1},\ldots,\omega_1\cdot v^{(p-2)}S^{-1})\in \mathbb{Z}^k_2$ and $b=\omega_1\cdot (\omega'_2\+ d)S^{-1}\in \{0,1\}$, it is not difficult to see that for any $i\in[0,2^{p-1}-1]$ the term $\omega_1\cdot \pi^{-1}_i(\omega'_2)$, which occurs in (\[piinverz\]) and (\[piinverz2\]), for any $\omega'_2\in \mathbb{Z}^k_2$ can be written as $$\omega_1\cdot \pi^{-1}_i(\omega'_2)=a\cdot z_i\+ b,$$ Consequently, Lemma \[Hrow\] implies that $$((-1)^{\omega_1\cdot \pi^{-1}_0(\omega'_2)},\ldots,(-1)^{\omega_1\cdot \pi^{-1}_{2^{p-2}-1}(\omega'_2)})=(-1)^{b}((-1)^{a\cdot z_0},\ldots,(-1)^{a\cdot z_{2^{p-2}-1}})=\pm H^{(r)}_{2^{p-2}},$$ for some $0\leq r\leq 2^{p-2}-1,$ which means that relation (\[HC\]) holds for $z=0$. Using the same arguments, the relation (\[HC\]) also holds for $z=1$, which completes the proof.
\[tau\_i\] One may notice that in Proposition \[const\], if $p-1>2^k$ then some mappings $\tau_i=v^{(i)}\in \mathbb{Z}^k_2$ will be the same (assuming $p$ is fixed in (\[eq:1\])). However, if $p-1\leq 2^k$ then all mappings $\tau_i$ can be defined to be pairwise different. Moreover, for $p-1\leq k$ the affine space $\Lambda=a_{p-1}\+ \langle a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2}\rangle$ may have the full dimension $p-1$ if the vectors $v^{(0)},\ldots,v^{(p-2)}\in \mathbb{Z}^{k}_2$ constitute a basis of $\mathbb{Z}^k_2$.
The results/discussions from this subsection allow us to formalize the generic construction method for gbent functions, which is given with the following steps.\
\
**Construction 1:** Let $f:\mathbb{Z}^{n}_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}_{2^p}$ be defined by (\[eq:1\]), where $n=2k+1$ ($k\in \mathbb{N}$) and $p\geq 2,$ and let the coordinate functions $a_0,\ldots,a_{p-1}$ be defined by (\[a\]). The function $f$ is gbent if its coordinate functions are selected as follows:
(1) Select the corresponding permutations $\sigma,\tau_0,\ldots,\tau_{p-2}$ as defined in Proposition \[const\].
(2) With respect to the previous step, set $a_{p-1}\in P^{(j)}_n$ for any $j\in\{0,1\}$, $a_{0},\ldots,a_{p-3}\in R^{(0)}_n$ and $a_{p-2}\in R^{(1)}_n.$
Note that the first construction step above ensures that $\Lambda=a_{p-1}\+ \langle a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2}\rangle$ is an affine space of semi-bent functions, for which (\[e1\]) and (\[e2\]) are satisfied. The second step ensures the disjoint spectra property in relation (\[H2\]), thus all functions $a_{p-1}\+ z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2})\in P^{(j)}_n$ for all $i\in[0,2^{p-2}-1]$ and $a_{p-1}\+ z_l\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2})\in P^{(j\+ 1)}_n$ for all $l\in[2^{p-2},2^{p-1}-1].$
The construction when $n$ is even
---------------------------------
In general, our method of constructing gbent functions for $n$ odd, summarized in **Construction 1**, heavily relies on Propositions \[pp2\] and \[const\]. Nevertheless, assuming that the coordinate functions $a_0,\ldots,a_{p-1}$ (and thus the function $f$ given by (\[eq:1\])) are defined on $\mathbb{Z}^k_2\times\mathbb{Z}^k_2$ implies that the $n$ even case can be treated quite similarly. Indeed, considering Proposition \[const\] as a method of selecting the coordinate functions $a_0,\ldots,a_{p-1}$, then all functions $h_i=a_{p-1}\+ z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_{p-2})$ (now defined on $\mathbb{Z}^k_2\times\mathbb{Z}^k_2$) will belong to the MM-class of bent Boolean functions, since $a_{p-1}(x,y)=\sigma(x)\cdot y$ is a bent function, and $a_{c}(x,y)=\tau_c(x)\cdot y=v^{(c)}\cdot y$, where $v^{(c)}\in \mathbb{Z}^k_2$ and $c\in[0,p-2]$, are linear functions. The resulting gbent function $f$, given as $$f(x,y)=v^{(0)}\cdot y+2v^{(1)}\cdot y+\ldots+2^{p-2}v^{(p-2)}\cdot y+2^{p-1}\sigma(x)\cdot y=g(y)+2^{p-1}\sigma(x)\cdot y,$$ will belong to the GMMF-class of gbent functions. Note that in [@SH2 Prposition 1] it has been shown that all functions within the GMMF-class satisfy the condition (\[H1\]).
Illustrating the construction details - an example {#sec:genconc}
==================================================
In what follows, we illustrate the use of construction steps in **Construction 1** for providing an example of a gbent function, for odd $n$. Hence, let us consider a generalized function $f:\mathbb{Z}^5_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}_{32}$ ($n=5=2k+1$, $q=32$) given as $$f(x)=a_0(x)+2a_1(x)+4a_2(x)+8a_3(x)+16a_4(x).$$ Recall that the function $f$ is gbent (for $n$ odd) if and only if the set $\Lambda=a_4\+\langle a_0,\ldots,a_3\rangle$ is an affine space of semi-bent functions satisfying (\[H2\]) (see Theorem \[th1\]). Since $k=2$, let $\sigma,\tau_0,\ldots, \tau_3:\mathbb{Z}^2_2\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^2_2$ correspond to the component functions $a_4,a_0,\ldots,a_3\in \mathcal{B}_5$, respectively. Using Proposition \[const\], we define these component functions via $\sigma,\tau_i$ so that $f$ is a gbent function, as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma(x)&=&x\+ (0,1),\;\;\tau_0(x)=v^{(0)}=(1,0),\;\;\tau_1(x)=v^{(1)}=(0,1),\\
\tau_2(x)&=&v^{(2)}=(0,0),\;\;\tau_3(x)=v^{(3)}=(1,1),\end{aligned}$$ for every $x\in \mathbb{Z}^2_2$. Note that the permutation $\sigma(x)=xS \oplus d$ uses the identity matrix $S$. Thus we complete the first step of **Construction 1**. Consequently, the coordinate functions are defined as $$a_4(x,y)=(1,\sigma(x))\cdot y,\;\;a_i(x,y)=(0,\tau_i(x))\cdot y,\;\; i=0,1,2,$$ $$a_3(x,y)=(1,\tau_3(x))\cdot y,\;\;\;(x,y)\in \mathbb{Z}^2_2\times \mathbb{Z}^3_2.$$ Clearly, we have that $a_4\oplus z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_3)\in P^{(1)}_5$ for $i\in[0,7]$ and $a_4\oplus z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_3)\in P^{(0)}_5$ for $i\in[8,15],$ $z_i\in \mathbb{Z}^4_2$, thus satisfying the disjoint spectra property (the choice of $a_i$ is in accordance to the second step in **Construction 1**). Denoting $W_{h_{\pi_i}}(u)=W_{a_{4}\oplus z_i\cdot (a_0,\ldots,a_3)}(u),$ for $u\in \mathbb{Z}^5_2,$ the vectors $\mathcal{W}(u)=(W_{h_{\pi_0}}(u),\ldots,W_{h_{\pi_{15}}}(u))$ are given in Table \[tab1\].
0.25cm
$u\in \mathbb{Z}^5_2$ $\mathcal{W}(u)=(W_{h_{\pi_0}}(u),\ldots,W_{h_{\pi_{15}}}(u))$ $\mathcal{W}(u)=\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\pm 8 H^{(r)}_{2^3}\}\;\;\text{or}\;\; W^T=\{\pm 8 H^{(r)}_{2^3},\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
----------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$u_0$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;8H^{(0)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_1$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;-8H^{(1)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_2$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;8H^{(2)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_3$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;-8H^{(3)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_4$ $\{8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{8H^{(0)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_5$ $\{8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{8H^{(1)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_6$ $\{-8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{-8H^{(2)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_7$ $\{-8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{-8H^{(3)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_8$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;8H^{(0)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_9$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;8H^{(1)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{10}$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;8H^{(2)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{11}$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;8H^{(3)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{12}$ $\{8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{8H^{(0)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{13}$ $\{-8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{-8H^{(1)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{14}$ $ \{-8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{-8H^{(2)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{15}$ $\{8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{8H^{(3)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{16}$ $ \{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;8H^{(0)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{17}$ $ \{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;-8H^{(1)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{18}$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;-8H^{(2)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{19}$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;8H^{(3)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{20}$ $\{8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{8H^{(0)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{21}$ $\{8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{8H^{(1)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{22}$ $\{8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{8H^{(2)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{23}$ $\{8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{8H^{(3)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{24}$ $ \{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;8H^{(0)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{25}$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;8H^{(1)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{26}$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;-8H^{(2)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{27}$ $\{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8\}$ $\{\textbf{0}_{2^3},\;-8H^{(3)}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{28}$ $\{8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{8H^{(0)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{29}$ $\{-8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, -8, 8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{-8H^{(1)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{30}$ $\{8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{8H^{(2)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
$u_{31}$ $\{-8, 8, 8, -8, -8, 8, 8, -8, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0\}$ $\{-8H^{(3)}_{2^3},\;\textbf{0}_{2^3}\}$
: Vectors $\mathcal{W}(u)$ for all $u\in \mathbb{Z}^5_2.$
\[tab1\]
Consequently, the output values of the gbent function $f$ are given by $$\{0, 0, 0, 0, 24, 24, 24, 24, 9, 25, 9, 25, 17, 1, 17, 1, 26, 26, 10, 10, 2, 2, 18, 18, 19, 3, 3, 19, 11, 27, 27, 11\}.$$
Conclusions {#sec:conc}
===========
In this article we have proposed a generic method for constructing gbent functions $f:\Z_2^n \rightarrow \Z_q$. The method presented here covers the case $n$ even completely since a gbent function can be specified for any even $q>2,$ and any odd $n$ for $q$ being a power of $2$. The problem of finding other methods for constructing gbent functions, different to those presented in this article, is left as an interesting research challenge.\
\
[**Acknowledgement.**]{} Samir Hodži' c is supported in part by the Slovenian Research Agency (research program P3-0384 and Young Researchers Grant). Enes Pasalic is partly supported by the Slovenian Research Agency (research program P3-0384 and research project J1-6720).
[10]{}
Decomposing bent functions. , vol. 49, no. 8, pp. 2004–2019, 2003.
Complementary series. , vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 82–87, 1961.
Generalized bent functions - Some general construction methods and related necessary and sufficient conditions. , vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 469–483, 2015.
Full characterization of generalized bent functions as (semi)-bent spaces, their dual, and the Gray image. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.05713
Generalized bent functions - sufficient conditions and related constructions. Available at: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1601.08084v1.pdf.
Generalized bent functions and their properties. vol. 40, pp. 90–107, 1985.
Decomposing generalized bent and hyperbent functions. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.02830
Generalized bent functions and their Gray images. Available at: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1511.01438v1.pdf
Partial Spread and vectorial generalized bent functions. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1511.01705
A secondary construction of bent functions, octal gbent functions and their duals. , 2016.
Several infinite classes of bent functions and their duals. , vol. 60, no. 7, pp. 4397–4407, 2014.
On Bent Functions. , vol 20, no. 3, pp. 300–305, 1976.
Cross-correlation analysis of cryptographically useful Boolean functions and S-boxes. , vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 39–57, 2002.
Complementary sets, generalized [R]{}eed-[M]{}uller Codes, and power control for [OFDM]{}. , vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 808–814, 2007.
Quaternary Constant-Amplitude Codes for Multicode CDMA. , vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 1824 – 1832, 2009. Available at http://arxiv.org/pdf/cs/0611162.pdf.
Secondary constructions on generalized bent functions. , pp. 17–17, 2012.
On cross-correlation spectrum of generalized bent functions in generalized Maiorana-McFarland class. , vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 139–145, 2013.
Connections between quaternary and binary bent functions. , 2009. Available at https://eprint.iacr.org/2009/544.pdf
Bent functions from a finite Abelian group into a finite Abelian group. , vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 111–126, 2002.
Octal bent generalized Boolean Functions. , pp. 89–89, 2011.
Bent and generalized bent Boolean functions. , vol. 69, pp. 77–94, 2013.
Complete characterization of generalized bent and $2^k$-bent Boolean functions. Available at: https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/335
Generalizations of bent functions - a survey. , vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 110–129, 2011.
Constructing Generalized Bent Functions from Trace Forms of Galois Rings. , pp. 467-477, 2014.
[^1]: University of Primorska, FAMNIT, Koper, Slovenia, e-mail: [email protected]
[^2]: University of Primorska, FAMNIT & IAM, Koper, Slovenia, e-mail: [email protected]
[^3]: For shortness of notation we usually drop the variables, thus writing $h_i$ instead of $h_i(x)$
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Using the Dirac (Clifford) algebra $\gamma^{\mu}$ as initial stage of our discussion, we summarize and extend previous work with respect to the isomorphic 15dimensional Lie algebra su$*$(4) as complex embedding of sl(2,$\mathbb{H}$), the relation to the compact group SU(4) as well as associated subgroups and group chains. The main subject, however, is to relate these technical procedures to the geometrical (and physical) background which we see in projective and especially in line geometry of $\mathbb{R}^{3}$. This line geometrical description, however, leads to applications and identifications of line complexes and the discussion of technicalities versus identifications of classical line geometrical concepts, Dirac’s ’square root of $p^{2}$’, the discussion of dynamics and the association of physical concepts like electromagnetism and relativity. We outline a generalizable framework and concept, and we close with a short summary and outlook.'
author:
-
date: 'January 15, 2015'
title: 'On a Microscopic Representation of Space-Time III'
---
[^1]
Introduction {#ch:intro}
============
Context so far
--------------
In the first two parts ([@dahm:MRST1], [@dahm:MRST2]) of this series of papers we’ve presented a mostly group-based approach to the Dirac algebra where we’ve started from nothing but very basic assumptions of spin and isospin symmetries in order to describe hadronic observables in the low-energy regime of the particle spectrum. The straightforward part of our approach resulted in a compact SU(4) ($A_{3}$) group[^2] covering independent SU(2)$\times$SU(2) spin$\times$isospin or isospin$\times$spin transformations, dependent on the respective operator representation (hereafter for short ’rep’) identifications.
As the main step, based on several observations, we’ve introduced [*only one physical assumption*]{}: We want to understand this compact SU(4) symmetry, although mathematically represented as an [*exact*]{} symmetry, physically as a ’nonrelativistic’ (or ’low energy’) [*approximative*]{} limit of an appropriate relativistic description, so we use compact SU(4) as a (physical) approximation or ’effective’ description only in order to use its well-established rep theory of compact Lie groups. With respect to the spectrum, we have to group ’particles’ and ’resonances’, so consequently we break the (noncompact and compact) $A_{3}$ symmetry further by spontaneous symmetry breaking with the Wigner-Weyl realized compact (maximal) subgroup USp(4) and other mechanisms later on. So in [@dahm:MRST2] we have continued this discussion (see also [@dahm:MRST1] and references) by presenting some more aspects with emphasis on spontaneously (and later explicitly) broken symmetries and some evidence to relate usual/standard quantum field theory to a background in projective and especially line geometry. Please note once more, that this discussion is [*not*]{} restricted to the old (and sometimes simple) spin/isospin hadron interpretation of the reps (see e.g. [@bjoedrell]) but holds for [*all*]{} theoretical descriptions based on the Dirac (Clifford) algebra due to its isomorphism[^3] with SU$*$(4).
In this context, we’ve begun branching into a parallel thread (see [@dahm:QTS7] and [@dahm:GOL]) which led deeper into projective geometry and transfer principles, and as such to various equivalent representations of geometries (see e.g. [@blaschkeIII:1928]). In terms of (Lie) group theory we are thus dealing with the real groups SO($n$,$m$) with $n+m=6$ and – by complexifying some of the coordinates in use – with various (complex or quaternionic) covering groups and their subgroups. As such we find on various levels correspondences between group transformations and reps on one side as well as geometries and objects on the other side.
What we want to present at this stage of work are some more remarks on physical aspects of a quaternionic projective theory (QPT, see [@dahm:MRST1], [@dahm:MRST2] and references therein) and we try to relate them to geometrical concepts. Although at a first glance this seems like rewriting some ’well-known’ representations only, in the long term we benefit from a well-defined and unique description in terms of line (and Complex[^4]) coordinates and their more general justification right from projective geometry by using lines as basic space elements of $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ or $P^{3}$. Last not least lines in the context of tangential and especially tetrahedral Complexe automatically (and naturally) introduce harmonic ratios[^5] of points and lines (and as such very naturally metric properties from the viewpoint of Caley-Klein metrics), not to mention polar and conjugation relations and a discussion of second order/class properties. Although here we do not have room to go too much into details of our ongoing work, we want to mention at least some physical relations and contexts of what is our work in progress with respect to electrodynamics and relativity.
As such, in the subsections of this first section we summarize briefly some basic concepts and notations which we need for this presentation. Afterwards, in section \[ch:physics\] we switch to physical aspects and identifications while in the last section we mention further aspects of the general framework, and we close with a brief summary and outlook of ongoing work.
Summary and Line Coordinates
----------------------------
In order to discuss physics, it is helpful to remember some basic notations[^6]. Using four real homogeneous [*point*]{} coordinates $x_{\alpha}$, $0\leq\alpha\leq 3$, to denote points in projective 3-space $P^{3}$ and by choosing two points $x$ and $y$ incident with the line, we can define the six independent (homogeneous) coordinates[^7] $\mathcal{X}_{\alpha\beta}$ of the line by $$\label{eq:plueckervars}
\mathcal{X}_{\alpha\beta}:=x_{\alpha}y_{\beta}-x_{\beta}y_{\alpha}
\quad\mathrm{or}\quad
\mathcal{X}_{\alpha\beta}:=
\left|
\begin{array}{cc}
x_{\alpha} & y_{\alpha}\\
x_{\beta} & y_{\beta}
\end{array}
\right|$$ where $0\leq\alpha,\beta\leq 3$. The coordinates are antisymmetric, i.e. $\mathcal{X}_{\beta\alpha}=-\mathcal{X}_{\alpha\beta}$, invariant under common (additive) displacement of both points and they fulfil the ’condition’ $\mathcal{X}_{01}\mathcal{X}_{23}+\mathcal{X}_{02}\mathcal{X}_{31}+\mathcal{X}_{03}\mathcal{X}_{12}=0$. Moreover, they transform linearly and homogeneously with respect to projective (space) transformations $a_{\alpha\beta}$, i.e. $\mathcal{X}'_{\alpha\beta}=\sum a_{\alpha\mu}a_{\beta\nu}\mathcal{X}_{\mu\nu}$, so that for line coordinates we may use a ’6-dim’ ’linear’ rep $p_{\alpha}$, $0\leq\alpha\leq 6$, with special constraints as well. The second definition in eq. (\[eq:plueckervars\]) and in general the determinant (re-)formulation on the right – at that time being more of a fashion – is easier to relate to symplectic transformations. By transfer principles, the line and Complex geometry of $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ can be mapped onto points in $\mathbb{R}^{5}$ and we can perform analogous (and sometimes easier) point considerations in $\mathbb{R}^{5}$ where the Pl[ü]{}cker-Klein quadric $M_{4}^{2}$ plays an important rôle (for more details see [@dahm:GOL]) in that lines in $\mathbb{R}^3$ are points of $\mathbb{R}^{5}$ located on the Pl[ü]{}cker-Klein quadric $M_{4}^{2}$. Investigating images of objects and transformations of $\mathbb{R}^3$ also in $\mathbb{R}^{5}$, special interest can be given to automorphisms of $M_{4}^{2}$ (see also [@dahm:GOL] and upcoming work). The transition to other geometries (like Laguerre, Möbius, spheres, etc.) and related geometrical objects may be performed as well [@blaschkeIII:1928]. Another closely related and deeply entangled aspect of line coordinates is Pl[ü]{}cker’s notion of a Complex (and M[ö]{}bius’ null systems in relation to planar lines of a linear Complex) as well as the related general geometry of Complexe, congruences and Dynamen.
In order to relate to (standard) differential geometry, it is easier to start right from Pl[ü]{}cker’s (Euclidean) coordinate rep ([@plueckerNG:1868], p. 26, Nr. 26, eq. (1)) $$\label{eq:PLCartCoordinates}
(x-x'), (y-y'), (z-z'), (yz'-zy'), (zx'-xz'), (xy'-yx')$$ of line (ray) coordinates[^8]. If we now (in the sense of continuity and analyticity, or even associating a ’transformation’ to ’connect’ the two points $x$ and $x'$ involved by using a line segment) require $x'_{i}=x_{i}+\mathrm{d}x_{i}$, i.e. $\mathrm{d}x_{i}=x'_{i}-x_{i}$, antisymmetry of the line coordinates (or the equivalent description by a determinant) provides expressions in terms of coordinates and differential forms which directly lead to line elements $\overline{x'x}$, Pfaffian equations and the [*calculus*]{}[^9] of differential forms. If in addition we introduce polar relations for the line segment by shifting the point $x$ to be incident with a (second order) surface (i.e. we replace $\mathrm{d}x_{i}$ by brute force with the tangential ’operators’ $\partial_{i}$ at the original – and then only remaining – reference point $x$!), we obtain (partial) differential representations of (compact) Lie generators (see e.g. [@gilmore:1974] or [@helgason:1978] for their differential rep) according to $x_{i}\partial_{j}-x_{j}\partial_{i}$. Up to coordinate complexifications (which we’ll discuss later briefly), the important fact, however, is the underlying geometry being nothing but line geometry which we can use to describe global/finite geometry, not only infinitesimal issues. Nevertheless, we maintain and we can perform full control over the two points $x'_{i}$ and $x_{i}$ from above [*individually*]{}, especially also with respect to more advanced projective concepts like polarity, conjugation, etc.
For us, it is noteworthy that the coordinate differences $\mathrm{d}x_{i}$ (see also [@dahm:GOL]) on the one hand show well-defined (line) transformation behaviour and a well-established geometrical interpretation as projections, on the other hand typical ’coordinate’ transformations $\delta x_{i} = x'_{i}-x_{i} = \mathrm{d}x_{i}$ can be mapped to known Lie algebraic transformation concepts like $\delta_{Y}\sim[Y,\cdot]$ or to transformations of differential forms using a ’transferred’, adopted and adapted geometrical calculus applied to those differentials. As such, also advanced algebraical and analytical concepts of such calculuses can be re-transferred back to (projective) geometry[^10] and especially to line transformations and line geometry. So we think line (and Complex) geometry is much better suited to describe physics in terms of global/finite mathematical concepts than the various concepts ’derived’ from infinitesimal/differential geometry only.
’The Metric’
------------
We have mentioned already [@dahm:GOL] the mixture in notion nowadays when working with vectors as well as the sometimes misleading (and most often ’vector-derived’) notion and use of a metric. In most cases a ’vector’, although formally a coordinate [*difference*]{} (or ’the upper half’ of the line rep in (\[eq:PLCartCoordinates\])), is used by setting one of the two points to coincide with the origin $0$ of a ’coordinate system’. This shrinks the coordinate difference to single point coordinates only which afterwards often spoils the concept. The notion ’metric’ – whether in the usual Euclidean sense or in the framework of (semi-)Riemannian spaces – usually describes a symmetric (and most often diagonal) structure which is used to ’contract’ two objects (usually vectorial or tensorial reps) which themselves transform linearly. In most cases this notation is nowadays used in conjunction with linear reps (on spaces/modules), and it is a fashion to discuss low-dimensional rep dimensions in the beginning and generalize soon to arbitrary (and sometimes infinite) rep dimensions. Typical examples are space-time using $x_{a}$, $a\geq 4$, and the related dynamics in various formulations, usually based on related momenta $p_{a}$, $a\geq 4$, when applying Hamiltonian dynamics or ’quantum’ approaches, and even ’time’-associated Lagrangian concepts and (partial) differential equations. It is often overseen when starting from coordinates only and counting the coordinates naively, that already switching the coordinate [*interpretation*]{} changes the ’dimension’ of such objects or of the underlying rep space. Simple examples are e.g. given by the 5-dim coset space $p$ (or $\exp p$) when switching from ’space-time’ (point) interpretation as usual in nonlinear sigma models (or SSB models) to (infinitesimal) line elements (Lie), lines, Complexe or even more sophisticated geometrical models[^11]. It is often also overlooked or ignored that conic sections and cubic or higher order curves are projectively generated or have intrinsic relations to other objects in projective geometry, e.g. planar curves to linear Complexe and Complex lines in the plane [@plueckerNG:1868].
This eclipses the fact that in order to perform physics we identify observable objects with special mathematical reps, and we map their (transformation) behaviour to reps having finite dimension only[^12]. The same holds for well-established projective concepts like polarity, conjugation and duality whose interpretations when associated with physical objects are often messed up by a generalization to arbitrary dimensions although one is – at least sometimes – still able to define a similar formal calculus and perform some calculations ’for arbitrary dimension $n$’. It should be mentioned here that it is often the background of projective (or incidence) geometry within its application and usefulness for logic (see e.g. [@enriques:1903] with respect to ’abstract geometry’, there especially appendix II) which still provides the helpful axiomatic background.
Here, we restrict our discussion to $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ where we have 3- or 4-dimensional (linear) point reps, dependent on whether we use inhomogeneous or homogeneous/projective coordinates. With this coordinate interpretation already the line reps may have ’dimension’ 4, 5 or 6 [@plueckerNG:1868], and we know from the very beginning of projective geometry, from duality, from the projective construction of objects (e.g. conic sections) or more general from synthetic geometry that we can switch from using orders to using classes and thus interrelating dimensions. So using $P^{3}$ as well as simple and well-known geometric objects, we are far from using only 3- or 4-dim reps to describe space-time objects and behaviour, and we find much more symmetry structure than simple transformation groups like SO(3) or the Poincaré group only [@dahm:GOL].
On this footing, interpreting the momentum $\vec{p}$ as (polar part of a) line rep and $\vec{x}^{2}=r^{2}=(ct)^{2}$ as a sphere with (infinite) radius per given common time ’t’ for all (projective!) space-dimensions $x_{i}$ and $x_{0}$, it is natural to (re-)introduce line coordinates as a unifying description which automatically comprises ’non-local’ effects. The only price we have apparently to pay is a loss of the direct (physical) coordinate interpretation of $x_{\alpha}$ as well as a loss of naive 1-dim parameter differentiation within the general geometric approach to describe point trajectories and/or orbits. This 1-dim and mostly differential geometric aspect, however, can be recovered by transitioning from (general) lines to line elements while restricting the geometry and coordinatizing the respective geometrical setup by appropriately chosen (inhomogeneous) coordinates. Moreover, this is just what Lie did when establishing ’Lie algebras’ and the differential rep of generators[^13]. So we feel free to work with line geometry (or in some places even with the fully-fledged framework of projective geometry) and we want to see how we can describe physics.
In this context, it is natural to understand the ’norms’ $\vec{p}^{2}$ and $p^{2}=p_{\mu}p^{\mu}$ in terms of a [*square*]{} of (a part of) a line rep and as such – remembering self-duality of lines in $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ – when linearizing such squares we have to end up with a (linear) 5- or 6-dim line rep instead of a 3-dim ’vector’ only[^14]. So in the standard treatment using the (3-dim) ’vector’ approach only, parts of the momentum rep (and as such moments and parts of the energy) are often missing and are not considered in calculations. The same holds for bilinear representations of a ’metric’ in order to linearize quadratic objects like in Clifford algebras, on semi-Riemannian or even ’two-point’ homogeneous spaces which introduce ’the metric’ only with respect to the point part or the point difference of the points of the respective manifold(s), i.e. ’the upper half of the line rep’ given in eq. (\[eq:PLCartCoordinates\]). A naive generalization in terms of arbitrary (point) dimensions spoils the line as well as the physical background, i.e. although formally we can rewrite (in Euclidean interpretation or using the four-vector calculus of special relativity) $p^{2}=m^2$ in terms of a linear rep $p$ and a symmetric formalism $\{\gamma_{i},\gamma_{j}\}=\delta_{ij}$ or $\{\gamma_{\mu},\gamma_{\nu}\}=g_{\mu\nu}$ (see e.g. [@bjoedrell] or [@lurie:1968], ch. 1-3), the simple (formal) abstraction of a metric is algebraically nice to handle but too simple in order to highlight the complete geometrical (polar) background of such an ’anticommutator’. Of course one finds an appropriate algebraic and analytic calculus and a generalization to arbitrary $n$ with lot of nice group theory attached but – as history proves – the fact that 6-dim line reps can be composed of two 3-dim ’vectors’ (’polar’ and ’axial’) and as such exhibit naturally a SO(3)$\times$SO(3) transformation structure seems forgotten nowadays. Moreover, ’the lower half of the line rep’ (\[eq:PLCartCoordinates\]) being apparently of $2^\mathrm{nd}$ order in the point reps has a [*physical*]{} identification by itself in terms of moments!
Even worse, allowing for individual coordinate complexifications (as long as we preserve the real ’norm’ constraint $v_{i}^{2}=\mathrm{const}$) for both of the two 3-dim ’vectors’ $v_{i}$ of the line rep (\[eq:PLCartCoordinates\]), we can as well discuss SU(2)$\times$SU(2) or twofold quaternionic transformations U(1,$\mathbb{H}$)$\times$U(1,$\mathbb{H}$) acting on these constituents but now we know the reason for the different polar and axial behaviour of the constituents being an artefact of the Euclidean point rep used in (\[eq:PLCartCoordinates\]) to represent the line by two Euclidean 3-dim ’vectors’ $v_{i}$. So the discussions of chiral symmetry and chirality fade out in the light of this background as being governed and superseded by lines and screws when complexified appropriately, i.e. being transferred to elliptic geometry. This outlines our intention and motivation to revive line and projective geometry instead of following the usual ’linearization’ of $p_{\mu}p^{\mu}=m^{2}$ by[^15] $p_{\mu}\gamma^{\mu}$ discussing ’quantum’ ’anything’ and attaching algebra and analysis naively in form of one or the other calculus attached to points or naive (point) manifold concepts. For us – argueing in Pl[ü]{}cker’s sense[^16] – the difference is the necessary switch towards using lines instead of only points (even if accompanied by planes) as the underlying base elements of space where people perform all kinds of analysis in ’space-time’, even in terms of very sophisticated concepts of differential geometry (see e.g. [@percacci:1986]) which – in our opinion – hide more physics behind formal mathematics than they are able to show or describe.
Summary ’Spheres’ and Complexe
------------------------------
The most important aspect in our current context[^17] is the transition from typical ’light cone’ reps $\vec{x}^{2}-x_{0}^{2}=\vec{x}^{2}-(ct)^{2}=0$ to lines and the transformation of this constraint. Note already here that this framework can be applied also to point reps not on the light cone (or in ’momentum space’ for ’massive particles’ ’on the mass shell’) by generalizing lines to ’Complexe’, ’Gewinde’ and null systems, ’Dynamen’, ’Somen’ or screws (see e.g. [@study:1903] and references therein). Whereas most usual treatments assume ’affine’ point coordinates $x_\alpha$ in Minkowski’s four-vector notation, we have already pointed out (see [@dahm:MRST1] and [@dahm:QTS7]) that for same/equal ’time’ $t$ in all four coordinates $x_\alpha$, the coordinate [*value*]{} $ct$ related to the coordinate $x_{0}$ has to be treated as infinity ($\infty$) which can be done in (four) homogeneous/projective coordinates and the framework of projective geometry only[^18], [*not*]{} in affine or Euclidean coordinates (see e.g. [@klein:1928]). The appropriate rep of space (point) coordinates, $x_{i}=v_{i}t$, to achieve an equally parametrized footing thus automatically introduces parameters $\beta_{i}=v_{i}/c$ by using a (projective) Cayley-Klein metric when switching to inhomogeneous/affine (point) coordinates[^19]. The parameters $\beta_{i}$ which appear in physical transformations thus turn out as a reminiscence of line geometry while using inhomogeneous coordinates $x'_{i}\sim x_{i}/x_{0}$. Although being – in conjunction with points as basic space elements – THE backdoor of Newtonian ideas and concepts within four-vector calculus, a parameter ’time’ allows people to express dynamics by performing differentiation while sticking to the point picture and its related dynamical concepts whereas part of the discussion can be mapped to velocities and their relations as is typically done in special relativity. But special relativity (see section \[ch:sgr\]) can also be interpreted in terms of line and Complex geometry easily, and we use the individual/local times ’$t$’ and ’$t'$’ of two coordinate systems only to select the respective subsets of lines out of all lines comprized within the geometrical setup. So the task of (local) coordinates in a sense is to relate and group certain lines in a large overall ’line set’ of a common geometrical setup. In other words, we can use ’times’ to group and sort lines or aggregations of lines (and related objects like points, sections or higher order/class curves) within the dynamical behaviour of the setup. Especially ’features’ like the invariance of normal planes (i.e. $x=x'$, $y=y'$ while translating along the $z$-axis) known from Lorentz transformations thus have straightforward geometrical background from Complex geometry and null systems.
Using a parameter $\epsilon^{2}=\pm 1,0$ to describe the respective non-Euclidean and Euclidean geometries, the transition of ’light cone’ reps $\epsilon^{2}\vec{x}^{2}+x_{0}^{2}=0$ in terms of (4-dim) point coordinates $x$ (or $\epsilon^{2}u_{0}^{2}+\vec{u}^{2}=0$ in terms of (4-dim) plane coordinates $u$) into a line rep in terms of six related homogeneous line coordinates $\mathcal{X}$ is known to be performed by $$\label{eq:traegheit}
\mathcal{X}_{01}^{2}+\mathcal{X}_{02}^{2}+\mathcal{X}_{03}^{2}+
\epsilon^{2}\left(\mathcal{X}_{12}^{2}+\mathcal{X}_{23}^{2}+\mathcal{X}_{31}^{2}\right)=0$$ or in the more symmetric form $$\frac{1}{\epsilon}\left(\mathcal{X}_{01}^{2}+\mathcal{X}_{02}^{2}+\mathcal{X}_{03}^{2}\right)+
\epsilon\left(\mathcal{X}_{12}^{2}+\mathcal{X}_{23}^{2}+\mathcal{X}_{31}^{2}\right)=0$$ which simplifies Euclidean geometrical reps and discussions. Whereas the general theory necessary for physics mounds at least into the framework of quadratic line Complexe[^20], here we want to mention only the fact that the lines of a Complex of $n$th degree if they are incident with one point (resp. they meet in one point) of $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ constitute a conic surface of $n$th order ([@plueckerNG:1868], §2, p.18), and the lines envelop a planar curve of $n$th class. So quadratic Complexe constitute a cone of second order in space meeting in one (or each) point as required by [@ehlers:1972] which we have associated with ’the photon’ (see also [@dahm:MRST2]), and we can study associated planar conic sections of second class which we can relate to (quadratic) invariants.
The limit towards Euclidean geometry has to be performed carefully. However, in this limit we find from above the constraint $\mathcal{X}_{01}^{2}+\mathcal{X}_{02}^{2}+\mathcal{X}_{03}^{2}=0$ involving the $x_{0}$ coordinate(s) of the point rep(s). Besides switching between and Klein coordinates, we can complexify further (individual) coordinates so that in general we have to discuss related transformation groups SO($n$,$m$), $0\leq n,m\leq 6$ with $n+m=6$ or the related complex transformation groups SU($n$,$m$), $0\leq n,m\leq 4$ with $n+m=4$, or even quaternionic transformations like Sl(2,$\mathbb{H}$) (or SU$*$(4), respectively). Dependent on the inertial index[^21] (or signature) of the quadratic form (\[eq:traegheit\]), we can of course define linear reps and a ’metric’ for a ’norm’ being invariant under the respective SO($n$,$m$) symmetry group, $n+m=6$; SO(3,3) and SO(6) for and Klein coordinates are well-known, subsets und ’sub’-symmetries are discussed in [@blaschkeIII:1928]. The general form $a_{\alpha\beta}\mathcal{X}_{\alpha\beta}=0$, $a_{\alpha\beta}\in\mathbb{R}$, defines a (linear) Complex $\mathcal{A}\sim a_{\alpha\beta}$ or a 6-dim real ’vector’ respectively, and we can distinguish singular and regular Complexe and apply the framework of Complex geometry and symplectic symmetries.
Last not least, in this context we want to mention one more aspect of our ongoing work in that has associated Complexe (resp. lines and axes) and especially congruences of two or more Complexe to ellipsoids (see [@plueckerNG:1868], ’Erste Abtheilung’, §3, p. 99ff, ibid. §3, eqns. (46)ff or [@plueckerNG:1868], ’Zweite Abtheilung’, preface and main text) or various more general types of surfaces. There is indeed much older work [@pluecker:1838] where defined such specialized ellipsoids in the context of Fresnel’s wave theory, confocal surfaces and ’potential theory’. For us, this provides some geometrical background of the nowadays usual and common mystification of the ’wave-particle dualism’. (and other people at that time) knew well that while working with Complexe and (some of) their congruences, one finds line reps with naturally associated ellipsoids [@pluecker:1838], and (strictly) spherical problems like Laplace or Schr[ö]{}dinger equations are special cases only. The separation denoted nowadays as a ’dualism’ is caused by describing ’point’ particles by only half (i.e. the polar part) of the originally necessary line rep (\[eq:PLCartCoordinates\]) while sometimes playing strange games with Euclidean/affine dynamics. So instead of mystifying the relation and interconnection of the two descriptions, one should think in terms of lines and transfer principles to resolve such ’questions’.
Due to a line being a priori free in $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ (or $P^{3}$) to connect a point with an observer (i.e. always by its very and axiomatic definition to connect at least two points), we can a priori handle (space-related) ’extension’, different coordinate choices by investigating and/or transforming the fundamental tetrahedra and ’non-localities’ especially of ’the photon’[^22]. Tangential spaces are special cases of polar setups in conjunction with conics or surfaces which themselves can be treated in general and complete by projective construction mechanisms and the discussion of ’class’ instead of ’order’. We can use the important apparatus of tangential and tetrahedral Complexe (see e.g. [@vonStaudt:1856], [@reye:1866]) and moreover we have a ’natural’ definition of conjugation right from geometry. Last not least, invariance of a line under transformations automatically provides (affine) translation invariance when expressed in point coordinates so with respect to the Poincaré group and contractions we definitely have a well-defined geometrical framework which can be treated by lines or ’Gewinde’ and geometrical limites thereof [@zindler:1902], [@study:1903].
As an example, after having accepted line coordinates and line reps, one can easily apply incidence relations of lines in (6-dim) line coordinates[^23] $p_{\alpha}$, $1\leq\alpha\leq 6$, and work e.g. with Klein coordinates[^24] in order to relate equations like $\sum p_{\nu}p_{\nu+3}=0$ or $\sum x_{i}^{2}=0$ to the framework of ruled surfaces (see [@zindler:1902], Vol. 2, I §4). This facilitates a direct generalization to Complex geometry.
Physical Identifications {#ch:physics}
========================
As this is ongoing work and room is short here, we’ll mention briefly some aspects of identifying physics with such geometrical concepts.
Electrodynamics
---------------
We’ve argued already (see [@dahm:MRST2]) within the framework of spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSBs) that we want to use a Goldstone identification of the (massless) photon in SU$*$(4)/USp(4) in order to relate equivalence classes of velocities and the ’masslessness’ of photons in common QFT frameworks. The physical equivalence is the connection of velocity changes (in the coset) with photon emission (’Bremsstrahlung’), and as a consequence we relate redefinitions of USp(4) Wigner-Weyl reps and especially the ground state to photon emission resp. (gauged) energy changes. Although this is reasonable from the physical viewpoint in that we can relate (hard) observations to such models, the mathematical and physical formulations using differential geometry at the one or other point look hazy. So people introduce ’velocity’ 4-vectors $k^{\mu}$ ’on the light cone’ and ’polarizations’ $\epsilon^{\mu}$ with additional constraints in an ’affine’ interpretation which lead to the one or other obscure explanation or philosophy. In this context one can mention conditions like the ’masslessness’ (of ’particles’) $k^{\mu}k_{\mu}=0$, the distinction of ’on-mass-shell’ and ’off-mass-shell’ behaviour (or ’virtual particles’) in interaction processes and ’gauge conditions’ like $k^{\mu}\epsilon_{\mu}=0$ or even $\vec{k}\cdot\vec{\epsilon}=0$, i.e. ’orthogonality’, in conjunction with using normals of normals like with $\vec{k}$, $\vec{E}$ and $\vec{B}$.
For us, the problem to determine a (’vectorial’ and ’affine’) ’velocity’ $k^{\mu}$ as a physically meaningful, linear dynamical object ends in front of the fact that light by definition spreads out ’on the light cone’, i.e. by construction on a second order (null) cone with the maximum (and for ’massive particles’ unreachable, i.e. [*infinite*]{}) ’velocity’ in order to transport information. As such we can honestly derive this spreading from a construct with $\vec{k}$, $\vec{\epsilon}$ and the Poynting vector (i.e. from two 3-dim objects $\vec{E}$ and $\vec{B}$ respectively $\vec{H}$ related to the physical force $\vec{F}$) only while keeping in mind that in order to treat this type of infinity ’on the light cone’ we have to use homogeneous coordinates! So we can use Klein’s remark (see [@klein:diss]) that (for homogeneous coordinates!) the condition $\sum p_{\nu}p_{\nu+3}=0$ is sufficient to define a line (rep). The general way to solve this problem is to use line (or Complex) coordinates.
However, for us that’s not really sufficient because we are not only working with simple lines or linear Complexe but also with quadratic ones (or at least with quadratic constraints using linear Complexe). Moreover, we know that electromagnetic [*forces*]{} related to $\vec{E}$ and $\vec{B}$ are to be described via the Lorentz force, and that in Hamiltonian (and also in Langrangian) formulations of dynamics we can start using $\vec{E}$ and $\vec{B}$ in terms of the antisymmetric field strength $F_{\mu\nu}$ although nowadays people prefer to use the description via the potential(s) $A^{\mu}$ and partial derivatives thereof, mostly as a trade-off to a Lorentz covariant description and differential reps. Whereas the rep of the ’potential’ $A$, as dependent of $k$ and $\epsilon$, can be naively related to a line rep comprizing $\vec{k}$ and $\vec{\epsilon}$, at the same time we have to take care of the two normals $\vec{E}$ and $\vec{B}$ and their dynamics, too.
Now a major point of discussion for us at the moment is a possible identification of the tensor $F_{\mu\nu}$ with a line rep (or a linear Complex). The ’tensor’ character of this object (with [*two*]{} indices) is caused formally only by Minkowski’s four-vector formalism. We can ad hoc associate the space components of $F_{ij}$ (the (Euclidean) vector components of $\vec{B}$ (or $\vec{H}$)) with the axial part of the 6-dim line rep, and we can associate the components $F_{0i}$, i.e. the components $\vec{E}_{i}$ (see e.g. [@jackson:1983], ch. 11), with its polar 3-dim part. Then the orthogonality relation $\vec{E}\cdot\vec{B}=0$ may simply be interpreted as the constraint to fulfil the line condition although the association of a polar 3-dim vector rep with null-components in the face of eq. (\[eq:traegheit\]) and its Euclidean transition seems to be not the best choice of identification. And yes, we have to talk about six [*homogeneous*]{} line coordinates which makes it difficult to interpret $\vec{E}$ and $\vec{B}$ directly in terms of physically observable or measurable objects but we have to keep in mind that also the charges (as well as the masses) are only defined [*in relation*]{} to another charge (or mass) as is known from Coulomb’s (and Newton’s) law[^25]. The discussion of Lab measurement brings us back to discuss the introduction of (local) time ’$t$’ like in $\vec{F}=\tfrac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}\vec{p}$ or $\vec{F}=m\vec{a}$ (indirectly).
Whereas we can use products like $F^{\mu\nu}F_{\mu\nu}$ to represent squares[^26], our investigations especially in the context of Complexe and Complex congruences have started only. So as ongoing ’program’, we have to map physical observations (i.e. objects and their dynamics!) to Complex geometry[^27].
With respect to electrodynamics, the introduction of the ’dual’ ’tensor’ $\mathcal{F}^{\alpha\beta}$ via $\tfrac{1}{2}\epsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}F_{\gamma\delta}$ enhances the scenario and introduces further aspects into the Complex representation[^28]. From the viewpoint of line or Complex geometry, this ’new’ object reflects advanced (algebraic) operations of a 6-dim line calculus in that we have to treat line incidences, i.e. ’products’ of line reps or parts thereof which resemble inner ’vector’ products or ’norms’. So the ’skew tensor’ approach corresponds directly to (6-dim) line geometry, and products of (skew-symmetric) ’tensors’ are able to represent (6-dim) multiplications in line coordinates, i.e. lines and incidence relations of lines. We’ll have to transfer and extend this to products of Complexe and/or an appropriate Complex geometry and its consequences. So at a first glance, line geometry works pretty well for electromagnetism in order to cover the four-vector formalism. What is under construction (or ’open’) at the time of writing, is the association between algebraical and physical objects and a deeper understanding of line congruences[^29] as well as the physical meaning/identification of $\vec{E}$ and $\vec{B}$ versus $\vec{k}$ and $\vec{\epsilon}$. There are indeed more sophisticated than simple line concepts. If we associate the 3-dim ’field’ reps to (linear) Complex parameters $a_{\alpha\beta}$ which (due to Cayley) can be interpreted as line coordinates fulfilling the condition, too, if $a_{\alpha\beta}p_{\alpha\beta}=0$ and $p_{\alpha\beta}$ are line coordinates of incident lines[^30], for (six) linear Complexe, a constraint formally similar to the constraint can be formulated as well to construct a quadratic Complex (see [@klein:diss], Nr. 26).
A further extension of the Complex identification is based on Complex geometry if we go back to the second order surface given in eq. (\[eq:traegheit\]) while choosing $\epsilon^{2}=-1$ and if we invoke polarity. Then the two Complexe $C_{1}=\left(\mathcal{X}_{01}, \mathcal{X}_{02},
\mathcal{X}_{03}, \mathcal{X}_{23}, \mathcal{X}_{31},
\mathcal{X}_{12}\right)$ and $C_{2}=\left(-\mathcal{X}_{23},
-\mathcal{X}_{31}, -\mathcal{X}_{12}, \mathcal{X}_{01},
\mathcal{X}_{02}, \mathcal{X}_{03}\right)$ are polar with respect to the surface, and we can start applying further reasoning from Complex geometry and compare to physical observations.
Special and General Relativity {#ch:sgr}
------------------------------
In order to extend what we have said above to ’relativistic’ physics, the simplest approach is to include observers right from beginning into the mathematical description. This, too, is automatically provided using line geometry. If we imagine for a moment the simplest scenario of an observer at rest watching a (non-accelerated) moving point (in some distance), then – as time elapses – we have at a first glance a point (the origin of the observer at rest) and the line of the (moving) point, i.e. a collection of points at different (observer) times, of course, or with different ’coordinates’ parametrized by time. This scenario can, of course, be interchanged by choosing an arbitrary point on the line of the moving point to be at rest, or by assuming both points moving (thus introducing a third point at rest not incident with each of the lines). If the two lines of the moving points don’t meet we obtain a geometrical (global) setup of two skew lines which we can use to construct a global geometrical picture with times and space coordinates being a subsidiary concept only while mapping the two lines. This illustrates explicitly that if we use the ’physical’ information of the relative velocity of the two points to parametrize this scenario, the notion of time – whether from the observer’s or the moving point’s side – is needed to parametrize the individual coordinate notations and definitions only. But moreover we find a (planar) set of lines connecting the observer’s point in space with points on the line representing the trajectory of the linearly moving point. Now, if in addition we allow for the observer to move[^31], the trajectory of the observer is a line, too.
If we now play the same game as before by connecting points on the two lines, velocities connect the individual ’line times’ to causality in the respective (local) coordinate systems and their related description(s) of physics. On the one hand, as such we can introduce and use individual (point) coordinate systems or apply the typical reasoning of special relativity in terms of point (or four-vector) coordinates. On the other hand, the picture of projective and especially line geometry offers some old and well-established frameworks to describe such a setup much better. We have mentioned already the idea to understand original skew lines from above as axes of (singular) Complexe and the lines intersecting both original lines as a linear congruence. So we can also map the two coordinate identifications to the respective coordinate systems. But besides being still free to use individual coordinate systems related to each line (e.g. in associating the 6 line coordinates to the sides/lines of a (fundamental) tetrahedron individually), we can use in addition the two lines of the trajectories (moving observer and moving point) as opposite sides of a (third) tetrahedron and introduce ’overall’ coordinates (with an additional unit point and (if necessary) absolute elements or by associating the framework of tetrahedral Complexe) in order to establish a common description/coordinatization of both systems. So we’ll have to work out the algebraic relations of the respective six line coordinates of the two individual line identifications used to describe the two individual coordinate identifications versus using a common (fundamental) tetrahedron related to a parametrization by relative velocity and an abstract overall time which will result in identifying point sets of line incidences and harmonic ratios and relating them while respecting (some or all) properties of projective transformations. This reminds correlating one-particle rep descriptions in quantum field theory (QFT) in order to find common and comparable physical behaviour like in Smilga’s nice work (see [@dahm:QTS7] and Smilga’s reference). Moreover, we can ’collect’ all the lines connecting the two trajectories (at different (individual) times and as such space points, of course) and describe them via line incidences[^32] of both lines, or more general in a first step by singular Complexe[^33], ray systems (see footnote before) and by appropriate congruences. This can be done not only in Euclidean geometry but the framework of line geometry (because imbedded in projective geometry) is available also for all types of non-Euclidean geometries which is necessary due to various coordinate complexifications relating the covering groups of SO($m$,$n$), $1\leq m+n\leq 6$. The physical picture of such a description becomes transparent and clear if in mind we associate a ’light’ source to both the moving point and the observer, and if we think in terms of rays being emitted by the point and by the observer, respectively. Nonlinear movements can then be described by e.g. higher order (or higher class) curves and surfaces, and projective geometry provides construction mechanisms, dimension formulas and a lot of further useful tools. Thus, the ’physics’ or dynamics is directly related to the geometry of the respective curves and/or trajectories. As mentioned above, the breakdown to (squares of) line elements $\mathrm{d}s^{2}$ is possible in various ways and respecting/representing various geometries and associated symmetry groups.
Outlook {#ch:outlook}
=======
Having in mind how we have associated (physical) light with ’light cones’ above, we have additional possibilities on a linear representation level to generalize lines (i.e. singular Complexe) to general linear (and higher degree) Complexe and, moreover, we can investigate their relation to ’massive’ reps ’on’ and ’off’ the mass shell. So what is open today besides a thorough and complete analytical framework is an a priori explanation of the Hamiltonian structure (and as such the energy) of being quadratic in line coordinates[^34]. As such, the generalization (and also our ongoing program if we think on how to approach general relativity) is twofold: We can extend the use and application of Complexe and Complex geometry, and we can investigate their various constraints with respective mappings to physics.
Because differential geometry (by using forms linearly) a priori reflects only (polar) parts of line reps and affine behaviour, we are convinced to find additional energy-momentum contributions to $T^{\mu\nu}$ (in four-vector notation) by simply taking elements of line or Complex reps (e.g. moments) into account or even more sophisticated mechanisms of line or Complex geometry and especially higher order Complex geometry. Moreover, we see differential forms, Pfaffian equations (one-forms) and Lie theory as subsidiary concepts of line geometry only in their respective (inhomogeneous) ’time’ dependent limits. Using line geometry, the inclusion of observers is a priori guaranteed by the formalism, i.e. we do not have ’observer-free’ physics as nowadays usual, and there is a priori no more need to speculate on ’non-localities’ because lines [*are*]{} non-local and their reps respect this property by ’the lower half’ of (\[eq:PLCartCoordinates\]). Last not least, with respect to dimensions of transformation groups and concerning reality conditions so far, we want to mention the possibility that in choosing a ’correct’ set of coordinate reps we may associate the 15-dim resp. 16-dim transformation groups with projective transformations mapping (linear) Complexe to Complexe and the 10-dim subgroup mapping null lines[^35] to null lines. However, that’s an open issue right now and has to be proven formally.
At the time of writing, we see various still ’competing’ possibilities[^36] to work with 5-dim $p$ (or $\exp p$) and identify the space physically (better: dynamically!), and we feel the need also to discuss the double 15-dim (automorphic) collineations of $M_{4}^{2}$ with respect to physics and real/complex descriptions much deeper in those contexts. This is especially interesting when starting from Hamiltonian formalism while using/identifying line coordinates and assuming the quadratic structure as originating from $M_{4}^{2}$ as the fundamental form (see [@klein:1872a]). We have given above already one application of polarity, however, we have to investigate the physical consequences in much more detail. We have mentioned as well tangential complexes and congruences which we have to arrange versus the current concept of affine connections (see e.g. [@klein:1872b]).
Another open problem is the identification of Complex-related numbers and/or constants versus reps and rep dimensions in the Lie group/algebra related approach, i.e. there are 15 constants mapping the constraint linearly onto itself, there exist polar systems depending on 20 constants (and series thereof as well) which map (arbitrary) lines to linear Complexe and vice versa, etc. For the low-energy regime of the spectrum, we have associated already an SU(4) interpretation in terms of observable SU(2) spin and isospin degrees of freedom as an approximate compact description, however, being the most compact real form we have to map this to line geometry and dynamics using transfer principles and appropriate coordinate complexifications.
We are convinced [@dahm:QTS7] that various low-dimensional Lie groups and algebras, especially su(2)$\oplus$u(1), occuring in various applications of QFT are artefacts of certain aspects of line (and projective) geometry of $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ which emerge by taking and generalizing certain analytic and algebraic aspects of line (and Complex) reps only in terms of individual ’calculuses’ and ’rules’. As such we see Pl[ü]{}cker’s $M_{4}^{2}$ and the twofold 15-dim automorphisms in a central rôle, governed however by the rules of projective geometry. In this context, there are lots of further deep geometrical connections to other topics like Kummer’s surface, Darboux’s 5-dim reps of confocal cyclids[^37], Pasch’s sphere Complexe and their geometry or to rep dimensions occuring both in line/Complex geometry and and physical/QFT rep identifications which we have to work on.
[9]{} Bjorken J D, Drell S D 1965 *Relativistic Quantum Mechanics.* (New York: McGraw-Hill) Blaschke W 1928 *Vorlesungen [ü]{}ber Differentialgeometrie III.* (Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaft XXIX) (Berlin: Springer) Wiegand R 2008 *Ein streitbarer Gelehrter im 19. Jahrhundert.* http://www3.uni-bonn.de/Pressemitteilungen/ein-streitbarer-gelehrter-im-19-jahrhundert (Pressemitteilungen, 21.5.2008) (University Bonn: Pressestelle) Clebsch A 1871 *Zum Ged[ä]{}chtniss an Julius Pl[ü]{}cker.* Abhandlungen der K[ö]{}niglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu G[ö]{}ttingen [**16**]{} Clebsch A 1869 *Ueber die Pl[ü]{}ckerschen Complexe.* Math. Ann. [**2**]{} 1 Dahm R 2012 *On A Microscopic Representation of Space-Time.* Yad. Fis. [**75**]{} 1244; Phys. Atom. Nuclei [**75**]{} 1173; *Proceedings of SymPhys XIV, Tsaghkadzor* Dahm R 2011 *On A Microscopic Representation of Space-Time II.* *Proceedings of ICCA 9, Weimar, 2011; to be published* Dahm R 2011 *Projective Geometry, Conformal and Lie Symmetries and Their Breakdown to a su(2)$\oplus$u(1) Lie Algebra.* *Proceedings of QTS 7, Prague, 2011; to be published* Dahm R 2013 *Some Remarks on Rank-3 Lie Algebras in Physics.* *Invited Lecture/Proceedings of GOL X, Tallinn, 2013; to be published* Ehlers J, Pirani F and Schild A 1972 *The Geometry of Free Fall and Light Propagation.* In: *Studies in Relativity.* ed L O’Raifeartaigh (Oxford: Clarendon Press) pp 63–84 Enriques F 1903 *Vorlesungen [ü]{}ber Projektive Geometrie.* (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner) Gilmore R 1974 *Lie Groups, Lie Algebras and Some of Their Applications* (New York: John Wiley & Sons) Helgason S 1978 *Differential Geometry, Lie Groups, and Symmetric Spaces* (San Diego: Academic Press) Jackson J D 1983 *Klassische Elektrodynamik.* 2nd edition (1975, German translation) (Berlin: de Gruyter) K[ä]{}hler E 1960 *Innerer und [Ä]{}usserer Differentialkalk[ü]{}l.* Abhandlungen der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag) Klein F 1868 *Ueber die Transformation der allgemeinen Gleichung des zweiten Grades zwischen Linien-Koordinaten auf eine kanonische Form.* Inauguraldissertation (Bonn: Georgi) Klein F 1872 *Ueber Liniengeometrie und metrische Geometrie.* Math. Ann. [**5**]{} 257 Klein F 1872 *Ueber gewisse in der Liniengeometrie auftretende Differentialgleichungen.* Math. Ann. [**5**]{} 278 Klein F 1928 *Vorlesungen [ü]{}ber nicht-euklidische Geometrie.* (Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaft XXVI) (Berlin: Springer) Lurié D 1968 *Particles and Fields.* (New York, London, Sydney: Interscience Publishers) Percacci R 1986 *Geometry of Nonlinear Field Theories.* (Singapore: World Scientific) Pl[ü]{}cker J 1838 *Discussion de la forme générale des ondes lumineuses.* Journal f[ü]{}r die reine und angewandte Mathematik [**19**]{} 1; ibd. [**19**]{} 91 Pl[ü]{}cker J 1868/1869 *Neue Geometrie des Raumes.* ed A Clebsch and F Klein (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner) Reye Th 1866/1868 *Die Geometrie der Lage.* (Hannover: R[ü]{}mpler) Reye Th 1879 *Synthetische Geometrie der Kugeln und linearen Kugelsysteme.* (Leipzig: Teubner) Study E 1903 *Geometrie der Dynamen.* (Leipzig: Teubner) von Staudt G K C 1856 *Beitr[ä]{}ge zur Geometrie der Lage.* (N[ü]{}rnberg: Bauer und Raspe) Zindler K 1902/1906. *Liniengeometrie mit Anwendungen.* (Sammlung Schubert XXXIV/LI) (Leipzig: G. J. G[ö]{}schensche Verlagshandlung)
[^1]: We thank J. G. Vargas for several interesting discussions during the ICCA-10 conference and especially for pointing out various aspects of K[ä]{}hler’s work as well as K[ä]{}hler’s achievements in differential calculus.
[^2]: In this energy regime, counting of (grouped) resonances works well with respect to dimensions of SU(4) group reps (see references in and ), especially in the PhD thesis Dahm.
[^3]: We have addressed the problem already that there are various compact low-dimensional symmetry groups which occur automatically in this context. So there is a priori [*no need*]{} to introduce manually (and additionally) further degrees of freedom based on such compact groups by hand like in gauge or Yang-Mills approaches. It is more important to gain and to exercise control over the respective (physical) field interpretations introduced already into the Dirac algebra.
[^4]: As before, we have used Pl[ü]{}cker’s old German notation ’Complex’ with capital ’C’ to denote line complexes, and as such we have also used the old German plural form ’Complexe’. So mix-ups with complex numbers are (hopefully) avoided, moreover it would be nice to honour this great scientist (although late) by using and establishing at least this small part of his notation.
[^5]: German: Doppelverh[ä]{}ltnisse
[^6]: A longer derivation of various line coordinates right from the underlying coordinate projections, i.e. starting in terms of inhomogeneous coordinates, can be found in . Take care, however, of the orientation of the underlying coordinate system.
[^7]: To denote line coordinates we use Study’s notation with capital fracture letters.
[^8]: usually used $(x,y,z)$ to denote the [*coordinates*]{} of one single point $p$ and attached sub- and superscripts to distinguish the points instead of using subscripts/indices attached to points $x$ and $y$ like $x_{i}$, $y_{i}$, etc. in order to distinguish and enumerate the respective point coordinates.
[^9]: Note the important fact that we need a calculus to reflect the antisymmetry of the two points $x'_{i}$and $x_{i}$ involved, and that in the context of $\mathrm{d}x_{i}$ we are talking of a calculus only!
[^10]: We thank J. G. Vargas for pointing us to Kähler’s work (see e.g. [@kaehler:1960]) which we find really interesting to study in more detail also in the context of line geometry.
[^11]: See e.g. , appendix II on ’abstract geometry’ related to dim 5!
[^12]: i.e. the reps depend on a finite number of parameters only!
[^13]: We think that this achievement is tightly related to having got knowledge on Pl[ü]{}cker’s work and establishing intensive contact to Klein after having met Klein for the first time in October 1869 during Klein’s ’Berlin time’ from August 1869 to March 1870. However, we want to leave the (more) complete and final discussion and judgement to science historians.
[^14]: Thanks to his talk and private communication with O. Conradt during the conference, we heard that Dirac knew much about projective geometry, and that it was Dirac who searched for (algebraic) reps of his results from within projective geometry. However, we do not have access to those references yet.
[^15]: We just want to remember the fact that this equation is independend from the mass as $m$ drops out. Indeed, we see this as an equation for 4-velocities $u_{\mu}$ describing the velocity constraint $u_{\mu}u^{\mu}=1$.
[^16]: It is to be pitied that the enormous achievements of this great scientist are not only not honoured but even almost forgotten. To top this deficit, even his own university was able to publish only a short note in order to remember his 140th anniversary of death in 2008. But even there, people put more focus on his CV and his ’strong’ and ’own’ personality than on his enormous achievements in mathematics and physics (see e.g. ). Indeed, a lot of Pl[ü]{}cker’s results were absorbed later in Lie’s, Klein’s, Clifford’s and Ball’s work mentioning only in general or even without citing or mentioning at all. This might be attributed to the fact that inbetween worked for decades in physics (and especially optics) only before returning to mathematics while teaching and advising Klein in physics and mathematics. It was Klein in conjunction with Clebsch to summarize at least some of Pl[ü]{}cker’s late and more systematic results on line geometry , based on existing manuscripts and on the outline originating from while himself only had time to publish two late presentations in 1865/66 on generalizations of lines to ’Complexe’, ’Dynamen’ and their tremendous use for physics before his death in 1868. For example, the treatment of oval surfaces in relation to generating line sets can be found in [@klein:1928] (see e.g. ch. II, §§4–6). Some very powerful consequences with respect to dynamics, differential geometry and cones have been given and appreciated by Clebsch in …
[^17]: Please note, that the expression is known as ’potency’ (German: ’Potenz’) of spheres and that we may branch here to sphere Complexe and their geometry as well. That’s, however, beyond the current scope of presentation here (see e.g. with respect to transfer principles) although there are ’tons of’ very interesting applications of this representation scheme in physics. What we also don’t want to discuss here in more detail is the interpretation of special relativity in terms of such sphere ’invariances’ in different coordinate systems and with the additional constraint $x'=x$ and $y'=y$ or $\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}y=\mathrm{d}x'\mathrm{d}y'$ in the normal plane. Therefore we need much deeper background with respect to sphere Complexe and Complex geometry.
[^18]: Please note, that this has to be discussed very carefully in terms of coordinate values and (binary) parameters, and care has to be taken in identifying homogeneous and inhomogeneous coordinates and their respective coordinate values/projection parameters. Moreover, an exact description related to Euclidean geometry has to be performed using normal instead of Euclidean coordinates which square to ’infinite radius’ as they approach infinite values, i.e. for absolute elements/points.
[^19]: Please note the intrinsic assumption of Klein’s Erlanger program by assuming [*t*]{} to parametrize the transformation(s) thus connecting the transformation parameters to velocities of an Euclidean, affine scenario!
[^20]: Quadratische Complexe
[^21]: German: Tr[ä]{}gheitsindex
[^22]: The discussion of relating differential geometry to projective geometry has been a major topic for decades around the turn of the 19th to the 20th century. However, the assumptions, specializations and drawbacks introduced into differential geometry and calculuses seem to be forgotten…
[^23]: German: Pl[ü]{}ckersche Zeiger
[^24]: German: Kleinsche Zeiger
[^25]: This results also from Pl[ü]{}cker’s identification of forces with respect to line reps, see references in . So in experiments we expect to see charge and/or mass relations like reduced masses or physically observable combinations like $e/m$ only which emphasizes the physical formulation by the Lorentz force when describing dynamics and (Lab) measurable ’accelerations’.
[^26]: And as such energies! According to our current understanding, that’s the reason why the electromagnetic description works well on the classical as well as on the quantum level using Hamiltonian/Lagrangian formulation.
[^27]: This is in some parts not new but the problem is that science industry today uses (although limited in a lot of aspects) all kinds of ’vectors’ or linear reps and not line or even projective geometry, and a lot of old knowledge is simply forgotten in favour of algebraic and analytic technicalities around all kinds of linear vector spaces.
[^28]: However, we do not want to discuss transitions from ray to axis line coordinates and the related duality considerations of points and planes in $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ here.
[^29]: Especially also with respect to the identification of ’ray systems’ (German: ’Strahlensysteme erster Ordnung und erster Classe’) and their geometry.
[^30]: German: Treffgeraden
[^31]: At first, we assume non-accelerated movements and skew/non-incident lines of observer and point.
[^32]: German: Treffgeraden
[^33]: German: Treffgeradenkomplexe
[^34]: Right now we can conjecture only that this quadratic form is related to the fact that the line representation of $\mathbb{R}^{3}$ is four-dimensional and we need a (quadratic) constraint to eliminate one degree of freedom/dimension. There are further (quadratic) explanation possibilities originating from tangential and tetrahedral Complexe or from the $M_{4}^{2}$ above. The possibility that a second order description of energy itself is an approximation only and that we have to treat this question based on general homogeneous functions is beyond scope at this time of writing.
[^35]: German: Nullgerade
[^36]: Here, we want to pinpoint once more [@enriques:1903], appendix II, this time in the context of mapping his two abstract spaces $S$ and $S'$ by collinear mappings.
[^37]: German: Konfokale Zykliden
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Establishing the physical mechanism governing exchange interactions is fundamental for exploring exotic phases such as quantum spin liquids (QSLs) in real materials. In this work, we address exchange interactions in , a series of double perovskites that realize a spin-1/2 square lattice and are suggested to harbor a QSL ground state arising from the random distribution of non-magnetic ions. Our *ab initio* multi-reference configuration interaction calculations show that replacing Te atoms with W atoms changes the dominant couplings from nearest to next-nearest neighbor due to the crucial role of unoccupied states of the non-magnetic ions in the super-superexchange mechanism. Combined with spin-wave theory simulations, our calculated exchange couplings provide an excellent description of the inelastic neutron scattering spectra of the parent compounds, as well as explaining that the magnetic excitations in emerge from bond-disordered exchange couplings. Our results demonstrate the crucial role of the non-magnetic cations in exchange interactions paving the way to further explore QSL phases in bond-disordered materials.'
author:
- 'Vamshi M. Katukuri'
- 'P. Babkevich'
- 'O. Mustonen'
- 'H. C. Walker'
- 'B. F[å]{}k'
- 'S. Vasala'
- 'M. Karppinen'
- 'H. M. Rønnow'
- 'O. V. Yazyev'
title: 'Exchange Interactions Mediated by Non-Magnetic Cations in Double Perovskites'
---
In 3d transition metal (TM) oxides, the on-site Coulomb repulsive interactions between the electrons are strong enough to confine them to the TM sites, leading to the formation of localized spin or spin-orbital moments [@khomskii-book]. The manner in which these moments couple to each other is primarily governed by the underlying exchange interactions, which may be direct and/or mediated by the intermediate anions or ligands (L), the latter is also referred to as the superexchange. There are many possible ways these interactions can manifest, resulting in a plethora of magnetically ordered states such as ferromagnetic and different types of antiferromagnetic (AFM) order, magnetic spirals or more exotic topologically protected magnetic textures such as Skyrmions [@khomskii-book; @spirals_review; @Roessler_nature_2006; @Muehlbauer_science_2009].
Even more fascinating ground states that stem from exchange interactions are those which do not undergo any magnetic ordering even at absolute zero temperature, e.g. spin-liquid states in low-dimensional magnetic systems [@balents-nature-2010]. Broken-symmetry valence-bond solids and QSLs where symmetry is conserved are examples of such phases [@anderson-1973; @anderson-science-1987; @balents-nature-2010]. In these quantum paramagnetic phases, the long-range magnetic order is typically destroyed by frustrated exchange interactions and quantum fluctuations [@Mila_frustrated_magnetism]. In the simplistic and prototypical two-dimensional spin-$ 1/2 $ Heisenberg square lattice (HSL) model, the ratio of nearest-neighbor (NN) $ J_{1} $ and AF next-nearest neighbor (NNN) $ J_{2} $ exchange interactions of $\sim$0.5 results in magnetic frustration and a QSL ground state [@anderson-science-1987]. The exchange mechanisms in TM compounds, principally the superexchange, are reasonably well understood in the form of the Goodenough-Kanamori-Anderson (GKA) rules [@khomskii-book]. The highly successful GKA rules correctly predict the sign of magnetic coupling for the 180$ ^\circ $ and 90$ ^\circ $ TM-L-TM bond angles. In double perovskite compounds like and the magnetic Cu$^{2+}$ ions are separated by non-magnetic Te$ ^{6+} $ and W$ ^{6+} $ cations, respectively, and the magnetic coupling is a result of the super-superexchange (SSE) mechanism. As shown in Fig. 1, there are multiple SSE paths – the NN exchange is via two identical Cu-O-Te/W-O-Cu paths involving four bridging ligands and two non-magnetic cations, with a 90$ ^\circ $ Cu-Te/W-Cu angle. Alternatively, the second or NNN coupling arises from only one Cu-O-Te/W-O-Cu exchange path (180$ ^\circ $ Cu-Te/W-Cu angle) involving two ligands and a non-magnetic cation. An interesting aspect in these compounds is weather the non-magnetic cation participates in the exchange.
In this paper, we address the question – “Do the exchange mechanisms in double perovskite compounds depend on the non-magnetic cations and if so, how?” We compute the exchange couplings in double perovskite with $x=\{0.0, 0.5, 1.0\}$ compounds using [*ab initio*]{} many-body quantum chemistry (QC) calculations. We analyze their microscopic provenance by examining the different SSE paths involved and show that the bridging non-magnetic cation plays a pivotal role in the exchange mechanism depending on whether it has an empty or completely filled $d$ manifold [@Zhu_cr_w_te_prl_2014; @Zhu_cr_dp_2015; @Mustonen2018]. Further, we decipher the possible physical origin of the features observed in the inelastic neutron scattering (INS) spectrum using spin-wave theory (SWT) while simulating the site disorder phenomena in . Our study exposes double perovskites with non-magnetic cations as the ideal playground to explore bond-disordered couplings and associated QSL phenomena.
![(a) The crystallographic unit cell of Sr$_2$Cu(Te/W)O$_6$. (b) The $ab$-plane view of showing the in-plane Cu $ 3d_{x^2-y^2} $ (red and blue) and W $ 5d_{x^2-y^2} $ (yellow and orange) orbitals, and the different exchange couplings.[]{data-label="Fig1"}](Fig1_struct_orbs_1.pdf){width="0.95\columnwidth"}
The isostructural double perovskite copper oxides [@Reinen_SCTO_Struct_ZAAC] and [@vasala_SCWO_structure_2012] realise a quasi-two-dimensional spin-$1/2$ HSL antiferromagnet, despite their three-dimensional crystal structures [@koga-jpn-2014; @babkevich_prl_2016; @walker-prb-2016]. However, the magnetic order in the two systems is different. While a N' eel AFM (NAF) ordering is observed in with large AFM $J_1$ and small $J_2$ of the same sign [@koga-prb-2016; @babkevich_prl_2016], a columnar AFM (CAF) order is stabilized in with small $J_1$ and large $J_2$, both AFM [@walker-prb-2016]. Interestingly, the reported $J_2/J_1$ ratio in these two compounds differs by two orders of magnitude, 0.03 and 7.92 for and , respectively.
It has been anticipated that a solid solution with equal quantities of Te and W may result in the ratio $J_2/J_1$ close to 0.5, leading to strong magnetic frustration and possibly producing a spin-liquid ground state [@Mustonen2018; @Watanabe_scwto_vbg_prb_2018; @Kazuki_randomness_qsl_2018]. Interestingly, the macroscopic magnetic features of Sr$_2$CuTe$_{x}$W$_{1-x}$O$_6$ for $x=0.5$ show no signs of magnetic ordering, instead indicates its proximity to the highly frustrated $J_2/J_1=0.5$ region. Furthermore, the specific heat behavior at low temperatures is reminiscent of a gapless QSL state with collective excitations of entangled spins [@Mustonen2018]. Fascinatingly, the suppression of long range magnetic order is observed in a wide region of $x \approx 0.1-0.6$ [@mustonen-prb-2018].
[*Exchange couplings from QC calculations*]{}: Table \[Exchg\_inter\] compares the Heisenberg exchange couplings defined in Fig. \[Fig1\] for the end compounds of solid solution – and – obtained from [*ab initio*]{} multireference difference dedicated configuration interaction (MR-DDCI) calculations [@DDCI_1_MIRALLES1992555; @DDCI_2_MIRALLES199333]. Those obtained from INS measurements are also shown in the same table. The calculations were done on three different embedded clusters for $J_1$, $J_2$ and $J_c$ (see Fig. \[Fig1\]), respectively. For computational details see Ref. [@babkevich_prl_2016] and Supplementary material [^1] which includes Refs. [@NOCI_J_hozoi03; @ewald; @FIGGEN2005227; @Peterson2005; @Dunning89; @Andrae1990; @Martin2001; @Ross_W_ecp_1990; @ANO-S_O_basis; @J_ligand_fink94; @J_ligand_calzado03; @NOCI_J_oosten96; @Ir113_bogdanov_12; @localization_PM; @Molpro12; @Davidson_MRCI]. In contrast to conventional density functional theory (DFT) and correlated calculations in conjunction with dynamical mean field theory (DFT + DMFT), our calculations are parameter free and accurately describe correlations within the cluster of atoms in a systematic manner. The virtual hopping processes necessary to capture the exchange interactions are well described in this approach and this makes it the only [*ab initio*]{} method that has sufficient predictive capability for estimating magnetic couplings [@Li2Cu2O2_Js; @Ir214_katukuri_12; @Ir213_katukuri_13; @Ir214_katukuri_14]. To extract the isotropic exchange couplings, the [*ab initio*]{} magnetic spectrum of two unpaired electrons in two Cu$^{2+}$ ions is mapped onto that of a two-spin Heisenberg Hamiltonian ${\mathcal H}_{ij}=J_{ij}\mathbf{S}_i\cdot\mathbf{S}_j$. All calculations were done using the [molpro]{} quantum chemistry package [@Molpro12].
[p[1cm]{}cp[2.10cm]{}cp[1.5cm]{}cp[2.10cm]{}cp[1.5cm]{}c]{}\
& &\
& QC & INS [@babkevich_prl_2016] &QC & INS [@walker-prb-2016]\
\
$J_1$ & 7.38 & 7.60(3) & 0.68 & 1.02\
$J_2$ & 0.05 & 0.60(3) & 8.33 & 8.50\
$J_c$ & 0.003 & 0.04 & 0.005 & -\
We have previously shown [@babkevich_prl_2016] that in the dominant Heisenberg coupling is the NN AF $J_1$, see columns one and two in Table \[Exchg\_inter\]. The SSE path that gives this large coupling is Cu$^{2+}$-O$^{2-}$-O$^{2-}$-Cu$^{2+}$ along the two bridging TeO$_6$ octahedra and does not include the Te$ ^{6+} $ ions explicitly. On the other hand, the NNN $J_2$ coupling with 180$^{\circ}$ Cu-Te-Cu angle is significantly smaller and is through the bridging Te atom – Cu$^{2+}$-O$^{2-}$-Te$^{6+}$-O$^{2-}$-Cu$^{2+}$.
We performed QC calculations for to find a strong NNN $J_2$ and a small NN $J_1$ resulting in the ratio $J_2/J_1 \sim 12$. The coupling along the $c$-axis is estimated to be two orders of magnitude smaller, but nevertheless larger than in . These results are consistent with the couplings extracted from the INS data [@walker-prb-2016]. We note that the magnon-magnon interaction, not included in the linear SWT employed in Ref. [@walker-prb-2016], could have the same effect as a small NN exchange coupling. Therefore, further corrections to $J_1$ and $J_2$ values extracted from the INS might be necessary to account for this. However, we expect this to be small, e.g. in , this corresponds to $(J_1,J_2)$ values being renormalized from (7.60,0.60) to (7.18,0.21) [@babkevich_prl_2016]. Given the qualitative similarity of the crystal structures [@Reinen_SCTO_Struct_ZAAC; @vasala_SCWO_structure_2012] as well as the electronic states near the Fermi level [@Yuanhui_DFT_2017], it seems surprising to find the dominant $ab$-plane exchange couplings reversed in the two compounds – $J_1$ in and $J_2$ in . It is important to note that the states above (unoccupied) and below (doubly occupied) the Fermi level play an active role in the superexchange process, particularly, if these states belong to the ions bridging the two magnetic sites. In this respect, there is a considerable difference in the unoccupied manifold near the Fermi level in the two compounds. While there is a large density of W 5$d$ unoccupied states in at 4 eV above the Fermi level [@Yuanhui_DFT_2017], in the relatively small density of unoccupied states near the Fermi level consists of Te 5$p$ character [@Yuanhui_DFT_2017]. Further, owing to the delocalized nature of W $5d$ orbitals, there is a considerable $dp$-hybridization with the bridging O 2$p$ orbitals leading to appreciable hopping matrix element across the W$^{6+}$ ions. In contrast, the Te 5$p$ orbitals are compact and little or zero $pp$-hybridization is expected with O 2$p$ orbitals. Thus, in the W$^{6+}$ ions actively participate in the superexchange mechanism.
One might ask “why $J_1$ is small in ?", given the arguments brought forward in the previous paragraph. To gain more insight into the SSE paths involved in NN and NNN couplings, we have computed $J_1$ and $J_2$ by restraining the virtual hopping processes involving the W$ ^{6+} $ unoccupied orbitals. This can be achieved in QC calculations by setting the coefficients of these orbitals to zero. Although this is unphysical, it gives direct information about the role of W virtual orbitals in the exchange mechanisms.
The NN $J_1$ coupling along two 90$^{\circ}$ Cu-W-Cu paths, see Fig. \[Fig1\](b), decreases to 0.49 meV ($\sim$25% reduction) when the unoccupied orbital coefficients of the two W$ ^{6+} $ ions are eliminated. This implies that the contribution to $J_1$ from the configurations involving W virtual orbitals is not the leading one. It turns out that the other exchange paths, particularly the Cu-O-O-Cu path, has larger contribution to $J_1$ just as in the case of [@babkevich_prl_2016]. It should be noted that there are three different W $5d$ orbitals that participate in the SSE mechanism. While the in-plane $5d_{x^2-y^2}$ orbitals, see Fig. \[Fig1\](b), have $\sigma$-overlap with the bridging oxygen $2p$ orbitals and result in an AF coupling, the out-of-plane degenerate $5d_{xz}$ and $5d_{yz}$ orbitals with $\pi$-type overlap contribute to ferromagnetic exchange that is governed by the Hund’s rule coupling of the W $5d$ orbitals. A competition of these two mechanisms result in an overall small AF exchange. On the other hand, constraining the virtual hopping into a single bridging W$ ^{6+} $ ion’s (with 180$^{\circ}$ Cu-W-Cu angle) unoccupied orbitals result in more than ten times smaller, 0.7 meV, $J_2$ coupling. This indicates the predominance of the W virtual orbitals in capturing the $J_2$ coupling. Note that there is only one out-of-plane $5d_{xz/yz}$ orbital participating in the hopping via $ \pi $-overlap which along with $\sigma$-type hopping through $5d_{x^2-y^2}$ orbital results in an AF coupling.
![Super-superexchange mechanisms involved in NNN $J_2$ coupling in a four band Hubbard model. The three possible intermediate states (see text) that contribute to exchange interaction are shown as three schemes. The Cu $3d_{x^2-y^2}$, O $2p$ and W $5d_{x^2-y^2}$ levels are represented in blue, green and orange, respectively. The sequence of virtual electron hoppings (arrows) are marked by numbers 1 to 8. []{data-label="Fig_sse"}](SSE_3.pdf){width="0.98\columnwidth"}
We emphasize that in QC calculations all the virtual orbitals of the W$ ^{6+} $ ions participate in the SSE process and estimating the contributions from a particular virtual orbital is impractical. However, one can understand the SSE from a simplified Hubbard model (SSE-H) that contains two oxygen $p$ orbitals and an additional single W $5d_{x^2-y^2}$ virtual orbital ($d-p-d-p-d$) compared to a conventional $d-p-d$ model applied for charge-transfer insulators [@khomskii-book]. In Fig. \[Fig\_sse\], the SSE processes in the $J_2$ coupling within the SSE-H model are shown. There are three different possible virtual hoppings, represented schematically in Fig. \[Fig\_sse\], that lift the spin degeneracy and hence contribute to the AFM exchange coupling. In scheme , Fig. \[Fig\_sse\](a), the electron from one Cu$ ^{2+} $ ion can hop to the other and back through the intermediate configurations with a single hole (electron) in O $2p$ (W $5d$) orbitals at a particular instance. This scheme has a dominant contribution to the $J_2$ coupling. Two other viable possibilities are shown in schemes and in Fig. \[Fig\_sse\](b) and \[Fig\_sse\](c). Here, configurations where both Cu $ d_{x^2-y^2} $ orbitals are doubly occupied are active. While in scheme both oxygen atoms can contain two holes and the W $5d_{x^2-y^2}$ orbital holds two electrons, in scheme only one of the oxygen atoms contains two holes. The last scheme contributes twice, as either of the two oxygen atoms can accommodate two holes.
![Square lattice scheme with bond disorder and different possible exchange interactions in .[]{data-label="solid_soln"}](solid_soln_ab_plane_2.pdf){width="0.90\columnwidth"}
The coupling arising from scheme can be written as $$J^{\rm {\uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral 1\relax}}}_2 = 2\frac{t_{dd}^2}{U^{\rm Cu}_{dd}}, \ \mathrm {with} \ \ t_{dd}= \frac{t_{pd_{\rm Cu}}^2}{\Delta_{pd_{\rm Cu}}} \frac{t_{pd_{\rm W}}^4}{\Delta_{pd_{\rm W}}^2},$$ where $t_{pd_{\rm Cu}}$ and $t_{pd_{\rm W}}$ are the hopping matrix elements from O $2p$ to Cu $3d_{x^2-y^2}$ and from O $2p$ to W $5d_{x^2-y^2}$, respectively, $U^{\rm Cu}_{dd}$ is the on-site Coulomb interaction on the Cu sites, and $\Delta_{pd_{\rm Cu}}$ and $ \Delta_{pd_{\rm W}} $ are the charge-transfer energies from O $2p$ to Cu $3d$ and W $5d$ orbitals, respectively. Schemes and would involve $U^{\rm O}_{pp}$ ($U^{\rm W}_{dd}$), the Coulomb interactions when two holes (electrons) are accommodated in O $2p$ (W $5d$) orbitals, and yield minor contributions.
[*Effect of Te/W atom disorder on the exchange coupling constants*]{}: Let us consider and assume that Te and W atoms are perfectly ordered such that every Cu$^{2+}$ ion is surrounded by two Te$^{6+}$ and two W$^{6+}$ ions. In such a scenario, there are three NN ($J_a$, $J_b$ and $J_c$) and two NNN ($J_d$ and $J_e$) exchange couplings as show in Fig. \[solid\_soln\]. Four of the five couplings, $J_b$, $J_c$, $J_d$ and $J_e$, remain the same as in the end compounds and as the exchange paths are the same. On the other hand, the exchange channels corresponding to $J_a$ are different compared to the end compounds. We estimated the coupling $J_a$ from our [*ab initio*]{} singlet-triplet energy separation for two Cu$^{2+}$ ions with the neighboring environment as shown in Fig. \[solid\_soln\]. We find this coupling AMF with a magnitude, 0.3 meV, much smaller than the dominant coupling in the end compounds. To summarize, our calculations show that the average $ J_{1} $ and $ J_{2} $ can be tuned from effectively 0 to 8meV through substitution of Te for W, opening up an interesting arena to explore bond disorder of a spin-1/2 square lattice antiferromagnet.
[*INS experiments and SWT calculations*]{}: Measurements on were performed using the IN4 spectrometer at the ILL utilizing an incident neutron energy of $E_i = 25.2$meV [@cicognani-in4c]. The for $x=0.5$ and 1.0 samples were studied using MERLIN at ISIS with $E_i = 45$meV [@merlin-spectrometer]. Further details on and INS measurements are reported elsewhere [@babkevich_prl_2016; @walker-prb-2016].
Figure \[Fig3\] shows the inelastic neutron scattering spectra of powder that have been collected on $x = \{0,0.5,1.0\}$ compounds. A background, adjusted for the Bose thermal population factor, recorded at $>$100 K has been subtracted from the spectra to remove the phonon contribution at larger . The end-compounds of and show spin waves dispersing from the CAF and NAF zone centres, respectively. A strong band of scattering around 15-17 meV is found in both compounds. This corresponds to a van Hove singularity from the top of the spin-wave dispersion. The INS spectrum of the intermediate compounds is dramatically different. There appears to be a significant smearing of the spectrum in momentum and energy transfer. The band of scattering corresponding to the van Hove singularity is absent. Weak excitations are observed up to around 20meV. This scattering decreases with increasing , as would be expected for magnetic scattering. Magnetic modes emerge from $\Qb = 0.65$ and 1.4Å$ ^{-1} $, much like in , which would suggest the dominant interactions in persist in the $x=0.5$ compound.
To simulate the INS spectra, we need to construct an appropriate magnetic ground state from which magnetic fluctuations can be calculated. We define a $10\times10$ square lattice with randomly populated W and Te atoms. The strengths of the $J_1-J_2$ exchange parameters are as given in Table \[Exchg\_inter\] and the different possible exchange pathways in the mixed $x=0.5$ compound are according to Fig. \[solid\_soln\]. Therefore, $J_1$ can take values of 7.60meV or 1.02meV depending on whether two Te or W atoms are involved in the exchange process with similar arguments applying to $J_2$. In the case of one W and one Te atom, we take $J_1 = 0$. From this construction, we find the classical spin configuration which minimises the total energy and calculate the spin-wave dispersion. To account for truncation of the spin Hamiltonian at the quadratic terms when calculating the one-magnon energy we rescale the magnon energy by a constant factor of $Z_c =1.18$ [@singh-prb-1989]. The calculation is repeated with different distributions of Te and W and the resulting spin-wave pattern is averaged. Figures \[Fig3\](d)-\[Fig3\](f) show the calculated powder averaged spectra for each composition. Comparing the calculated spectra for $x=0.5$ to the end compounds, we observe that the simulation predicts a rather broad spectrum. The intense and sharp scattering at the top of the bandwidth in and is no longer present for the intermediate compound. Therefore, the effect of the substitution for the intermediate compounds is to leave the powder spectrum featureless with the exception of excitations that emerge from Neel-like and CAF-like low-energy excitations centered at $\Qb \approx 0.7$ and 1.4Å$ ^{-1} $. The spectrum, despite the lack of long range magnetic order and contrary to expectations of the limitations of LSWT [@Zhang_prl_2019], appears to be in good agreement with the measured powder spectrum, indicating that the bond-disordered exchange couplings reproduce the INS spectrum of .
To summarize, we have computed the NN and NNN Heisenberg exchange couplings in and finding excellent agreement with available experimental observations. We established that the non-magnetic cation bridging the magnetic sites play a significant role in the SSE process. In the case of a completely filled $d$-manifold (Te$ ^{6+} $) cation, the exchange path does not include any of its orbitals, but for the $d^0$ (W$^{6+}$) bridging cation, the SSE process via these empty orbitals is pivotal. While these conclusions corroborate with DFT+$U$ based studies [@Yuanhui_DFT_2017; @Vasala_prb_2014; @walker-prb-2016], it is important to know that the computed exchange couplings strongly depend on the choice of the Coulomb repulsion parameter $U$. We further provided the rationale for the observed exchange interactions, justifying with numerical evidence. Our simulated INS spectra for and compare extremely well with experimental data, and they give a good understanding of the measured powder spectrum for . Although further neutron scattering studies are necessary to examine the latter compound, our calculations provide a deep insight into the nature of the interactions within the complex ground state of this system. Our work thus establishes the theoretical background for describing bond-disorder exchange couplings highlighting site-disordered materials as a new playground for exploring QSL states.
V.M.K. and O.V.Y. acknowledge the support from ERC project ‘TopoMat’ (grant No. 306504), Swiss NSF NCCR MARVEL and SNSF Sinergia grant CRSII5\_171003. The authors would like to acknowledge CSCS (project s832) and EPFL-SCITAS for providing the computational resources.
[49]{}ifxundefined \[1\][ ifx[\#1]{} ]{}ifnum \[1\][ \#1firstoftwo secondoftwo ]{}ifx \[1\][ \#1firstoftwo secondoftwo ]{}““\#1””@noop \[0\][secondoftwo]{}sanitize@url \[0\][‘\
12‘\$12 ‘&12‘\#12‘12‘\_12‘%12]{}@startlink\[1\]@endlink\[0\]@bib@innerbibempty @noop [**]{} (, , ) @noop [****, ()]{} [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05056) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1166767) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08917) [****, ()](https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0025-5408(73)90167-0) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1126/science.235.4793.1196) , , and , eds., [**](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10589-0), ed. (, ) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.076406) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.92.094419) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03435-1) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1002/zaac.19764240107) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1021/cm301154n) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.7566/JPSJ.83.115001) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.237203) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.94.064411) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.93.054426) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.98.054422) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.98.134427) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.98.064411) [****, ()](https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0009-2614(92)85030-E) [****, ()](https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0301-0104(93)80104-H) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1080/0026897021000035205) [****, ()](https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-4655(00)00071-0) [****, ()](https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemphys.2004.10.005) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1007/s00214-005-0681-9) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1063/1.456153) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01114537) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1337864) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1063/1.458934) [****, ()](https://doi.org/{10.1007/BF01113842}) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1021/ic00104a036) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1021/jp034582t) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2614(96)00498-8) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.85.235147) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1063/1.456588) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1002/wcms.82) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1063/1.455354) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.86.024411) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.85.220402) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/16/1/013056) @noop [****, ()]{} [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.39.9760) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/0953-8984/29/i=10/a=105801) [****, ()](https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0921-4526(99)01366-6) [****, ()](https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physb.2006.05.328) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.167203) [****, ()](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.134419)
[^1]: Supplementary information \[URL\] contains the computational details.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
address: 'IRAP, Université de Toulouse, CNRS, CNES, UPS, (Toulouse), France'
author:
- 'I. TUTUSAUS, B. LAMINE, AND A. BLANCHARD'
title: GENERALIZED DARK MATTER MODEL WITH THE EUCLID SATELLITE
---
Introduction
============
$\Lambda$CDM has become the concordance model in cosmology thanks to its ability to fit the main cosmological observations[@Planck2016]. It is mainly characterized by its dark sector, composed of pressure-less, non-interacting cold dark matter (CDM) and a cosmological constant $\Lambda$. However, their nature remain still unknown. In this work we focus only on the dark matter component of the Universe and we follow a phenomenological approach to go beyond the standard model. In particular, we use the generalized dark matter (GDM) model, first proposed by Hu[@Hu1998], to constrain dark matter properties in the linear regime. We first present the theoretical framework of the GDM model in Sec.\[sec\_2\]. We then show the constraints on this model using current observations in Sec.\[sec\_3\], and we finally show the expected precision of the photometric Euclid survey on the GDM model parameters in Sec.\[sec\_4\], before finishing with the conclusions in Sec.\[conclusions\].
Theoretical framework {#sec_2}
=====================
In this work we assume that dark matter is only coupled to the visible sector through gravitational interaction, so we assume that the dark matter energy-momentum tensor is conserved. This implies that all kind of dark matter components can be covered by the standard conservation equations for a general matter source[@Ma1995]. The dark matter energy density $\rho$ evolves as $\dot{\rho}+3H(1+w)\rho=0$, where the over-dot stands for the derivative with respect to conformal time, and $H\equiv \dot{a}/a$ is the conformal Hubble parameter. In this work we focus on the scalar modes, neglecting vector and tensor perturbations. Therefore, a conserved energy-momentum tensor must satisfy[@Ma1995] (at a linear level of perturbations and in the synchronous gauge)
[$$\dot{\delta}+(1+w)\left(\theta+\frac{\dot{h}}{2}\right)+3H\left(\frac{\delta
p}{\delta\rho}-w\right)=0\,\hspace{5pt}{\rm
and}\hspace{5pt}\dot{\theta}+H(1-3w)\theta+\frac{\dot{w}}{1+w}\theta-\frac{\delta p/\delta\rho}{1+w}k^2\delta+k^2\sigma =0\,,\label{eq_GDM_pert2}$$]{} where $w$, $\delta$, and $\theta$ stand for the fluid equation of state parameter, its density fluctuation and the divergence of its velocity, respectively. $\delta p$ represents the pressure perturbation, and $\sigma$ corresponds to the anisotropic stress. Provided Eq.(\[eq\_GDM\_pert2\]), the GDM model is specified by the dark matter equation of state parameter $w$, and relations between $\delta p$ and $\sigma$ to the dynamically evolving variables $\delta,\,\theta$. We consider non-relativistic dark matter (it can allow for the formation of galaxies) with the so-called $c_{\rm vis}$ parametrization[@Hu1998], where $\delta p$ is related to $\delta$ and $\theta$ through the rest-frame sound speed $c_s$, and $\sigma$ evolves according to:
[$$\delta p=c_s^2\delta \rho
-\dot{\rho}(c_s^2-c_a^2)\theta/k^2\,\hspace{5pt}{\rm and}\hspace{5pt}\dot{\sigma}+3H\frac{c_a^2}{w}\sigma=\frac{4}{3}\frac{c_{\rm vis}^2}{1+w}(2\theta+\dot{h}+6\dot{\eta})\,,$$]{} where the adiabatic sound speed is $c_a^2\equiv
(w\rho)^{\dot{}}/\dot{\rho}$, $c_{\rm vis}^2$ is a new viscosity parameter, and $h$ and $\eta$ are the synchronous metric perturbations. We fix $c_{\rm vis}^2=0$, for simplicity, and we consider only the equation of state parameter $w$ and the sound velocity $c_s^2$ as constant parameters for the GDM model.
Current constraints {#sec_3}
===================
We first need a Boltzmann code to compute the power spectrum for the GDM model. In this work we use the `CLASS` code[@class2]. It already includes a parametrization for the dark energy fluid with a constant equation of state parameter and a constant sound velocity[@class4], so we use this parametrization as GDM, while we keep a cosmological constant for the dark energy contribution, and a negligible fraction of cold dark matter. Notice that the perturbations computed for this fluid must be added to the total matter perturbations, which is not the case in the default version of `CLASS`, since the fluid is supposed to behave as dark energy. We then investigate the constraints on the cosmological parameters using a Markov chain Monte Carlo approach, with the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm, implemented in the parameter inference Monte Python code[@Audren2013]. We use the Gelman-Rubin test[@Gelman1992], requiring $1-R<0.015$ for all parameters, to consider that the chains have converged. We consider the 6 baseline parameters for $\Lambda$CDM that can be seen in Table\[table1\], plus $w$ and $c_s^2$ for GDM. We further consider two massless neutrinos and a massive one with mass 0.06eV, keeping the value of the effective number of neutrino-like relativistic degrees of freedom $N_{\rm eff}=3.046$. The constraints on the parameters are obtained using CMB data (the 2015 Planck CMB likelihoods[@PlanckGDM1; @PlanckGDM2]), baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO) measurements from BOSS[@Anderson2014], 6dFGS[@Beutler2011], and SDSS[@Ross2015], and type Ia supernovae (SNIa) data from the joint light-curve analysis (JLA)[@Betoule2014]. For some runs we include weak lensing (WL) data from the CFHTLenS survey[@Heymans2013] to check whether the tension between WL and CMB data is alleviated when considering GDM.
In Table\[table1\] we present the constraints on the cosmological parameters when we fit both models, $\Lambda$CDM and $\Lambda$GDM, to SNIa, BAO, and CMB data. The constraints are weakened when we consider $\Lambda$GDM, due to the introduction of two extra degrees of freedom. Even if all the parameters are compatible within 1-$\sigma$ for both models, we can see that $\Lambda$GDM allows for a smaller value of $\Omega_{\rm b}$, $\Omega_{\rm dm}$ and $\sigma_8$, and a larger value of $h$ than $\Lambda$CDM. This points towards the fact that $\Lambda$GDM could alleviate the tension between $\Omega_{\rm m}$ and the rms matter density fluctuation $\sigma_8$ that appears when considering the $\Lambda$CDM model, as it can be seen in the left panel of Fig.\[fig1\]. Allowing for a non-vanishing sound speed strongly suppresses the matter power spectrum at small scales, therefore, cosmological probes sensitive to small scales are extremely important to constrain the GDM parameters. In order to add WL data we need to take into account that we enter the non-linear regime and our predictions for GDM are no longer accurate. There is no non-linear recipe for GDM yet, so we use an ultra-conservative approach by keeping only the largest scales from CFHTLenS data, and we keep the standard halofit[@halofit] non-linear correction. The constraints when WL data is added into the analysis are shown in Table\[table1\]. We can observe that the constraints on most of the parameters (for both models) are equivalent to the ones obtained without WL, since we are discarding most of the WL data. However, the constraint on $c_s^2$ improves by two orders of magnitude, due to the addition of information at mildly non-linear scales. We need to remind, though, that the halofit correction has been derived and tested only for standard cold dark matter, so the constraint on $c_s^2$ could be slightly too optimistic. We can also see this effect in the right panel of Fig.\[fig1\]. The (probably) over-estimated spectrum at small scales for $\Lambda$GDM gives very good constraints on $\sigma_8$, questioning the ability of $\Lambda$GDM to completely remove the tension between WL and CMB measurements.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model Parameters CMB+SNIa+BAO CMB+SNIa+BAO+WL Photometric Euclid
-------------- ----------------------------- ---------------------------- -------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$10^2\times \Omega_{\rm b}$ $4.834\pm 0.054$ $4.815\pm 0.053$ $(4.834)\pm 0.075$
$\Omega_{\rm dm}$ $0.2562\pm 0.0060$ $0.2539\pm 0.0057$ $(0.2562)\pm 0.0074$
$\Lambda$CDM $h$ $0.6797\pm 0.0049$ $0.6816\pm 0.0048$ $(0.6797)\pm 0.016$
$\sigma_8$ $0.8187\pm 0.0089$ $0.8142\pm 0.0090$ $(0.8187)\pm 0.0088$
$n_s$ $0.9674\pm 0.0043$ $0.9686\pm 0.0043$ $(0.9674)\pm 0.023$
$10\times \tau$ $0.72\pm 0.13$ $0.68\pm 0.13$ $-$
$10^2\times \Omega_{\rm b}$ $4.71\pm 0.12$ $4.69\pm 0.12$ $(4.834)\pm
0.11$
$\Omega_{\rm dm}$ $0.2491\pm 0.0087$ $0.2458\pm 0.0088$ $(0.2562)\pm 0.014$
$10^2\times w$ $0.066\pm 0.054$ $0.055\pm 0.053$ $(0.00) \pm 0.21$
$\Lambda$GDM $10^6\times c_s^2$ $<0.78$ $<0.010$ $<0.0018$
$h$ $0.6873\pm 0.0082$ $0.6898\pm 0.0082$ $(0.6797)\pm 0.020$
$\sigma_8$ $0.7351_{-0.041}^{+0.094}$ $0.8174\pm 0.016$ $(0.8187)\pm 0.0096$
$n_s$ $0.9656\pm 0.0044$ $0.9682\pm 0.0042$ $(0.9674)\pm 0.035$
$10\times \tau$ $0.73\pm 0.15$ $0.58\pm 0.16$ $-$
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Mean values with the 1-$\sigma$ constraints on the cosmological parameters for both $\Lambda$CDM and $\Lambda$GDM. Both the constraints from the fit to CMB, SNIa, and BAO data (with and without WL) and the forecasted constraints from the photometric Euclid survey are shown.[]{data-label="table1"}
Euclid forecast {#sec_4}
===============
In this section we focus our attention to study the $\Lambda$GDM model with the future Euclid satellite[^1] using the specifications of the Euclid Red-book[@Redbook]. We use the `CosmoSIS`[@cosmosis] code[^2] to compute a Fisher matrix forecast for the photometric Euclid survey. In particular, for photometric galaxy clustering (GC), weak lensing (WL), and their cross-correlations (XC). More in detail, we replace (in the `CosmoSIS` pipeline) the standard Boltzmann code by our GDM modified version of `CLASS` used in the previous section. We follow the previous approach of using the halofit correction and keeping only the largest scales (up to $\ell_{\rm max}=750$). Concerning the fiducial cosmological model for the forecast, we use the values obtained from the fit of $\Lambda$CDM to the combination of CMB, SNIa, and BAO data from the previous section, including the treatment of massive neutrinos and the value of $\tau$, which are fixed in the forecast. For the parameters specific to GDM we consider the fiducial values $w=0$ and $c_s^2=10^{-9}$.
We can see in Table\[table1\] that the photometric Euclid survey will provide very good constraints on all parameters for both models. For some parameters the forecasted constraints are worse than the current ones. but this can be justified by the fact that Euclid will only probe up to redshift $\sim 2.5$. Therefore, the lack of high-redshift information coming from the CMB makes it harder to constrain $w$ and break the degeneracies between the cosmological parameters. We can infer that the combination of the full (photometric and spectroscopic) Euclid data with the CMB will provide exquisite constraints on GDM. It is worth mentioning that current low-redshift probes (without the CMB) are only marginally able to constrain the GDM parameters[@Tutusaus]. It is also important to notice that the photometric Euclid survey alone will be able to constrain $c_s^2$ better than the combination of background and WL current data by nearly an order of magnitude. However, as it was the case in the previous section, we should treat these forecasted constraints (especially on $c_s^2$) with caution, since we know that the halofit correction is adapted to standard cold dark matter.
![1-$\sigma$ and 2-$\sigma$ contours for the $\Omega_{\rm m}$ and $\sigma_8$ cosmological parameters for both $\Lambda$CDM (blue) and $\Lambda$GDM (red). [*Left panel*]{}: Combination of CMB, SNIa, and BAO data. [*Right panel*]{}: WL data are added into the analysis.[]{data-label="fig1"}](fig1a.pdf "fig:")![1-$\sigma$ and 2-$\sigma$ contours for the $\Omega_{\rm m}$ and $\sigma_8$ cosmological parameters for both $\Lambda$CDM (blue) and $\Lambda$GDM (red). [*Left panel*]{}: Combination of CMB, SNIa, and BAO data. [*Right panel*]{}: WL data are added into the analysis.[]{data-label="fig1"}](fig1b.pdf "fig:")
Conclusions
===========
In conclusion, we have seen that a more generalized treatment of dark matter could alleviate the tension between low-redshift and high-redshift data, thanks to a non-vanishing sound speed. Because of $c_s^2$, the main differences between GDM and the standard model appear at small scales. It is thus very important to add cosmological probes sensitive to small scales to constrain GDM. We have shown that adding WL data strongly improves the constraints on the GDM sound speed. We have then focused on the photometric Euclid survey, and we have shown that it will be able to put nice constraints on all parameters (a very strong constraint on $c_s^2$), and it will allow us to increase our knowledge on the nature of dark matter. However, it is necessary to have a non-linear recipe adapted to GDM to be able to explore the small scales that Euclid will probe, and extract the maximum of information of it.
References {#references .unnumbered}
==========
[99]{} Planck Collaboration, .
W. Hu, .
C.-P. Ma & E. Bertschinger, .
D. Blas, J. Lesgourgues, & T. Tram .
J. Lesgourgues & T. Tram, .
B. Audren [*et al.*]{}, .
A. Gelman & D. B. Rubin, .
Planck Collaboration, .
Planck Collaboration, .
L. Anderson [*et al.*]{}, .
F. Beutler [*et al.*]{}, .
A. J. Ross [*et al.*]{}, .
M. Betoule [*et al.*]{}, .
C. Heymans [*et al.*]{}, .
R. Takahashi [*et al.*]{}, .
R. Laureijs [*et al.*]{}, .
J. Zuntz [*et al.*]{}, .
I. Tutusaus [*et al.*]{}, .
[^1]: https://www.euclid-ec.org
[^2]: https://bitbucket.org/joezuntz/cosmosis/wiki/Home
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
address: |
Max Planck Institut für Kernphysik, P.O. Box 103980,\
69029 Heidelberg, Germany,\
Home Page Heidelberg Non-Accelerator Particle Physics group: http://mpi-hd.mpg.de.non$\_$acc/
author:
- 'H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus[^1], B. Majorovits[^2]'
title: |
GENIUS and the Genius TF:\
A New Observatory for WIMP Dark Matter and Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay
---
Introduction
============
The topic of Dark Matter search has lately gained particular actuality by the results of the DAMA [@damahere] and CDMS [@cdmshere] experiments. The DAMA collaboration claims to see positive evidence for WIMP dark matter using the annual modulation signature, whereas the CDMS experiment seems to almost exclude fully the DAMA allowed cross-sections for WIMP dark matter. It is, therefore, of utmost importance to independently test these results using both experimental approaches: to look for the WIMP-nucleus recoil signal and for the annual modulation effect. However, should the positive DAMA WIMP evidence be disproven, a large step forward in terms of increasing the sensitivity of Dark Matter experiments is needed in order to obtain relevant data concerning WIMP dark matter. In this article we shortly highlight the physics potential of the GENIUS project [@genius; @GENIUS; @geniusproposal] regarding WIMP Dark Matter search, neutrinoless double beta decay and the real time observation of Solar neutrinos and we introduce the Genius TF [@gtfmpg; @geniustf; @diss], a new experimental setup to probe the evidence region favoured by the DAMA experiment [@damahere] and to test the prerequisites neccessary to realize the Genius project.
The GENIUS experiment
=====================
In order to achieve a dramatic step forward regarding background reduction, a new experimental technique is needed. The GENIUS project uses the concept of application of standard detection techniques while removing all dangerous contaminations from the direct vicinity of the detectors.
The concept of the GENIUS experiment
------------------------------------
The GENIUS project [@genius; @GENIUS; @geniusproposal] is based on the idea to operate ’naked’ HPGe crystals directly in liquid nitrogen [@heusser2]. The naked Germanium crystals are located in a huge nitrogen tank (diameter 12-13m). This way all dangerous contaminations from the direct vicinity of the crystals are removed. This has the great advantage that the liquid nitrogen which is very clean with respect to radiopurity due to its production process (fractional distillation), can act simultaneously as cooling medium and shield against external activities. The conceptual design of the experiment is shown in figure \[genius\_scheme\].
It has been shown that with this approach a reduction of background by three to four orders of magnitude can be achieved [@genius; @GENIUS; @geniusproposal; @geniustf; @diss]. The final reachable background index with a 12 m diameter GENIUS tank is estimated to be around $\sim 10^{-2}$ counts/(kg keV y) in the low-energy region below 50 keV. The sensitivity regarding WIMP Dark Matter search reachable with this background and a total detector mass of 100 kg of natural Germanium can be seen in Fig. \[dmall\].
=16.5pc
With a background of $\sim$ 0.1 counts/(t keV y), which can be reached with this device in the energy region around the Q-value of the neutrinoless double beta decay of $^{76}$Ge at 2038.5 keV, and with 1 tonne of enriched $^{76}$Ge, GENIUS would be sensitive to an effective Majorana neutrino mass down to $\sim$0.01 eV. This will allow already to test many different neutrino mass scenarios (see figure \[exclusion\_intro\]). If the sensitivity of GENIUS would be increased to a level of $\langle$m$_{\nu}\rangle \sim$ 0.001 eV (using 10 tonnes of $^{76}$Ge), this would allow to test [*all*]{} neutrino mass scenarios allowed by present neutrino oscillation experiments - except for one, the (not favoured) hierarchical LOW solution. For a detailed discussion see [@heinrichosc; @16; @17; @18].
With a background index of 10$^{-3}$counts/(kg keV y) in the energy region below 200 keV, which can be reached with a tank size of 13 m diameter and some improved shielding[@baudissolar; @20], GENIUS (10 tons) would be able to see the full solar pp neutrino spectrum in real time [@baudissolar; @geniusproposal; @20], with a count rate being a factor of 30-60 larger than a 20 tonnes LENS detector, and with a threshold of 11 keV or 19 keV.
Tritium production in HPGe at sea level
---------------------------------------
As evident from previous considerations of the expected background [@geniusproposal; @NIM], great care has to be taken about the cosmogenic isotopes produced inside the HPGe crystals at sea level. However, with an additional shield against the hard component of cosmic rays during fabrication, the good sensitivity for dark matter can be maintained.
Especially the production of $^{68}$Ge from the isotope $^{70}$Ge can affect the sensitivity due to the 10.37 keV X-ray emitted by the decay of $^{68}$Ge to $^{68}$Ga. In the main reaction leading to $^{68}$Ge enhancement tritium is produced through the process $^{70}$Ge(n,t)$^{68}$Ge. Tritium has a half life of 12.35 years and can thus not be deactivated within a reasonable time. $^3$H is a $\beta$ emitter with a Q-value of 18.6 keV.
The cosmogenic production rate of $^3$H in natural germanium has been estimated through simulations in [@juan; @avignone] using the cosmic neutron fluxes cited in [@lal; @hess]. For natural germanium it is estimated to be less than $\sim$ 200 atoms per day and kg material. Using this upper limit for tritium production at sea level with an overall fabrication time of ten days this would mean a tritium abundance of $\sim$ 2000 atoms per kilogram material. With the half life of 12.3 years this results in a decay rate of $\sim$3.6 $\mu$Bq/kg equivalent to $\sim$113 decays per year (this is in very good agreement with the result in [@zdesenko]). Even assuming an energy threshold of 12 keV and taking into account the spectral shape of tritium decay this yields an event rate of approximately 2 counts/(kg keV y) in the energy region between 12 keV and 19 keV, which is by two orders of magnitude above the allowed count rate required for GENIUS as a dark matter detector.
This consideration drastically shows the importance of proper planning of the crystal production and transportation. To avoid major problems with cosmogenic isotopes it is therefore essential to minimize the exposure of the crystals to cosmic rays at sea level.
It is therefore planned to shield the detector material during the complete 78 hours of production after the zone refining and approximately one week of transportation periods using concrete with a thickness equivalent to $\sim$ 5 mwe. Heavy concrete can be produced with a density up to 5.9 g/cm$^3$. Thus an additional heavy concrete layer of 1 m could act as a shield of roughly 5 mwe. This reduces the hard nucleonic component mainly responsible for the cosmogenic isotope production by up to two orders of magnitude [@heusser2]. A further increase of shielding strength does not seem to be reasonable since the cosmogenic production through fast muons which is by approximately two orders of magnitude less than through the hadronic component can not be shielded whatsoever.
With such a protection a reduction of the tritium production by a factor of $\sim$ 30 (see figures 2 and 3 in [@heusser2]) can be obtained. In this way the final background from tritium in the energy interval between 12 keV and 19 keV would be $\sim$1.6$\times10^{-2}$ counts/(kg keV y) without additional transportation and $\sim$5.6$\times10^{-2}$ counts/(kg keV y) with a week of transport from the fabrication site to the site of the experiment.
The Genius-TF
=============
It has been shown[@bargein; @diss] that with a setup using a conventional shield, a sensitivity can be reached which allows for a test of the DAMA evidence region within a short time period. With an active mass of the detector of approximately 40 kg, projected for the Genius-TF (see Fig. \[geniustf\_scheme\]), in which the background index will be maintained, not only the WIMP-nucleon recoil spectrum, but also the expected signature of WIMP dark matter in form of the annual modulation signal could be tested within a reasonable time window with a sensitivity probing the full DAMA evidence region [@gtfmpg; @geniustf; @kla5].
The Genius Test Facility could test the following points: the long term stability of ’naked’ HPGe-detectors in liquid nitrogen, the possibility of constructing a feasible holder system and in addition the DAMA evidence contour, through testing the expected signal and signature. The GENIUS-TF will also be a suitable place to develop and test the electronics needed for the GENIUS experiment. The data acquisition system should be based on a modular structure being capable of taking data from up to 300 detectors simultaneously.
The Test Facility
-----------------
The concept of the GENIUS proposal has the great advantage that no individual cryostat system is needed. Instead the HPGe crystals are surrounded by liquid nitrogen of much higher radiopurity which in addition provides ideal cooling and shielding against external radiation. This opens the new research potentials for the Genius project [@genius; @GENIUS].
It is proposed to install a setup with up to fourteen detectors on a small scale in order to be sensitive in the range of the DAMA result [@damahere] on a short time scale and to prove the long term stability of the new detector concept.
The design is shown in figure \[geniustf\_scheme\]. It is based on a dewar made from low-activity polystyrene and on a shield of zone refined germanium bricks inside the dewar and low activity lead outside the dewar. A layer of boron loaded polyethylene plates for suppression of neutron-induced background completes the shield.
340 kg of zone-refined high-purity Germanium bricks will serve as the inner layer to shield the ’naked’ HPGe detector against the less radio-pure polystyrene. Also the first 5cm layer outside the polystyrene-dewar needs to be of extreme radiopurity. The same type of copper as installed in the Heidelberg-Moscow experiment, and/or some complementary low-level lead could be used. To shield the external $\gamma$ rays (natural radioactivity from the surroundings) an overall lead layer of approximately 35 cm is needed.
Using this concept an inner detector chamber of 40 cm$\times$40 cm$\times$40 cm would be sufficient to house up to seven HPGe-detectors in one layer or 14 detectors in two layers. This will allow for the development and test of a holder system for the same amount of crystals.
The overall dimension of the experiment will be 1.8 m$\times$1.8 m$\times$1.8 m thus fitting in one of the buildings of the Heidelberg-Moscow experiment which is used momentarily for material measurements.
The background considerations and simulations discussed in [@geniustf], which extend those of [@bargein] suggest that a reduction of the background by a factor of $\sim$5-10 with respect to the Heidelberg-Moscow-Experiment can be attained with the proposed setup.
Assuming a final target mass of 40 kg, an energy threshold of 12 keV and a background index of 4 counts/(kg keV y) corresponding to $\sim$ 0.01 counts/(kg keV d) in the energy region between 12 keV and 100 keV the Genius TF would need a significance of 190 kg y to see the claimed DAMA annual modulation with 95% probability and 90%C.L. (see [@cebrian]). This corresponds to an overall measuring time of approximately five years which would correspond to the life time of this experiment.
However, the new detectors will have an energy threshold of 0.5 keV (four detectors with 2.5kg weight each, and this threshold have been produced already) thus allowing for the use of the experimental spectrum in the energy range between the threshold and the X-ray peaks seen from the cosmogenically produced isotopes. This will significantly improve the sensitivity of the Genius TF on the annual modulation effect.
In the energy region around the Q-value of the double beta decay of $^{76}$Ge at 2038.5 keV a background index of $\sim7\times10^{-3}$counts/(kg keV y) could be reached, leading to a sensitivity for the effective Majorana neutrino mass down to 0.15 eV with 90% C.L. [@gtfmpg; @geniustf]
The construction of the setup will be started in 2001. First results may be expected in the end of the year 2002.
Conclusions
===========
The large physics potential of the GENIUS project regarding WIMP Dark Matter search, neutrinoless double beta decay search and real time observation of solar pp-neutrinos has been briefly outlined. We presented the Genius TF, a test facility for the GENIUS project, whose construction started in early 2001. The Genius TF can, according to Monte Carlo simulations, reach a background of $\sim$ 2-4counts/(kgkeVy) in the energy region between 11keV and 100keV. Thus it could for the first time probe the DAMA evidence region using both, the WIMP-nuclear recoil signal and the annual modulation signature.
[99]{} P. Belli, these Proceedings and CDMS Collaboration and R. Bernabei et al. Phys. Lett. B **480**(2000)23 R. Gaitskell, these Proceedings, R. Abusaidi et al., Nucl. Inst. and Meth. A **444**(2000)345 H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus in Proceedings of the First International Conference on Particle Physics Beyond the Standard Model, [*BEYOND THE DESERT 1997*]{}, Castle Ringberg, Germany, 8-14 June 1997, edited by H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus and H.Päs, IOP Bristol, 1998, pp. 485–531, and Int. Journ. Mod. Phys. A [**13**]{}(1998)3953 H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, J. Hellmig und M. Hirsch, J. Phys. G **24**(1998)483 H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, L. Baudis, G. Heusser, B. Majorovits, H. Päs, Proposal, MPI-H-V26-1999, August 1999, hep-ph/9910205 and in Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Particle Physics Beyond the Standard Model, [*BEYOND THE DESERT 1999*]{}, Castle Ringberg, Germany, 6-12 June, 1999, ed. by H.V. Klapdor–Kleingrothaus, I. Krivosheina (IOP Bristol 2000), pp. 915-1024 H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, L. Baudis, A. Dietz, G. Heusser, I. Krivosheina, B. Majorovits, H. Strecker , H. Tu, et al., Internal Report, Proposal MPI-H-V32-2000 L. Baudis, A. Dietz, G. Heusser, B. Majorovits, H. Strecker and H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, hep-ex/0012022, submitted for publication B. Majorovits, PhD thesis, University of Heidelberg, 2000 G. Heusser, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. **45**(1995)543 L. Baudis, G. Heusser, H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, B. Majorovits, Y. Ramachers, H. Strecker, Nucl. Inst. and Meth. A **426**(1999)425 R. Bernabei et al., Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl) **70**(1998)79 HEIDELBERG-MOSCOW collaboration, L. Baudis, J. Hellmig, G. Heusser, H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, S Kolb, B. Majorovits, H. Päs, Y. Ramachers, H. Strecker, V. Alexeev, A. Bakalyarov, A. Balysh, S.T. Belyaev, V.I. Lebedev, S. Zhoukov, Phys. Rev. D **59**(1998)022001 and Preprint hep-ex/9811045 L. Baudis, A. Dietz, B. Majorovits, F. Schwamm, H. Strecker, H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, Phys. Rev. D **63**(2000)022001 and astro-ph/0008339 V. Bednyakov and H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, hep-ph/0011233, Phys. Rev. D, in press, (2001) J. Ellis, A. Ferstl, K.A. Olive, Phys. Lett. B **481**(2000)304, hep-ph/0007113 H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, H. Päs, Y.A. Smirnov, hep-ph/0003219, Phys. Rev. D, in press, (2001) H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, H. Päs, Yu. Smirnov, submitted for publ. H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, H. Päs, Comments in Nucl. and Part. Phys, in press, (2000) and physics/0006024 H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, in Proc. of NOON 2000 - Internat. Workshop on ’NEUTRINO OSCILLATIONS AND THEIR ORIGIN’, Tokyo, Dec. 2000, World Scientific, Singapore, 2001 HEIDELBERG-MOSCOW Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. **83**(1999)41 E. Fiorini et al., Phys. Rep **307**(1998)309 H. Eijiri et al., Phys.Rev.Lett. **85**(2000)2917, nucl-ex/9911008 L. Baudis, H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, Eur. Phys. J. A **5**(1999)441 H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, in Proc. of LowNu 2000 - Internat. Workshop on ’Low Energy Solar Neutrinos’, Tokyo, Dec. 2000, World Scientific, Singapore, 2001 J. Collar, PhD thesis, University of South Carolina, 1992 F.T. Avignone, et al., Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) **28**(1992)280 D. Lal, B. Peter, [*Cosmic Ray Produced Radioactivity on the Earth*]{}, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg, 1967 W.N. Hess, H.W. Patterson and R. Wallace, Phys. Rev. **116**(1959)449 O.A. Ponkratenko, V.I. Tretyak and Y.G. Zdesenko, in Proc. of DARK98, 2nd International Conference on Dark Matter in Astro- and Particle Physics, Heidelberg, Germany, July 20-25, 1998, eds. H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, L. Baudis, IoP, Bristol, 1999 B. Majorovits, L. Baudis, G. Heusser, H. Strecker, H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, Nucl. Inst. and Meth. A **455**(2000)371 Homepage of the Non-Accelerator Particle Physics group, Max Planck Institut für Kernphysik, Heidelberg at http://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/non\_acc S. Cebrian et al., Astropart.Phys. **14**(2001)339 and hep-ph/9912394
[^1]: Spokesman of HEIDELBERG-MOSCOW and GENIUS collaborations; E-mail: [email protected]
[^2]: Talk presented by B. Majorovits
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- 'K.K. Nilsson'
- 'P. M[ø]{}ller'
date: 'Received date; accepted date'
title: |
Ly$\alpha$ emitters: blue dwarfs or supermassive ULIRGs?\
Evidence for a transition with redshift
---
Introduction
============
Galaxies at high redshift come in all kinds of flavours. Depending on the search criteria, the sources found may be dusty or dust-free, more or less massive, star forming or quiescent. Some of the most impressive beasts of the high redshift zoo are the sub-mm and ultra-luminous infrared galaxies: SMGs (Ivison et al. 1998, 2000, Blain et al. 2002, Chapman et al. 2005) and ULIRGs (Sanders & Mirabel 1996). These galaxies show star formation rates in the hundreds or thousands of solar masses per year, with most of their light re-processed into the infrared or sub-mm wavelengths due to large amounts of dust. On the other end of the scale, Ly$\alpha$ emitters are found (LAEs; M[ø]{}ller & Warren 1998, Gronwall et al. 2007, Nilsson et al. 2007, Finkelstein et al. 2009, Ouchi et al. 2008, Grove et al. 2009) which have hitherto been generally considered blue and dust-free galaxies with moderate star formation rates of a few to a few times ten solar masses per year.
Only a few publications have reported finding red and/or dusty Ly$\alpha$ emitters (Stiavelli et al. 2001, Colbert et al. 2006, Lai et al. 2007, Finkelstein et al. 2009, Nilsson et al. 2009). Considering the traditional view that even small amounts of dust would quench any Ly$\alpha$ emission (for a discussion, see Pritchet 1994), the detection of the Ly$\alpha$ line in dusty galaxies would seem surprising, but even more so the detection of Ly$\alpha$ in a sample of sub-mm galaxies (Chapman et al. 2003, 2005). Likely explanations for the existence of dusty galaxies with Ly$\alpha$ emission are either special geometrical alignments or strong local variations in the dust-to-gas ratios in a clumpy medium (Neufeld 1991, Hansen & Oh 2006). Observational evidence that Ly$\alpha$ emission is commonly seen among sub-mm galaxies does not, however, constitute evidence for the opposite, since sub-mm galaxies are rare and because there are few ways other than Ly$\alpha$ to determine the redshift of very red galaxies. It follows that the overlap reported so far could well be an observational selection bias. The fundamental questions that remain are therefore whether [*i)*]{} sub-mm galaxies and ULIRGs are common among Ly$\alpha$ emitters and [*ii)*]{} whether the ULIRG fraction evolves with redshift. This *Letter* aims to address those two questions. We here present the infrared properties of two samples of galaxies found through their Ly$\alpha$ emission at $z = 0.3$ and $2.3$. We show that they have infrared fluxes well into the ULIRG regime. This sample is unique, bridging the gap between low-mass star forming and large star-bursting galaxies.
Throughout this paper, we assume a cosmology with $H_0=72$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega _{\rm m}=0.3$ and $\Omega _\Lambda=0.7$.
Data
====
The Ly$\alpha$ candidate samples studied here come from Deharveng et al. (2008, $z=0.3$, hereafter z03) and Nilsson et al. (2009, $z=2.3$, hereafter z23). The z03 sample consists of a total of 31 Ly$\alpha$ emitting galaxies at $0.1 < z < 0.4$ in the ECDF-S and ELAIS-S fields, found in a survey volume of $\sim 5 \times 10^5$ Mpc$^3$. Of the 31, one is observed to be an AGN by Cowie et al. (2009) and 11 are not included in their classification. At $z = 2.3$, the sample includes 187 Ly$\alpha$ emitting candidates at redshifts $2.21< z <2.31$, and are spread over a $\sim 0.2$ deg$^2$ area in the central COSMOS field (the survey volume is $\sim 3\times10^5$ Mpc$^3$). Of the 187 candidates, 27 are considered AGN, based on detections in public *Chandra* and/or XMM X-ray images. The ECDF-S, ELAIS-S and COSMOS fields are covered by the SWIRE (Lonsdale et al. 2003) and S-COSMOS (Sanders et al. 2007) *Spitzer* surveys. The photometry of all the z23 candidates, in all *Spitzer* bands from $3.6 - 24\mu$m, will be presented in a forthcoming publication (Nilsson et al., in prep.). Here we focus on the results found for the photometry in the $8\mu$m and $24\mu$m (MIPS) bands for the z03 and z23 samples, respectively, corresponding to $\sim 7 \mu$m in the restframe of both samples.
For the z03 emitters, aperture photometry centred on the Ly$\alpha$ coordinates was performed. The aperture radius was $4.5''$, selected to be consistent with the z23 results. The limiting sensitivity is a few times ten $\mu$Jy. Of the 31 candidates, 24 are detected at $> 3\sigma$, of which Cowie et al. (2009) classified one as an AGN and 17 as galaxies.
In COSMOS, both a deep and a wide survey has been published in the MIPS band. The deep survey covers $\sim 33$% of the field surveyed for Ly$\alpha$, and the sensitivities reached in the two surveys were 71 and 150 $\mu$Jy, respectively (5$\sigma$). To find counterparts to the Ly$\alpha$ emitters, the public catalogues were searched within 4 pixels ($4.8''$, i.e. $0.8 \, \times$ FWHM of the MIPS PSF) radii of each source and 25 counterparts were found. Of these, 16 are also X-ray detected, and are considered to be AGN based on their R band-to-X-ray flux ratios. The fluxes of the galaxies in the 8/24 $\mu$m bands are found in Table \[tab:IR\].
Infrared properties of Ly$\alpha$ emitters
==========================================
At $z = 2.25$, the MIPS $24\mu$m band corresponds to restframe $5.9 - 8.8$ $\mu$m. Correspondingly, the $8\mu$m IRAC band covers $4 - 8.8$ $\mu$m for the z03 emitters. To convert this mid-infrared luminosity to the total infrared luminosity, we use the conversion of Chary & Elbaz (2001): $$\label{eq:IR}
L_{IR} \, [8-1000 \, \mu\mathrm{m}] = 4.37^{+2.35}_{-2.13} \times 10^{-6}L^{1.62}_{6.7 \mu m}.$$ The values derived can be found in Table \[tab:IR\], and a histogram of the total infrared luminosities is shown in Fig. \[fig:IRnum\].
[@lcccccccc]{}\
LAE\_ & $F_{24\mu m}$ & $L_{IR}$ & $L_{bol}$ & $SFR_{bol}$ & $A_{1600}$ & Offset & Remark\
COSMOS\_\# & $\mu$Jy & erg s$^{-1}$ & erg s$^{-1}$ & M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ & & arcsec & &\
20 & $154\pm16$ & $46.50\pm0.05$ & $46.50\pm0.07$ & $ 1420\pm220$ & $5.51\pm0.18$ & 0.02 & AGN\
36 & $835\pm20$ & $47.69\pm0.02$ & $47.69\pm0.02$ & $ 21830\pm1000$ & $7.65\pm0.05$ & 0.02 & AGN\
\
ID & $F_{8\mu m}$ & $L_{IR}$ & $L_{bol}$ & $SFR_{bol}$ & $A_{1600}$ & — & Remark &\
& $\mu$Jy & erg s$^{-1}$ & erg s$^{-1}$ & M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ & &\
CDFS\_1348 & $1.63\pm0.03$ & $45.19\pm0.01$ & $45.20\pm0.01$ & $70.9\pm2.1$ & $4.91\pm0.03$ & &\
CDFS\_1821 & $0.38\pm0.05$ & $44.17\pm0.08$ & $44.20\pm0.09$ &$7.1\pm1.4$ & $2.69\pm0.21$ & & Unclass. &\
\[tab:IR\]
Columns are: (1) flux in the 8/24 $\mu$m data, (2) infrared luminosity, (3) bolometric luminosity, (4) star formation rate, (5) dust attenuation derived from the infrared luminosities, (6) offsets between MIPS catalogue source and LAE candidate in z23 sample, and (7) other remarks. The IDs for the z03 sample are from Deharveng et al. (2008). Full table is available in the online version.
At each redshift, the infrared luminosities for the full samples (25 and 24, respectively), as well as the subsamples with certain identifications, are shown. It is seen that the flux limits at the two redshifts cause the overlap between the high and z03 sample to be very small. All of the z23 sources are consistent with ULIRG luminosities ($L_{IR} > 10^{12} L_{\odot}$), including the “normal” LAEs. The luminosities are also in the same range as high redshift sub-mm galaxies (Chapman et al. 2005). At $z = 0.3$, roughly half of the galaxies lie in the range of normal star forming galaxies, seven have LIRG luminosities ($10^{11} < L_{IR} < 10^{12} L_{\odot}$), and two have ULIRG luminosities. Note that at $z = 2.3$, detected sources are automatically ULIRGs, as the detection limit in the deep survey in the $24\mu$m band corresponds to $\log L_{IR} = 12.4 \, L_{\odot}$, and in the shallow survey to $\log L_{IR} = 12.9 \, L_{\odot}$.
In Fig. \[fig:IRbol\] the Ly$\alpha$ luminosities are shown as a function of the infrared luminosities of the galaxies. Here and in the following analysis, we have chosen to be conservative and have excluded all AGN from the samples. In Sect. \[sec:ulirgcolour\] we return to the question of AGN and test how robust the results are against AGN inclusion.
In Fig. \[fig:IRbol\] the z23 LAE candidates with MIPS detections seem to follow a given trend between the two flux measurements. The best-fit ratio between Ly$\alpha$ and infrared luminosity is $\sim 0.02$ %. In the z03 sample, the Ly$\alpha$ luminosity interestingly stays constant as a function of infrared luminosity. This indicates that the physical processes governing the Ly$\alpha$ and the IR luminosities are not related at low Ly$\alpha$ and/or IR luminosities, although the relation seen at bright luminosities is based on small number statistics. As the blue points in this case (sources with no previous identification as either galaxy or AGN) are mixed in the population of galaxy LAEs based on Ly$\alpha$ luminosity, these are hereafter considered as normal LAE candidates.
The bolometric luminosity can be calculated from the infrared and ultraviolet luminosity according to $$\label{eq:bol}
L_{bol} = L_{IR}+L_{1600},$$ where $$L_{1600} = \lambda_{1600} \, f_{1600} \, 4 \, \pi \, dL^2.$$ This can further be converted to a dust unobscured star formation rate, assuming that the bolometric luminosity includes all the re-processed light from star forming regions (Kennicutt 1998): $$\label{eq:bolsfr}
SFR = 4.5 \times 10^{-44} \times L_{bol} \, \mathrm{[erg \, s^{-1}]}.$$ The star formation rates found from the bolometric luminosity are in the range $500 - 5000$ M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ for the non-AGN z23 LAEs and $2 - 3300$ M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ for the non-AGN z03 LAEs. Comparing the star formation rates found from the Ly$\alpha$ line and from the bolometric luminosity, we find a median ratio of $0.0043 \pm 0.0025$ and $0.034 \pm 0.18$ for the high and z03 non-AGN LAEs, where the error bars indicate the spread in the values. As the SFR found from the bolometric luminosity is the total SFR of the galaxy, tracing the same population of star forming objects as those creating the Ly$\alpha$ emission, the Ly$\alpha$ escape fraction can be calculated as the ratio between these two values. In the z23 sample, this escape fraction is $\sim 0.4$% for infrared selected Ly$\alpha$ emitters, whereas it covers the whole range from a few to 100% in the z03 sample. Furthermore, for the z23 sample, five out of the 9 non-AGN LAEs have SFRs that should make them observable in the *Chandra* X-ray images of the COSMOS field ($\log L_X > 43.3$ erg s$^{-1}$), if we assume the SFR-X-ray luminosity conversion of Ranalli et al. (2003). That they are not must indicate that the X-ray sources are obscured by dust.
In Meurer et al. (1999), a relation between the ratio of infrared to ultraviolet flux and the dust attenuation $A_{1600}$ was derived: $$\label{eq:sfrav}
\log \frac{L_{IR}}{L_{1600}} = \log (10^{0.4 \times A_{1600}} - 1) + 0.076.$$ The spread in $A_{1600}$ for the galaxies here is large. The attenuation in both samples reaches as high as eight magnitudes in $A_{1600}$. In the z03 sample the attenuation spreads down to one magnitude, whereas the z23 galaxies all have $A_{1600} > 3$. The distribution is flat in both samples. A plot of the SFR ratios against the dust attenuation derived according to this equation is found in Fig. \[fig:IRsfr\].
The SFR ratios, which are proxies of the Ly$\alpha$ escape fraction, are seen to decrease with increasing dust attenuation, similar to what is seen in local galaxies (Atek et al. 2009). The appearance of this plot, however, stems from the relation between the $x-$ and $y-$axis and Ly$\alpha$ equivalent width (EW). Lines of constant EW have been overplotted in Fig. \[fig:IRsfr\]. All objects have EWs of roughly $20 - 400$ [Å]{}.
ULIRG fraction and redshift evolution
=====================================
The finding that Ly$\alpha$ emitting galaxies can also be very IR-bright, hence dusty, is not a novel result. Chapman et al. (2003, 2005) showed that a set of sub-mm galaxies had Ly$\alpha$ in emission. Very red LAEs have also been found in other surveys. At $z\sim3.1$, Nilsson et al. (2007; N07, $\log L_{Ly\alpha} > 41.88$ erg s$^{-1}$) found one red LAE in a sample of 24 and Lai et al. (2008; L08, $\log L_{Ly\alpha} > 42.07$ erg s$^{-1}$) presented four red LAEs among 162, also at $z \sim 3.1$. To determine the fraction of ULIRGs in the $z\sim 3.1$ surveys, we studied the ULIRG template SEDs of Vega et al. (2008) and find that $z=3.1$ ULIRGs must be detected in the *Spitzer* IRAC bands to the flux limits of ECDF-S. Furthermore, the colours in the IRAC bands have to be red; $R-Ch4 \, (8\mu\mathrm{m}) > 2.5, Ch1\, (3.6\mu\mathrm{m}) - Ch4 > 2$. In the N07 sample, only one object is detected in the IRAC bands, with $R-Ch4 = 6.5$, resulting in one ULIRG in this sample (1/24). In the L08 sample, 18 galaxies are detected in the IRAC bands. However, the colours of these objects, including the red objects, are all $Ch1-Ch4 < 2$ (their Fig. 2). As a result, no ULIRGs are found in their survey (0/162). Combining these two samples, the number of ULIRGs at $z\sim 3.1$ are 1 out of 186, resulting in a ULIRG fraction of $0.5^{+1.3}_{-0.5}$%, where the $1\sigma$ error bars are based on Poisson statistics. Finally, Colbert et al. (2006) found that three out of 22 $z \sim 2.3$ LAEs ($14^{+13}_{-7}$%, excluding their detections of ULIRGs in Ly$\alpha$ blobs[^1], see also Francis et al. 2001) were bright in the observed infrared, and that they were ULIRGs. The percentage of ULIRGs in the $z = 2.3$ sample presented here is $ 14^{+8}_{-5}$%, if only the objects in the deep survey are considered (7/50). This number is a lower estimate, as the sensitivity of the deep COSMOS MIPS data only reaches $\log L_{IR} = 12.4 \, \mathrm{L}_{\odot}$ at $z = 2.3$. In the $z = 0.3$ sample, the results are complete in infrared luminosity, and the percentage of ULIRGs in the sample is $20^{+12}_{-8}$% (6/30), where we again have included 6 unclassified objects but not the AGN. We return to the robustness also of this result against AGN inclusion in Sec. \[sec:ulirgcolour\] below.
In Fig. \[fig:frac\] the ULIRG fractions are plotted as a function of redshift.
The data points are few, but there is a clear trend for the ULIRG fraction to grow from high redshifts up to the present day. There even seems to be a hint that the transition from almost zero ULIRG fraction to the current value is rather sudden. For the sole purpose of illustrating the time and steepness of the transition, we overplot in Fig. \[fig:frac\] a hyperbolic tangents function of the form: $$\label{eq:tanh}
UF(z) = \frac{UF_{0}}{2} (1-\tanh(\theta \,\, (z - z_{tr}))).$$ In this equation, $UF$ is the ULIRG fraction, $\theta$ represents the steepness of the transition, and $z_{tr}$ is the transition redshift. The function plotted in Fig. \[fig:frac\] has $UF_0 = 0.20$ (present-day fraction), $\theta = 2.28$, and $z_{tr} = 2.52$. This means that the transition redshift for the ULIRG fraction is $z \sim 2.5$; the ULIRG fraction is negligible at higher redshifts, whereas at lower redshifts it approaches $\sim 25$%.
Robustness of the result {#sec:ulirgcolour}
------------------------
For the definition of the Ly$\alpha$-selected ULIRG subsamples we used the common definition based on $L_{IR}$. IR-selected ULIRG samples are known to have a significant (15-50%) fraction of galaxies with AGN components, but it is also known that their total luminosity is often dominated by star formation rather than by the AGNs (Veilleux et al. 2009). Nevertheless, to make sure that our Ly$\alpha$ selection did not bias the results, we chose the most conservative approach and therefore removed all X-ray detected objects from the samples. We now ask the question of whether a less conservative approach is possible, and if that would change the conclusions. We therefore searched for an additional test to certify that a candidate is a ULIRG. Using the ULIRG template SEDs of Vega et al. (2008), we find that a useful index at $z=2.3$ is optical $R$ band minus Ch4 of IRAC. All Vega templates have $R-Ch4>2.7$, see Fig. \[fig:colours\].
The points in the plot show all the LAE candidates at $z=2.3$ from Nilsson et al. (2009) with $> 3\sigma$ detections in $R$ and $Ch4$. The black points are those detected with MIPS, whereas the green points are not MIPS-detected. X-ray detected objects are marked with a pink ring. Four ULIRGs are not detected in $Ch4$ and are shown with upper limits. It can be seen from this plot that the flux selection with MIPS very cleanly samples the region of colour space where ULIRGs are expected to be, except the very brightest AGN that are too blue for this selection. Selecting ULIRGs based on the infrared flux and the $R-Ch4$ colour, and including all objects that have the correct colours within $1\sigma$, changes the $z=2.3$ sample by increasing the number of ULIRGs from seven of a total 50 LAE candidates in the first selection to eight of a total 60 candidates in the second selection. The new fraction is $13^{+7}_{-5}$%, in perfect agreement with the initial result.
The ULIRG fraction at $z=0.3$ was obtained using the Deharveng et al. (2008) sample but excluding the AGN reported by Cowie et al. (2009). If the AGN are included, the ULIRG fraction drops to $19^{+12}_{-8}$% rather than the previous $20^{+12}_{-8}$%, while ignoring the Deharveng et al. (2008) sample. Using only the sample of Cowie et al. (2009) gives a ULIRG fraction of $12^{+16}_{-4}$%. All of those results are identical to within $1\sigma$ errors, so the $z=0.3$ result is also robust against details of the sample selection.
Conclusion
==========
We have here presented the infrared properties of two samples of Ly$\alpha$ emitters, at $z = 0.3$ (24 objects) and $z = 2.3$ (25 objects). The samples were originally Ly$\alpha$-selected but here we considered only the subsamples that were also detected with *Spitzer*. The two subsamples were selected to determine the fraction of powerful dusty starburst galaxies (ULIRGs) among LAEs and the redshift evolution of this fraction. Our most important conclusions are the following.
*i)* At all redshifts below $z = 3$, a non-zero fraction of LAEs are found to be ULIRGs. This result directly contradicts the classic view that dust and Ly$\alpha$ emission are mutually exclusive, and it holds together with the finding that Ly$\alpha$ emission at high redshifts correlate with metallicity (M[ø]{}ller et al. 2004) makes the case that we must re-think the importance of dust for the Ly$\alpha$ escape fraction.
*ii)* There is evidence for a strong evolution in ULIRG fraction from redshift 3.1 to the present universe. The fractions derived have been shown to be very robust against different selection criteria. This explains why there was severe disagreement about the colour of Ly$\alpha$ galaxies originally. At redshifts around three they were reported to be young, blue, low-dust starbursts (Warren & M[ø]{}ller 1996, Fynbo et al. 2000), while at redshifts closer to two they were reported to be red/dusty (Stiavelli et al. 2001).
*iii)* There may be evidence that the evolution of the ULIRG fraction is not linear in time, but rather that there is a jump from redshift three to two, and then a more gradual evolution to the present time. Even though the evidence is merely suggestive at present, this jump does coincide with the number density evolution of quasars and suggests a connection between those classes of objects. This question bears strongly on the connection between starbursts and the formation of quasars, so it should be investigated more thoroughly via dedicated surveys of LAEs at several different redshifts in the range $z = 2$ to $z = 3.5$. We provide a simple formalism in the form of a three parameter function which is well suited to future tests of how sharp the transition is.
From the accumulation of evidence, it is clear that some Ly$\alpha$ emitting galaxies are very red and dusty, and vice versa that at least some ULIRG galaxies exhibit Ly$\alpha$ emission. As was shown in e.g. Finkelstein et al. (2009), it is possible that for some LAEs the Ly$\alpha$ emission is not affected by the dust at all, or at least not along the line-of-sight towards us. The possibility that Ly$\alpha$ equivalent widths may be enhanced in dusty environments has also been discussed in, e.g., Neufeld (1991), Hansen & Oh (2006), and Finkelstein et al. (2008, 2009). Interestingly, one of the ULIRG LAEs found at high redshift in the Nilsson et al. (2009) sample also has by far the largest equivalent width of their sample, with a restframe Ly$\alpha$ equivalent width of nearly $800$ [Å]{}. Considering that samples of LAEs now have for several years consistently included red, dusty galaxies, it is advisable to stop considering Ly$\alpha$ emitters as one type of galaxy, as we have seen in this and previous publications (Nilsson et al. 2009) that Ly$\alpha$ emitters exhibit a range of properties and that this range increases with decreasing redshift.
The authors wish to thank Daniel Schaerer and Anne Verhamme for useful discussions. We would also like to thank the anonymous referee for useful comments that have significantly improved the presentation of our results.
Atek, H., Kunth, D., Schaerer, D., et al., 2009, accepted in A&A, arXiv:0906.5349 Blain, A.W., Smail, I., Ivison, R.J., Kneib, J.-P., & Frayer, D.T., 2002, Phys. Rep., 369,111 Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R.C., et al., 2000, ApJ, 533, 682 Chapman, S.C., Blain, A.W., Ivison, R.J., & Smail, I., 2003, Nature, 422, 695 Chapman, S.C., Blain, A.W., Smail, I., & Ivison, R.J., 2005, ApJ, 622, 772 Chary, R., & Elbaz, D., 2001, ApJ, 556, 562 Colbert, J.W., Teplitz, H., Francis, P., et al., 2006, ApJ, 637, L89 Cowie, L.L., Barger, A.J., & Hu, E.M., 2009, submitted to ApJ, arXiv:0909.0031 Deharveng, J.-M., Small, T., Barlow, T.A., et al., 2008, ApJ, 680, 1072 Finkelstein, S.L., Rhoads, J.E., Malhotra, S., Grogin, N., & Wang, J., 2008, ApJ, 678, 655 Finkelstein, S.L., Rhoads, J.E., Malhotra, S., & Grogin, N., 2009, ApJ, 691, 465 Francis, P.J., Williger, G.M., Collins, N.R., et al., 2001, ApJ, 554, 1001 Fynbo, J.U., Thomsen, B., & M[ø]{}ller, P., 2000, A&A, 353, 457 Gronwall, C., Ciardullo, R., Hickey, T., et al., 2007, ApJ, 667, 79 Grove, L.F., Fynbo, J.P.U., Ledoux, C., et al., 2009, A&A, 497, 689 Hansen, M., & Oh, S.P., 2006, MNRAS, 367, 979 Ivison, R.J., Smail, I., Le Borgne, J.-F., et al., 1998, MNRAS, 298, 583 Ivison, R.J., Smail, I., Barger, A.J., et al., 2000, MNRAS, 315, 209 Kennicutt, R.C., 1998, ARAA, 36, 189 Lai, K., Huang, J.-S., Fazio, G., et al., 2007, ApJ, 655, 704 Lai, K., Huang, J.-S., Fazio, G., et al., 2008, ApJ, 674, 70 Lonsdale, C.J., Smith, H.E., Rowan-Robinson, M., et al., 2003, PASP, 115, 897 Meurer, G.R., Heckman, T.M., & Calzetti, D., 1999, ApJ, 521, 64 M[ø]{}ller, P., & Warren, S.J., 1998, MNRAS, 299, 661 M[ø]{}ller, P., Fynbo, J.P.U., & Fall, S.M., 2004, A&A, 422, L33 Neufeld, D.A., 1991, ApJ, 370, L85 Nilsson, K.K., M[ø]{}ller, P., M[ö]{}ller, O., et al., 2007, A&A, 471, 71 Nilsson, K.K., Tapken, C., M[ø]{}ller P., et al., 2009, A&A, 498, 13 Ouchi, M., Shimasaku, K., Akiyama, M., et al., 2008, ApJS, 176, 301 Pritchet, C.J., 1994, PASP, 106, 1052 Ranalli, P., Comastri, A., & Setti, G., 2003, A&A, 399, 39 Sanders, D.B., & Mirabel, I.F., 1996, ARAA, 34, 749 Sanders, D.B., Salvato, M., Aussel, H., et al., 2007, ApJS, 172, 86 Seaton, M.J., 1979, MNRAS, 187P, 73 Stiavelli, M., Scarlata, C., Panagia, N., et al., 2001, ApJ, 561, L37 Vega, O., Clemens, M.S., Bressan, A., et al., 2008, A&A, 484, 631 Veilleux, S., Rupke, D.S.N., Kim, D.-C., et al., 2009, ApJS, 182, 628 Warren, S.J., & M[ø]{}ller, P., 1996, A&A, 311, 25
[^1]: It is unclear what mechanisms power Ly$\alpha$ blobs, and if they are a distinct population of objects or simply the tail of the size distribution of LAEs. Due to these uncertainties, we chose a conservative selection and disregard these sources here.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Near infrared (NIR) and optical surface photometric analyses of the dusty galaxy NGC972 are presented. The photometric profiles in the $BVRJHK$ bands can be fitted with a combination of gaussian and exponential profiles, corresponding to a starburst nucleus and a stellar disk respectively. The exponential scale length in the $B$-band is 2.8 times larger than in the $K$-band, which implies a central $B$-band optical depth as high as 11. A bulge is absent even in the NIR bands and hence the galaxy must be of a morphological type later than the usually adopted Sb type. Relatively low rotational velocity and high gas content also favor a later type, probably Sd, for the galaxy. Only one arm can be traced in the distribution of old stars; the second arm, however, can be traced in the distribution of dust and [H[ii]{}]{} regions. Data suggest a short NIR bar, which ends inside the nuclear ring. The slowly rising nature of the rotation curve rules out a resonance origin of the the nuclear ring. The ring is most likely not in the plane of the galaxy, given its circular appearance in spite of the moderately high inclination of the galaxy. The off-planar nature of the star forming ring, the unusually high fraction (30%) of the total mass in molecular form, the presence of a nuclear starburst and the asymmetry of spiral arms, are probably the result of a merger with a gas-rich companion galaxy.'
author:
- 'Y.D. Mayya$^1$, Swara Ravindranath$^2$'
- 'L. Carrasco$^{1,3}$'
title: Near infrared and optical morphology of the dusty galaxy NGC972
---
Introduction
============
NGC972 is a nearby dusty galaxy whose morphological type is yet to be established. It is classified as Sb in Hubble Atlas of Galaxies (Sandage 1961), Third Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies (de Vaucouleurs et al. 1991, RC3 henceforth) and Revised Shapely-Ames Catalogue (Sandage & Tammann 1981). However, Krienke & Hodge (1974) had found the galaxy to be sharing many properties of I0 type galaxies and accordingly the galaxy was given an I0 classification in the Second Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies (de Vaucouleurs, de Vaucouleurs & Corwin 1976). Given the heterogeneity of the I0 class galaxies, the presence of a well established trailing dusty arm (Burbidge, Burbidge & Prendergast 1965) in this galaxy was taken as a strong support in favor of the Sb classification. The presence of a star forming nuclear ring in this galaxy, if assumed to be a resonance ring, also seems to support the Sb classification of the galaxy (Ravindranath & Prabhu 1998, RP98 henceforth).
The optical appearance of NGC972, which was the basis for its morphological classification hitherto, is dominated by the dust lanes. Interestingly the presence of these dust lanes has played a major role in its classification both as Sb and I0 — the dusty trailing arm supporting its Sb classification, the chaotic appearance caused by dust placing it in the class of I0 galaxies. This highlights the limitation of the qualitative classification schemes based solely on the optical morphologies, especially for the dust-rich galaxies such as NGC972. Recent advances in observational techniques and theoretical modeling of galaxy dynamics allow us to use many more properties than just optical morphology to establish the true morphological type of galaxies. From the observational side, NIR imaging allows us to have a dust-free view of the underlying morphological components of galaxies. Such observations have already helped discover new components such as nuclear spirals and bars in galaxies, whose optical appearance did not suggest the existence of those components (Zaritsky, Rix & Rieke 1993; Knapen et al. 1995). The variation of dynamical properties, such as the rotation speed, length of the bar etc., along the Hubble sequence is now well understood. Early-type galaxies rotate faster than the late-type galaxies (Zaritsky 1993). The bars of early-type galaxies are lengthy and uniform, where as they are short and weak in late-type galaxies (Combes & Elmegreen 1993). Thus galaxy classification can be done in an integrated way by making use of both the morphological and dynamical properties of galaxies. Such studies will also help in isolating the underlying physical quantities governing the Hubble sequence.
We carried out a quantitative morphological investigation of NGC972 to check whether its Sb classification requires revision. We based our analysis on the newly obtained NIR images, and made use of the existing optical images. Additionally we compiled the available information on the gas content, star formation indicators and dynamics to infer its morphological type in an integrated way. We found that none of the quantitative indicators of the galaxy morphology favor its Sb classification and the galaxy seems to be of type as late as Sd. Observations and the techniques followed in the reduction of the data are described in Sec. 2. The main surface photometric results are presented in Sec. 3 and the opacity of the disk of NGC972 is discussed in Sec. 4. Issues related to the morphological type and the dynamical history of the galaxy are discussed in Sec. 5. Concluding remarks are given Sec. 6. A distance of 21.9 Mpc is adopted for the galaxy, based on the velocity from RC3 and Hubble constant of 75 kms$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-1}$. This results in an image scale of 105 parsec arcsec$^{-1}$.
Observations and Data Reduction
===============================
Near infrared observations were carried out using the CAMILA instrument (Cruz-Gonzalez et al. 1994) at the 2.1-m telescope of the [*Observatorio Astronómico Nacional*]{} at San Pedro Martir, Baja California. The CAMILA instrument uses a NICMOS 3 detector of 256$\times$256 pixel format. The instrument was used in the imaging mode with the focal reducer configuration $f/4.5$ in all our observations. This results in a spatial resolution of $0\farcs85/$pixel and a total field of view of $3\farcm6\times3\farcm6$.
The imaging observations were carried out on the night of 13 September 1997 using the broad band filters $J,H,K'$. Each observation consisted of a sequence of object and sky exposures, with the integration time of an individual exposure limited by the sky counts, which was kept well below the non-linear regime of the detector. The net exposure times on the object were 12, 6 and 5 minutes for $J,H$ and $K'$ bands respectively. Roughly equal amounts of time were spent on the sky fields. The recessional velocity of 1670 kms$^{-1}$ for NGC972 did not allow us to detect the Br$\gamma$ emission line with the available zero-redshift Br$\gamma$ filter. Photometric calibration to the standard $JHK$ system was performed using the UKIRT standard star FS7 (Casali & Hawarden 1992). The sky conditions were photometric and the sky magnitudes were roughly $15.9, 14.2$ and 11.5 magnitude arcsec$^{-2}$ in $J,H,$ and $K$ bands respectively. The seeing FWHM was typically $2\farcs0$.
The image processing involved subtraction of the bias and sky frames, division by flat field frames, registration of the images to a common co-ordinate system and then stacking all the images in a filter. Bias subtraction was carried out as part of the data acquisition. The sky frames in each filter were prepared by combining all the sky frames using the median operation. Flat field frames were taken during twilight period. A master flat field frame for each filter was constructed by stacking several night-sky subtracted twilight frames in corresponding filters. The flat fielding operation involved dividing the sky subtracted images of the object by normalized master flats. The resulting images were aligned to a common co-ordinate system using the common stars in the frames and then combined using the median operation. Only good images (as defined in the CAMILA manual — see Cruz-Gonzalez et al. 1994) were used for combining the images. Some of the images had a horizontal band at the joints of the individual chips forming the detector of the NICMOS 3 camera. We eliminated this feature by subtracting a $255\times1$ median smoothed image from the original images. The resulting combined images were aligned to the image from the Digitized Sky Survey (DSS), through a geometrical mapping using the GEOTRAN and GEOMAP tasks available in the reduction software. The transformed star positions in the images agreed to within $0\farcs2$ as judged from the coordinates of common stars. Also, the images were assigned the equatorial coordinates using the image from the Digitized Sky Survey.
The routines under Image Reduction and Analysis Facility (IRAF) and Space Telescope Science Data Analysis System (STSDAS) were used in the reduction and analysis of all the data. Optical images used in this study are from RP98.
Morphological Structures
========================
The most striking feature on the optical images of the galaxy is a dust lane running from southeast to northwest. The prominent spiral arm is on the northwest, partially broken by the dust lane. The second spiral arm in the symmetric position on the southeast is traced by the dust lane. The appearance of the dusty arm suggests that the southeast side is the near side of the galaxy. Burbidge, Burbidge & Prendergast (1965) used this information along with the rotation curve to establish that the spiral arms are trailing in this galaxy. However, the stellar arm corresponding to the dusty arm cannot be traced on the optical images which is probably due to the heavy obscuration.
The structure of the galaxy in the optical and NIR bands is shown as grey scale maps in Fig. 1. The $K$ and $B$ band images are shown in Figs 1(a) and (b) where as the $H-K$ and $J-K$ color maps are shown in Figs 1(c) and (d) respectively. The galaxy has a smooth distribution of intensity in the NIR bands as compared to the optical bands. The dust lanes, which are prominent in the $B$ band image are absent in the $K$ band image. The northwest spiral arm is easily traceable and continuous in all the three NIR bands and coincides in position with that in the $B$-band. However the southeast stellar arm, which is expected to lie on the leading side of the dusty arm, cannot be traced even on NIR images. Instead, a linear spur can be traced on the NIR images on the inner side of the dust lane. The spur lies roughly parallel to the major axis of the galaxy and runs $\sim5\arcsec$ south of the nucleus into the northwest side. The nucleus and the optically prominent [H[ii]{}]{} region on the northwest can both be traced in the NIR bands, with the nucleus relatively brighter than the [H[ii]{}]{} region. A bulge is not apparent on the NIR images. A short bar-like extension along the northsouth direction can be seen.
Spiral arms, Dust lanes and Star formation
------------------------------------------
Images in the $K$-band are least affected by dust and hence are best suited to study the intrinsic components, such as bulge, disk and the spiral arms of galaxies. On the other-hand the $B$-band images are heavily affected by the dust and hence structural differences between $B$ and $K$ bands can be used to map the distribution of dust. Difference in stellar populations can also lead to structural differences between $B$ and $K$ bands (de Jong 1996). However in dusty galaxies such as NGC972, the major contribution to the observed structures on color images comes from the non-uniform distribution of dust, rather than the stellar population gradients. Thus it can be assumed that the structures seen in $B-K$ color image of NGC972, to first order, represent the dust distribution. Contours of $B-K$ colors, drawn to illustrate the dust lanes, are shown superimposed on the $H-K$ and $J-K$ color maps (Figs 1(c) and (d)). The outer contour almost forms the boundaries of the structures seen in the NIR color maps, indicating that the dust absorption is non-negligible even at NIR wavelengths in this galaxy.
Distribution of giant [H[ii]{}]{} regions, as traced by H$\alpha$ emission, characterizes the regions of current star formation. [H$\alpha$]{} emission in NGC972 extends to 3.4 kpc (RP98) and is shown as a grey scale map in Fig. 2. $K$-band contours at levels selected to illustrate the disk shape, spiral arms and the nuclear regions are superimposed (thin double lines denoted by 1, 2 and 3 respectively) on the [H$\alpha$]{} map. The boundary of the principal structures seen on the $B-K$ color map are shown as contours (thick lines) in this figure. On the southeast side, these contours demarcate the leading edge of a dusty arm.
It can be seen that the star formation extends almost over the entire stellar disk as traced by the $K$ band isophote. Current star formation is active along the northwest spiral arm. [H[ii]{}]{} region population can be traced along the southeast dusty arm as well. Significantly, these [H[ii]{}]{} regions lie on the convex side of the dusty arm, as is expected for a trailing density wave. [H[ii]{}]{} regions near the center of the galaxy are distributed along a partial nuclear ring of radius $6\arcsec$. Note that this ring is nearly circular in shape, whereas the outermost $K$-band isophote (contour numbered as 1) is highly elliptical. The central $K$-band contour (denoted as 3) is of oval shape and is elongated along the line connecting the beginning of the spiral arms. This suggests the presence of a weak bar in the galaxy, which seems to end just inside the circumnuclear ring. There is significant amount of star formation in the inter-arm regions of this galaxy.
Bar, Bulge, Nucleus and Disk
----------------------------
Azimuthally averaged radial surface brightness profiles have been most widely used for a quantitative analysis of the morphological structures. $K$-band profiles are best suited for this purpose because of their ability to trace the old stellar population and also because they are least affected by the obscuring dust. However the high background levels in the $K$-band restrict the usable radius to within $1\arcmin$ of the center. On the other hand $J$ band profiles are less affected by the sky background and hence we carried out surface photometric analysis on the $J$ profiles as well. Surface photometric analysis included fitting ellipses to the isophotes and the construction of the radial profiles of isophote intensity, ellipticity ($\epsilon$) and the position angle (PA) of the resulting ellipses. These were carried out using the ellipse fitting routines under the STSDAS package.
The results of surface photometric analyses are plotted in Fig. 3. The ellipticity and PA for the $J$ and $K$ bands are plotted in Figs. 3(a) and (b) respectively. Both the plotted quantities attain a steady value (ellipticity $=0.60$ and PA$=$152[$^\circ$]{}) at radii exceeding $35\arcsec$. The resulting PA is exactly equal to the optically measured value (RC3). However the value of ellipticity suggests that the galaxy is marginally more elongated in the NIR compared to the optical value in RC3. Figures such as 3(a) and 3(b) can be used to infer the presence of a bar; e.g. a strong bar would show up as a high eccentricity and a constant position angle structure between the nucleus and the beginning of the spiral arm. No such structure is obvious in Figs 3(a) and (b), and hence a strong bar is absent in this galaxy. However there is an indication for the presence of a small bar at PA$=170$[$^\circ$]{}, which ends inside a radius of 10$\arcsec$. This weak bar can also be seen on the $K$-band image (Fig. 1(a)) as discussed earlier.
A quantitative estimate of the bulge-to-disk ratio of galaxies can be done by decomposing the radial intensity profiles into de Vaucouleurs $r^{\onequarter}$ and exponential profiles. We obtained azimuthally averaged radial intensity profiles, by fixing the eccentricity and PA corresponding to their values at the outer radii. We fitted the radial intensity profiles with a composite profile containing a nucleus (gaussian), bulge ($r^{\onequarter}$) and an exponential disk. The profile shape is inconsistent with the presence of an $r^{\onequarter}$ central bulge for both $J$ and $K$ profiles. In Fig. 3(c), we show the observed intensity profiles in $J$ and $K$ bands along with the best fit combination of gaussian and exponential profiles. The central component corresponds to the nucleus with a gaussian intensity profile of $\sigma=4\farcs0$ (420 pc). The fitted exponential disk has scale lengths of 1.2 and 1.5 kpc in $K$ and $J$ bands respectively.
Thus we conclude that there is no bulge in NGC972. The central bright spot corresponds to the nucleus. The bar is weak and ends inside a radius of 1 kpc. The disk intensity follows an exponential profile, with a scale length of 1.2 kpc in the $K$-band.
Surface brightness and color profiles
-------------------------------------
Azimuthally averaged radial intensity profiles in $BVRJHK$ bands and in the emission line of [H$\alpha$]{} were obtained by fixing the eccentricity and PA corresponding to their values at the outer radii. Prior to profile extraction, the point spread functions of all the images are matched (using the IRAF task PSFMATCH) to the one having the poorest seeing ($2\farcs7$). The resulting intensity and color profiles are shown in Figs 3(d) and (e) respectively. It can be easily noticed that the intensity profile in broad bands is the steepest in the $K$-band and the flattest in the $B$-band. The profiles flatten systematically with decreasing wavelength of the bands. This results in a color gradient with the disk becoming gradually bluer at outer radii. The nuclear $B-K$ color reaches as red as 5.5. The $B-K$ color profile shows a red bump between 20 and 30 which corresponds to the position of the dusty arm.
The [H$\alpha$]{} emission line surface brightness, which is a measure of current star formation, is expressed in magnitude units (with an arbitrary zeropoint) and hence its profile shape can be directly compared with those in the broad bands. It distinctly differs from other profiles between 10and 25, where the profile falls slower than the brightness profiles of old disk stars. This is due to the presence of the brightest [H[ii]{}]{} region in the galaxy in this zone. Outside this zone [H$\alpha$]{} surface brightness falls smoothly.
Scale lengths and Central Optical Depth
=======================================
The question about the opacity of galactic disks has drawn a lot of attention in recent years (Burstein, Haynes, & Faber 1991). The availability of data extending from $B$ to $K$ bands allows us to study the opacity of the disk in NGC972. One of the quantities which is extensively used for this purpose is the scale length of the exponential disks in different bands (Bothun & Rogers 1992; Evans 1994; Peletier et al. 1994). The underlying stellar disks of galaxies do not show a strong color gradient and hence the intrinsic (dust-free) scale length of a galactic disk is only weakly dependent on wavelength. However, absorption by dust has the effect of flattening the observed intensity profiles, the effect being maximum at shorter wavelengths. Thus for dusty disks, the scale length observed at $B$ band is expected to be larger than that at the $K$ band.
Evans (1994) modeled the wavelength dependence of scale lengths of galaxies for dusty disks. He found that the amount of increase in the scale length at shorter wavelengths depends on the amount of dust (or optical depth) as well as on the relative scale height of dust with respect to that of stars in disks of galaxies. While comparing the observed scale lengths available in the literature to his model results, he noted the necessity to use the same radial zones of intensity profiles to obtain the scale lengths at different wavelengths. Following his suggestions, we obtained scale lengths in $BVRJHK$ bands by fitting exponential profiles between an inner radius of 25 and an outer radius of 65 for all the profiles. The resulting scale length in the $B$-band is r$_{\rm d}(B)=28.6\arcsec=0.3R_{25}=3$ kpc. Ratios of $B$-band scale length to that in other bands is given in Table 1. Evans (1994) computed scale lengths at $B, I$ and $H$ bands for galaxies with and without bulges. Among the computed pure disk models, a model with dust scale height equal to that of stars can produce the observed scale length ratio r$_{\rm d}(B)/\rm{r}_{\rm d}(H)=2.1$ for a central optical depth $\tau_B(0)=11$. Models including a bulge imply even higher $\tau_B(0)$ value. Moriondo, Giovanardi, & Hunt (1998) had obtained a mean value for the central optical depth in $V$-band $\tau_V(0)=$2–4, for a sample of early-type spiral galaxies. Hence the inferred value of optical depth in NGC972 is higher than for normal galaxies, which is not surprising given its dusty appearance. Such high values are also inferred in other dusty galaxies; for example, Evans (1994) had estimated a value of $\tau_B(0)=20$ in the dusty starburst galaxy NGC253.
[ccc]{} $K$ & 10.23 & 2.76\
$H$ & 13.46 & 2.10\
$J$ & 16.41 & 1.72\
$R$ & 23.42 & 1.20\
$V$ & 24.39 & 1.16\
$B$ & 28.21 & 1.00\
[llll]{} Bulge/Disk ratio & no bulge & Sd or later & This work\
Pitch Angle ($^\circ$) & 50–60 & Sd or later & This work\
V$_{\rm rot}^{\rm max}$ (km s$^{-1}$) & 120 & Sc or later & Burbidge et al. (1965)\
Mass ($10^{10}$ M$\odot$) & 1.2 & Sc or later & Burbidge et al. (1965)\
M(HI)/M(T) & 0.21 & Sd or later & Young et al. (1996)\
EW([H$\alpha$]{}) (Å) & 36.4 & Sc or later & RP98\
$B-V$ & 0.64 & Sb or later & RC3\
$U-B$ & 0.07 & Sb or later & RC3\
Yerkes Type & F3 & $\sim$ Sc & Humason et al. (1956)\
& &\
Mean Type & & Sd &\
& &\
L(FIR) ($10^{10}$ L$\odot$) & 3.67 & $1.15\times$M82 & Young et al. (1996)\
L$_{{\rm H}\alpha}$ ($10^{41}$ erg s$^{-1}$) & 2.95 & $0.85\times$M82 & RP98, Young et al. (1996)\
SFR (M$\odot$ yr$^{-1}$)& 2.64 & $0.85\times$M82 & RP98\
M(H2)/M(HI) & 1.41& $1.70\times$M82 & Young et al. (1996)\
M(HI+H2)/M(T) & 0.50& & Young et al. (1996)\
Discussion
==========
The nuclear [H$\alpha$]{} ring
------------------------------
RP98 reported the presence of a nearly circular star forming ring of radius 630 pc around the nucleus of NGC972. Given that the inclination of the galactic disk to the line of sight is 60[$^\circ$]{}, the nuclear ring is either in the galactic plane and intrinsically elliptical or it is off-planar and intrinsically circular. Classical nuclear rings are circular and lie in the plane of the parent galaxy and are commonly found in early-type barred galaxies. Such rings are associated with the Inner Lindbland Resonance (ILR) of galaxies. The existence of ILR in a galaxy depends on the form of the rotation curve in the central parts of galaxies and the pattern speed of the bar or the spiral arm. Burbidge et al. (1965) had obtained the rotation curve for the galaxy from slit spectroscopy at different position angles. They found that the rotation curve in the galaxy rises very slowly reaching values of around 100 kms$^{-1}$ at a radius of 25$\arcsec$. The galaxy rotates like a solid body at least up to 10$\arcsec$ (1 kpc). ILR can exist only outside the solid body rotating region and hence the observed ring at 630 pc is not a resonance ring.
The [H[ii]{}]{} regions forming the ring can be traced in the optical broad bands, especially in the $B$-band, and cannot be traced in any of the NIR bands. In general nuclear rings in galaxies have stronger continuum compared to the disk [H[ii]{}]{} regions (Kennicutt, Keel & Blaha 1989). This is understood in terms of a longer history of star formation in circumnuclear [H[ii]{}]{} regions (Korchagin et al. 1995). The absence of a strong continuum in the nuclear ring of NGC972 indicates that the star formation in the ring has started relatively recently. The formation of the ring is possibly associated with the perturbation caused by a small intruding galaxy (see Sec. 5.3).
Revision of morphological type of NGC972
----------------------------------------
The absence of a bulge even on the NIR images calls for a re-discussion of the adopted Sb morphological classification of NGC972. In recent years, there have been reports of the absence of classical bulges in galaxies classified as early-type spirals (Carollo et al. 1997). These may either represent pure mis-classifications, considering the subjective nature of the classification, or intrinsic limitations of the criteria used in classification. For example, one of the intrinsic limitations was recently demonstrated by Combes and Elmegreen (1993). Using numerical simulation, they found that bar morphology is more tightly related to the dynamical properties rather than the spiral morphology of the galaxy. Thus a bar with early-type properties can be present in a late-type spiral, as was found recently in NGC6221 by Vega-Beltrán et al. (1998). Historically used classification criteria do not allow for such mixed characteristics in galaxies.
We compiled all the existing global properties on NGC972 in an attempt to clarify its morphological type. In particular, we aim to establish whether it is a mis-classified galaxy or has mixed morphological characteristics. The compiled data are presented in Tab. 2. The parameters in the upper half of the table are related to the morphological type whereas those in the lower part are related to the starburst properties. The dependence of the listed parameters with morphological type is well established statistically (e.g. Roberts & Haynes 1994). The most likely morphological type for NGC972, based on each of the observed quantities, is indicated in Col. 3. Principal morphological indicators, namely bulge-to-disk ratio and the pitch angle (of the north-west arm measured on the deprojected $K$-band image), are clearly inconsistent with the Sb classification. The dynamical mass, as inferred from the rotational speed, is also too small for the Sb classification. The size of the weak bar is almost equal to the exponential scale length — a condition found to be typical in late type galaxies (Combes & Elmegreen 1993). Secondary indicators of morphological type such as the neutral hydrogen content and the [H$\alpha$]{} equivalent width (a measure of present to past star formation rate — see Kennicutt & Kent 1983), also suggest a morphological type later than Sc for the galaxy. Observed colors are redder than those found in galaxies of Hubble types Sc and later. However the prominent stellar population, as indicated by the Yerkes type, is not consistent with the red colors, suggesting that the galaxy may have intrinsically blue color typical of late-type spirals, but is reddened by the heavy amount of dust in the galaxy. Thus all the global properties suggest a morphological type later than Sc. The galaxy however has several peculiarities, the most striking one being the absence of a stellar arm accompanying the dusty arm on the southeast side. Thus the most appropriate morphological type for NGC972 would be SABd pec.
Is NGC972 result of a minor merger?
-----------------------------------
The Far Infrared (FIR) and [H$\alpha$]{} luminosities suggest a high rate of recent star formation in NGC972. Nuclear starburst, whose properties compare well with that of other well-known starbursts, contributes to most of this star formation (Table 2; see also RP98). Starburst activity is common in galaxies having an interacting companion or in galaxies formed due to merging of two nearly equal mass systems. The chaotic distribution of dust lanes in NGC972 gives it a close resemblence in appearance to the starburst galaxy M82. The present activity of M82 is known to be triggered due to its interaction with M81 (Ichikawa et al. 1994; Yun, Ho & Lo 1994). However there is no galaxy visible on the Palomar Sky Survey prints within 10 times the optical diameter with a velocity difference less than 1000 kms$^{-1}$ of NGC972 (Solomon & Sage 1988). The galaxy does not show any obvious signatures of a merger such as tidal tails or bridges. Thus it is safe to assume NGC972 is an isolated galaxy. Among the isolated galaxies, starbursts are most commonly associated with a strong bar. Absence of a strong bar in NGC972 calls for invoking alternative mechanisms for triggering the activity in this galaxy. One of such alternative mechanisms is a merger with a low-mass companion object, such as a dwarf galaxy (minor merger).
NGC972 at present contains an unusually high amount of its mass (50%) in the gaseous form, with the molecular mass exceeding the atomic mass (Young et al. 1996). Such a high ratio of molecular to atomic mass is typical of that found in optically distorted and merging galaxies (Mirabel & Sanders 1989), which gives independent support for a possibly merger-induced starburst activity in this galaxy. NGC972 group of galaxies contains many dwarf spheroidals (Vennick & Richter 1994) and hence a merger with one of those galaxies in the recent past cannot be ruled out. If that is the case, the merged dwarf spheroidal galaxy had to be gas-rich. However dwarf spheroidal galaxies are normally poor in gas content. On the other hand, small gas clouds (mass less than 10% of the primary galaxy) are known to exist around several galaxies (Schulman, Bregman & Roberts 1994), the most familiar example being the high velocity clouds around our own Milky Way. Accretion of such clouds can naturally enhance the gas mass in the galaxy. As the accreted gas flows to the center of the galaxy, it transforms to molecular form, triggering the intense burst seen in the galaxy. The accretion process is probably responsible for the off-planar nuclear ring. In such a scenario, the plane of the ring may represent the plane in which the gas is being accreted.
NGC972 is very asymmetric with its northwest arm much stronger than the southeast arm in the stellar continuum. Such an asymmetry is common in late-type galaxies containing a companion (Odewahn 1994). In a recent study, Pisano, Wilcots & Elmegreen (1998) argue that the observed morphological and kinematical asymmetries in the late type galaxy NGC925 are due to one or many interactions with a companion low-mass galaxy. They discovered an [H[i]{}]{} cloud of mass $10^7$ [M$_\odot$]{} in the neighborhood of the galaxy, which they believe is the residual gas cloud resulting from the interactions. Thus it is very likely that the observed asymmetry in NGC972 is caused by the minor merger of a gas-rich companion, which as we discussed above, can also account for the observed starburst activity, high molecular gas fraction and the off-planar nuclear ring. It however remains to be seen whether gas clouds, such as that found in NGC925, also surround NGC972. This is one of the issues we will be investigating in the future.
Conclusions
===========
We carried out a detailed analysis of the morphological type of NGC972 using a variety of physical parameters. We favor a morphological type as late as Sd based on the absence of a bulge, high pitch angle of the spiral arm, low dynamical mass and high mass fraction in gas. However, it was classified as Sb and I0 in major astronomical catalogs and atlasses, which were mainly guided by the morphological appearence of dust lanes rather than a detailed quantitative analysis such as carried out in our work. The galaxy contains heavy amount of dust with central B-band face-on optical depth as high as $\tau_{\rm B}(0)=11$. The spiral arms are asymmetric with the northwest spiral arm brighter than the southeast spiral in the stellar continuum. The galactic nucleus is undergoing a starburst with a strength comparable to that in M82. In addition there is active star formation in an off-planar nuclear ring, and the galaxy is extremely gas-rich, especially in molecular form. We propose that all these activities are a result of merger of NGC972 with a gas-rich companion.
We thank the time allocation committee of the [*Observatorio Astronómico Nacional*]{} for granting us the telescope time for NIR observations. We also thank Olga Kuhn for her excellent support as resident astronomer at the observatory and Ivanio Puerari for reading the manuscript. The Digitized Sky Surveys were produced at the Space Telescope Science Institute under US government grant NAGW-2166. The images of these surveys are based on photographic data obtained using the Oschin Schmidt Telescope on Palomar Mountain and the UK Schmidt Telescope.
[99]{}
Bothun, G.D. & Rogers, C. 1992, AJ, 103, 1484
Burbidge, E.M., Burbidge, G.R., & Prendergast, K.H. 1965, ApJ, 142, 649
Burstein, D., Haynes, M.P., & Faber, S.M. 1991, Nature, 353, 515
Carollo, C.M., Stiavelli, M., De Zeeuw, P.T., & Mack, J. 1997, AJ, 114, 2366
Casali, M.M., & Hawarden, T. 1992, The JCMT-UKIRT Facility Newsletter, 4, 33
Combes, F., & Elmegreen, B.G. 1993, A&A, 271, 391
Cruz-Gonzalez, I., Carrasco, L., Ruiz, E., Salas, L., et al. 1994, RMxAA, 29, 197
de Jong, R.S. 1996, A&A, 313, 377
de Vaucouleurs, G., de Vaucouleurs, A., Corwin, H.G., 1976, Second reference catalogue of bright galaxies, (Austin: Univ. of Texas Press)
de Vaucouleurs, G., de Vaucouleurs, A., Corwin, H.G., et al. 1991, Third Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies (New York: Springer-Verlag)(RC3) Evans, R. 1994, MNRAS, 266, 511
Humason, M., Mayal, N.U. & Sandage, A. 1956, AJ, 60, 254
Ichikawa, T., van Driel, W., Aoki, T., Soyano, T., Tarusawa, K., & Yoshida, S., 1994, ApJ, 433, 645
Kennicutt, R.C., Keel, W.C., & Blaha, C.A. 1989, AJ, 97, 1022
Kennicutt, R.C. & Kent, S.M. 1983, AJ, 88, 1094
Knapen, J.H., Beckman, J.E., Heller, C.H., Shlosman, I., & de Jong R.S. 1995, ApJ, 454, 623
Krienke, O.K., & Hodge, P.W. 1974, AJ, 79, 1242
Korchagin, V., Kembhavi, A.K., Mayya, Y.D., & Prabhu, T.P. 1995, ApJ, 446, 574
Mirabel, I.F. & Sanders, D.B. 1989, ApJ, 340, L53
Moriondo, G., Giovanardi, C., & Hunt, L.K. 1998, A&A (in press)
Odewahn, S. 1994, AJ, 107, 1320
Peletier, R.F., Valentijn, E.A., Moorwood, A.F.M., & Freudling, W.F. 1994, A&AS, 108, 621
Pisano, D.J., Wilcots, W.M., & Elmegreen, B.G. 1998, AJ, 115, 975
Ravindranath, S., & Prabhu, T.P. 1998, AJ, 115, 2320 (RP98)
Roberts, M.S., & Haynes, M.P. 1994, ARA&A, 32, 115
Sandage, A.R. 1961, Hubble Atlas of Galaxies, (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington)
Sandage, A.R., & Tammann, G. A. 1981, A Revised Shapely-Ames Catalogue of Bright Galaxies, (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington) Publ. 635 (RSA)
Schulman, E., Bregman, J.B., & Roberts, M.S. 1994, ApJ, 423, 180
Solomon, P.M. & Sage, L.J. 1988, ApJ, 334, 613
Vega-Beltrán, J.C., Zeilinger, W.W., Amico, P., Schultheis, M. et al. 1998 (astro-ph/9802309)
Vennick, J., & Richter, G.M. 1994, Astron. Nachr., 315, 245
Young, J.S., Allen, L., Kenny, J.D., Lesser, A., & Rownd, B. 1996, AJ, 112, 1903
Yun, M.S., Ho, P.T.P., & Lo, K.Y. 1994, Nature, 372, 530
Zaritsky, D. 1993, PASP, 105, 1006
Zaritsky, D., Rix, H.-W., & Rieke, M. 1993, Nature, 364, 313
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'A basic question for any property of quasi–coherent sheaves on a scheme $X$ is whether the property is local, that is, it can be defined using any open affine covering of $X$. Locality follows from the descent of the corresponding module property: for (infinite dimensional) vector bundles and Drinfeld vector bundles, it was proved by Kaplansky’s technique of dévissage already in [@RG II.§3]. Since vector bundles coincide with $\aleph_0$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundles, a question arose in [@EGPT] of whether locality holds for $\kappa$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundles for each infinite cardinal $\kappa$. We give a positive answer here by replacing the d'' evissage with its recent refinement involving $\mathcal C$–filtrations and the Hill Lemma.'
address:
- |
Departamento de Matemática Aplicada, Universidad de Murcia\
Campus del Espinardo 30100, Spain
- |
Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad de Murcia\
Campus del Espinardo 30100, Spain
- |
Charles University, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Department of Algebra\
Sokolovská 83, 186 75 Prague 8, Czech Republic
author:
- Sergio Estrada
- Pedro Guil Asensio
- Jan Trlifaj
title: 'Descent of restricted flat Mittag–Leffler modules and generalized vector bundles'
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
In [@D §2] Drinfeld considered generalizations of the notion of a finite dimensional vector bundle on a scheme to the infinite dimensional setting. One of the options suggested replaced finitely generated projective modules by the flat Mittag–Leffler ones, leading thus to what was later called a Drinfeld vector bundle in [@EGPT]. Mittag–Leffler modules have been studied for decades, starting from the classic works of Grothendieck, Raynaud and Gruson [@RG] until recent contributions in [@AH], [@HT] et al.
Another ingredient of the theory is due to Quillen. Following [@Q], one can compute morphisms between two objects $A$ and $B$ of the derived category of the category $\Qco (X)$ of quasi–coherent sheaves on a scheme $X$. First, one introduces a model category structure on ${\mathbf{C}}(\Qco (X))$ (= the category of unbounded chain complexes on $\Qco (X)$). Morphisms between $A$ and $B$ are then computed as the ${\mathbf{C}}(\Qco (X))$–morphisms between cofibrant and fibrant replacements of $A$ and $B$ modulo chain homotopy. Much later, Hovey and Gillespie [@H], [@G] developed a machinery for transferring the computation to ${\mathbf{C}}(\Qco (X))$ using complete cotorsion pairs.
A test question for the Drinfeld options is to what extent they fit the Quillen–Hovey theory. While the answer for the general setting of arbitrary flat Mittag–Leffler modules is negative, there is a positive answer in case we admit only filtrations by Mittag–Leffler modules of restricted size [@EGPT]. This yields the notion of a $\kappa$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundle for each infinite cardinal $\kappa \geq \aleph_0$. In fact, the $\aleph_0$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundles are exactly the (infinite dimensional) vector bundles from [@D §2, Definition], that is, those quasi–coherent sheaves all of whose modules of sections are projective, but not necessarily finitely generated.
While defining the notion of a restricted Drinfeld vector bundle, one faces the question of whether the notion is local, i.e., it can be defined using any open affine covering of the scheme. The question is known to have a positive answer in the two extreme cases: for all Drinfeld vector bundles, and for all (infinite dimensional) vector bundles. In [@RG Seconde partie] it was proved that locality follows from the descent of the corresponding module property, that of a flat Mittag–Leffler module, and a projective module, respectively. Raynaud and Gruson proved the descent of projectivity using Kaplansky’s technique of dévissage: a module $M$ is projective, if and only if $M$ is both flat Mittag–Leffler and a direct sum of countably generated modules (cf. [@D §2]). However, whether the notion of a $\kappa$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundle is local also for $\kappa > \aleph_0$ remained open [@EGPT]. Our main result here gives a positive answer:
\[local\] Let $\kappa$ be an infinite cardinal. Then the notion of a $\kappa$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundle is local. That is, if $X$ is any scheme, $V$ a set of open affine sets of $X$ such that $X = \bigcup_{v \in V} v$, and $\mathscr M$ a quasi–coherent sheaf on $X$ such that $\mathscr M (v)$ is a $\kappa$–restricted flat Mittag–Leffler $\mathscr R (v)$–module for all $v \in V$, then $\mathscr M$ is a $\kappa$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundle on $X$.
Our proof is also based on proving descent, this time for restricted flat Mittag–Leffler modules, but replaces Kaplansky’s dévissage by a more subtle technique for dealing with filtrations due to Hill. On the way, we also notice that the $\kappa$–restricted flat Mittag–Leffler modules for $\kappa > \aleph_0$ are related to another interesting class of modules, the Whitehead ones. Namely, as shown by Eklof and Shelah [@ES], there exist local PIDs $R_\kappa$ such that the $\kappa$–restricted Mittag–Leffler $R_\kappa$–modules coincide with the Whitehead $R_\kappa$–modules under the assumption of G" odel’s Axiom of Constructibility (see Example \[proj-white\](ii)). So in this particular case the $\kappa$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundles over the affine scheme ${\mbox{\rm Spec}}(R_\kappa)$ are exactly the Whitehead vector bundles.
Preliminaries
=============
Let $R$ be a ring. Following [@RG], we call a (right $R$–) module $M$ *Mittag–Leffler* provided that the canonical map $M \otimes_R \prod_{i \in I} M_i \to \prod_{i \in I} M \otimes_R M_i$ is monic for each family of left $R$–modules $( M_i \mid i \in I )$.
As in [@D §2], we will primarily be interested in flat Mittag–Leffler modules, that is, the Mittag–Leffler modules such that the functor $M \otimes_R -$ is exact. These modules were characterized in [@RG Seconde partie, Corollary 2.2.2] as the modules $M$ such that each finite subset of $M$ is contained in a countably generated pure and projective submodule of $M$. In fact, they can also be characterized without referring to purity, as the $\aleph_1$–projective modules [@HT]. For example, if $R$ is a PID, then a module $M$ is flat Mittag–Leffler, iff each countably generated submodule of $M$ is free.
The corresponding notion for quasi–coherent sheaves is as follows (see [@EGPT]): a quasi–coherent sheaf $\mathscr F$ on a scheme $X$ is a *Drinfeld vector bundle* provided that for each open affine set $u$, the $\mathscr R (u)$–module of sections $\mathscr M (u)$ is flat and Mittag–Leffler.
We also recall [@D §2, Definition] that a quasi–coherent sheaf $\mathscr F$ on a scheme $X$ is an (infinite dimensional) *vector bundle* provided that for each open affine set $u$, the $\mathscr R (u)$–module $\mathscr M (u)$ is projective.
A module $M$ is a *Whitehead module* provided that ${\mbox{Ext}^{1}_{R}(M,R)} = 0$ [@EM]. A quasi–coherent sheaf $\mathscr F$ on a scheme $X$ is a *Whitehead vector bundle* provided that for each open affine set $u$, the $\mathscr R (u)$–module $\mathscr M (u)$ is Whitehead.
Of course, each projective module is Whitehead and flat Mittag–Leffler. The relations between the classes of all Whitehead and flat Mittag–Leffler modules depend on the structure of the ring $R$. For example, if $R$ is a Dedekind domain which is not a complete discrete valuation ring, then all Whitehead modules are flat Mittag–Leffler. But if $R$ is a complete discrete valuation domain, then Whitehead modules coincide with the flat ones, so the inclusion of the classes is reversed, cf. [@EM].
In [@EGPT] it was shown that in general, the class of all Drinfeld vector bundles does not fit the Quillen–Hovey setting for computing cohomology via model category structures. Various restricted versions of the notion were suggested there to fix the problem. In order to define them, we recall the notion of a $\mathcal C$–filtration.
Let $\mathcal C$ be a class of modules. A module $M$ is *$\mathcal C$–filtered* provided there exist an ordinal $\sigma$ and a chain of submodules of $M$ $$0 = M_0 \subseteq \dots \subseteq M_\alpha \subseteq M_{\alpha +1} \subseteq \dots \subseteq M_\sigma = M$$ which is continuous (i.e., $M_\alpha = \bigcup_{\beta < \alpha} M_\beta$ for all limit ordinals $\alpha \leq \sigma$), and for each $\alpha < \sigma$, the module $M_{\alpha +1}/M_\alpha$ is isomorphic to an element of $\mathcal C$.
The chain $( M_\alpha \mid \alpha \leq \sigma)$ is called a *$\mathcal C$–filtration* of $M$. Notice that for $\sigma = 2$, $M_2$ is just the extension of the module $M_1 \in \mathcal C$ by the module $M_2/M_1 \in \mathcal C$. Also, the class of all $\mathcal C$–filtered modules includes arbitrary direct sums of copies of modules in $\mathcal C$.
A class of modules $\mathcal A$ is *closed under transfinite extensions* provided that $M \in \mathcal A$ whenever $M$ is $\mathcal A$–filtered. In this case $\mathcal A$ is closed under extensions and arbitrary direct sums.
For example, if $\mathcal A = {}^\perp \mathcal B$ for a class $\mathcal B$, then $\mathcal A$ is closed under transfinite extensions by the Eklof Lemma [@GT 3.1.2]. Here, we define ${}^\perp \mathcal B = \mbox{Ker} {\mbox{Ext}^{1}_{R}(-,\mathcal B)} = \{ M \in {\mbox{\rm{Mod}--}{R}} \mid {\mbox{Ext}^{1}_{R}(M,N)} = 0 \mbox{ for all } N \in \mathcal B \}$. Similarly the class $\mathcal B ^\perp$ is defined; a pair of classes $(\mathcal A, \mathcal B)$ is a *cotorsion pair* provided that $\mathcal A= {}^\perp \mathcal B$ and $\mathcal B = \mathcal A ^\perp$.
In particular, the classes of all projective and flat modules are closed under transfinite extensions and direct summands, because they are the first components of cotorsion pairs. The class of all flat Mittag–Leffler modules is also closed under transfinite extensions and direct summands, but it is not of the form $^\perp \mathcal B$ for any class of modules $\mathcal B$ in general (see [@AH] and [@HT]).
Given a class $\mathcal A$ closed under transfinite extensions and an infinite cardinal $\kappa$, we let $\mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa}$ denote the class of all $\leq \kappa$–presented modules from $\mathcal A$, and $\mathcal A (\kappa)$ the class of all $\mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa}$–filtered modules. If $M \in \mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa}$, then $M$ is called the *$\kappa$–restricted module in $\mathcal A$*. We have the chain
$$\mathcal A (\aleph_0) \subseteq \mathcal A (\aleph_1) \subseteq \dots \subseteq \mathcal A (\kappa) \subseteq \mathcal A (\kappa^+) \subseteq \dots \subseteq \mathcal A = \bigcup_{\aleph_0 \leq \kappa} \mathcal A (\kappa).$$
\[threecases\] 1. If $\mathcal A$ is the class of all projective modules over any ring $R$, then the chain above is constant, because $\mathcal A (\aleph_0) = \mathcal A$ by a classic result of Kaplansky [@K].
2\. If $\mathcal A$ is the class of all flat modules over a ring $R$, then the chain stabilizes at ${\mbox{card}}R + \aleph_0$, that is, $\mathcal A (\kappa) = \mathcal A$ for each infinite cardinal $\kappa \geq {\mbox{card}}R$. This follows from Enochs’ solution of the Flat Cover Conjecture [@BEE].
3\. Let $\mathcal A$ be the class of all flat Mittag–Leffler modules over any ring $R$. If $\kappa$ is an infinite cardinal, then the modules in the class $\mathcal A (\kappa)$ are the $\kappa$–restricted flat Mittag–Leffler modules. A quasi–coherent sheaf $\mathscr F$ on a scheme $X$ is called *$\kappa$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundle* provided that for each open affine set $u$, the $\mathscr R (u)$–module of sections $\mathscr M (u)$ is $\kappa$–restricted flat Mittag–Leffler.
If $R$ is right perfect, then $\mathcal A$ is just the class of all projective modules, so we are in case 1. But if $R$ is a non–right perfect ring, then the chain above is strictly increasing starting from ${\mbox{card}}R + \aleph_0$, because for each infinite cardinal $\kappa \geq {\mbox{card}}R$, there exists a module $M_{\kappa^+} \in \mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa^+} \setminus \mathcal A (\kappa)$ (see [@HT Theorem 6.10]).
Returning to the general case, we observe that the classes $\mathcal A (\kappa)$ are often the first components of complete cotorsion pairs. Here, a cotorsion pair $(\mathcal A, \mathcal B)$ is said to be *complete* provided that for each module $M$ there is a short exact sequence $0 \to M \to B \to A \to 0$.
\[basic\] Let $R$ be a ring and $\kappa$ be an infinite cardinal. Let $\mathcal A$ be a class of modules closed under transfinite extensions and direct summands, and such that $R \in \mathcal A$. Then $(\mathcal A (\kappa), (\mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa})^\perp)$ is a complete cotorsion pair.
[[*Proof.* ]{}]{}First, we observe that $\mathcal A (\kappa)^\perp = (\mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa})^\perp$ by the Eklof Lemma [@GT 3.1.2]. Let $\mathcal E = {}^\perp ((\mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa})^\perp)$. Since $\mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa}$ has a representative set $\mathcal S$ of objects and contains the regular module $R$, [@GT 3.2.4] implies that $\mathcal E$ consists of all direct summands of elements of $\mathcal A (\kappa)$. In particular, $\mathcal E \subseteq \mathcal A$ by assumption. Moreover, the Kaplansky theorem for cotorsion pairs [@GT 4.2.11] shows that each element of $\mathcal E$ is $\mathcal E ^{\leq \kappa}$–filtered, hence $\mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa}$–filtered, and $\mathcal E = \mathcal A (\kappa)$. Finally, since $(\mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa})^\perp = \mathcal S ^\perp$, the cotorsion pair $(\mathcal A (\kappa), (\mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa})^\perp)$ is complete by [@GT 3.2.1].
Moreover, if the class $\mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa}$ contains all its $\leq \kappa$–presented syzygies, then the cotorsion pair in Lemma \[basic\] is hereditary, that is, ${\mbox{Ext}^{i}_{R}(A,B)} = 0$ for all $i \geq 2$, $A \in \mathcal A (\kappa)$, and $B \in (\mathcal A ^{\leq \kappa})^\perp$. This is the case when
\(i) $\mathcal A$ = the class of all flat Mittag–Leffler modules over any ring by [@AH], and when
\(ii) $\mathcal A$ = the class of all flat modules over any right $\kappa$–noetherian ring.
Finally, let us consider the relations between restricted Mittag–Leffler modules and the better known classes of projective and Whitehead modules:
\[proj-white\] (i) By the characterization of flat Mittag–Leffler modules in [@RG] mentioned above, all countably generated flat Mittag–Leffler modules are projective. So the notion of an $\aleph_0$–restricted flat Mittag–Leffler module coincides with that of a projective module, and (infinite dimensional) vector bundles are exactly the $\aleph_0$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundles.
\(ii) Let $\kappa$ be an infinite cardinal. By [@ES Theorem 6] there exists a local, but not complete, PID $R = R_\kappa$ of cardinality $2^\kappa$ such that for each $\leq \kappa$–generated module $M$, $M$ is Whitehead, iff $M$ is flat Mittag–Leffler. If we assume V = L (G" odel’s Axiom of Constructibility), then for each module $M$, we have that $M$ is Whitehead, iff $M$ is $\kappa$–restricted flat Mittag–Leffler (see e.g. [@GT Theorem 10.1.5]). So in this case the $\kappa$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundles over the affine scheme $X = {\mbox{\rm Spec}}(R_\kappa)$ are exactly the Whitehead vector bundles over $X$.
Locality for induced quasi–coherent sheaves
===========================================
Let $\mathfrak P$ be a property of modules. For each commutative ring $R$, we let $\mathfrak P _R$ denote the class of all $R$–modules satisfying $\mathfrak P$. Throughout, we will assume that $\mathfrak P$ is compatible with ring direct products in the following sense: if $R = \prod_{i < n} R_i$ and $M_i \in \mathfrak P _{R_i}$ for all $i < n$, then $M = \prod_{i<n} M_i \in \mathfrak P _R$.
\[induced\] For a scheme $X$, we define the quasi–coherent sheaf *induced by $\mathfrak P$* on $X$ (or a *$\mathfrak P$–quasi–coherent sheaf on $X$*) as the quasi–coherent sheaf $\mathscr M$ such that for each open affine set $u$ of $X$, the $\mathscr R (u)$–module of sections $\mathscr M (u)$ satisfies $\mathfrak P$ (that is, $\mathscr M (u) \in \mathfrak P _{\mathscr R (u)}$).
\[allex\] Let $\mathfrak P$ be the property of being a projective, flat, flat Mittag–Leffler, and $\kappa$–restricted flat Mittag–Leffler module (where $\kappa$ is an infinite cardinal). Then $\mathfrak P _R$ is the class of all projective, flat, flat Mittag–Leffler, and $\kappa$–restricted flat Mittag–Leffler $R$–modules (and $\mathfrak P$ is obviously compatible with ring direct products). Moreover, $\mathfrak P$–quasi–coherent sheaves on a scheme $X$ are exactly the (infinite dimensional) vector bundles, flat quasi–coherent sheaves, Drinfeld vector bundles, and $\kappa$–restricted Drinfeld vector bundles on $X$, respectively.
\[localprop\] The notion of a $\mathfrak P$–quasi–coherent sheaf is *local* in case for each open affine covering $X = \bigcup_{v \in V} v$ of $X$ and each quasi–coherent sheaf $\mathscr M$ on $X$, $\mathscr M$ is $\mathfrak P$–quasi–coherent provided that $\mathscr M (v) \in \mathfrak P _{\mathscr R (v)}$ for all $v \in V$.
So locality means that the property of being a $\mathfrak P$–quasi–coherent sheaf can be tested on any open affine covering of $X$.
We present a useful classic tool for proving locality based on ascent and descent of the coresponding module property (cf. [@SP]):
\[faithflat\] Let $\mathcal R$ be a class of commutative rings. Let $\mathfrak P$ be a property of modules such that for each flat homomorphism $\varphi : R \to S$ of rings in $\mathcal R$ and each $R$–module $M$, the following two conditions hold:
1. $M \in \mathfrak P _R$ implies $M \otimes_R S \in \mathfrak P _S$, and
2. $M \otimes_R S \in \mathfrak P _S$ implies $M \in \mathfrak P _R$ provided that $\varphi$ is faithfully flat.
Then the notion of a $\mathfrak P$–quasi–coherent sheaf is local.
[[*Proof.* ]{}]{}Let $X = \bigcup_{v \in V} v$ be an open affine covering of $X$ such that $\mathscr M (v) \in \mathfrak P _{\mathscr R (v)}$ for all $v \in V$. Let $u$ be an arbitrary open affine set of $X$. Then there exists a standard open covering $u = \bigcup_{j < n} u_j$ such that for each $j < n$ there exists $v_j \in V$ such that $u_j$ is a standard open in $v_j$, so $u_j = D(f_j) = {\mbox{\rm Spec}}(\mathscr R (v_j)_{f_j})$ for some $f_j \in \mathscr R (v_j)$. In particular, $\mathscr M (u_j) \cong \mathscr M (v_j) \otimes_{\mathscr R (v_j)} \mathscr R (v_j) _{f_j}$, hence $\mathscr M (u_j) \in \mathfrak P _{\mathscr R (u_j)}$ by Condition (1). The compatibility of $\mathfrak P$ with ring direct products gives $\prod_{j < n} \mathscr M (u_j) \in \mathfrak P _{\prod_{j < n} \mathscr R (u_j)}$. Since the canonical morphism $\psi : \mathscr R (u) \to \prod_{j < n} \mathscr R (u_j)$ is faithfully flat, we conclude that $\mathscr M (u) \in \mathfrak P _{\mathscr R (u)}$ by Condition (2).
\[ad-property\] A property $\mathfrak P$ satisfying Conditions (1) and (2) above is said to *ascend* and *descend* in $\mathcal R$, respectively (see [@RG]).
A property $\mathfrak P$ satisfying both Conditions (1) and (2) of Lemma \[faithflat\] is called the *ascent–descent property*, or *AD–property*, in $\mathcal R$.
While the ascent is usually easy to prove, proving the descent is more involved.
However, it is easy to see that being a flat module is an AD–property. Also the property of being a flat Mittag–Leffler module is known to be an AD-property: Condition (1) is easy while Condition (2) follows from the next lemma:
\[MLdescent\] Let $\varphi : R \to S$ be a faithfully flat homomorphism of commutative rings, and $M$ be an $R$–module such that $M \otimes_R S$ is a Mittag–Leffler $S$–module. Then $M$ is a Mittag–Leffler $R$–module.
[[*Proof.* ]{}]{}First, we note that the property of being a Mittag–Leffler module can be restated in terms of the Mittag–Leffler condition for certain inverse systems: expressing $M$ as a direct limit of a direct system $( F_i, f_{ij} \mid i \leq j \in I )$ of finitely presented modules, $M = \varinjlim_{i \in I} F_i$, and applying the functor ${\mbox{Hom}_{R}(-,R)}$, we obtain the inverse system $( {\mbox{Hom}_{R}(F_i,R)}, {\mbox{Hom}_{R}(f_{ij},R)} \mid i \leq j \in I )$. Then $M$ is a Mittag–Leffler $R$–module, iff this inverse system satisfies the Mittag–Leffler condition.
We have $M \otimes_R S = \varinjlim_{i \in I} F_i \otimes_R S$, and $M \otimes_R S$ is a Mittag–Leffler $S$–module by assumption. The Mittag–Leffler condition says that for each $i \in I$ the family $( \mbox{Im} {\mbox{Hom}_{S}(f_{ij}\otimes_R S,S)} \mid i \leq j \in I )$ of $S$–submodules of ${\mbox{Hom}_{S}(F_i \otimes_R S,S)}$ stabilizes starting from some $j \geq i$. Since $F_i$ is finitely presented, there is a natural isomorphism $${\mbox{Hom}_{S}(F_i \otimes_R S,S)} \cong {\mbox{Hom}_{R}(F_i,R)} \otimes_R S.$$ Since $\varphi$ is faithfully flat, for each $i \in I$ the family $( \mbox{Im} {\mbox{Hom}_{R}(f_{ij},R)} \mid i \leq j \in I )$ of $R$–submodules of ${\mbox{Hom}_{R}(F_i,R)}$ stabilizes starting from some $j \geq i$. But the latter just says that $M$ is a Mittag–Leffler $R$–module.
Restricting ad–properties of modules
====================================
In order to treat the restricted Drinfeld vector bundles, we will need to transfer the unrestricted version of Lemma \[faithflat\] to a restricted one. The following result (known as the Hill Lemma, and proved e.g. in [@GT Theorem 4.2.6]) will be our tool for refining the technique of dévissage from $\mathcal C$–direct sums of modules to the more general setting of $\mathcal C$–filtered modules:
\[hill\] Let $R$ be a ring, $\lambda$ a regular infinite cardinal, and $\mathcal C$ a class of ${<} \lambda$–presented modules. Let $P$ be a module with a $\mathcal C$–filtration $\mathcal P = (P_\alpha
\mid \alpha \leq \sigma )$. Then there is a family $\mathcal F$ consisting of submodules of $P$ such that
- $\mathcal P \subseteq \mathcal F$,
- $\mathcal F$ is closed under arbitrary sums and intersections,
- $N^\prime/N$ is $\mathcal P$–filtered for all $N, N^\prime \in \mathcal F$ such that $N \subseteq N^\prime$, and
- If $N \in \mathcal F$ and $T$ is a subset of $P$ of cardinality ${<} \lambda$, then there exists $N^\prime \in \mathcal F$ such that $N \cup T \subseteq N^\prime$ and $N^\prime/N$ is ${<} \lambda$–presented.
For the restricted version, we will use the following
\[restricted\] Let $\mathcal R$ be a class of commutative rings and $\mathfrak P$ be an AD–property in $\mathcal R$. Assume moreover that for each $R \in \mathcal R$, the class $\mathfrak P _R$ is closed under pure submodules and transfinite extensions, and contains $R$.
Let $\kappa$ be an infinite cardinal such that for each $R \in \mathcal R$, each $M \in \mathfrak P _R$, and each subset $A \subseteq M$ of cardinality $\leq \kappa$, there exists a $\leq \kappa$–presented pure submodule $N \subseteq M$ containing $A$.
Let $\mathfrak R$ be the restricted property of modules defined by $\mathfrak R
_R = \mathfrak P _R (\kappa)$ for each $R\in \mathcal R$. Then $\mathfrak R$ is an AD–property in $\mathcal R$.
[[*Proof.* ]{}]{}First, we prove that Condition (1) of Lemma \[faithflat\] holds for $\mathfrak R$. If $M \in \mathfrak P _R (\kappa)$, then $M$ is $(\mathfrak P _R)^{\leq \kappa}$–filtered. Since $S$ is a flat $R$–module, $M \otimes_R S$ is $\mathcal C$–filtered where $\mathcal C$ is the class of all modules of the form $N \otimes_R S$ where $N \in (\mathfrak P _R)^{\leq \kappa}$. By Condition (1) for $\mathfrak P$, we have $N \otimes_R S \in \mathfrak P _S$. Since $N$ is $\leq \kappa$–presented as $R$–module, so is $N \otimes_R S$ as $S$–module. Thus $M \otimes_R S$ is $(\mathfrak P _S)^{\leq \kappa}$–filtered, and Condition (1) holds for $\mathfrak R$.
In order to prove Condition (2) for $\mathfrak R$, let $M$ be an $R$–module such that $P = M \otimes_R S \in \mathfrak P _S (\kappa)$, so there exists a $(\mathfrak P _S)^{\leq \kappa}$–filtration $\mathcal P = (P_\alpha \mid \alpha \leq \sigma )$ of $P$. By Condition (2) for $\mathfrak P$, we have $M \in \mathfrak P _R$.
Consider the family $\mathcal F$ corresponding to the filtration $\mathcal P$ by Lemma \[hill\] (for the regular infinite cardinal $\lambda = \kappa^+$). Notice that Condition (H3) of Lemma \[hill\] yields for each $N \in \mathcal F$ that $N, P/N \in \mathfrak P _S (\kappa)$.
We will use the family $\mathcal F$ to construct a $(\mathfrak P _R)^{\leq \kappa}$–filtration $(M_\beta \mid \beta \leq \tau )$ of $M$ by induction on $\beta$ as follows:
We let $M_0 = 0$, and assume that $M_\beta$ is constructed so that $M_\beta$ is a pure submodule of $M$ such that $N = M_\beta \otimes _R S \in \mathcal F$ and $M/M_\beta \in \mathfrak P _R$.
Assume there exists $x \in M \setminus M_\beta$. Since $M/M_\beta \in \mathfrak P _R$, the assumption on $\mathfrak P _R$ yields a $\leq \kappa$–presented submodule $U_1 = Q_1/M_\beta$ of $M/M_\beta$ containing $x + M_\beta$ such that $U_1$ is pure in $M/M_\beta$ (and hence $Q_1$ is pure in $M$ by [@GT Lemma 1.2.17(b)]). Then $N = N_0 \subseteq Q_1 \otimes_R S$.
Condition (H4) of Lemma \[hill\] provides us with $N_1 \in \mathcal F$ such that $Q_1 \otimes_R S \subseteq N_1$ and $N_1/N_0$ is $\leq \kappa$–presented. Again, the assumption on $\mathfrak P _R$ gives a $\leq \kappa$–presented submodule $U_1 \subseteq U_2 = Q_2/M_\beta$ of $M$ such that $U_2$ is pure in $M/M_\beta$ (and hence $Q_2$ is pure in $M$), and $N_1 \subseteq Q_2 \otimes_R S$. Proceeding similarly, we obtain a sequence of pure $R$–submodules $M_\beta = Q_0 \subseteq Q_1 \subseteq Q_2 \subseteq \dots$ of $M$, and a sequence $N = N_0 \subseteq N_1 \subseteq N_2 \subseteq \dots$ of elements of $\mathcal F$.
Let $M_{\beta +1} = \bigcup_{i < \omega} Q_i$ and $N^\prime = \bigcup_{i < \omega} N_i$. Then $M_{\beta +1}$ is a pure submodule of $M$, and $N^\prime \in \mathcal F$ by Condition (H2) of Lemma \[hill\]. Moreover, $M_{\beta + 1}/M_\beta = \bigcup_{i < \omega} U_i$ is a $\leq \kappa$–presented pure submodule of $M/M_\beta$, hence $M_{\beta + 1}/M_\beta \in (\mathfrak P _R)^{\leq \kappa}$ by the assumption on $\mathfrak P _R$. Moreover, $x \in M_{\beta + 1}$ and $M_{\beta+1} \otimes _R S = N^\prime$ by construction.
Since $(M/M_{\beta +1}) \otimes_R S \cong P/N^\prime \in \mathfrak P _S (\kappa)$, Condition (2) for $\mathfrak P$ gives $M/M_{\beta +1} \in \mathfrak P _R$.
If $\beta$ is a limit ordinal, we let $M_\beta = \bigcup_{\gamma < \beta} M_\gamma$. Then $M_\beta$ is pure in $P$, and $M_\beta \otimes_R S = \bigcup_{\gamma < \beta} (M_\gamma \otimes_R S) \in \mathcal F$ by Condition (H2) of Lemma \[hill\]. Again, $(M/M_{\beta}) \otimes _R S \cong P/(M_\beta \otimes_R S) \in \mathcal F$, so Condition (2) for $\mathfrak P$ implies that $M/M_\beta \in \mathfrak P _R$.
By construction, there exists an ordinal $\tau$ such that $M_\tau = M$, hence $(M_\beta \mid \beta \leq \tau )$ is the desired $(\mathfrak P _R)^{\leq \kappa}$–filtration of $M$.
To complete the picture, we recall several known properties of flat Mittag–Leffler modules:
\[e-g-p-t\] Let $R$ be a ring. Then the class of all flat Mittag–Leffler modules is closed under pure submodules.
Let $\kappa$ be an infinite cardinal. Then each $\leq \kappa$–generated flat Mittag–Leffler module is $\leq \kappa$–presented. Moreover, each subset of cardinality $\leq \kappa$ in a flat Mittag–Leffler module $M$ is contained in a pure and $\leq \kappa$–presented submodule $N$ of $M$.
[[*Proof.* ]{}]{}This follows by [@BH Proposition 3.8] and [@EGPT Lemma 2.7(ii)].
Now, we can prove our main result:
*Proof of Theorem \[local\].* Let $\mathfrak P$ denote the property of being a flat Mittag–Leffler module. By Lemmas \[MLdescent\] and \[e-g-p-t\], $\mathfrak P$ satisfies the assumptions of Theorem \[restricted\] for $\mathcal R$ = the class of all commutative rings. Thus the property $\mathfrak R$ of being a $\kappa$–restricted flat Mittag–Leffler module satisfies Conditions (1) and (2) of Lemma \[faithflat\], and the claim follows.
[AH]{}
, [*Mittag–Leffler conditions on modules*]{}, Indiana Math. J. [**57**]{} (2008), 2459–2517.
, [*Cotorsion pairs generated by modules of bounded projective dimension*]{}, Israel J. Math. [**174**]{} (2009), 119–160.
, [*All modules have flat covers*]{}, Bull. London Math. Soc. **33** (2001), 385 – 390.
, [*Infinite–dimensional vector bundles in algebraic geometry: an introduction*]{}, in The Unity of Mathematics, Birkhäuser, Boston 2006, pp. 263–304.
, [*Almost Free Modules*]{}, Revised Ed., North–Holland, New York 2002.
, [*Whitehead modules over large principal ideal domains*]{}, Forum Math. [**14**]{} (2002), 477 – 482.
, [*Model category structures arising from Drinfeld vector bundles*]{}, preprint, arXiv:0906.5213.
, [*Kaplansky classes and derived categories*]{}, Math. Z. 257(2007), 811–843.
, [*Approximations and Endomorphism Algebras of Modules*]{}, GEM [**41**]{}, W. de Gruyter, Berlin 2006.
, [*Almost free modules and Mittag–Leffler conditions*]{}, preprint, arXiv:0910.4277.
, [*Cotorsion pairs, model category structures, and representation theory*]{}, Math. Z. [**241**]{} (2002), 553–592.
, [*Projective modules*]{}, Ann. Math. [**68**]{} (1958), 372–377.
, [*The Stacks Project*]{}, http://math.columbia.edu/algebraic\_geometry/stacks-git/book.pdf.
, [*Homotopical Algebra*]{}, LNM 43, Springer, Berlin–New York, 1967.
, [*Critères de platitude et de projectivité*]{}, Invent. Math. [**13**]{}(1971), 1–89.
[^1]: The first author partially supported by DGI MTM2008-03339, by the Fundación Seneca and by the Junta de Andalucía, Consejería de Economía, Innovación y Ciencia and FEDER funds. The third author supported by GAČR 201/09/0816 and MSM 0021620839
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Instant social video sharing which combines the online social network and user-generated short video streaming services, has become popular in today’s Internet. Cloud-based hosting of such instant social video contents has become a norm to serve the increasing users with user-generated contents. A fundamental problem of cloud-based social video sharing service is that users are located globally, who cannot be served with good service quality with a single cloud provider. In this paper, we investigate the feasibility of dispersing instant social video contents to multiple cloud providers. The challenge is that inter-cloud social *propagation* is indispensable with such multi-cloud social video hosting, yet such inter-cloud traffic incurs substantial operational cost. We analyze and formulate the multi-cloud hosting of an instant social video system as an optimization problem. We conduct large-scale measurement studies to show the characteristics of instant social video deployment, and demonstrate the trade-off between satisfying users with their ideal cloud providers, and reducing the inter-cloud data propagation. Our measurement insights of the social propagation allow us to propose a heuristic algorithm with acceptable complexity to solve the optimization problem, by partitioning a propagation-weighted social graph in two phases: a preference-aware initial cloud provider selection and a propagation-aware re-hosting. Our simulation experiments driven by real-world social network traces show the superiority of our design.'
author:
- 'Zhi Wang[^1], Baochun Li, Lifeng Sun, Wenwu Zhu, and Shiqiang Yang'
title: |
Dispersing Instant Social Video Service\
Across Multiple Clouds
---
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
Instant social video sharing based on the combination of online social networks and user-generated video streaming, has rapidly emerged as one of the most important social media services for users to access contents online [@zhang2014understand]. A fundamental reason for the popularity of social video sharing is that it satisfies the users’ inherent interests in sharing video contents which are generated and uploaded by users themselves [@kwak2010twitter], with their friends [@wasko2005should]. When viewing such user-generated videos, other users need to download the media files from servers over the Internet.
As a result, the placement of instant social video content and the network performance between the servers and the users can significantly affect the service quality of instant social video sharing systems. For this reason, many of them try to use the cloud-based services to deploy their systems, and take full advantage of the elastic and geo-distributed server resource availability in the cloud [@hajjat2010cloudward; @cheng2011load; @wuscaling2012; @hu2014community]. Since online social network services are generally targeted at a large scale of users distributed at different geographic locations, to satisfy the needs of users, possibly with different network conditions, we may need to allocate servers across many different geographic regions and ISPs, for the sake of achieving better network performance by allocating servers in the proximity of users [@liu2012case].
Today, a number of online multimedia services have been deployed over the geo-distributed cloud and network infrastructure [@wuscaling2012]. Intuitively, multi-cloud hosting provides better geographical diversity, since no single cloud provider is able to cover all the regions/ISPs across the Internet [@liuoptimizing], to serve users with their ideal servers. The growing trend of social application as well as the existing geo-distributed deployment for online multimedia applications naturally lead to the idea of [*multi-cloud instant social video hosting*]{}, or [*multi-cloud hosting*]{} in short, in that the instant video contents are dispersed to multiple cloud service providers, rather than a single cloud provider. Fig. \[fig:partition-example\] gives an example of the multi-cloud hosting (details are to be presented in Sec. \[sec:design\]).
![Multi-cloud hosting based on preference- and propagation-aware social graph partition.[]{data-label="fig:partition-example"}](partition-example.eps){width="0.8\linewidth"}
A fundamental difference between an instant social video sharing system and a traditional content distribution system is the presence of content propagation in the social network, in which social activities such as *sharing* are demanded by users [@wasko2005should]. In the context of multi-cloud hosting, besides storage and network cost, social propagation can lead to a large volume of content exchanges between different cloud providers, incurring a high cost of inter-cloud content replication.
The reason is that cloud providers tend to block content replication between the cloud providers with custom tailored pricing schemes: (1) A cloud provider typically encourages a social video sharing system to host user-generated contents, *e.g.*, the *incoming* traffic in Amazon EC2 (Elastic Cloud Computing) is not charged at all; and (2) a cloud provider charges much more for the *outgoing* traffic to a different cloud provider than inside the same cloud, *e.g.*, for the first $10$ TB data transferred from an Virginia EC2 instance outside, the price is $0.12$ USD/GB if the traffic goes to a server hosted by a different cloud provider, while it is only $0.02$ USD/GB if the outgoing traffic remains in Amazon EC2, even though both traffics transfer between the same pair of locations [@amazonec2price].
Such a pricing scheme penalizes outbound transfers, and establishes a roadblock that limits replication across the boundary between different cloud providers, even though such replication is indispensable in the context of social video sharing, since users frequently share and *reshare* content from one another [@ye2010measuring]. Taking inter-cloud propagation into account, we seek to study the design space of a multi-cloud hosting strategy that can achieve the following objectives: (1) Satisfying the *cloud-provider preference* of users, so that users are hosted with their ideal cloud providers — they can share contents to friends and view contents generated by their friends fast [@krishnan2009moving]; and (2) Reducing the *cost of inter-cloud traffic* caused by social propagation between users hosted with different cloud providers.
In this paper, we study how to efficiently host an instant social video system with multiple cloud providers based on partition of a propagation-weighted social graph. First, we conduct large-scale measurements to study the benefit of hosting social video contents with multiple cloud providers, the challenges with such multi-cloud hosting, and design guidelines from social propagation characteristics. Second, we formulate the multi-cloud hosting as an optimization problem, which is proven to be NP-hard. *Third*, based on our measurement insights, we propose to solve the problem heuristically by dividing the partition into two phases: an initial preference-aware cloud selection (so that users can upload/download the instant videos to/from their ideal servers), and a *propagation-aware* re-hosting (so as to reduce the cost of replicating the content across the boundary between multiple cloud providers caused by the social propagation). Since only a small set of social connections incurring a large amount of replication cost are re-hosted in our design, the algorithm can efficiently partition large-scale social graphs.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Sec. \[sec:measure\], we motivate our design by measurement studies of real-world social video sharing and cloud systems. In Sec. \[sec:design\], we formulate the problem and present our multi-cloud hosting design based on the preference- and propagation-aware social graph partition. In Sec. \[sec:evaluation\], we evaluate the performance of our design using trace-driven simulations. In Sec. \[sec:relatedwork\], we discuss related work. Finally, we conclude the paper in Sec. \[sec:conclusion\].
Motivation and Design Principles {#sec:measure}
================================
In this section, we first present our motivation based on measurement results of an instant social video sharing system, then we present our measurement insights for the multi-cloud hosting design for instant social video contents.
Assumption: Hosting Users Instead of Contents
---------------------------------------------
Before presenting the measurement results, we give the assumption made in the multi-cloud hosting.
Social connections determine how contents propagate between users in the online social network [@zhang2014understand]. Content propagation over these social connections turns an online social network to a “user-subscribing” network, *i.e.*, each user acts as a source which generates the contents to be subscribed by others [@kwak2010twitter]. For this reason, in our study of the multi-cloud hosting of a social video sharing system, we focus on handling the hosting of users, [*i.e.*]{}, contents generated or shared by a user will be hosted by the same cloud provider assigned to host the user, and different cloud providers are assigned to host different users. Note that content instead of users is physically stored and served by the cloud servers. The users are actually “logical” instances, which generate and propagate contents in the online social networks. These contents can be either static (e.g., photos uploaded by users), and dynamical (e.g., pages generated according to different contexts).
The benefits of hosting contents of the same user in the same cloud provider are as follows: (1) it avoids individually handling the user-generated contents, which have an extremely large number [@facebook-mineral]; and (2) developers for the instant video sharing system can access a user’s own contents *locally*, when they are hosted within the same cloud [@pujol2010little].
Today, user-level redirection is feasible for several content providers. For example, two different users will use different URLs (associated with their IDs) to download the same content from different servers. As social networks are popularly used by users, such user-aware redirection will be more practical in the future.
The problem is then to determine which cloud provider is assigned to host which user.
Measurement Setup
-----------------
To motivate our design, we present the measurement on users’ cloud-provider preference, the replication roadblock across the boundary between different cloud providers, and the propagation characteristics in instant social video sharing systems, respectively. We use active and trace-based measurements as follows.
### Instant Video Sharing and Social Propagation
We have obtained content upload and request traces from Weishi from the technical team of Tencent, an instant social video sharing system based in China. In Weishi, short videos (in $10$ seconds) are generated by individuals and shared with their “followers”. Each video in Weishi is transcoded into the following versions: a) 480x480, $2000$ Kbps; b) 480x480, $1050$ Kbps; c) 480x480, $500$ Kbps; d) 480x480, $300$ Kbps. The Weishi traces record two types of user activities in April 2014: (1) Video upload: each record records when a video is generated and uploaded by a particular user; (2) Video download: each item records when a video with a particular version is download by which user, and from which server.
To further study social propagation between users, we have also obtained Weibo traces, containing valuable runtime data of the system in $6$ months (June 2011 — November 2011). We have collected two types of traces as follows: (1) the social relationship database, which records how users are socially connected to each other at different time points; (2) the microblogs, which are messages posted by the users — each entry includes the ID, name, IP address of the publisher, time stamp when the microblog is posted, IDs of the parent and root microbloggers if it is a re-post [@zhi-tomccap-psar2013].
Weibo and Weishi are different social networks, and different types of online social network services may have different social propagation patterns and characteristics. To jointly use them for studying the service deployment for instant social video service, we carry out the following preprocessing: (1) We choose the traces of Weibo and Weishi, instead of Twitter and Vine, because Weishi and Weibo share a significant fraction of users, as Weishi was developed based on the social graph of Weibo; (2) In Weibo, we only use the propagation traces of videos, and remove other types of multimedia contents.
### PlanetLab-based Active Measurement
To practically study the user preference with servers located at different geographic regions over the world, we use PlanetLab-based experiments. We simulate user activities on the PlanetLab nodes, and let them download from and upload to cloud servers allocated from Amazon EC2 (Elastic Cloud Computing) [@amazon-ec2], to study the user preference of different cloud regions.
Benefits from Multi-Cloud Hosting {#sec:diverse}
---------------------------------
### Diverse Regions/ISPs Improve Service Quality
To show that diverse server deployment improves the service quality in instance social video sharing, we study the performance of users downloading contents from servers at different geographic locations. In particular, we measure the time users (PlanetLab nodes) spend on downloading contents from the servers allocated at different locations ($7$ Amazon regions are selected). The content size is $1$ MB, and users download the content over HTTP, from the same type of web server. We repeated these download experiments in one week, and calculated the average download speeds of the users, to infer their preference of servers deployed at different regions.
Fig. \[fig:best-worst-region\] shows the preference of $55$ PlanetLab nodes randomly distributed in different locations over the world. These nodes download the same content from servers deployed at $7$ different regions which are randomly selected from Amazon regions. A pair of bars represent the fraction of each region being selected as the “ideal” region (*i.e.*, a PlanetLab node downloads the contents from the region at the highest speed), against the “worst” region (*i.e.*, a PlanetLab node downloads the contents from the region at the slowest speed), respectively. We observe that all the regions have an opportunity to be selected as the ideal region by users, indicating that different users have different region preference.
![User preference of regions in the Amazon cloud service.[]{data-label="fig:best-worst-region"}](download-best-worst-region.eps){width="0.8\linewidth"}
### Multiple Cloud Providers Cover More Service Regions {#sec:amazon-ec2}
Today’s cloud providers are scaling their services globally, by building datacenters at different regions and with different ISPs around the world. However, it is difficult for a single cloud provider to cover all the possible regions/ISPs that an instant social video sharing system requires, to serve the users with servers deployed at their ideal regions [@liuoptimizing].
For example, the Amazon EC2 has deployed servers at $9$ regions, including 1. Virginia, 2. Oregon, 3. California, 4. Ireland, 5. Frankfurt, 6. Singapore, 7. Tokyo, 8. Sydney, and 9. Sao Paulo [@amazon-ec2], but these regions fail to locally serve users at some locations, *e.g.*, users in China. On the other hand, some Chinese cloud providers including Tencent Cloud [@tencent-cloud] can provide servers in a variety of these regions in China.
It is promising for a social video sharing system to allocate servers from a larger range of regions and ISPs, by utilizing more cloud providers.
**Measurement insight**. We observe that (1) different cloud providers have deployed servers at different regions/ISPs, and (2) user preference of different regions/ISPs is very different. As a result, multi-cloud hosting of an instant social video sharing system is appealing, since multiple cloud providers allow the system to host contents at a large range of regions/ISPs, so as to improve the possibility for users to download from and upload to their ideal servers.
Challenges of Multi-cloud Hosting for Instant Social Video Service
------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, we study the statistics of content uploads and requests in an instant video sharing service, the replication limitation caused by the pricing schemes of the cloud providers, and the dynamics of social propagation in an instant social video sharing system.
### Instant Video Uploads and Requests
Based on the Weishi traces, we measure the content uploads and requests in an instant social video sharing service. We first study the statistics of the number of video uploads and requests in one day, as illustrated in Fig. \[fig:upload-request\]. The two curves in this figure represent the number of instant videos uploaded/requested by users in each time slot ($1$ hour) over time. We observe that both the upload and request curves demonstrate daily patterns, with the peak hours at 8pm and 10pm, respectively. We also observe that the average number of requests is around $100$x larger than that of uploads, indicating that it is likely for the popular videos to be requested by many users, located at different regions. It is thus necessary to deploy these contents into multiple clouds.
We next study the elapse between the upload of a video and the requests. We plot the CDF of the elapse between the upload time of a video and the time the first request for the video was issued in Fig. \[fig:updowntimediff\], over $300,000$ videos. We observe that more than $40\%$ (resp. $55\%$ and $85\%$) of the videos were requested $1$ hour (resp. $8$ hours and $24$ hours) after they were uploaded. These observations show that it is necessary for instant videos to be deployed into multiple clouds timely.
![CDF of elapse between upload and the first request.[]{data-label="fig:updowntimediff"}](request-upload-overtime.eps){width="\linewidth"}
![CDF of elapse between upload and the first request.[]{data-label="fig:updowntimediff"}](updowntimediff.eps){width="\linewidth"}
### Inter-Cloud Replication Cost
Another challenge is the inter-cloud *replication cost*, which is the cost from replicating contents between cloud providers due to social propagation. In this paper, propagation cost and replication cost are interchangeable. Taking the bandwidth pricing schemes used by Amazon EC2 [@amazonec2price] as example, we observe two important pricing schemes used in today’s cloud providers as follows. (1) *Incoming content encouragement*. It is observed that cloud providers do not charge the incoming traffic from the Internet, *i.e.*, in the cloud-based social video sharing system, the contents generated by users can be uploaded to servers of any cloud providers for free. (2) *Inter-cloud replication roadblock*. However, it is observed that the outgoing traffic is generally charged. Specifically, the cloud providers charge a regular price of the outgoing traffic when contents are transferred from inside one cloud to another cloud provider; while they charge much less when the outgoing traffic is inside the same cloud. For example, the price scheme for the first $10$ TB outgoing traffic in Amazon EC2 is illustrated in Table \[tab:ec2-data-price\]. When data is transferred outside an EC2 server at Virginia, the price is $0.12$ USD/GB on average if the traffic goes to a server hosted by a different cloud provider; while it is only $0.02$ USD/GB if the outgoing traffic remains in Amazon EC2.
This pricing scheme restricts the social video sharing systems from freely extending their service to multiple cloud providers, given that contents are indispensably replicated between servers in different cloud providers because of the social propagation between users hosted with different cloud providers. Note that the pricing in our study is actually an input, instead of a mechanism as in typical game theory studies: Our design tries to reduce the replication cost caused by the data transfer price between different cloud providers.
**Region** **To another Amazon region** **To another cloud provider**
------------ ------------------------------ -------------------------------
Virginia 0.02 0.12
Oregon 0.02 0.12
California 0.02 0.12
Ireland 0.02 0.12
Frankfurt 0.02 0.12
Singapore 0.09 0.19
Tokyo 0.09 0.201
Sydney 0.14 0.19
Sao Paulo 0.16 0.25
: Data transfer price of Amazon EC2 for outgoing traffic (USD/GB for first 1TB, November 2014) [@amazonec2price].[]{data-label="tab:ec2-data-price"}
### Dynamics of Social Propagation
Another challenge is related to the dynamics of social topology.
*Creation and removal of social connections*. One year since it was online, social connections within Tencent Weibo were still changing dramatically. Fig. \[fig:conn-dynamics\] illustrates the creation and removal ratios of social connections related to a sample of $1$ million users over time (*i.e.*, any social connection that connects at least one user in the $1$ million users is included).
In Fig. \[fig:conn-dynamics\](a), we have a baseline of the number of social connections in June 2011, and each sample in the “social connection created” curve represents the creation ratio of social connections since then, while each sample in the “social connection removed” curve represents the removal ratio of social connections since then. The creation and removal of social connections among users are relatively dynamical — in 5 months, over $65\%$ new social connections are created. Besides, much more social connections are created (friending or following others) than removed (un-friending or un-following others). Similar results are also observed in a period of one week in November 2011 in Fig. \[fig:conn-dynamics\](b).
For a newly deployed social video sharing system, the social connections can change dramatically over time for a long period.
![Dynamics of social connections in Tencent Weibo after it was online.[]{data-label="fig:conn-dynamics"}](conn-add-remove-monthly.eps){width="\linewidth"}
![Dynamics of social connections in Tencent Weibo after it was online.[]{data-label="fig:conn-dynamics"}](conn-add-remove-daily.eps){width="\linewidth"}
**Measurement insight**. Multi-cloud hosting of a social video sharing system is challenging, because (1) the cloud providers are using pricing schemes that block the replication of contents between cloud providers, and (2) the social topology is changing dynamically due to frequent creation and removal of the social connections after the social video sharing system is deployed.
Principles Learnt from Measurement Studies {#sec:propagation}
------------------------------------------
We study the characteristics of the social propagation in the online social network, which can guide the multi-cloud hosting design.
### A Few Server Regions Are Enough for Most of the Users
After a content is generated or shared by a user in the online social network, her friends are the ones who are to view the content. As mentioned above, these friends have different preference of regions to download the contents from. We study how many server regions are required to host a user so that every friend of her can download the content from their ideal regions. Based on the Weibo traces, we retrieve users’ geographic locations and estimate their ideal server regions based on the geographic distance, *i.e.*, an ideal server region is one closest to the user.
Fig. \[fig:different-region-req\] illustrates the CDF of the number of regions demanded by a user so that all her friends can download the content from their ideal regions. We observe that this number follows a heavy-tailed distribution, *i.e.*, while some of the users need to be hosted with many regions to serve their friends with their ideal regions, most of the users only need a small number of regions, which are highly possible to be covered by a single cloud provider. Since the first type of users tend to be hosted by almost all the cloud providers available to the social video sharing system, in our design, we are focused on the second type of users, to determine which cloud provider is assigned to host which user.
![CDF of the propagation weights of social connections.[]{data-label="fig:propnum-vs-connrank"}](regionnum-per-user-cdf.eps){width="\linewidth"}
![CDF of the propagation weights of social connections.[]{data-label="fig:propnum-vs-connrank"}](propnumconn-cdf.eps){width="\linewidth"}
### A Few Social Connections Incur a Large Amount of Propagation {#sec:measure-propagation}
In an online social network, users can reach the content generated by others through the social connections between them. We observe that the number of contents propagating over different social connections can be quite different. In Fig. \[fig:propnum-vs-connrank\], we plot the CDF of the *propagation weight* (*i.e.*, the number of reshares via a particular social connection in $1$ day) of $10,000$ social connections, randomly chosen from all the social connections among all the $1$ million users.
We observe that the distribution of the propagation weight over different social connections is also heavy-tailed. To reduce the cost of inter-cloud traffic, we need to take social connections with the dominating propagation weight into account when applying the multi-cloud hosting.
**Measurement insight**. We observe that, (1) for most of the users, each individual of them only needs a few number of regions to serve the contents for his followers, which can be provided by a single cloud provider, though multiple cloud providers are needed to cover regions for all of the users; (2) only a few number of social connections incur a large amount of social propagation, which may be the cause of the dominate inter-cloud data transfer cost.
Based on the measurement insights, we will present our design of the multi-cloud hosting of an instant video sharing media system in Sec. \[sec:design\].
Multi-Cloud Hosting: Detailed Design {#sec:design}
====================================
Fig. \[fig:framework\] illustrates the framework of our instant social video multi-cloud hosting proposal. We design the instant video content hosting strategies following a data-driven approach. We collect the following information: (1) the social propagation information, including the social graph between users, how they generate videos and how these contents propagate via social connections; and (2) the cloud information, including locations and ISPs of cloud servers, their upload/download speeds to users, and the resource price of these cloud servers (*e.g.*, storage, data). Based on these information, we carry out the multi-cloud hosting strategies, to partition users to different cloud providers, such that users can receive videos with good streaming quality, as well as that the overall content replication cost is minimized.
{width="0.85\linewidth"}
We need to strategically determine which users should be hosted by which cloud provider, so as to not only satisfy users’ cloud-provider preference but also reduce the cost of inter-cloud content replication. In this section, we present our detailed design for instant social video multi-cloud hosting.
Fig. \[fig:partition-example\] illustrates the idea of hosting an instant social video sharing system with multiple cloud providers based on the preference- and propagation-aware social graph partition. In this figure, $a,b,\ldots,f$ represent users in the social network, and $r1, r2, \ldots, r6$ represent regions with servers deployed by two cloud providers $A$ and $B$, where $\{r1,r2,r3\}\in A$ and $\{r4,r5,r6\}\in B$. Each user can generate and share a number of contents, which will be downloaded by her friends. The segments between users represent the social connections, which can be retrieved from the online social network. The thickness of a segment represents the propagation level between two users, *i.e.*, a thicker segment indicates that more contents propagate between two users. Recall that such propagation will cause the content replication between the servers where the two users are hosted, as presented in Sec. \[sec:measure\].
We assume that users $a$, $b$, and $c$ prefer cloud $A$, while users $d$, $e$, and $f$ prefer cloud $B$, *i.e.*, better download and upload performance can be achieved if they are hosted with their ideal cloud provider. In this example, we observe that the partition (indicated by the two large dashed circles) of the users can satisfy the preference of all users, as well as minimize the inter-cloud propagation, since the propagation weights of social connections $(c,d)$ and $(c,e)$ are much smaller than that of other social connections. However, in most of the cases, satisfying users’ cloud-provider preference and minimizing the inter-cloud propagation will conflict (*e.g.*, when the propagation weight between $c$ and $d$ is very large), and we need to strategically achieve the two objectives jointly.
Next, we present the formulation of the multi-cloud hosting problem, and our solution based on the measurement insights.
Problem Formulation
-------------------
In this subsection, we will formulate the multi-cloud hosting of an instant social video sharing service into an optimization problem. In particular, the objectives we seek to achieve are as follows: (1) we need to satisfy the cloud-provider preference of users who are influenced to download the contents shared by their friends; (2) we need to satisfy the cloud-provider preference of users who generate and upload the contents; and (3) we need to reduce the inter-cloud traffic caused by social propagation between users that are hosted with different cloud providers.
Before we present the details of our design, we summarize some important notations in Table \[tab:notations\].
Symbol Definition
------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*$u,v,w$* Indices for users in the online social network
*$c,d,f$* Indices for cloud providers
*${\mathcal{G}}=\{{\mathbf{V}},{\mathbf{E}}\}$* The social graph with users in set ${\mathbf{V}}$ and social connections in set ${\mathbf{E}}$
*${\mathbf{C}}$* The set of cloud providers
*$e_{uv}$* The propagation weight of social connection $u \rightarrow v$
*${\mathbf{R}}_c$* The set of regions in cloud provider $c$
*${\mathbf{F}}_u$* The set of friends of user $u$
*${\chi}(v,s)$* The preference level for user $v$ to download contents from servers at region $s$
*${\chi}'(v,s)$* The preference level for user $v$ to upload contents to servers at region $s$
*$Q(u,c)$* The local download index of user $u$ hosted with cloud provider $c$
*$W(u,c)$* The local upload index of user $u$ hosted with cloud provider $c$
*${\psi}(u,c)$* The preference of user $u$ to the cloud provider $c$
*$Y(u,c)$* The cost of inter-cloud replication between user $u$ and her friends if $u$ is hosted with cloud provider $c$
*$p_{cd}$* The data-transfer price of inter-cloud traffic from cloud $c$ to cloud $d$
*$\alpha$* The parameter used to balance satisfying users’ cloud-provider preference and reducing inter-cloud propagation
*${\gamma}_X$* The gain of re-hosting users using the strategy $X$
*${\phi}(\cdot)$* The cost caused by inter-cloud propagation in the re-hosting
*$\eta$* A threshold used to determine which social connections are considered in the re-hosting.
: Important notations[]{data-label="tab:notations"}
### Social Graph and Multiple Cloud Providers
Let ${\mathcal{G}}=\{{\mathbf{V}},{\mathbf{E}}\}$ denote the social graph with each node $u \in {\mathbf{V}}$ representing a user in the online social network, and each edge $e_{uv} \in {\mathbf{E}}$ denoting the propagation weight from user $u$ to user $v$. Let ${\mathbf{C}}$ denote the set of cloud providers that the instant social video sharing system can be hosted with. Each cloud provider $c \in {\mathbf{C}}$ has a set of regions ${\mathbf{R}}_c$ where users can be hosted.
### Cloud Preference of a User
The cloud-provider preference of a user includes the following two perspectives: (1) improving the download performance by hosting the user with a cloud so that the user’s friends can download from regions that are close to them; and (2) improving the upload performance by hosting the user with a cloud with regions that are close to the user himself.
*Local download index*. Let $Q(u,c)$ denote the local download index of hosting user $u$ with cloud $c$, to satisfy her friends to download from local regions. $Q(u,c)$ is calculated as follows: $$Q(u,c) = \sum_{v \in {\mathbf{F}}_u} \max_{s \in {\mathbf{R}}_c} {\chi}(v, s),$$ where ${\mathbf{F}}_u$ is the set of user $u$’s friends in the online social network, $r_v$ is the region where user $v$ is located, and ${\chi}(v,s)$ denotes the preference level for user $v$ to download contents that are hosted at region $s$. ${\chi}(v,s)$ depends on the network condition between user $v$ and region $s$, and large ${\chi}(v,s)$ indicates that better network performance can be achieved in the download. The rationale of $Q(u,c)$ is that hosting a user $u$ with a cloud $c$ with large $Q(u,c)$ can benefit her friends, who can download the contents generated or shared by user $u$ from their ideal cloud regions.
*Local upload index*. We also seek to find an ideal server for the user himself to upload the generated contents to. Let $W(u,c)$ denote the local upload index, which represents the upload performance achieved at user $u$ when $u$ is hosted with cloud $c$. $W(u,c)$ is defined as follows: $$W(u,c) = \max_{s \in {\mathbf{R}}_c} {\chi}'(u, s) K_u,$$ where ${\chi}'(u,s)$ denotes the preference level for user $u$ to upload his generated contents to a server at region $s$, and $K_u$ is the average amount of content that can be generated by user $u$ in the next time slot. A larger local upload index $W(u,c)$ indicates that better upload gain can be achieved when $u$ is hosted with the cloud provider $c$.
In our experiments, ${\chi}(v,s)$ and ${\chi}'(v,s)$ can be estimated either by the geographic distance between the user and the server region, or using the historical network performance.
*Cloud-provider preference of a user*. In our design, the overall cloud-provider preference of a user takes both the local download performance (for the user’s friends) and local upload performance (for the user himself) into consideration. The overall cloud-provider preference of a user is then the combination of the two indices. We denote ${\psi}(u,c)$ as user $u$’s preference of cloud provider $c$, defined as follows: $${\psi}(u,c) = Q(u,c) + \beta_u W(u,c),
\label{eq:pref}$$ where $\beta_u$ is an implementation parameter used to combine the two indices, depending on the characteristics of a user, *e.g.*, a large $\beta_u$ for a user who frequently generates and uploads contents from a mobile device, so that a cloud provider with servers the user can upload content fast to will have a larger preference index ${\psi}(u,c)$ with the user.
### Replication Cost Due to Inter-Cloud Propagation
As a unique cost in the multi-cloud hosting, the inter-cloud traffic cost is caused by the social propagation between users that are hosted with different cloud providers, due to the pricing scheme of the cloud providers we have shown in Sec. \[sec:measure\]. In the online social network, the common social activities such as sharing contents [@wasko2005should] make the contents associate with different users dynamically.
Due to the high cost of replicating contents from servers in one cloud to servers in another cloud, we need to take the cost of inter-cloud content replication caused by social propagation into account. We define the replication cost for user $u$ hosted with cloud $c$ as follows: $$Y(u,c) = \sum_{v \in {\mathbf{F}}_u} {\frac{1}{2} (p_{C_uC_v}e_{uv} + p_{C_vC_u}e_{vu})},$$ where $p_{cd}$ is the data transfer price for replicating a content from cloud $c$ to cloud $d$, *i.e.*, the price that the instant social video sharing system has to pay when contents are replicated between two cloud providers rather than inside one cloud provider. $C_u$ is the cloud with which user $u$ is hosted. $p_{C_uC_v}e_{uv}$ is the cost of inter-cloud traffic of social connection $(u,v)$, depending on the actual pricing scheme used by cloud providers. Next, we will discuss how these objectives are achieved in our multi-cloud hosting design.
### Problem Formulation and Analysis
*Optimization*. To satisfy users’ cloud-provider preference as well as reducing the inter-cloud propagation, the multi-cloud hosting can be formulated as an optimization problem by combining the two objectives, as follows: $$\max_{\{C_u|u \in {\mathbf{V}}\}} \sum_{u \in {\mathbf{V}}} \alpha {\psi}(u,C_u) - (1-\alpha) \gamma Y(u,C_u),
\label{eq:obj}$$ subject to: $$C_u \in {\mathbf{C}}, \forall u \in {\mathbf{V}},$$ where $C_u$ is the objective variable that determines the cloud provider with which user $u$ is hosted, $\gamma$ is the parameter used to combine the inter-cloud *propagation cost* (The cost caused by content replication across different cloud servers due to social propagation) with the users’ cloud-provider preference, and $\alpha$ is the parameter to adjust the weight between the two objectives. The optimization variables give the choices of cloud providers for users in the online social network.
*Proof of NP-Hardness*. The optimization to determine the multi-cloud hosting is NP-hard in general.
To prove this, we reduce a MCP (Multiterminal Cut Problem) [@dahlhaus1994complexity], which is NP-hard, to it. In the MCP, we are given an edge-weighted graph $G$ and a subset of $k$ vertices called terminals, and asked for a minimum weight set of edges that separates each terminal from all the others. Next, we show that the MCP can be reduced to the multi-cloud hosting problem. We build a social graph $G'$ which has the same structure with $G$. The reduction is as follows. (1) We have $k$ cloud providers $c_1,c_2,\ldots, c_k$ for the multi-cloud hosting, and the data-transfer price between any two cloud providers is $1$. (2) We let the propagation weight of a social connection in $G'$ be the same as the edge weight of the corresponding edge in $G$. (3) Without loss of generality, we let users $u_1,u_2,\ldots,u_k$ in $G'$ be the ones corresponding to the $k$ terminals in $G$, and we assign the cloud-provider preference of users as follows: $$\begin{cases}
{\psi}(u_i,c_j) = 0, & i > k, j = 1,2,\ldots,k \\
{\psi}(u_i,c_j) = 0, & j \ne i, i = 1,2,\dots,k\\
{\psi}(u_i,c_j) = L, & j = i, i = 1,2,\ldots,k \\
\end{cases},$$ where $L$ is a const cloud-provider preference, which can be assigned with a value large enough (*e.g.*, the sum of all propagation weight) so that every user $u_i, i = 1,2,\ldots,k$ has to be hosted with the cloud $c_i$ to achieve the optimal multi-cloud hosting. Thus, the $k$ users will be separated from each other in the multi-cloud hosting (they are hosted with different cloud providers respectively) while the overall social propagation is minimized. If the multi-cloud hosting problem can be solved, then the solution of the original MCP can be achieved as well, *i.e.*, the set of edges corresponding to the social connections between any two cloud providers. Thus, the multi-cloud hosting problem is NP-hard.
Heuristic Multi-Cloud Hosting
-----------------------------
Based on our measurement insights, we design a heuristic algorithm to solve the multi-cloud hosting problem. Algorithm \[alg:multi-cloud-hosting\] presents our strategy to partition the social graph, determining which users should be hosted with which cloud providers. Our algorithm includes two phases as follows: (1) In the initial preference-aware cloud selection (lines \[ln:init-cloud-sel-start\] – \[ln:init-cloud-sel-end\]), a user is assigned to a cloud provider according to only the cloud-provider preference of hosting a user (${\psi}(u,c)$), without considering the social propagation; (2) In the propagation-aware re-hosting (lines \[ln:re-host-user-start\] – \[ln:re-host-user-end\]), pairs of users are assigned with different cloud providers to reduce the inter-cloud propagation. We will present the two phases as follows.
\[ln:init-cloud-sel-start\] $C_u \gets \arg\max_{c \in {\mathbf{C}}} {{\psi}(u,c)}$ \[ln:sel-max\] \[ln:init-cloud-sel-end\] Sort social connections in their propagation weight’s descending order \[ln:re-host-user-start\] $\{u,v\}, C_u \ne C_v \gets$ head of the sorted list Calculate ${\gamma}_A$, ${\gamma}_B$, ${\gamma}_C$ and ${\gamma}_D$ in Eq. (\[equ:pref\]) ${\gamma}'_X = \max\{{\gamma}_A, {\gamma}_B, {\gamma}_C, {\gamma}_D\}$ Re-host user $u$ and user $v$ accordingly (Sec. \[sec:design-rehosting\]) Remove social connection $\{u,v\}$ from the sorted list \[ln:re-host-user-end\]
### Preference-Aware Initial Hosting
In this phase, an initial cloud provider is assigned to host each user, only according the cloud-provider preference (${\psi}(u,c)$) of users. For each user in the online social network, the ideal cloud provider is the one that can maximize its cloud-provider preference among all available cloud providers (line \[ln:sel-max\]). After the initial cloud selection, users are assigned to the cloud providers that can maximize their preference; however, such assignment can result in a large cost of inter-cloud propagation ($Y(u,c)$). Next, users are adjusted to reduce the inter-cloud propagation.
### Propagation-Aware Re-Hosting {#sec:design-rehosting}
Our re-hosting strategy is to change the cloud providers for users so that the inter-cloud replication cost can be reduced. The re-hosting procedure works as follows.
First, the social connections are ranked between users that are not hosted with the same cloud in the descending order of the propagation weight (line \[ln:re-host-user-start\]). A pair of users who have a large propagation weight between them are can be hosted with the same cloud to reduce the inter-cloud replication cost.
Second, we present the re-hosting approach. Let $u$ and $v$ denote the pair of users whose social connection has the largest propagation weight. Fig. \[fig:re-hosting\] illustrates the schemes that we can apply to improve the partition: (1) keep the original hosting strategy, as illustrated in Fig. \[fig:re-hosting\](A); (2) re-host $u$ to the cloud by which $v$ is hosted, as illustrated in Fig. \[fig:re-hosting\](B); (3) re-host $v$ to the cloud by which $u$ is hosted, as illustrated in Fig. \[fig:re-hosting\](C); and (4) re-host both $u$ and $v$ to a new cloud provider $f$, as illustrated in Fig. \[fig:re-hosting\](D). We can improve the performance by applying one among the four strategies, to re-host $u$ and $v$ with one cloud.
*Third*, to determine which strategy is used to re-host user $u$ and user $v$, we use the following heuristic: we define a gain ${\gamma}_X,
X \in \{A,B,C,D\}$ for each re-hosting scheme. ${\gamma}_A$ is the gain of hosting user $u$ with cloud $c$, and user $v$ in cloud $d$, without any change to the original hosting (it is the baseline); ${\gamma}_B$ is the gain of hosting users $u$ and $v$ with cloud $d$; ${\gamma}_C$ is the gain of hosting users $u$ and $v$ with cloud $c$; and ${\gamma}_D$ is the gain of hosting users $u$ and $v$ with a new cloud provider $f$. The gain is defined as follows: $$\begin{array}{l}
\begin{array}{l}
{\gamma}_A = 0 \\
\end{array}\\
\begin{array}{l}
{\gamma}_B = \alpha[{\psi}(u,d) - {\psi}(u,c)] - (1-\alpha){\phi}(u \rightarrow d) \\
\end{array}\\
\begin{array}{l}
{\gamma}_C = \alpha[{\psi}(v,c) - {\psi}(v,d)] - (1-\alpha){\phi}(v \rightarrow c) \\
\end{array}\\
\begin{array}{l}
{\gamma}_D = \max_{f \ne c,d} \{\alpha[{\psi}(u,f) + {\psi}(v,f) - {\psi}(u,c) \\
- {\psi}(v,d)] - (1-\alpha){\phi}(u,v \rightarrow f) \}
\end{array}
\end{array},
\label{equ:pref}$$ where the first part ($\alpha[\cdot]$) is the gain of improving the cloud-provider preference of user $u$ and $v$ according to the re-hosting, and the second part ($-(1-\alpha){\phi}(\cdot)$) represents the gain by reducing the inter-cloud replication cost under different re-hosts. ${\phi}(\cdot)$ is defined as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{cases}
\begin{array}{l}
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{w|C(w) = c} {\gamma (p_{cd} e_{wu} + p_{dc} e_{uw})} \\
- \frac{1}{2}\sum_{w|C(w) = d} {\gamma (p_{cd} e_{uw} + p_{dc} e_{wu})}
\end{array} & u \rightarrow d\\
\begin{array}{l}
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{w|C(w) = d} {\gamma (p_{dc} e_{wv} + p_{cd} e_{vw})} \\
- \frac{1}{2}\sum_{w|C(w) = c} {\gamma (p_{dc} e_{vw} + p_{cd} e_{wv})}
\end{array} & v \rightarrow c \\
\begin{array}{l}
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{w|C(w) = c} {\gamma (p_{cd} e_{wu} + p_{dc} e_{uw})} \\
- \frac{1}{2}\sum_{w|C(w) = f} {\gamma (p_{cf} e_{uw} + p_{fc} e_{wu})} \\
+ \frac{1}{2}\sum_{w|C(w) = d} {\gamma (p_{dc} e_{wv} + p_{cd} e_{vw})} \\
- \frac{1}{2}\sum_{w|C(w) = f} {\gamma (p_{df} e_{vw} + p_{fd} e_{wv})} \\
\end{array} & u,v \rightarrow f \\
\end{cases}.
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The re-hosting is performed according to the value of the gains. Among ${\gamma}_A$, ${\gamma}_B$, ${\gamma}_C$ and ${\gamma}_D$, if ${\gamma}_A$ is the largest, $u$ will remain in cloud $c$ and $v$ in cloud $d$; if ${\gamma}_B$ is the largest, $u$ will be hosted with cloud $d$; if ${\gamma}_C$ is the largest, $v$ will be hosted with cloud $c$; otherwise, $v$ will be hosted and $u$ with a new cloud provider $f$, which can maximize the re-hosting gain.
*Fourth*, in our heuristic re-hosting, social connections with the largest propagation weight are first processed. In each pass, we only consider the social connections that can incur a high cost of inter-cloud traffic (as observed in our measurement study, the fraction of such social connections is very small). A threshold $\eta$ is used to determine which social connections are considered in the re-hosting. In our experiments, $\eta$ is selected to terminate the re-hosting loop when the fraction of social connections touched exceeds $20\%$ of all the social connections. The rationale is that, according to our measurement insight in Sec. \[sec:measure-propagation\], in a real online social video sharing system, only the most “active” social connections will affect the replication cost.
![Strategies of re-hosting a pair of users.[]{data-label="fig:re-hosting"}](rehost-new.eps){height="\figureheightfour"}
[(A)]{}
![Strategies of re-hosting a pair of users.[]{data-label="fig:re-hosting"}](rehost-u2v.eps){height="\figureheightfour"}
[(B)]{}
![Strategies of re-hosting a pair of users.[]{data-label="fig:re-hosting"}](rehost-v2u.eps){height="\figureheightfour"}
[(C)]{}
![Strategies of re-hosting a pair of users.[]{data-label="fig:re-hosting"}](rehost-uv2w.eps){height="\figureheightfour"}
[(D)]{}
According to our design, the complexity of the algorithm is $\mathcal{O}({\mathbf{E}}|\log|{\mathbf{E}}|)$, since only the most influential social connections are considered in our algorithm. In a social network, as $|{\mathbf{V}}|$ is similar to $|{\mathbf{E}}|$ [@caldarelli2007scale], the complexity is then similar to $\mathcal{O}(|{\mathbf{V}}|\log|{\mathbf{V}}|)$.
Experimental Results {#sec:evaluation}
====================
In this section, we evaluate the performance of our design using simulation experiments driven by the Weibo traces. In our experiments, we will study the satisfaction of users’ cloud-provider preference, the reduction of replication cost caused by inter-cloud social propagation, and the efficiency of the heuristic algorithm.
Experiment Setup
----------------
*Users and social graph*. We have used a sample of $20,000$ users selected from the social graph of Tencent Weibo, by a BFS-based collection from $10$ random seed users, *i.e.*, we initialize a user set with the $10$ seed users, and iteratively add friends of users that are already in the set, until the size of the set reaches $20,000$ or it is self-contained.
*Content generation and propagation*. We also use the traces of Tencent Weibo to drive the experiments. The actions of posting microblogs in the traces are considered as generating new contents, and the actions of sharing microblogs are used to weight the social propagation between the users. Contents generated and shared need to be hosted with the cloud providers. Based on the traces, we perform the social graph partition for the multi-cloud hosting.
*Cloud regions and prices*. In these Weibo traces, about $80$ regions are observed to have users located in. We have randomly assigned each of these regions to one of $6$ cloud providers. We assume the cloud providers have the same pricing scheme: (1) the price of outgoing traffic to a different cloud provider is $1$, and the price of outgoing traffic to the same cloud provider is $0$, *i.e.*, the roadblock of inter-cloud replication; and (2) the price of incoming traffic is $0$, *i.e.*, the encouragement of incoming contents from the Internet.
According to our design in Sec. \[sec:design\], the locations of users are used to calculate their preference of cloud providers, according to Eq. \[eq:pref\].
Next, we present the results in our evaluation.
Performance Evaluation
----------------------
### Satisfying Users’ Cloud Preference
First, we study how users’ cloud-provider preference is satisfied in our design. In our experiments, a user’s preference of a cloud provider is normalized, *i.e.*, the sum of the preference of all the cloud providers is $1$. We denote the normalized preference as ${\bar{\psi}}(u, C_u)$, and use the overall satisfaction of user preference ($\sum_u {\bar{\psi}}(u, C_u)$) as the metric to evaluate the performance.
We study the satisfaction of user preference under different weight of parameter $\alpha$. Fig. \[fig:user-pref\] illustrates the overall cloud-provider preference versus $\alpha$. Different curves are generated under different numbers of available cloud providers (out of all the $6$ cloud providers) for the multi-cloud hosting. We observe a general increase of users’ cloud-provider preference as $\alpha$ grows using more than $1$ cloud providers, since the users’ cloud-provider preference is more considered when $\alpha$ is larger. We also observe that when more cloud providers are available for the social video sharing system to choose from, the overall cloud-provider preference can be improved.
![Comparison between our algorithm and the brute-force algorithm with the optimal solution.[]{data-label="fig:optimal-cmp"}](pref-vs-alpha.eps){width="\linewidth"}
![Comparison between our algorithm and the brute-force algorithm with the optimal solution.[]{data-label="fig:optimal-cmp"}](obj_cmp_opt_vs_ours.eps){width="\linewidth"}
### Reducing Inter-Cloud Propagation
Next, we study the cost caused by inter-cloud propagation. To evaluate the cost, we define two metrics: (1) the propagation cost of all inter-cloud social connections calculated as $\sum_{u,v} p_{C_uC_v} e_{uv}$; and (2) the number of social connections that connect users hosted with different cloud providers.
In Fig. \[fig:inter-cloud\], we study the impact of $\alpha$ on the cost of inter-cloud propagation. The curves in Fig. \[fig:inter-cloud\](a) illustrate the propagation cost against $\alpha$. We observe that the inter-cloud replication cost generally increases as $\alpha$ grows, since the weight of the inter-cloud propagation becomes smaller in the social graph partition. We also observe that the cost increases much faster when $\alpha$ is larger. This result indicates that strategies only considering users’ cloud-provider preference can incur a high inter-cloud propagation cost for the social video sharing system.
The curves in Fig. \[fig:inter-cloud\](b) illustrate the numbers of the inter-cloud social connections. We observe that more social connections span different cloud providers when $\alpha$ grows, and the increase speed of the number of inter-cloud social connections as $\alpha$ increases is much more linear than the propagation cost. The reason is that our algorithm tends to divide friends with small propagation weight between them into different cloud providers, but keep them in the same cloud if the propagation weight is large.
![Replication cost caused by inter-cloud social propagation.[]{data-label="fig:inter-cloud"}](propcost-vs-alpha.eps){width="\linewidth"}
![Replication cost caused by inter-cloud social propagation.[]{data-label="fig:inter-cloud"}](conn-vs-alpha.eps){width="\linewidth"}
### Performance Comparison
In our experiments, we have also compared our algorithm (with $\alpha=0.5$) with the following strategies: (1) Random partition, in which users are randomly assigned to the cloud providers; (2) Min-propagation, in which users are partitioned to minimize the inter-cloud propagation; and (3) Max-preference, in which users are hosted with their ideal cloud providers.
We study their performance by varying the number of cloud providers that are available for the instant social video sharing system to perform the multi-cloud hosting. In Fig. \[fig:eval-inter-cloud\](a), we first study the satisfaction of users’ cloud-provider preference. We observe that the user preference increases in both our design and the max-preference strategy; while the other two strategies cannot benefit from the availability of more cloud providers. We also observe that the max-preference strategy outperforms our design by about $12\%$ when all the $6$ cloud providers can be utilized in the multi-cloud hosting.
However, the max-preference algorithm incurs much larger inter-cloud replication cost due to the social propagation over the social connections between users hosted with different cloud providers. The curves in Fig. \[fig:eval-inter-cloud\](b) illustrate the propagation cost against the number of available cloud providers. We observe that both our design and the min-propagation strategy remain very low inter-cloud propagation cost as the number of cloud providers increases, while the cost increases in both the max-preference and random strategies as the number of cloud providers increases. The inter-cloud propagation cost in the max-preference strategy is about $6$ times larger than that in our design when all the cloud providers can be utilized. The results indicate that our design can well balance users’ cloud-provider preference and the cost of inter-cloud propagation.
![Comparison of different multi-cloud hosting algorithms under different number of cloud providers.[]{data-label="fig:eval-inter-cloud"}](pref-vs-cloud-pref.eps){width="\linewidth"}
![Comparison of different multi-cloud hosting algorithms under different number of cloud providers.[]{data-label="fig:eval-inter-cloud"}](propcost-vs-cloud-cost.eps){width="\linewidth"}
### Effectiveness of the Heuristic Algorithm
Since finding the optimal solution for deploying the social video sharing system is generally NP-Hard, we present the effectiveness of our heuristic algorithm. In particular, we compare the combined objective defined in Eq. \[eq:obj\] achieved by our algorithm, with the optimal value achieved by a brute-force searching. In this experiment, we generate a graph with $10$ nodes (users), who have random preferences of $3$ cloud providers.
By varying the number of the directed social connections between them, we compare the combined objective value achieved by both algorithms in Fig. \[fig:optimal-cmp\]. We observe that when the number of social connections (edges) is under $30$ (*i.e.*, $1/3$ of all possible social connections), our algorithm achieves similar performance as the optimal solution does — in a real social graph, the number of social connections is much smaller than that [@mislove2007measurement]. Thus, our algorithm has relatively good performance for the real online social network systems.
Related Work {#sec:relatedwork}
============
Growth of Online Social Media and Cloud-based Hosting
-----------------------------------------------------
The philosophy of social media is to let users in an online social network not only generate the content, but also disseminate the generated content through social connections [@kaplan2010users], including the “following” relationship in a Twitter-like system, and the “friending” relationship in a Facebook-like system.
Cloud computing has been widely used to deploy the social media systems. As both the number and the geographic distribution of the users in an online social media service are expanding, hosting such a social media system can take full advantage of the elastic cloud resource [@pujol2010little]. In [@pujol2010little], social graph is studied for locality partition, while in our study, we design partition by studying social propagation, which is determined by not only the social graph, but also user behaviors.
There are several works on hosting a social media system with different cloud computing platforms. Cheng *et al.* [@cheng2011load] have studied the migration of socialized videos in YouTube to the cloud so as to balance the load between servers. Wu *et al.* [@wuscaling2012] have studied how to scale the social media service using the geo-distributed cloud resource. In our previous study, we presented that using a edge cloud framework, users can benefit from downloading from local servers [@zhi-tomccap-psar2013] in social video streaming.
Instant Social Video Delivery
-----------------------------
Given the crowdsourced content capturing and sharing, the preferred length of online videos becomes shorter and shorter. Vine and Weishi are representative services that enable users to create ultra-short video clips, and instantly post and share them with their friends. Taking Vine as a case study, Zhang et al. [@zhang2014understand] show that the instant social videos have short lifetime and highly skewed popularity that fast decays over time. Videos in these social trending media become more fragmented and instantaneous, which have challenged today’s content replication and streaming strategies.
Social Propagation
------------------
In a social media system, contents propagate among users due to a variety of social activities, *e.g.*, users can *reshare* contents that are originally generated by their friends, so as to make the contents available to more people in the online social network. To efficiently serve the social media contents, the propagation information has to be considered for the service deployment [@yoganarasimhan2012impact].
In an online social network, contents can be dynamically shared by social groups with very different size and geographic distribution [@backstrom2010find]. As a result, propagation inference has become an important factor for improving the performance of social media services — a number of research efforts have been devoted to studying the content propagation in social media [@kwak2010twitter], including the traditional message propagation in Twitter-like microblogging systems [@petrovic2011rt], as well as the video propagation in YouTube-like systems [@li2012understanding]. Xu *et al.* [@xu2014forecasting] studied how to forecast video popularity of social video contents, and observed that social propagation is a critical factor for predicting social video contents.
Graph Partition for Distributed Social Media
--------------------------------------------
A fundamental problem in hosting social video contents with a distributed system is the partition of contents and users in the social graph. Tran *et al.* [@tran2012s] have studied the partition of contents in an online social network by taking users’ social relationship into consideration. Newman *et al.* [@newman2004finding] have studied the community structure in the social network. Pujol *et al.* [@pujol2010little] have designed a social partition and replication middleware where data from a user’s friends can be co-located at load-balanced servers. Carrasco *et al.* [@carrasco2011partitioning] have proposed to partition the social graph by dividing users’ activities into different time phases, since the propagation levels between two users vary over time.
These works have studied the hosting of a social media system in the context of a single cloud provider, or the cloud servers are treated equally even when they are allocated from different cloud providers — the replication roadblock across the boundary among different cloud providers does not exist. However, this assumption is no longer true under the pricing scheme of today’s cloud providers [@amazonec2price].
In this paper, we seek to design a multi-cloud hosting strategy based on a social graph partition, which jointly takes users’ cloud-provider preference, the content propagation between users, and the replication roadblock across the boundary between cloud providers caused by their pricing schemes into account.
Concluding Remarks {#sec:conclusion}
==================
In this paper, we have studied hosting an instant social video sharing service with multiple cloud providers. Our measurement studies not only confirm the benefit of the multi-cloud hosting, but also reveal several guidelines for the multi-cloud hosting design. The multi-cloud hosting problem to optimize a combination of satisfying users’ cloud-provider preference and reducing the cost caused by inter-cloud social propagation is proven to be NP-hard in general. We design a heuristic algorithm to solve the problem, by iteratively partitioning a propagation-weighted social graph — based on an initial preference-aware partition, a propagation-aware re-hosting dynamically reduces the inter-cloud propagation of the most active social connections. Trace-driven simulations further demonstrate that our heuristic can efficiently solve the multi-cloud hosting problem, and our design achieves a good balance of the two objectives under acceptable complexity — with only $12\%$ user preference degradation, our algorithm reduces $5/6$ of the inter-cloud data transfer cost.
Acknowledgment {#acknowledgment .unnumbered}
==============
We thank the Tsinghua-Tencent Joint Laboratory for providing the valuable traces used in our study. This work is supported in part by the National Basic Research Program of China (973) under Grant No. 2011CB302206.
[10]{} \[1\][\#1]{} url@samestyle \[2\][\#2]{} \[2\][[l@\#1=l@\#1\#2]{}]{}
L. Zhang, F. Wang, and J. Liu, “[Understand Instant Video Clip Sharing on Mobile Platforms: Twitter’s Vine as a Case Study]{},” in *ACM Network and Operating System Support on Digital Audio and Video Workshop (NOSSDAV)*, 2014.
H. Kwak, C. Lee, H. Park, and S. Moon, “[What Is Twitter, a Social Network or a News Media?]{}” in *ACM International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW)*, 2010, pp. 591–600.
M. Wasko and S. Faraj, “[Why Should I Share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice]{},” *Mis Quarterly*, pp. 35–57, 2005.
M. Hajjat, X. Sun, Y. Sung, D. Maltz, S. Rao, K. Sripanidkulchai, and M. Tawarmalani, “[Cloudward Bound: Planning for Beneficial Migration of Enterprise Applications to the Cloud]{},” vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 243–254, 2010.
X. Cheng and J. Liu, “[Load-Balanced Migration of Social Media to Content Clouds]{},” in *ACM Network and Operating System Support for Digital Audio and Video (NOSSDAV)*, 2011.
Y. Wu, C. Wu, B. Li, L. Zhang, Z. Li, and F. C. Lau, “[Scaling Social Media Applications into Geo-Distributed Clouds]{},” in *IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS)*, 2012.
H. Hu, Y. Wen, T.-S. Chua, Z. Wang, J. Huang, W. Zhu, and D. Wu, “[Community Based Effective Social Video Contents Placement in Cloud Centric CDN Network]{},” in *IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME)*, 2014.
X. Liu, F. Dobrian, H. Milner, J. Jiang, V. Sekar, I. Stoica, and H. Zhang, “[A Case for a Coordinated Internet Video Control Plane]{},” in *ACM SIGCOMM*, 2012.
H. Liu, Y. Wang, Y. Yang, A. Tian, and H. Wang, “[Optimizing Cost and Performance for Content Multihoming]{},” in *ACM SIGCOMM*, 2012, pp. 371–382.
“[Amazon Data Transfer Price (Last accessed: November, 2014)]{},” http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/\#DataTransfer.
S. Ye and S. F. Wu, “[Measuring Message Propagation and Social Influence on twitter.com]{},” in *Social informatics*.1em plus 0.5em minus 0.4emSpringer, 2010, pp. 216–231.
R. Krishnan, H. Madhyastha, S. Srinivasan, S. Jain, A. Krishnamurthy, T. Anderson, and J. Gao, “[Moving Beyond End-to-End Path Information to Optimize CDN Performance]{},” in *ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC)*, 2009.
“Facebook photos,” http://gizmodo.com/5937143/what-facebook-deals-with-everyday-27-billion-likes-300-million-photos-uploaded-and-500-terabytes-of-data.
J. Pujol, V. Erramilli, G. Siganos, X. Yang, N. Laoutaris, P. Chhabra, and P. Rodriguez, “[The Little Engine(s) That Could: Scaling Online Social Networks]{},” *ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review*, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 375–386, 2010.
Z. Wang, W. Zhu, X. Chen, L. Sun, J. Liu, M. Chen, P. Cui, and S. Yang, “Propagation-based social multimedia distribution,” *ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications and Applications*, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 52–72, October 2013.
\[Online\]. Available: <http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/>
\[Online\]. Available: <http://wiki.open.qq.com/wiki/>
E. Dahlhaus, D. Johnson, C. Papadimitriou, P. Seymour, and M. Yannakakis, “[The Complexity of Multiterminal Cuts]{},” *SIAM J. Comput.*, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 864–894, 1994.
G. Caldarelli, “Scale-free networks: complex webs in nature and technology,” *OUP Catalogue*, 2007.
A. Mislove, M. Marcon, K. Gummadi, P. Druschel, and B. Bhattacharjee, “[Measurement and Analysis of Online Social Networks]{},” in *ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC)*, 2007.
A. Kaplan and M. Haenlein, “[Users of the World, Unite! the Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media]{},” *Business horizons*, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 59–68, 2010.
H. Yoganarasimhan, “[Impact of Social Network Structure on Content Propagation: a Study Using YouTube Data]{},” *Quantitative Marketing and Economics*, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 111–150, 2012.
L. Backstrom, E. Sun, and C. Marlow, “[Find Me if You Can: Improving Geographical Prediction With Social and Spatial Proximity]{},” in *ACM International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW)*, 2010, pp. 61–70.
S. Petrovic, M. Osborne, and V. Lavrenko, “[RT to Win! Predicting Message Propagation in Twitter]{},” in *International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM)*, 2011.
H. Li, J. Liu, K. Xu, and S. Wen, “[Understanding Video Propagation in Online Social Networks]{},” in *IEEE International Workshop on Quality of Service (IWQoS)*, 2012.
J. Xu, M. van der Schaar, J. Liu, and H. Li, “[Forecasting Popularity of Videos using Social Media]{},” *arXiv preprint arXiv:1403.5603*, 2014.
D. Tran, K. Nguyen, and C. Pham, “[S-CLONE: Socially-Aware Data Replication for Social Networks]{},” *Computer Networks*, 2012.
M. Newman and M. Girvan, “[Finding and Evaluating Community Structure in Networks]{},” *Physical review E*, vol. 69, no. 2, p. 026113, 2004.
B. Carrasco, Y. Lu, and J. Trindade, “[Partitioning Social Networks for Time-Dependent Queries]{},” in *ACM Workshop on Social Network Systems*, 2011.
[^1]: Z. Wang is with the Graduate School at Shenzhen, Tsinghua University, Email: [email protected]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'This paper presents a simulator-assisted training method ([[SimVAE]{}]{}) for variational autoencoders (VAE) that leads to a disentangled and interpretable latent space. Training [[SimVAE]{}]{}is a two step process in which first a deep generator network (decoder) is trained to approximate the simulator. During this step the simulator acts as the data source or as a teacher network. Then an inference network (encoder) is trained to invert the decoder. As such, upon complete training, the encoder represents an approximately inverted simulator. By decoupling the training of the encoder and decoder we bypass some of the difficulties that arise in training generative models such as VAEs and generative adversarial networks (GANs). We show applications of our approach in a variety of domains such as circuit design, graphics de-rendering and other natural science problems that involve inference via simulation.'
author:
- |
Akash Srivastava[^1]\
MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab\
IBM Research\
Cambridge, MA\
`[email protected]`\
Jessie Rosenberg$^*$\
MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab\
IBM Research\
Cambridge, MA\
`[email protected]`\
Dan Gutfreund\
IBM Research\
Cambridge, MA\
`[email protected]`\
David D. Cox\
MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab\
IBM Research\
Cambridge, MA\
`[email protected]`\
bibliography:
- 'neurips.bib'
title: 'SimVAE: Simulator-Assisted Training for Interpretable Generative Models'
---
Introduction
============
Simulation as a scientific tool is as old as scientific exploration itself. From the ancient Greeks who drew circles in the sand to discover the connection between radius and circumference, to modern simulations of complex atomic reactions, protein folding and photo-realistic computer graphics, simulators represent human knowledge in a well-defined symbolic form, crystallizing information into models that can generate output data based on particular input specifications. Much of our progress in understanding the world relies on developing simulators, often using several of them in concert to describe larger interconnected systems.
Humans (and animals in general) also distill information from the world, but rather than explicitly knowing and manipulating precise equations governing e.g. the laws of physics, they have an intuitive sense of physics that allows split second, “good enough” estimates; for instance, even a dog can catch a ball mid-air without explicitly knowing the laws of physics or manipulating equations. Therefore, one might speculate that our brains possess some form of a “simulation engine in the head,” which distills knowledge of the world into simpler heuristics that help us in our everyday lives [@Lake:2016]. Moreover, a desirable feature of such a simplified model would be to allow inference in both the forward and inverse directions of the simulator, in contrast to traditional numerical simulators which are difficult or impossible to invert. In this paper we address the question of how to distill symbolic mappings modeled by complex and not necessarily differentiable simulators into neural networks. Classification systems can learn a map between data points and labels, but there is no continuity in the output space and these systems often cannot generalize well to new types of examples. Generative models understand their domain well enough to create new examples, they possess smooth mappings over the input-output space, and can operate probabilistically. However, the latent space typically does not correspond to any human-understandable set of parameters; therefore it is difficult to generate output data with a specified set of features. If a larger system needs to take input from multiple domains, all component parts must be trained together end-to-end, since there is no interpretable and standard interface between components that would allow different units to be swapped out or combined in different configurations. In recent years, a few approaches to address these issues have been proposed [@infogan; @bvae; @kulkarni2015deep]. In Section \[sec:related\] we compare our approach to these works.
Here we present [[SimVAE]{}]{}, a method for training a variational autoencoder model of a simulator, resulting in both a generator that represents a simplified, probabilistic version of the simulator, and an encoder that is a corresponding probabilistic inverse of the simulator. Though simulators can in general be quite complex and may be discontinuous, a heuristic, smooth version that is invertible can be valuable for applications in downstream reasoning tasks, or in technical fields such as circuit design, protein folding, and materials design, among others. Such a simplified simulator can also be used as a guide for further detailed inquiry into specific parameter spaces of interest that could take place back in the original, more accurate simulation domain.
The [[SimVAE]{}]{}training method naturally restricts the latent space to be both interpretable and disentangled. Note that this does not require orthogonality, and in fact we show example cases where the natural and interpretable parameters of the simulator are not orthogonal. In this case the [[SimVAE]{}]{}latent space matches the simulator input space rather than artificially constraining its parameters to be orthogonal at the cost of reducing accuracy. [[SimVAE]{}]{}can be trained either in a semi-supervised manner using an explicit simulator, which results in a differentiable, probabilistic model and inverse model of the simulator, or can be trained fully unsupervised by taking the inputs from, for example, a GAN [@gan] or InfoGAN [@infogan].
We demonstrate the general applicability of our approach by plugging in several simulators from very different domains such as computer graphics, circuit design and mathematics. This is in contrast to most previous works on learning disentangled representations which focused on understanding images and scenes.
Background {#sec:related}
==========
Variational autoencoders (VAE) [@kingma2013auto] and generative adversarial networks (GAN) [@gan] are two of the most popular state-of-art methods for learning deep generative models. Both methods are unsupervised and only need samples $\{x_i\}_{i=1}^M$ from the data distribution $p_x$ to learn a parametric model $G_\phi$ (generator) whose distribution $q_\phi$ matches that of the true data $p_x$. The distributions are matched using discrepancy measures such as $f$-divergences [@kullback1951information] or integral probability metrics [@mmd].
In VAEs, $G_\phi$ represents a probabilistic function that maps sets of samples from the prior distribution $p_z$ over the latent space $\mathbb{R}^K$ to sets of samples in the observation space $\mathbb{R}^N$. In doing so, it additionally requires an encoding function (encoder) or an inference network $E_\theta$ to parameterise the variational posterior $p_\theta(z|x)$, which is trained to approximately invert the mapping of $G_\phi$. VAEs make an assumption about the distribution of the data, which yields a likelihood function. As such they can be trained using stochastic gradient based variational inference. In practice, the VAE training objective is a lower bound to the log-likelihood, also referred to as the ELBO: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:elbo_0}
\int_{\mathcal{X}} p_x(x)\log q_\phi(x) dx \geq \int_{\mathcal{X}} p_x(x) \big [ \int_{\mathcal{Z}} p_\theta(z|x) \log \frac{p_z}{p_\theta(z|x)}dz + \int_{\mathcal{Z}} p_\theta(z|x) \log q_\phi(x|z)dz \big ] dx. \end{aligned}$$
This ELBO has a unique form, the first term is in fact a negative Kullback–Leibler (KL) divergence between the variational posterior and the model prior over the latent space. The second term promotes the likelihood of the observed data under the assumed model $\phi$ but it is not always tractable unlike the first term and is usually estimated using Monte Carlo (MC) estimators. But MC estimator based training increases the variance of the gradients. This increase in variance is controlled using the *re-parameterisation trick* which, in effect, removes the MC sampler from the computation graph. For example, using this trick $u \sim \mathcal{N}(\mu, \sigma)$ can be expressed as $u = \mu + \sigma*\epsilon$ where $\epsilon \sim \mathcal{N}(0,1)$. This gives the final ELBO $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:elbo}
\mathbb{E}_{p_x}[\log q_\phi(x)] \geq \mathbb{E}_{p_x} \bigg [ -KL[p_\theta(z|x)\Vert p_z] + \mathbb{E}_{\mathcal{N}(0,I)} [\log q_\phi(x|\mu_\theta(x) + \sigma_\theta(x)*\epsilon ) ] \bigg]. \end{aligned}$$ Here $\mu_\theta$ and $\sigma_\theta$ are posterior parameters that the encoder function $E_\theta$ outputs.
Method
======
In this section we describe the two-step, simulator-assisted training procedure of [[SimVAE]{}]{}. We formally define the simulator $S: \mathbb{R}^K \mapsto \mathbb{R}^N$ as a deterministic black-box function that maps each $i$th point $z_i \in \mathbb{R}^K$ from its domain to a unique point $x_i \in \mathbb{R}^N$ in its range. Usually, $N>>K$ for most physical simulators. In the first step, [[SimVAE]{}]{}trains a generator $G_\phi: \mathbb{R}^K \mapsto \mathbb{R}^N$, a Borel measurable function, to learn a probabilistic map of the simulator $S$. In order to achieve this we define $Z(z)$, in the latent space, and $X(x)$, in the output space, as $K$ and $N$ dimensional random variables. In order to learn the function $S$ faithfully, $G_\phi$ is parameterized with a deep neural network. The training is achieved by minimizing a suitable measure of discrepancy $D$ (depending on the output space of $S$) on the observations from the two functions on the same input with respect to $\phi$, as shown below: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:decloss}
\min_\phi \mathcal{L_D}(\phi) = \min_\phi \sum_i D[S(z_i),G_\phi(z_i)].\end{aligned}$$
Since the domain of $S$ is infinite in practice, the optimization problem is solved using mini-batches in a stochastic gradient descent first order optimization method such as ADAM.
Upon successful training of the generator, $G_\phi \approx S$, the next step in [[SimVAE]{}]{}is to train an inference network (encoder, $E_\theta: \mathbb{R}^D \mapsto \mathbb{R}^K$) to invert the generator, which in turn, if successfully trained, will give an approximate inversion of the simulator and as a result a disentangled and interpretable representation of the latent space. We do that via the following objective:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:encloss}
\min_\theta \mathcal{L_E}(\theta) = \min_\theta \sum_i D[S(z_i),G_\phi(\mu_{E_\theta}(S(z_i)))].\end{aligned}$$
Here, $\mu_{E_\theta}$ is the posterior parameters that the encoder output. We emphasize that training the encoder does not involve any supervision. Computation is only done on $S(z_i)$, a sample in data space, while the latent variables $z_i$ are hidden. The key point is that while the simulator is typically black-box and non-differentiable, the generator is a neural network which we control and therefore we can backpropagate through the network and the latent variables to train the encoder. Note, while we use the re-parameterization trick here, in general our method does not require it. If it is not used, in the cases where $S$ is a one-to-many map, the encoder will only learn one such mapping.
Comparison to other related approaches {#sec:related}
--------------------------------------
#### [[SimVAE]{}]{}vs. Classification.
Having access to a simulator, one could directly train a model of its inverse via the following objective: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:encpre}
\min_\theta \mathcal{L_E}(\theta) = \min_\theta \sum_i loss[z_i,E_\theta(S(z_i))],\end{aligned}$$ where $loss$ could be any classification loss (e.g. cross entropy) and/or regression loss (e.g. MSE) depending on $z$’s components. In other words, we could turn the problem into a supervised classification/regression problem. This was done in the past for graphics de-rendering, see for example [@de-rendering].
There are several reasons why our approach of inverting the generator is preferred. First, $z$ can involve many components which could be very different in nature, turning the problem into a complex multi-task learning problem, where some of the output parameters may be correlated (see the box plotter example in Section \[sec:Models\]). Furthermore, the inverse of the simulator could potentially be (and often is) a one-to-many relation (see the RLC or polygon examples in Section \[sec:Models\]), turning the problem into a multi-label learning problem. Most importantly, while loss functions on the latent/symbolic space are useful mathematically and are often used for supervised learning, discrepancies in the observable space, which are the basis for loss functions used to train generative models such as VAE, allow reconstruction of the data distribution and are more natural for humans learning (see Section \[sec:discussion\]).
#### [[SimVAE]{}]{}vs. other disentangled representation learning schemes.
In the last few years several approaches for learning disentangled representations with generative models have been proposed. Here we survey the ones that are most related to this paper.
We start with three VAE-based approaches. [[$\beta$-VAE]{}]{}[@bvae] is an unsupervised technique which involves constraining the representations to ensure variable independence at the price of reconstruction accuracy. A hyper-parameter governs that trade-off. We note that the assumption of latent variables independence does not necessarily hold, see the box plots example in Section \[sec:Models\]. Deep Convolutional Inverse Graphics Network (DC-IGN) [@kulkarni2015deep] is a semi-supervised approach for learning interpretable representations of graphics engines. A crucial aspect in training DC-IGN models is the ability to divide the training set into batches in which only one of the latent variables varies (e.g. lighting) while all others are fixed. Training proceeds by clamping all the fixed latent variables to their respective means. We note that while this makes sense for graphics engines, the average of latent variables does not necessarily corresponds to a meaningful data point in the observable space (e.g. see our RLC circuits example). [@graphical] incorporate graphical models to the VAE architecture, imposing assumptions on the interpretable variables. Naturally, the specific graphical model depends on the use-case and requires a re-design if the application changes.
InfoGANs [@infogan] learn disentangled representations by regularizing the minimax game between the discriminator and the generator in the GAN framework with an information-theoretic term which aims to maximize the mutual information between a small set of latent variables and the observed data. While InfoGANs have shown impressive results on visual data, still as an unsupervised method it can miss latent information that is important in certain contexts. For example, feeding an image of a function curve to an InfoGAN will likely generate a representation capturing appearance properties of the curve, but it is unlikely that it will retrieve the Fourier coefficients of the function. In addition, InfoGAN, just like other GAN-based approaches, require a significant amount of training while balancing the discriminator and the generator to keep the training stable.
Finally, Wu et. al. [@physics] suggest an approach which combines inference models with generative models. However, the models are not trained based on a single simulation but rather independently and thus the approach is not as general as the one we suggest here.
In contrast to the previously mentioned works, our method is general and applies to simulators from a plethora of domains. It does not make any assumptions on the prior or posterior distributions, and it avoids some of the difficulties in jointly training competing (as in GANs) or complementing (as in VAE) models. It relies of course, on the existence of a simulator but as we argue, simulators are everywhere when thinking about them broadly, even the world can be viewed as a simulator (see Section \[sec:discussion\]).
Experiments {#others}
===========
We trained the [[SimVAE]{}]{}on a variety of simulators, both image-based and purely symbolic, to show the generality of this training method. We used the ADAM [@adam] optimiser for training, with the learning rate set to $0.001$ and the other parameters set to their default values in the Tensorflow framework. All image-based models were trained using the DCGAN architecture ([@radford2015unsupervised]), and the RLC circuit simulator model was trained using a simple feed-forward architecture. The architecture of the [[SimVAE]{}]{}is interchangeable depending on the desired task, e.g. a RNN could be used for circuit simulation to capture larger signal spaces, or an autoregressive decoder could be used for image generation tasks to enhance reproduction accuracy.
Comparisons of the output from the model vs. the ground truth simulations are shown in Fig. \[fig:output\] for all image-based models, and Fig. \[fig:RLC\] for the circuit model. Representative samples of model output from varying one latent variable while holding the others fixed are shown in Fig. \[fig:transversals\]. Note that all latent variables in all models are shown, there are no additional latent variables that do not represent interpretable parameters.
Trained models {#sec:Models}
--------------
#### Box plotter
We trained a model on a simple graphical simulator written in Matplotlib ([@Hunter:2007]) which plots a black rectangle with a blue ’x’ in the center. Input parameters were the $(x,y)$ coordinates of the lower left corner of the rectangle, and the width $w$ and height $h$ of the rectangle. The sample space that the model was trained on was constrained for the rectangle to remain always within the 64x64 pixel field of view, by constraining the initial $(x,y)$ coordinates based on the randomly sampled $w$ and $h$. This intentionally creates correlations in the ground truth simulator latent variables, which must be replicated in the model latent space for optimum accuracy and interpretability.
![**Output of simulator, encoder and generator for image-based models.** For each of the four image-based simulators, random samples are shown of the simulator output $X$ on input $Z$, the generator output $\bar{X}$ on the same input $Z$, the simulator output $X$ on encoder output $\bar{Z}$, and the generator output $\bar{X}$ on encoder output $\bar{Z}$, arranged top to bottom in each section. For the Fourier transform, we also show inference on four hand drawn images (right), excepting the generator $\bar{X}$ from input $Z$ as the input $Z$ is not available in this case.[]{data-label="fig:output"}](InfResults2.pdf){width="90.00000%"}
#### Polygon plotter {#sec:polygon}
This method generalizes straightforwardly to rendering and de-rendering an arbitrary four-pointed polygon. The polygon is not restricted to be non-intersecting, and therefore generates folded shapes which the model is also required to learn. Note that the model can choose multiple permutations of the four points of the polygon to generate the same output shape, so the inverse simulator is a one-to-many map.
![**Latent transversals.** For each of the four image-based simulators, the output of the generator upon transversing one latent variable and holding the others fixed is shown for each of the latent variables. Box plotter: \[width, height, $x$-position, $y$-position\], Fourier transform: \[constant, 5 cosine coefficients, 5 sine coefficients\], Polygon plotter: \[($x$,$y$) coordinates for each of four points of the polygon\], dSprites: \[shape, scale, rotation, $x$-position, $y$-position\]. []{data-label="fig:transversals"}](Transversal.pdf){width="90.00000%"}
#### dSprites
We also trained a [[SimVAE]{}]{}on the dSprites disentanglement dataset ([@bvae]), consisting of 737,280 binary 2D shapes constructed from five independent generative parameters (shape, size, rotation, $x$-position, and $y$-position). Since the dataset is complete, including all examples of images from the five parameters, we can treat the dataset itself as a black box simulator and invert it using the method described above, although the discrete nature of the shape parameter prevents the VAE from accurately learning this variable within the minimal latent space provided.
#### Fourier transform
To demonstrate the advantages of an inverse simulator that operates probabilistically, we train a model based on a simulator which takes as input a set of Fourier coefficients, and outputs a plot of the inverse Fourier transform based on those coefficients. In addition to the performance of the model on input from the simulator, in Fig. \[fig:output\] we also show four hand-drawn images of arbitrary curves, which are given to the model to reconstruct based on the Fourier coefficients generated by the encoder. Though there are well-known methods for calculating the Fourier decomposition of a curve, this method can generalize to calculate the most likely result even given input that is outside the domain of the original function (a hand-drawn image vs. a vector of data or a plot in the original format generated by the simulator).
#### RLC circuit
Finally, we present an example that is outside the domain of images altogether. Using the pySpice circuit simulator package ([@pyspice]), we simulate the series RLC circuit shown in Fig. \[fig:RLC\], with the simulator input being the resistance $R$, inductance $L$, and capacitance $C$, and the output being the gain and phase vs. frequency. The inverse RLC simulator is also a one-to-many map, as the gain and phase are invariant with respect to a transformation of the form $R \mapsto R/x$, $L \mapsto L/x$, and $C \mapsto Cx$, where $x$ is any scaling factor. The relevant physical parameters are the resonant frequency $f_0 = 1/(2\pi \sqrt{LC})$ and quality factor $Q = (1/R)\sqrt{L/C}$.
![**Output of RLC model.** Left: schematic of the series RLC circuit. Center: comparison of decoder-generated and simulator-generated output gain in dB (top) and phase in radians (bottom). From left to right, the plots show simulator output $X$ on input $Z$, generator output $\bar{X}$ on the same input $Z$, the simulator output $X$ on encoder output $\bar{Z}$, and the generator output $\bar{X}$ on encoder output $\bar{Z}$. Right: correlation between $f_0$ (kHz) and $Q$ calculated from $Z$ vs from $V$, with calculated slopes of 1.00 and 0.97, and $R^2$ of 0.99 and 0.97 respectively. Data was limited to the range of validity of the model, $f_0$<10kHz and $Q$<4.[]{data-label="fig:RLC"}](RLC.pdf){width=".9\textwidth"}
Disentanglement metrics {#sec:metrics}
-----------------------
Given their joint and marginal distributions, mutual information (MI) between two discrete random variables $Z$ and $V$ is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:mi}
\text{MI}(Z,V) = \frac{1}{H(v)} \sum_z \sum_v p(z,v) \log \frac{p(z,v)}{p(z)p(v)}.\end{aligned}$$
We can then define the mutual information matrix (MIM) as the element-wise MI between each element of $Z$ and $V$, and the mutual information gap (MIG) as defined in [@MIG] as the difference in MI between the two latent variables with highest MI for a given factor. Then one measure of disentanglement is the comparison between the mutual information between $Z$, the latent variable of the model, and $V$, the input of the simulator, with the ground truth being the mutual information between $V$ and itself.
For the ground truth MIM and MIG calculations, we take into account the one-to-many mappings of the inverse simulator. For example, if the polygon plotter sees a shape, any ordered permutation of the four points in the shape will generate the same shape, and will be a valid $Z$ for the encoder to learn. Therefore for simulators with one-to-many mappings, we calculate the ground truth mutual information as MIM($V$,$\bar{V}$) and MIG($V$,$\bar{V}$), where $\bar{V}$ represents $V$ under an invariance transformation: scaling for the RLC circuit and permutation for the polygon plotter.
Results
-------
Simulator MIG score Ground truth MIG score Ground truth correlations
------------------- ----------- ------------------------ ------------------------------
Fourier transform 0.76 1 Independent
dSprites 0.32 1 Independent
Box plotter 0.56 0.82 Correlated in sampling space
RLC circuit 0.13 0.07 Invariant under scaling
Polygon plotter 0 0 Invariant under permutation
: Mutual information gap score of [[SimVAE]{}]{}models.[]{data-label="table:disentanglement"}
![**Visualizations of mutual information matrices.** The top row is MIM($Z$,$V$), the mutual information of the model with the simulator, and the bottom row is the ground truth mutual information, MIM($V$,$V$) or MIM($V$,$\bar{V}$) as described in Sec. \[sec:metrics\]. []{data-label="fig:MI"}](MIMatrix.pdf){width="\textwidth"}
For all models, MIG scores are given in Table \[table:disentanglement\] and MIM visualizations are plotted in Fig. \[fig:MI\]. In the [[SimVAE]{}]{}where each element of $Z$ should be identically matched with the corresponding element of $V$, the MIM matrix is square and carries an intuitive meaning: the diagonal elements specify how accurately the model has learned the simulator (how close $Z$ comes to exactly matching the simulated $V$), and the off-diagonal elements represent the correlations between the variables in the latent space, and therefore the degree of orthogonality. In contrast, the commonly used disentanglement metric MIG has the drawback of penalizing even a model which perfectly matches the intrinsic correlations between the ground truth factors. Additionally it combines the effects of representation accuracy and disentanglement (reductions in either will lower the MIG).
Even if the model does not perfectly learn the action of the simulator, due to insufficient depth, training time, suboptimal choice of architecture, etc, it is still possible to demonstrate a high degree of disentanglement using the MIM metric. For example, for the Fourier transform model, the MIG score is 0.76. However, we can see from the MIM that all of the weight is in the diagonal elements, and therefore in practice this is a fully disentangled representation. The missing mutual information is from insufficient model strength to match the simulator, and not in any correlations between the latent variables.
This similarly holds for the dSprites dataset - the latent variables are fully orthogonal, even though the representation accuracy is not complete. As calculated in [@DisentanglementLib], MIG scores for a selection of models on the dSprites dataset fall between a wide range of 0-0.4 depending on the choice of hyperparameters. Our model gives a MIG score of 0.32 on the (scale, rotation, $x$-position, $y$-position) factors of dSprites (treating the shape factor as noise, as in [@MIG]), which falls within this range. But as can be seen from the full MIM in Fig. \[fig:MI\], the latent variables are fully disentangled, and the limit of mutual information is due to the quality of fit to the dataset rather than information mixing between latent variables. A different neural network architecture could be used to improve fit, or if a more accurate fit were prioritized over the matching of $Z$ with $V$, the latent space could be expanded with additional non-interpretable latent variables.
Note, however, that a lack of orthogonality also does not necessarily imply that the latent space is not interpretable. In the example of the 2D box plotter, the simulator was formulated with an inherent correlation between the variables of $V$: that the box must always remain fully within the specified plotting range, and therefore the width and height are correlated with the $x$ and $y$ coordinates respectively. Given this simple correlation built into the system, we can see that even in correlating $V$ with itself - as would be the case when $Z$ perfectly learns $V$ - there remains mutual information between the latent variables. By penalizing this correlation, as would be imposed for [[$\beta$-VAE]{}]{}for example, the model would be required to deviate from the natural variables specified in the problem and would likely have a reduced representation accuracy.
In cases such as the RLC circuit and polygon plotter, where the inverse simulator has a one-to-many mapping, both the MIM and MIG are uninformative. Though the latent variables $Z$ themselves are meaningful, as demonstrated by the quality of representation and transversals, they don’t have a fixed relationship with the $V$ values from the simulator. Hence, the mutual information drives towards zero as the space for scaling and permutation expands. We raise a task for future work to identify a metric to quantify disentanglement and interpretability that can distinguish between representation accuracy and disentanglement, and which is effective in the case of many-to-one and one-to-many mappings.
Discussion {#sec:discussion}
==========
In this paper we present [[SimVAE]{}]{}, a new approach for simulator-based training of variational autoencoders. Our approach is general and can hypothetically work with any simulator (assuming that the backbone network is expressive enough). We demonstrated its breadth by applying it to several domains, some of which are very different from visual scene understanding which was the focus of previous work on learning disentangled representations. A key aspect of our approach is to separate the training to two stages: a supervised stage where a generative model approximating the simulator is learned, and an unsupervised stage where an inference model approximating the inverse of the simulator is learned. It is interesting to note that typically generative models are associated with unsupervised learning while inference (discriminative) models are associated with supervision. Here we show that the opposite can yield powerful models.
When considering the world as a complex simulator, our decoupled semi-supervised approach suggests interesting directions to explore in the context of machines vs. humans learning. A [[SimVAE]{}]{}model can be initialized in an unsupervised manner using a VAE or GAN approach (in our experiments we did not need this stage), followed by a supervised stage of training the generator and then an unsupervised one of training the encoder. Moving forward, both models can be continuously trained depending on the data that the system receives: when the observed data is coupled with labels (namely, values of latent variables) the supervised generator training kicks in, and when it is not, the unsupervised encoder training kicks in. When babies sense the world, they similarly receive both labeled and unlabaled data: most of the time they observe the world without supervision, but every now and then someone points to an object saying ’this is a red ball’. It is therefore intriguing to explore whether alternating between supervised and unsupervised learning of approximate simulation and its inverse respectively, are at work in human learning.
An interesting direction for future research is to explore compositionality. As opposed to unsupervised approaches such as InfoGAN or [[$\beta$-VAE]{}]{}, our approach can learn exactly the latent variables of interest for downstream applications. For example consider the problem of learning to multiply hand written numbers. One can first learn models that generate and recognize hand written digits by approximating a digits graphics engine. Then given a multiplication simulator, one can learn models that multiply and factor hand written numbers up to 81 (9X9) and use the digits generator to generate the ’hand written’ result. In order to learn in general how to multiply multi-digit numbers, causality is key [@Lake:2016]. Namely, fine grained simulators of the components of the multiplication algorithm will have to be learned (note that this is how children learn to do it at school). This idea, with a different learning technique, was explored in the context of hand written characters [@Lake:2015]. In future work we plan to explore compositionality and causality as well as applications of our approach to more complex simulators such as photo-realistic graphics engines.
[^1]: Equal Contribution.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- Andrey Vladimirov
bibliography:
- 'etd.bib'
title: '[Modeling Magnetic Field Amplification in Nonlinear Diffusive Shock Acceleration]{}'
---
.5cm VLADIMIROV, ANDREY. [Modeling Magnetic Field Amplification in Nonlinear Diffusive Shock Acceleration]{}. (Under the direction of Dr. Donald C. Ellison.)
This research was motivated by the recent observations indicating very strong magnetic fields at some supernova remnant shocks, which suggests in-situ generation of magnetic turbulence. The dissertation presents a numerical model of collisionless shocks with strong amplification of stochastic magnetic fields, self-consistently coupled to efficient shock acceleration of charged particles. Based on a Monte Carlo simulation of particle transport and acceleration in nonlinear shocks, the model describes magnetic field amplification using the state-of-the-art analytic models of instabilities in magnetized plasmas in the presence of non-thermal particle streaming. The results help one understand the complex nonlinear connections between the thermal plasma, the accelerated particles and the stochastic magnetic fields in strong collisionless shocks. Also, predictions regarding the efficiency of particle acceleration and magnetic field amplification, the impact of magnetic field amplification on the maximum energy of accelerated particles, and the compression and heating of the thermal plasma by the shocks are presented. Particle distribution functions and turbulence spectra derived with this model can be used to calculate the emission of observable nonthermal radiation.
.5cm
This dissertation dedicated to my family. To my mother, whose hard work and care have made my walk through the early life an easier one. To my father, who, by personal example, has set the highest standards for me in education and achievement. And to my treasured wife, whose love, beauty and support has sustained my inspiration and fostered our happiness. Her patience and understanding in my graduate school years were truly heroic.
.5cm
I was born in 1982 in the vast and beautiful Eurasian country of Kazakhstan, which was one of the 15 Soviet Union republics at that time, and now it is an independent state. By nationality I am Russian, and my native language is Russian.
I earned my B.S. (2002) and M.S. (2004) in physics from St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University in Russia, where my concentration was physics of space, and I did my research under Prof. Andrei M. Bykov at the Department of Theoretical Astrophysics of Ioffe Physical-Technical Institute.
In 2004–2009 I was a graduate student at the Department of Physics of North Carolina State University, working on a theoretical research project in the field of astrophysical plasmas with Prof. Don Ellison.
.5cm
.5cm
I am deeply grateful to my adviser, Prof. Don Ellison, who not only commited to educating, supervising and directing me in this work, but also was a great source of encouragement and support throughout my graduate work at NC State University.
This project was carried out in a close collaboration with Prof. Andrei Bykov from the Ioffe Physical-Technical Institute in Russia. I value very much the priviledge of working with him and wish to thank him for his participation in this work.
I am also appreciative of the help of the members of the advisory committee, who agreed to contribute their diverse expertise and time for evaluating this research.
I cannot praise enough many of the NCSU staff members, especially in the Department of Physics and the Office of International Services, who made my graduate school experience, even in the more complicated situations, stressless and memorable.
Finaly, my heartfelt thanks go to the American and international friends whom I have met in the past five years in the United States, and whose kindness and hospitality made me feel welcome in this country.
Introduction. Interstellar Shocks, Cosmic Rays and Magnetic Fields {#chap-one}
==================================================================
What happens after a massive star explodes at the end of its life cycle as a supernova (SN)? Why are the rims of supernova remnants (SNRs) so thin and luminous in the radio, X-ray and gamma ray spectral ranges? Where and how are cosmic rays (CRs) produced? What does it take to explain the dynamics of matter in the most energetic systems in space, including the cosmological large scale structure of the Universe? The current state of affairs in astrophysics makes it clear that, in order to answer these questions, the phenomenon of shocks must be studied in detail. The low gas densities in many cosmic environments make the shocks collisionless (see Section \[sec\_collisionless\]), which gives them properties different from those of the collisional terrestrial shocks.
Understanding shocks is as important for astrophysicists as describing electromagnetic waves is for radio engineers. Shocks are born whenever gases or fluids are forced to move at a supersonic speed. They compress and heat the interstellar matter (ISM), transfer energy and momentum, produce cosmic rays that fill and affect the Universe, and, as recent observations show, shocks may produce and strongly amplify turbulent magnetic fields. Electromagnetic radiation from processes in shocks is a powerful diagnostic of the conditions in the shock-generating systems.
Shocks in hydrodynamics
-----------------------
I would like to illustrate shocks with a phenomenon that we encounter on a daily basis – a standing shell shock in a kitchen sink formed by the quickly running water from the tap.
0.5in ![$ $ Tap water in a sink forms a shock.[]{data-label="fig-shockinasink"}](images/image_shockinasink_labeled.eps "fig:"){width="5.0in"}
As seen in Figure \[fig-shockinasink\], the falling water hits the bottom of the sink and moves outward at a speed that exceeds the speed of the surface waves in water of the local depth. This makes a shock form, a relatively stationary enclosed boundary, at which the speed of the water flow abruptly drops, and the depth increases. The direction in of the shock’s apparent motion depends on the choice of the observer’s reference frame, but let us adopt a convention that unambiguously determines the [*direction of shock propagation*]{}. I will define the latter as the direction in which the boundary between the unshocked and shocked media moves with respect to the unshocked medium. In the case of the shock in a sink, the unperturbed medium is inside of the circular shell, and it moves outward. Therefore, the shock is directed inward (i.e., any small arc of the shock boundary is moving towards the center with respect to the water inside the boundary). The arrows show the velocity of the water with respect to the shock.
A similar inward-directed shock exists in the Solar System: the Solar wind, composed of fast charged particles emitted by the Sun, moves radially outward and collides with the cold interstellar material approximately 80-100 AU from the Sun (an astronomical unit, $1$ AU$\approx 1.5\cdot 10^{11}$ cm, is close to the distance between the Sun and the Earth). The so-called termination shock forms there. At this thin boundary, the Solar wind becomes compressed and heated, and its speed drops by a factor of 2-5. Both Voyager spacecrafts recently passed through the termination shock on their way out of the Solar System [@Voyager1_1; @Voyager1_2; @Voyager2_1; @Voyager2_2].
Forward shock of SNRs
---------------------
After a star with an initial mass greater than approximately 8 $M_{\odot}$ ($M_{\odot}\approx 2\cdot10^{33}$ g is the mass of the Sun) runs out of its fusion fuel, or a white dwarf accreting mass from another star in a binary system reaches the critical mass and ignites, an explosion will occur. This explosion, powered either by gravity, or by thermonuclear fusion, is known as a supernova, and ejecting up to $10^{51}$ ergs in kinetic energy, it can be bright enough to see with the naked eye thousands of light years away. A remnant of a supernova in our Galaxy may remain visible to radio, optical and X-ray telescopes for hundreds or thousands of years after the explosion, as it expands into the interstellar medium, cools and gradually fades.
0.5in ![$ $ Schematic structure of an SNR.[]{data-label="fig-snrstructure"}](images/image_snr_structure.eps "fig:"){width="4.0in"}
Hydrodynamic simulations and observations show a common structure of flow that forms in SNRs, as shown in Figure \[fig-snrstructure\]. The metal-rich material (ejecta) is thrown out from the star at speeds of several thousand kilometers per second. It ploughs through the low-density ISM, and eventually forms a strong forward shock in front of it, directed outward. A contact discontinuity separates the metal-rich ejecta material from the low-metallicity shocked ISM. Simulations show that a reverse shock, may form in the ejecta. While the inverse shock is directed inward (i.e., it shocks the material coming from the interior of the reverse shock boundary), it may be physically moving outward or inward at different stages of the SNR evolution (e.g., [@EDB2005]). Note that in Figure \[fig-snrstructure\], the solid arrows show the velocities of the unshocked medium with respect to the forward and the reverse shocks. The dotted lines indicate the expansion of the forward shock in time.
Of particular importance to us is the forward shock, because it can be very strong, sonic Mach number reaching the values of several hundred. There are two important differences between the shell shocks in Figure \[fig-shockinasink\] and Figure \[fig-snrstructure\]. First, the shock in the sink is directed inward (it sweeps up water coming from the interior of the circle), while the SNR forward shock is directed outward (sweeping up the interstellar matter outside of it). The second difference is that the sink shock is stationary, i. e., its radius remains constant in time, but the SNR expands into a stationary unshocked ISM, increasing the radius of the forward shock.
0.5in ![$ $ The youngest known galactic SNR, G 1.9+0.3.[]{data-label="fig-g19"}](images/image_g19.eps "fig:"){width="4.0in"}
One of the hundreds of known and carefully observed SNRs, G 1.9+0.3, stands out as the youngest known supernova remnant in the Galaxy. It was very recently identified as one by an international team led by NCSU astronomers [@Reynolds2008_G19] and [@Green2008_G19]. It provides an illustration of a typical spatially resolved SNR imaged in X-rays. In Figure \[fig-g19\] (image credit: Prof. S. Reynolds, NCSU, [@Reynolds2008_G19]), the dotted line maps the approximate location of the forward shock[^1], the dotted arrows indicate the direction of the shock movement with respect to the interstellar medium, and the solid arrows indicate the directions and the relative magnitudes of the velocities of the unshocked (the long arrow) and the shocked (the short arrow) plasma, with respect to the shock. Note that in the following text we usually adopt the reference frame in which the shock is at rest, and the plasma is flowing into the shock at a supersonic speed. This approach corresponds to the flow directions shown in Figures \[fig-shockinasink\] and \[fig-g19\].
The concept of a collisionless shock {#sec_collisionless}
------------------------------------
Generally, gas flowing into a shock gets compressed and heated in a narrow region. But how narrow can this region be for a shock in an astrophysical plasma? In order to change the density, bulk speed and temperature, the gas particles must experience a few strong collisions, and the thickness of the shock can therefore be estimated as the mean free path of particles between collisions. Indeed, for shocks in dense gases (for example, air) a particle mean free path is comparable to the shock thickness. However, in an attempt to apply the same reasoning to interstellar or interplanetary shocks, one runs into a complication.
For a plasma consisting of fully ionized hydrogen, the cross section of Coulomb collisions between protons is formally infinite [@SpitzersBook], but we can roughly estimate the cross section of collisions that are strong enough to change the energy of the particles significantly. If by ’significantly’ one means that the change energy due to collision must be comparable to the thermal energy, then the protons must approach each other within a distance $r_c$ such that $$\label{eq_sigcoll}
\frac{e^2}{r_c} = k_B T.$$ Here and in the rest of the equations in this dissertation, the CGS system of units is adopted. The quantity $e$ is the elementary charge, and the left-hand side of Equation (\[eq\_sigcoll\]) is the electrostatic potential energy of two protons separated by the distance $r_c$. The right-hand side is the characteristic thermal energy of protons in a gas of temperature $T$ ($k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant). This gives a rough estimate of the collision cross section $$\sigma = \pi r_c^2=\frac{\pi e^4}{k_B^2 T^2}$$ and of the mean free path $$\Lambda = \frac{1}{\sigma n}=\frac{k_B^2 T^2}{\pi e^4 n},$$ where $T$ is the temperature and $n$ is the number density of the gas. For conditions typical for the Solar Wind in the near Earth space, $n \sim 4$ cm$^{-3}$, $T\sim 10^6$ K, which gives $\Lambda \sim 3\cdot 10^{16}$ cm$=2\cdot 10^3$ AU. This distance is much greater than the size of the Solar System, which means that shocks just do not have room to form in the Solar wind near the Earth. However, spacecraft observations clearly indicate numerous interplanetary shocks of various strengths traversing the Solar System. Measurements reveal that the interplanetary shocks are much thinner then the number above: observed thicknesses are around $\Lambda \sim 10^7-10^{10}$ cm [@Smith1983].
These observational data are successfully explained by the theory of collisionless shocks, which assumes that in the transition region of the shock, particles collide not with each other, but with inhomogeneities of magnetic fields. This shrinks the thickness of the transition region down to the scales of (multiple) proton gyroradii (see Section 6.4 of [@Kulsrud2005]). A shock in which collisions between particles play a negligible role compared to the dynamics of the particles in stochastic magnetic fields is called *a collisionless shock*, and the term *collisionless plasma* is widely used to define the systems in which similar conditions exist.
An interesting property of collisionless plasmas is that, due to the absence of particle-particle collisions, the time scales of thermalization of non-equilibrium energy distributions of particles are extremely large. This allows for the existence and sustainability of a superthermal component in the particle distribution (i.e., energetic particles). Present research, along with other models, shows that the superthermal particles may be not just a minor admixture to the thermal particle pool, but, on the contrary, they may dominate the dynamics of a collisionless shock. This assertion is explained in the following two sections.
Cosmic rays
-----------
Cosmic rays (CRs) are charged particles, first seen as radiation coming from space in a balloon experiment performed by Victor Hess in 1912, and identified as charged nuclei by Phyllis Freier and others in 1948 [@Freier1948]. The spectrum of these particles spans many decades in particle energy ($10^{7}$ to $10^{20}$ eV (!) per nucleus) as well as in flux (from $1$ cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$sr$^{-1}$ for energies of $1$ GeV and above, down to 1 particle per square kilometer per century for energies over $10^{20}$ eV [@Auger2008]). From the multitude of observational data on CRs, it is known that the lower energy CRs come from the Sun, and the higher energy CRs (over $1$-$10$ GeV) are of Galactic origin. CRs are therefore the second most important source of information about deep space after electromagnetic radiation. The problem of measuring and explaining the spectrum, composition, temporal variation and directional distribution of CRs is extensive and longstanding. It requires answering two major questions: how CRs are produced, and what happens to them en route from the source to the detector on Earth.
0.5in ![$ $ The all particle spectrum of cosmic rays[]{data-label="fig-crspec"}](images/plot_cr_spectrum.eps "fig:"){height="6.8in"}
The spectrum shown in Figure \[fig-crspec\] (image credit: S. Swordy, University of Chicago, [@Swordy2001]) is a compilation of the various measurements. This spectrum cannot be identified with a single CR source or even multiple CR sources; in fact, it represents a superposition of the multitude of Galactic CR sources, integrated over a time scale of millions of years, and convolved with the history of their propagation in the Galactic magnetic fields from all parts of the Galaxy.
Most researchers these days are convinced that the bulk of the Galactic CRs at least up to the ‘knee’ of the CR spectrum (i.e., up to the energies of $3\cdot 10^{15}$ eV), are produced in astrophysical collisionless shocks [@BE87]. While the details of this process may be uncertain (how much shocks of individual SNRs contribute to the CR production, in comparison with SNR shock ensembles in the so-called superbubbles, how the interstellar dust is involved, etc.), the general idea is commonly accepted now.
The process that accelerates the particles to ultra-relativistic energies in shocks is known as the first order Fermi process[^2], or diffusive shock acceleration (DSA).
DSA – test-particle approximation {#sec_dsa_tp}
---------------------------------
Diffusive shock acceleration, DSA, also known as the first order Fermi process (often abbreviated as Fermi-I) was first applied to the problem of cosmic ray production in shocks by several independent groups and researchers at the end of the 1970s [@Bell78a; @BO78; @Kry77; @Eichler79]. The best simple mechanical analogy to this process is the acceleration of a rubber ball elastically bouncing back and forth between two massive walls, as the walls are slowly moved towards each other. In a shock, the role of the moving walls is played by the bulk gas flow: the faster-moving unshocked gas and the slower moving shocked gas form an effectively converging system.
The spectrum of particles accelerated in such a manner may be calculated in various ways, including a kinetic approach (see, e.g., [@Kry77]). Consider a one-dimensional shocked flow, with the shock located at $x=0$, and the flow speed $$u(x)=\left\{ \begin{array}{l} u_0, \quad x<0, \\ u_2, \quad x>0,\end{array}\right.$$ where $u_0$ is the upstream and $u_2 < u_0$ – the downstream speed, and let there be a minor admixture of energetic particles that move diffusively in the bulk plasma, the diffusion being isotropic in the plasma frame. Assume that the diffusion coefficient is independent of momentum and of coordinate (except it may have different constant values upstream and downstream of the shock): $$D(x)=\left\{ \begin{array}{l} D_0, \quad x<0, \\ D_2, \quad x>0,\end{array}\right.$$ In a steady state, diffusive propagation of the energetic particles, as they are being advected downstream by the flow, can be described by the equation $$\label{unmod_prop}
u(x) \frac{\partial f(x,p)}{\partial x} = D(x) \frac{\partial^2 f(x,p)}{\partial^2 x},$$ where $f(x,p)$ is the particle distribution function, such that $f(x,p)dxdydzdp_xdp_ydp_z$ is the number of particles in the phase space volume $dxdydzdp_xdp_ydp_z$, and that $f(x,p)$ does not depend on the direction of ${{\bf p}}$. Suppose the incoming energetic particles have a distribution function: $$\label{bc_minusinf}
\lim_{x\to -\infty}{f(x, p)}=f_0(p)\equiv f_0\frac{1}{p_0^2} \delta_D(p-p_0),$$ where $p_0$ is a momentum such that the corresponding particle speed is much greater than $u_0$, $p$ is the current particle momentum, and $\delta_D$ is the Dirac delta-function. Assume the trivial downstream boundary condition $$\label{bc_plusinf}
\lim_{x \to +\infty}{f(x,p)} < \infty,$$ and define the conditions at the discontinuity point $x=0$: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{cond0_1}
\lim_{x \to 0-}{f(x, p)} &=& \lim_{x \to 0+}{f(x, p)}, \\
\label{cond0_2}
\lim_{x \to 0-}{\left(-D_0 \frac{\partial f(x,p)}{\partial x}
- \frac{p}{3}\frac{\partial f(x,p)}{\partial p}\right)} &=&
\lim_{x \to 0+}{\left(-D_2 \frac{\partial f(x,p)}{\partial x}
- \frac{p}{3}\frac{\partial f(x,p)}{\partial p}\right)}.\end{aligned}$$ The first equation expresses the requirement of continuity of the particle density, and the second – of particle flux. The general solution of equation (\[unmod\_prop\]) may be written as $$\label{fp_general}
f(x,p) = \left\{ \begin{array}{l}
A(p) \exp{\left(\displaystyle\frac{u_0 x}{D_0}\right)} + B(p), \quad x < 0 \\
C(p) \exp{\left(\displaystyle\frac{u_2 x}{D_2}\right)} + E(p), \quad x > 0.
\end{array}\right.$$ Substitution of this form into the boundary condition (\[bc\_minusinf\]) results in $$B(p) = f_0(p),$$ and using the boundary condition (\[bc\_plusinf\]) gives $$C(p) = 0.$$ Now we can use the conditions at $x=0$, where the density continuity equation (\[cond0\_1\]) can help constrain $A(p)$ and $E(p)$ in (\[fp\_general\]): $$\label{equap}
A(p) + f_0(p) = E(p),$$ and flux continuity condition (\[cond0\_2\]), rewritten as $$D_0 \lim_{x \to 0-}{\left( \frac{\partial f(x,p)}{\partial x}\right)}
- D_2 \lim_{x \to 0+}{\left(\frac{\partial f(x,p)}{\partial x}\right)} =
-\frac{p}{3} \left(\frac{\partial f(0,p)}{\partial p}\right),$$ gives $$\label{equdp}
-D_0 A(p) \frac{u_1}{D_0} \exp{(0)} - 0 = -\frac{p}{3}\frac{dE(p)}{dp}\left(u_0 - u_2\right).$$ Combining (\[equap\]) and (\[equdp\]), we get $$\frac{p}{3} \frac{dE(p)}{dp} \left(u_0 - u_2\right) + E(p) u_1
= u_1 \frac{f_0}{p_0^2} \delta_D (p-p_0),$$ which can easily be integrated, assuming $E(0)=0$, and the solution is $$E(p) = E_0
\left( \frac{p_0}{p} \right)^{s} H(p-p_0),$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
E_0 &=& \frac{3 N_0 u_0}{p_0^3 \left(u_0 - u_2\right)} \\
\label{s_one}
s &=& \frac{3 u_0}{u_0 - u_2},\end{aligned}$$ and $H(z)$ is the Heaviside step function: $$H(z) = \left\{ \begin{array}{l}
0, \quad x < 0 \\
1, \quad x \geq 0.
\end{array}\right.$$ Finally, the solution of equation (\[unmod\_prop\]) with boundary conditions (\[bc\_minusinf\]), (\[bc\_plusinf\]) and the continuity conditions at the shock (\[cond0\_1\]) and (\[cond0\_1\]) is: $$\label{tpsolution}
f(p) = \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
E_0
\left(\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{p}\right)^{s} H(p-p_0)
e^{u_0 x/D_0} +
\displaystyle \frac{f_0}{p_0^2}\delta_D(p-p_0) \left(1 - e^{u_0 x/D_0}\right),
\quad x < 0, \\
E_0
\left(\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{p}\right)^{s} H(p-p_0) , \quad x > 0.
\end{array}
\right.$$ This is the so-called *test-particle solution* of the problem of diffusive shock acceleration, meaning that the accelerated energetic particles are implicitly assumed to be a small admixture in the vast thermal pool. This assumption is likely to fail for strong collisionless shocks, leading to serious modifications of the solution, on which the present work concentrates.
Let us analyze the basic properties of the test-particle solution (\[tpsolution\]).
- [It requires that some seed particles be introduced, represented by $f_0(p)$, but in real shocks these seed particles must be produced from the thermal pool (*injected*, as the theorists of the particle acceleration field prefer to put it). This model is unable to predict anything about the injection of particles, and their number $f_0$ and momentum $p_0$ are free parameters of the test-particle model.]{}
- [Once the seed particles are introduced, they form a power-law superthermal tail upward of the injection momentum $p_0$, with the index $s$ that depends only on the pre-shock and the post-shock speed, as given by equation \[s\_one\]. That equation can be re-written in terms of the shock compression ratio $r=u_0/u_2$ as $$\label{pl_index_tp}
s=\frac{3u_0}{u_0-u_2}=\frac{3r}{r-1}.$$ For the strongest hydrodynamic shocks in a non-relativistic monatomic gas, the compression ratio $r=u_0/u_2$ approaches the value of $r=4$ (this well known result can easily be derived from the Hugoniot adiabat presented in Section \[sec-rtot\] in the limit $M_s \to \infty$ with $\gamma=5/3$). Notably, such compression ratio corresponds to the power law index of the accelerated particle distribution $s=4$. A particle distribution $f(p) \propto p^{-4}$ extending to $p \to \infty$ in unphysical, because the internal energy of such distribution diverges logarithmically at $p \to \infty$. This means that, if compression ratios of $r=4$ or greater[^3] are achieved in space, there must be some process responsible for limiting the maximum achievable energy. The escape of the highest energy particles from the system, or a finite time of particle acceleration in a time-dependent calculation may determine the high-energy cutoff of the particle spectrum. Such processes are not included in this simplistic model.]{}
- [The basic physical assumption that leads to the emergence of the power-law superthermal tail of $f(p)$ is that the particles are subject to diffusion isotropic in the plasma frame (this is expressed by the equation (\[unmod\_prop\])). This implies that we are dealing with a collisionless shock (otherwise the superthermal particles would have to thermalize through collisions with their thermal counterparts) that has a certain stochastic magnetic field structure (i.e., turbulence), responsible for particle scattering. The properties of these stochastic fields are, obviously, beyond the scope of this model, but they must influence the solution by at least determining the diffusion coefficient $D(x,p)$. In fact, as will be shown later, the magnetic turbulence that confines the particles to the acceleration site, and allows for the Fermi-I acceleration, is probably produced by the accelerated particles themselves, which raises the question of solving the particle acceleration problem consistently with the turbulence production process. ]{}
It turns out that all of these properties of the test-particle make it unable to explain some observations of interstellar collisionless shocks (see the next section), which calls for a better model.
DSA – nonlinear regime
----------------------
The example from classical mechanics that illustrates the first order Fermi process – the rubber ball bouncing between two converging walls – may also be used to understand the nonlinear aspects of diffusive shock acceleration. The ball in classical mechanics gains energy at every collision, but only as long as the walls are much heavier than the ball and continue to move inward despite the ball’s kicks. But what if the ball gains enough energy, so the recoil of the walls makes them slow down their convergence? In this case we would have to account for the feedback of the ball on the walls. This makes the problem nonlinear. Suppose, we put one ball between the walls, and its kinetic energy after $N$ cycles becomes $K$. If we were to put not one, but two balls, the their total energy after $N$ cycles would be less than $2K$, because the recoil of the two balls would have slowed the walls down more efficiently than the recoil of one ball. Similarly, in shock acceleration, the energy of the bulk plasma flow powers the energetic particle acceleration, but once the accelerated particles gain enough energy to push back on the flow, the situation changes dramatically. Such a system is called a *nonlinear*, or a *multicomponent* shock wave, and is the subject of study of nonlinear diffusive shock acceleration theory.
There is a number of reasons to believe that strong shocks in space accelerate particles very efficiently, thus operating in the nonlinear regime. I outline these reasons below, and some of them will be elaborated on further in the dissertation.
1. [Energy considerations. The energy density of Galactic cosmic rays at the location of the Solar System is $\varepsilon\approx 0.6$ eV$\cdot$cm$^{-3}$, and their characteristic age inferred from the radioactive nuclei in CRs is of order $\tau_\mathrm{cr} \approx 10^7$ yr. Assuming that the escape of CRs from the Galaxy has the time scale $\tau_\mathrm{cr}$ and that the escape is balanced by the CR production one can estimate the required power of CR production in the Galaxy as $$P_\mathrm{cr} =
\frac{\varepsilon V}{\tau_\mathrm{cr}} =
3\cdot10^{41}\,\mathrm{erg}\;\mathrm{s}^{-1},$$ where $V$ is the volume of the Galaxy, $V = \pi (10^5 \,\mathrm{pc})^2 \cdot 100 \, \mathrm{pc}
=3\cdot 10^{12}\,\mathrm{pc}^3 \approx 10^{68} \, \mathrm{cm}^3$. Assuming that all of these cosmic rays are produced by shocks of SNRs, which occur once in $\tau_\mathrm{sn}=100$ yrs and release $E=10^{51}$ erg as the kinetic energy of the shock wave, the Galactic energy production in the form of shocks is $$P_\mathrm{sk} = \frac{E}{\tau_\mathrm{sn}} = 3\cdot 10^{41}\,\mathrm{erg}\;\mathrm{s}^{-1}.$$ Our estimates of the quantities $P_\mathrm{cr}$ and $P_\mathrm{sk}$ are comparable, which means that SN shocks may easily be required to have an efficiency on the order of tens of percent of converting the bulk motion energy into the energy of accelerated particles. See also [@BE87] for a detailed discussion. ]{}
2. [Numerical simulations (e.g., [@Ellison85; @Malkov97; @KJ97; @BGV2005]) predict efficient particle acceleration given the simplest physically realistic model of particle injection, thermal leakage. The above mentioned models use different techniques, but all of them predict that in a strong collisionless shock, the energy density of energetic particles becomes comparable to the kinetic energy density of the flow, thus making the problem nonlinear.]{}
3. [Analysis of the morphology of resolved SNRs indicates high compression ratios at the forward shock (e.g., [@WarrenEtal2005; @Gamil2008]) which is consistent with the predictions of nonlinear particle acceleration theories. There is also observational evidence of the nonlinearity of DSA that comes from the analysis of nonthermal emission spectra (e.g., [@RE92; @AHS2008]) and from spacecraft observations of the Earth’s bow shock (e.g., [@EMP90]).]{}
4. [Recent observations indicate that magnetic fields in some SNR shocks are much stronger than the ambient magnetic fields, which makes many researchers believe that magnetic fields are amplified in situ, i.e. in the shocks, by the shock-accelerated particles. If that is the case, the energy density of the accelerated particles must be no less than the energy density of the amplified magnetic fields, and, according to the observational estimates, the latter is a significant fraction of the dynamical pressure of the shock flow. This necessitates the nonlinear DSA (see, e.g., [@EV2008]).]{}
The nonlinear DSA theory was developed by various researchers in the 1980s. Although the details of the models may differ, all of them agree on the following: when the energetic particles gain enough energy to feed back on the flow, the unshocked plasma slows down and becomes compressed even before it reaches the viscous shock (the latter is renamed a *subshock* in context of nonlinear DSA), which means that a *shock precursor* forms in the upstream region ($x<0$); the maximum particle energy must be limited either by the age, or by the size of the shock, and if particles of the highest energies are allowed to leave the shock far upstream, it leads to an increase in the compression ratio.
Magnetic field amplification in shocks
--------------------------------------
Recent observations and modeling of several young supernova remnants (SNRs) suggest the presence of magnetic fields at the forward shock (i.e., the outer blast wave) well in excess of what is expected from simple compression of the ambient circumstellar field, ${B_\mathrm{ism}}$. These large fields are inferred from:
- [ spectral curvature in radio emission (e.g., [@RE92; @BKP99]) ]{},
- [ broad-band fits of [synchrotron]{} emission between radio and non-thermal X-rays (e.g., [@BKV2003; @VBK2005a], see also [@Cowsik80])]{},
- [ sharp X-ray edges (e.g., [@VL2003; @BambaEtal2003; @VBK2005a; @EC2005; @CHBD2007]), and]{}
- [ rapid variability of nonthermal X-ray emission from bright filaments in SNRs (first reported by [@Uchiyama07]).]{}
While these methods are all indirect, fields greater than 500 [$\mu$G]{} are inferred in the supernova remnant Cassiopeia A and values of at least several 100 [$\mu$G]{} are estimated in Tycho, Kepler, SN1006, and G347.3-0.5. If ${B_\mathrm{ism}}\sim 3-10$ [$\mu$G]{}, amplification factors of 100 or more may be required to explain the fields immediately behind the forward shocks and this is likely the result of a nonlinear amplification process associated with the efficient acceleration of cosmic-ray ions via diffusive shock acceleration (DSA). The magnetic field strength is a critical parameter in DSA and also strongly influences the [synchrotron]{} emission from shock accelerated electrons. Since shocks are expected to accelerate particles in diverse astrophysical environments and [synchrotron]{} emission is often an important emission process (e.g., radio jets), quantifying the magnetic field amplification has become an important problem in particle astrophysics and has relevance beyond cosmic-ray production in SNRs.
These highly amplified magnetic fields are most likely an intrinsic part of efficient particle acceleration by shocks. This strong turbulence, which may result from cosmic ray driven instabilities, both resonant and non-resonant, in the shock precursor, is certain to play a critical role in [self-consistent]{}, [nonlinear]{} models of strong, [cosmic ray]{} modified shocks. Although plasma wave instabilities in presence of accelerated particles have been studied in the context of shock acceleration before (e.g., [@Bell78a; @LC83]), it was only recently suggested that these instabilities may lead to very efficient amplification of magnetic field fluctuations, $\Delta B \gg B_0$ [@BL2001]. Since then, new models of plasma instabilities possibly responsible for efficient magnetic field amplification were proposed [@LB2000; @Bell2004; @BT2005] and studied in context of shock acceleration [@PLM2006; @AB2006; @VEB2006; @ZP2008].
All these plasma instabilities are assumed to amplify pre-existing waves in a plasma in the presence of an underlying uniform magnetic field $B_0$ parallel to the flow[^4]. The two models of interest that will be applied to the present work are:
1. [Resonant CR streaming instability (see [@Skilling75b; @LC83] and [@BL2001; @AB2006; @VEB2006]), in which particles of a certain momentum amplify [Alfvén]{} waves with a wavenumber equal to the inverse gyroradius of the particle, and]{}
2. [Nonresonant CR streaming instability of short-wavelength modes (suggested by [@Bell2004]), which I will sometimes refer to as Bell’s instability, in which the diffusive electric current of CRs amplifies almost purely growing waves with wavenumbers much greater than the inverse particle gyroradius. ]{}
I should also mention a nonresonant instability that produces long-wavelengths modes and may also be important in shocks (see [@BT2005] and Section \[nonres\_long\_inst\]), which I am planning to apply to the modeling of shocks in the future, as well as other possible mechanisms (e.g., [@MD2009]).
Amplification of magnetic turbulence has great importance in the process of DSA. The amplified turbulence provides the stochastic magnetic fields that scatter the accelerated particles, allowing them to participate in the Fermi-I process. The properties of the particle scattering are therefore dependent on the spectrum of stochastic magnetic fields, yet the latter are produced by the accelerated particles. This complex connection between particles and waves in shocks adds to the nonlinear nature of shock acceleration, discussed in Chapter \[ch\_nonlin\_dsa\]. Therefore, magnetic field amplification affects the observable nonthermal synchrotron emission from shocks in two ways: it determines the structure and strength of the magnetic fields in which the emission occurs, and shapes the spectrum of the radiating energetic particles.
Turbulence
----------
Studying strong magnetic field amplification in interstellar shocks inevitably makes us face the subject of magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) turbulence. Usually turbulence is defined as chaotic fluid motion, that is, a motion with a very sensitive dependence on initial conditions. Chaotic behavior makes turbulent motions effectively non-deterministic, but they can be studied using statistical methods.
Motions of gases and fluids of high Reynolds number tend to transit to the turbulent regime (see, e.g., [@LL_HYDRO; @MoninYaglom]), which is encountered on a regular basis in areas ranging from plasma fusion engineering and race car design to air transport, plumbing, golf and food processing (e.g., [@FO90; @SS1983; @USPAT_golf; @USPAT_homo]). Driven by the need of applications like meteorology, climate modeling, aerospace engineering, and others, turbulence research has been conducted for many decades, and is a challenging field of mathematics and physics (e.g., [@FS2006]). Conducting fluids (plasmas) easily develop and sustain magnetic fields, and the MHD turbulence regime, occurring in plasmas, is even more complicated by the magnetic field interactions than its hydrodynamic counterpart [@Biskamp2003].
Considering that plasmas constitute a large fraction of all baryonic matter in space, their properties have pervading importance for astrophysics. Namely, turbulence in plasmas determines cosmic ray acceleration and propagation, plays a crucial role for angular momentum transfer in accreting systems and impacts the properties of gravitational collapse. The list of astrophysical objects affected by MHD turbulence is therefore extensive: large scale structure of the Universe, quasars, accreting binary systems, forming stars, supernova remnants, etc.
The primary sources of information about MHD turbulence are spacecraft observations of interplanetary space and numerical simulations. The former provide real, but often hard to interpret data, the bottom line of which is that turbulence often consists of stochastic perturbations of plasma velocities and magnetic fields spanning many decades of the spatial scales. Oftentimes, the Fourier spectrum of spatial structure of turbulent fluctuations reveals a power-law distribution of energy in wavenumber space. The numerical simulations have the advantage of providing data that is easy to analyze and scale for practically applicable theories.
A simplified picture of turbulence evolution, based on extensive research, involves three dominant processes: energy supply, spectral transfer of energy and dissipation. Consider a fluid flow in a pipe, where a large flux of the fluid leads to the development of a hydrodynamic instability that creates vortices (eddies) breaking the laminar flow. In this way energy is supplied to the turbulence in the form of large-scale vortices. These eddies then break down into smaller eddies – this way, spectral energy transfer (cascade) from large to small scales is realized. As the scale of the turbulent structures due to cascading becomes smaller, fluid viscosity plays an increasingly greater role, eventually leading to the dissipation of the smallest eddies into heat.
The MHD turbulence, as mentioned above, is difficult to describe. It was originally treated and analyzed as a set of small perturbations (i.e., plasma waves) moving in the large-scale uniform magnetic field and weakly interacting with each other (the so-called Iroshnikov-Kraichnan approach [@Iroshnikov1964; @Kraichnan1965]). However, Goldreich and Sridhar [@GS95][^5] point out that this approach may be inappropriate for MHD turbulence due to its inherent anisotropy introduced by the magnetic field [@ES2004a]. The bottom line of their theory and of the subsequent simulations of MHD is that the magnetic field plays a stabilizing role. The cascading takes place mostly for wave vectors perpendicular to the uniform magnetic field, while the parallel cascade is suppressed.
A comprehensive source on classical theory of hydrodynamical turbulence is [@MoninYaglom]. Modern advances in the study of MHD turbulence is presented in [@Biskamp2003].
The Problem of Nonlinear DSA {#ch_nonlin_dsa}
============================
The general problem of nonlinear diffusive shock acceleration of charged particles (DSA) can be formulated as follows: given a supersonic flow with a speed $u_0$ of a plasma with a number density $n_0$, temperature $T_0$ and a pre-existing magnetic field ${\bf B}_0$, and given the location $x=0$ where this flow develops a subshock, find the distribution of particles $f({\bf x},{\bf p},t)$ and electromagnetic fields in the shock vicinity. This problem is complicated by two facts: a) particle acceleration occurs due to complex motions of particles in the turbulent magnetic field, but the magnetic turbulence itself is dependent upon the motion of the accelerated particles, and, b) if particle acceleration is efficient, different parts of the particle spectrum interact with each other (i.e., the accelerated particles push back on and slow down the flow of the thermal particles).
This problem cannot be practically tackled by particle simulations from first principles like Maxwell’s equations and Lorentz force (see Section \[sec\_pic\]), and the most computationally expensive operations must be performed analytically. Namely, all currently existing models of nonlinear DSA, including the one discussed in this dissertation, assume that the accelerated particles propagate diffusively with some diffusion coefficient, or mean free path, prescription. This allows the models to eliminate the need to describe the complex interactions between particles and waves, and to concentrate on the physical aspects of particle acceleration.
Analytic models
---------------
In successful analytic models, a one-dimensional steady state shock with a nonlinear precursor is described by the flow speed $u(x,t)$, mass density of the plasma $\rho(x,t)$ and an isotropic distribution function of energetic particles, $f_\mathrm{cr}(x,p,t)$. The above mentioned macroscopic quantities must be consistent with the fundamental conservation laws: mass, momentum and energy must be conserved. These conditions are expressed with the following system of equations: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{masscons_aa}
\rho u &=& \mathrm{const}, \\
\label{momcons_aa}
\rho u^2 + P_\mathrm{th} + P_\mathrm{cr} + P_\mathrm{mag} &=&
\mathrm{const}, \\
\label{engycons_aa}
\frac12 \rho u^3 +
\frac{\gamma_\mathrm{th}}{\gamma_\mathrm{th}-1}P_\mathrm{th}u +
\frac{\gamma_\mathrm{cr}}{\gamma_\mathrm{cr}-1}P_\mathrm{cr}u +
\frac32 P_\mathrm{mag} u + Q_\mathrm{esc}
&=&
\mathrm{const}.\end{aligned}$$ and the evolution of the particle distribution is governed by the kinetic equation of CR transport $$\label{isotr_cr_prop}
\frac{\partial }{\partial x} \left[
D(x,p)\frac{\partial}{\partial x}f(x,p)
\right]
-u\frac{\partial f(x,p)}{\partial x} +
\frac13 \left( \frac{du}{dx} \right)p\frac{\partial f(x,p)}{\partial p}
+ Q_\mathrm{inj} = 0.$$ Equations (\[masscons\_aa\]), (\[momcons\_aa\]) and (\[engycons\_aa\]) represent conservation of mass, momentum and energy fluxes, respectively. Equation (\[isotr\_cr\_prop\]) is the kinetic equation describing propagation of cosmic rays in the diffusion approximation. The expressions above are, essentially, a direct generalization of the test particle model of shock acceleration demonstrated in Section \[sec\_dsa\_tp\], complemented by the treatment of the flow speed $u(x)$ variability upstream. Let us use the following notation for the flow speed and other quantities at points of interest: $u_0$ is the far upstream flow speed, $u_2$ is the downstream flow speed, and $u_1$ is the flow speed just before the subshock. Thus, in the upstream region, $x<0$, the flow speed varies from $u(x=-\infty)=u_0$ to $u(x=-0)=u_1 < u_0$, and then jumps in a viscous subshock to $u(x=+0)=u_2 < u_1$. Let us also define the total compression ratio, $r_\mathrm{tot}=u_0 / u_2$ and the subshock compression ratio $r_\mathrm{sub}=u_1 / u_2$.
To close the model, one must describe the evolution of thermal gas pressure, $P_\mathrm{th}$, define the cosmic ray pressure, $P_\mathrm{cr}$ and have a model for determining the magnetic field pressure, $P_\mathrm{mag}$. The term $Q_\mathrm{esc}$ representing the energy escape from the system requires a model of particle escape, the term $Q_\mathrm{inj}$ representing the injection of thermal particles into the acceleration process calls for a model of particle injection. The most important parameter of the model, the diffusion coefficient $D(x,p)$, must be calculated using some simple approximation or using the assumed spectrum of turbulence.
These models were used in [@BE99; @Malkov97; @KJG2002; @BGV2005; @Eichler84]. The major advantage of the analytic models is that they provide a fast solution of the problem, which can be used in the simulations of objects incorporating shocks, for example, to calculate the spectrum of electromagnetic emission from an evolving SNR (see, e.g., [@BV2008; @MAB2009]).
The computation speed comes at the cost of making some important approximations, as summarized below.
1. [Analytic models are limited by the assumptions that go into the analytic description of the plasma physics. For example, the diffusion coefficient of charged particles in stochastic magnetic fields can be reliably estimated either in the limit of weak turbulence, or in the simplistic Bohm approximation. Similarly, the analytic description of the physics of turbulence generation is only valid in the quasi-linear regime, i.e., weak turbulence.]{}
2. [These models adopt a diffusion approximation of particle transport. Hand in hand with this approximation goes the assumption that the particle distribution function is isotropic in the plasma frame. Only this way can one define the pressures of thermal particles $P_\mathrm{th}(x,t)$ and cosmic rays $P_\mathrm{cr}(x,t)$ as moments of particle distribution function $f(x,p,t)$. The isotropy assumption breaks down for relativistic shocks. But even for the non-relativistic shocks that we are discussing in this work, the anisotropy of particle distribution is important, because it determines the thermal particle injection process. Therefore, analytic models require additional parameters or assumptions in order to estimate particle injection.]{}
3. [If a strong uniform magnetic field is present in the shock, its strength and orientation may affect particle injection and transport. Some SNRs may have an asymmetric appearance due to the variation of the obliquity of magnetic field around the rim [@Gamil2008]. Analytic models are not able to account for this effect due to the isotropy assumption.]{}
4. [Including some important physical processes in the analytic models of shock acceleration complicates calculations. These important processes include particle escape far upstream, nonlinear processes in turbulence generation (such as cascading), modifications of the diffusion regime by a specific shape of turbulence spectrum, etc.]{}
Despite these limitations, analytic models are very helpful for making qualitative and quantitative predictions regarding the nonlinear structure of shocks, and are the current method of choice for modeling the electromagnetic emission of SNRs, where fast simulations of shocks are required.
Particle-in-cell (PIC) codes {#sec_pic}
----------------------------
In principle, the problem can be solved completely with few assumptions and approximations with plasma simulations. Those fall into two major categories: particle-in-cell (PIC) simulations (e.g., [@Spitkovsky2008; @NPS2008]), and hybrid models that assume that electrons are not dynamically important (e.g., [@WO1996; @Giacalone2004])[^6].
However, modeling the nonlinear generation of relativistic particles and strong magnetic turbulence in collisionless shocks is computationally challenging and PIC simulations will not be able to fully address this problem in nonrelativistic shocks for some years to come even though they can provide critical information on the plasma processes that can be obtained in no other way. In this section I outline the requirements that a PIC simulation must fulfill in order to tackle the problem of efficient DSA with nonlinear magnetic field amplification (MFA) in SNR shocks. The reasoning presented in this section was also laid down in [@VBE2008].
There are two basic reasons why the problem of MFA in nonlinear diffusive shock acceleration (NL-DSA) is particularly difficult for particle-in-cell (PIC) simulations. The first is that PIC simulations must be done fully in three dimensions to properly account for cross-field diffusion. As Jones [@JJB98] proved from first principles, PIC simulations with one or more ignorable dimensions unphysically prevent particles from crossing magnetic field lines. In all but strictly parallel shock geometry,[^7] a condition which never occurs in strong turbulence, cross-field scattering is expected to contribute importantly to particle injection and must be fully accounted for if injection from the thermal background is to be modeled accurately.
The second reason is that, in nonrelativistic shocks, NL-DSA spans large spatial, temporal, and momentum scales. The range of scales is more important than might be expected because DSA is intrinsically efficient and nonlinear effects tend to place a large fraction of the particle pressure in the highest energy particles. The highest energy particles, with the largest diffusion lengths and longest acceleration times, feed back on the injection of the lowest energy particles with the shortest scales. The accelerated particles exchange their momentum and energy with the incoming thermal plasma through the magnetic fluctuations coupled to the flow. This results in the flow being decelerated and the plasma being heated. The structure of the shock, including the subshock where fresh particles are injected, depends critically on the highest energy particles in the system.
A plasma simulation must resolve the electron skin depth, $c/\omega_{pe}$, i.e., $L_\mathrm{cell} < c/ \omega_{pe}$, where $\omega_{pe}=[4 \pi n_e e^2/m_e]^{1/2}$ is the electron plasma frequency and $L_\mathrm{cell}$ is the simulation cell size. Here, $n_e$ is the electron number density, $m_e$ is the electron mass and $c$ and $e$ have their usual meanings (the speed of light and the elementary charge, respectively). The simulation must also have a time step small compared to $\omega_{pe}^{-1}$, i.e., $t_\mathrm{tstep} < \omega_{pe}^{-1}$. If one wishes to follow the acceleration of protons in DSA to the TeV energies present in SNRs, one must have a simulation box that is as large as the upstream diffusion length of the highest energy protons, i.e., $\kappa(\mathrm{E_\mathrm{max}})/u_0 \sim r_g(E_\mathrm{max}) c / (3 u_0)$, where $\kappa$ is the diffusion coefficient, $r_g(E_\mathrm{max})$ is the gyroradius of a relativistic proton with the energy $E_\mathrm{max}$, $u_0$ is the shock speed, and assuming Bohm diffusion. The simulation must also be able to run for as long as the acceleration time of the highest energy protons, $\tau_\mathrm{acc}(E_\mathrm{max}) \sim E_\mathrm{max} c /(eBu_0^2)$. Here, $B$ is some average magnetic field. The spatial condition gives $$\frac{\kappa(E_\mathrm{max})/u_0}{(c/\omega_{pe})} \sim 6\cdot 10^{11}
\left ( \frac{E_\mathrm{max}}{\mathrm{TeV}} \right )
\left ( \frac{u_0}{1000 \, \mathrm{km \, s}^{-1}} \right )^{-1}
\left ( \frac{B}{\mu \mathrm{G}} \right )^{-1}
\left ( \frac{n_e}{\mathrm{cm}^{-3}}\right )^{1/2}
\left ( \frac{f}{1836}\right )^{1/2}
\ ,$$ for the number of cells [*in one dimension*]{}. The factor $f=m_p/m_e$ is the proton to electron mass ratio. From the acceleration time condition, the required number of time steps is, $$\frac{\tau_\mathrm{acc}(E_\mathrm{max})}{\omega_{pe}^{-1}} \sim 6\cdot 10^{14}
\left ( \frac{E_\mathrm{max}}{\mathrm{TeV}} \right )
\left ( \frac{u_0}{1000\,\mathrm{km\,s}^{-1}}\right )^{-2}
\left ( \frac{B}{\mu \mathrm{G}} \right )^{-1}
\left ( \frac{n_e}{\mathrm{cm}^{-3}}\right )^{1/2}
\left ( \frac{f}{1836}\right )^{1/2}
\ .$$ Even with $f=1$ these numbers are obviously far beyond any conceivable computing capabilities and they show that approximate methods are essential for studying NL-DSA.
One approximation that is often used is a hybrid PIC simulation where the electrons are treated as a background fluid. To get the estimate of the requirements in this case, we can take the minimum cell size as the thermal proton gyroradius, $r_\mathrm{g0} = c \sqrt{2 m_p E_\mathrm{th}}/(e B)$. Now, the number of cells, [*again in one dimension,*]{} is: $$\label{eq:cell}
\frac{\kappa(E_\mathrm{max})/u_0}{r_\mathrm{g0}} \sim 7\cdot 10^{7}
\left ( \frac{E_\mathrm{max}}{\mathrm{TeV}} \right )
\left ( \frac{u_0}{1000 \, \mathrm{km \, s}^{-1}} \right)^{-1}
\left ( \frac{E\mathrm{th}}{\mathrm{keV}} \right )^{-1/2}
\ .$$ The time step size must be $\tau_\mathrm{step} < \omega_\mathrm{cp}^{-1}$, where $\omega_\mathrm{cp}=eB/m_{p}c$ is the thermal proton gyrofrequency. This gives the number of time steps to reach 1 TeV, $$\label{eq:step}
\frac{\tau_\mathrm{acc}(E_\mathrm{max})}{\omega_\mathrm{cp}^{-1}} \sim 1\cdot 10^{8}
\left ( \frac{E_\mathrm{max}}{\mathrm{TeV}} \right )
\left ( \frac{u_0}{1000\,\mathrm{km\,s}^{-1}}\right )^{-2}
\ .$$ These combined spatial and temporal requirements, even for the most optimistic case of a hybrid simulation with an unrealistically large $\tau_\mathrm{step}$, are well beyond existing computing capabilities unless a maximum energy well below 1 TeV is used.
Since the three-dimensional requirement is fundamental and relaxing it eliminates cross-field diffusion, restricting the energy range is the best way to make the problem accessible to hybrid PIC simulations. However, since producing relativistic particles from nonrelativistic ones is an essential part of the NL problem, the energy range must comfortably span $m_p c^2$ to be realistic. If $E_\mathrm{max}=10$GeV is used, with $u_0=5000$km s$^{-1}$, and $E_\mathrm{th}= 10$MeV, equation (\[eq:cell\]) gives $\sim 1400$ and equation (\[eq:step\]) gives $\sim 4 \cdot 10^{4}$. Now, the computation may be possible, even with the 3-D requirement, but the hybrid simulation can’t fully investigate MFA since electron return currents are not modeled. The exact microscopic description of the system is not currently feasible.
It’s hard to make a comparison in run-time between PIC simulations and the Monte Carlo technique used here because we are not aware of any published results of 3-D PIC simulations of nonrelativistic shocks that follow particles from fully nonrelativistic to fully relativistic energies. A direct comparison of 1-D hybrid and Monte Carlo codes was given in [@EGBS93] for energies consistent with the acceleration of diffuse ions at the quasi-parallel Earth bow shock. Three-dimensional hybrid PIC results for nonrelativistic shocks were presented in [@GE2000] and these were barely able to show injection and acceleration given the computational limits at that time. As for the Monte Carlo technique, a simulation that calculates the nonlinear structure of a shock with a dynamic range typical for SNRs, typically takes several hours on 4-10 processors. Thus, realistic Monte Carlo SNR models are possible with modest computing resources.
Despite these limitations, PIC simulations are the only way of self-consistently modeling the plasma physics of collisionless shocks. In particular, the injection of thermal particles in the large amplitude waves and time varying structure of the subshock can only only be determined with PIC simulations (e.g., [@NPS2008; @Spitkovsky2008]). Injection is one of the most important aspects of DSA and one where analytic and Monte Carlo techniques have large uncertainties.
Monte Carlo Simulation
----------------------
The Monte Carlo method of solving the problem of nonlinear DSA was developed by Ellison and co-workers (see [@EJR90; @JE91; @VEB2006] and references therein for more complete details). This method provides an excellent compromise between the physically realistic, but computationally limited PIC simulations and fast, but simplified analytic models. The compromise is achieved by replacing the solution of coupled equations of particle propagation, of conservation laws, and of turbulence generation, with a Monte Carlo simulation of particle transport that incorporates an iterative procedure that ensures the simultaneous consistency of all assumed laws. The Monte Carlo method goes beyond the diffusion approximation of particle transport and allows the calculation of rates of particle injection into the acceleration process and of energetic particle escape upstream and/or downstream of the shock.
In this method, particle transport is described as a stochastic process. Particles move in small time steps, as their local plasma frame momenta are ‘scattered’ at each step in a random walk process on a sphere in momentum space. The properties of the random walk are determined by the assumption of a certain particle mean free path (or diffusion coefficient), that statistically describes the interactions of particles with the stochastic magnetic fields. By assuming that such a description is possible, Monte Carlo methods gets a speed advantage over the PIC simulations at the cost of relying on theoretical models of the diffusive properties of the plasma. On the one hand, these models can be rather advanced and successful, therefore making this approximation justified. On the other hand, ignoring the spatial structure of electromagnetic fields and replacing it with a statistical description is the biggest simplification of this model.
Acceleration of particles takes place naturally in this model, as long as a shocked flow is described. Some shock heated thermal particles are injected into the acceleration process when their history of random scatterings in the downstream region takes them back upstream. These particles gain energy and some continue to be accelerated in the first-order Fermi mechanism. This form of injection is generally called ‘thermal leakage’ and was first used in the context of DSA in [@EJE1981] (see also [@Ellison82]). The number of particles that do this back-crossing, and the energy they gain, are determined only by the random particle histories; no parameterization of the injection process is made other than the assumption of the diffusion coefficient value at various particle energies.
The nonlinearity of the problem is dealt with by employing an iterative scheme that ensures the conservation of mass, momentum, and energy fluxes, thus producing a self-consistent solution for a steady-state, plane shock, with particle injection and acceleration coupled to the bulk plasma flow modification.
An important advantage of the Monte Carlo model is that it was shown to agree well with spacecraft observations of the Earth’s bow shock [@EM87; @EMP90], interplanetary shocks [@BOEF97], and with 1-D hybrid PIC simulations [@EGBS93].
Objectives of this dissertation
-------------------------------
Hopefully, I have convinced the reader of the far-reaching impact of processes in shocks on many astrophysical objects. Considering the observations of supernova remnants that indicate the possibility of strong magnetic field amplifications at shocks in-situ, I would like to theoretically investigate the physics of shock acceleration in the presence of strong MHD turbulence generation by the accelerated particles.
I favor the Monte Carlo approach to this problem, because of the growing complexity of the models of nonlinear DSA (which makes the analytic approach less productive), and because I would like to probe the aspects of NL-DSA that neither the analytic models, nor the PIC simulations have yet constrained.
The questions that interest me include:
- [How efficient can magnetic field amplification be, considering the nonlinear effects in the system? What impact does the generated strong magnetic turbulence have on the efficiency of particle acceleration?]{}
- [How do these results depend on the model of turbulence generation and on the model for statistical description of particle transport?]{}
- [What are the consequences of efficient MFA on the maximum momentum of accelerated particles and how do they impact the shock structure? ]{}
- [Highest energy particles must escape upstream of the shock. What are the properties of the escaping particles?]{}
- [What does the shock precursor look like (scale, structure, processes)?]{}
- [What is the qualitative and quantitative dependence of some observable parameters (i.e., effective magnetic field strength, shocked gas temperature, flow compression ratio, etc.) on the properties of the shock (shock speed, plasma density and magnetization, etc.)? ]{}
Over the past 3 years that the work on this project was being done, we (I, under the guidance of Prof. Ellison, and with the help of Prof. Bykov’s advice) have successfully developed the model and obtained results shedding light on most of these questions. Our results have appeared in several peer-reviewed journal publications.
The purpose of this dissertation is to make a record of the process of developing and testing the Monte Carlo simulation of NL-DSA with MFA, and to exhibit and summarize our results that have been or will soon be presented in conferences and in the press.
Model
=====
In the present research, I used the Monte Carlo method developed by Ellison and co-workers to build a self-consistent model of shock acceleration of charged particles, now with efficient magnetic field amplification. I wrote the computer code realizing the Monte Carlo model from scratch, but making a full use of the formerly developed procedures. I also contributed some essential improvements to the Monte Carlo method, that were necessary for the implementation of magnetic turbulence amplification models.
In this Chapter, I will discuss the model. In Section \[coremc\] I will present the fundamentals of the Monte Carlo simulation and the tests performed to confirm that my numerical model reproduces the known analytic results and conforms with the fundamental laws of physics. Section \[mfa\_in\_mc\] will be devoted to the state-of-the-art models of magnetic turbulence amplification discussed these days in the astrophysical literature, and to the implementation of these models in the Monte Carlo code. This part of the model is the essence of my research project. Another original contribution I made to the model in this project is the adaptation and incorporation of advanced particle transport techniques into the simulation, as discussed in Section \[advanced\_transport\]. Finally, in Section \[parallel\_computing\] I will discss the realization of parallel computing in the simulation.
Core Monte Carlo {#coremc}
----------------
This section discusses the techniques that were used in the Monte Carlo simulation before the incorporation of the magnetic turbulence amplification. Most of them had been developed before the author of this dissertation began contributing to the model. However, the tests of the model demonstrated in this section were performed by the computer code written by me.
### Overview
The simulation of nonlinear particle acceleration with the Monte Carlo particle transport starts by assuming an unmodified shocked flow \[$u(x<0)=u_0$, $u(x >0) = u_2$\]. One must also assume some scattering properties of the medium, i.e., assign a mean free path $\lambda(x,p)$ to the whole particle energy range, at every point in space.
Then thermal particles are introduced far upstream, and the code propagates these particles until they cross the subshock at $x=0$. Particle propagation is diffusive, according to the chosen mean free path $\lambda(x,p)$, and it is performed as described in Section \[subsec-pascatt\]. Some of these particles will be advected downstream with the flow $u_2$, and once the code finds any particle many diffusion lengths downstream of the shock, its propagation may be terminated. However, the downstream flow speed must by definition be smaller than the downstream speed of sound (i.e., a thermal particle speed), so a small fraction of the downstream thermal particles may, in the random walk process, find themselves upstream. If this happens to a particle, it is said to have been [*injected*]{} into the acceleration process and becomes a CR particle (as opposed to having been a thermal one). An injected particle is much more likely than a thermal one to cross the shock again and again, and eventually gain a relativistic energy in this process[^8]. The action of the advection with the flow combined with particle diffusion in a non-uniform flow is described in Section \[subsec-motion\].
The particles that have been injected will, due to the flow speed difference across the shock, find themselves moving at a high speed with respect to the plasma, at least at the speed $v=u_0-u_2$. This completes the first cycle of the Fermi-I process. In a short time, the accelerated particles will again be advected downstream, but having a greater energy, they will find it easier to return upstream again and get accelerated a second time. As this process goes on, a few particles may achieve, in principle, unlimited energy.
The acceleration process in reality must have an upper limit for particle energy. The two possible causes of such a limit are [*a)*]{} time-limited acceleration: the particles only gain as much energy as they can in the amount of time that the shock has been in existence, and [*b)*]{} size-limited acceleration: particles have enough time to achieve such high energies that their scattering length becomes comparable to the size of the accelerating system, and they escape. The Monte Carlo method can, in principle, model both situations by terminating the acceleration of every given particle either after it had been in the process for a certain amount of time, or once it has reached a certain boundary. I favor the second scenario, due to its inherent consistency with the assumption of a steady state solution, and throughout this work it will be assumed that the acceleration is size-limited. For the model it means assuming a boundary, let us call it the free escape boundary (FEB) located at ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}<0$, such that any particle that crosses this boundary while moving against the flow leaves the system forever. The mean free path of the accelerated particles generally increases with energy, therefore only the highest energy particles can reach the distant boundary at ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}$. This way, the acceleration has an upper energy determined by the location of the free escape boundary. In reality, the distance ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}$ must be comparable to, or be a fraction of, the radius of the SNR shell shock.
After all the accelerated particles either had been advected downstream, or had escaped through the free escape boundary, the Monte Carlo transport process finishes. During the transport, the model was calculating the contributions of the particles, both thermal and CRs, to the particle distribution at every point. This process is described in Section \[subsec-calcfp\]. The fluxes of mass, momentum, and energy of the particles (and the accompanying magnetic fields) are the important moments of the particle distribution function, that can be calculated directly from particle trajectories. ‘Balancing the books’ after the Monte Carlo iteration, one may either find that the above mentioned fluxes were constant throughout the shock, or, if the particle injection was efficient, one may find that the calculated fluxes deviated from their upstream value. The latter case means that the accelerated particles gained too much energy from the bulk flow to be just a small admixture. Indeed, the Fermi-I process powers particle acceleration by giving a fraction of the bulk flow energy to the particle scattering in it. There is only a finite amount of energy available for the accelerated particles, and as soon as they borrow a significant amount of it, the energy-bearing flow must change. This is where the nonlinearity of efficient particle acceleration comes into play.
In order to obtain a steady state solution consistent with the fundamental conservation laws (i.e., conservation of mass, momentum and energy), the simulation invokes an iterative procedure. Using the calculated, non-equilibrium, fluxes of mass, momentum and energy, the simulation adjusts the flow speed in the precursor, $u(x<0)$, making it decrease slightly towards the subshock, as outlined in Section \[subsec\_smoothing\]. It will be referred to as precursor smoothing. The value $u(x=-0)\equiv u_1$ is the flow speed just before the subshock. Then a second Monte Carlo iteration of particle propagation may be run. Thermal particles are introduced far upstream, where the flow is yet unmodified, $u(x)=u_0$, and allowed to propagate, get injected and accelerated. However, this time, the flow speed difference between the downstream region and the upstream region is smaller due to the slowing down of the incoming flow in the precursor. This means that particle acceleration will borrow less energy from the flow than in the previous iteration.
Continuing the iterative process of particle propagation followed by the flow speed adjustment, one may obtain a self-consistent solution, in which particles gain just the right amount of energy from the flow, to conserve mass, momentum and energy of the sum of the slowed down upstream flow and the accelerated particle distribution. It turns out that, in the presence of highly relativistic particles that change the compressibility of the plasma, and due to the assumption of the upstream particle escape at ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}$, one must also adjust the downstream flow speed, $u_2$, in order to conserve the fundamental fluxes across the subshock as well.
The procedure outlined above is the method of solving the problem of nonlinear particle acceleration developed by Ellison and co-workers.
In order to implement efficient magnetic field amplification and self-consistent particle transport, the author made adjustments to the procedure. The underlying theory and practical details are explained in the following two Sections, \[mfa\_in\_mc\] and \[advanced\_transport\].
First of all, in addition to the flow speed, $u(x)$ being an unknown function derived by the iterative procedure, we now seek for turbulence spectrum, $W(x,k)$, in a similar way (see Section \[mfa\_in\_mc\]). Starting with some initial guess for $W(x,k)$, the simulation runs the diffusion module, that analyzes the spectrum $W(x,k)$ and calculates the corresponding mean free path at all energies, $\lambda(x,p)$ (Section \[advanced\_transport\] is devoted to this calculation). Then the Monte Carlo transport module is executed, that simulates particle acceleration in the given structure of the shock with the scattering properties determined by $\lambda$. After that, collecting the information about mass, momentum, and energy fluxes, the model estimates the smoothing of the precursor required for the next iteration. Additionally, it collects the information about particle streaming during the acceleration process \[i.e., the diffusive current of CRs, $j_d(x)$ or the CR pressure, ${P_\mathrm{cr}}(x,p)$\]. Using this information, the code runs the magnetic field amplification module that calculates the turbulence generation by the particle streaming and adjusts the turbulence spectrum for the next iteration, $W(x,k)$. The latter is then used to improve the guess on the particle mean free path, $\lambda(x,p)$, and the next Monte Carlo transport iteration starts. Similarly, this process continues until a self-consistent solution is derived, one that preserves the mass, momentum and energy fluxes, and in which particle acceleration produces the spectrum of accelerated particles that generates precisely the magnetic turbulence spectrum used for simulating the particle acceleration.
### Particle propagation, pitch angle scattering {#subsec-pascatt}
#### Theory
Propagation of particles is performed using the methods developed and presented in [@EJR90]. The bottom line of the reasoning provided in this work is the following procedure. If the particle has a mean free path $\lambda$ and a corresponding collision time $t_c=\lambda/v$, where $v$ is the particle speed, then the scheme allows the particle to travel a finite time, $\Delta t \ll t_c$, in a straight line, and then rotates the particle’s momentum. The momentum is rotated by an angle $\delta \theta$, which is chosen randomly as follows: $$\cos{\delta \theta} = 1 - \mathcal{X}\left(1-\cos{\Delta
\theta_\mathrm{max}}\right).$$ Here $\mathcal{X}$ is a random number with a uniform distribution between $0$ and $1$, and $$\label{deltathetamax}
\Delta \theta_\mathrm{max}= \sqrt{\frac{6 \Delta t}{t_c}}$$ is the maximal scattering angle. The scheme works consistently when this angle is small. After choosing the polar angle of scattering, $\delta \theta$, one must choose the azimuthal direction of scattering, $\delta \phi$. Assuming the scattering is isotropic, $$\delta \phi = 2 \pi \mathcal{Y} - \pi,$$ where $\mathcal{Y}$ is another random number uniformly distributed between $0$ and $1$. To rotate the momentum, let’s define spherical coordinates in the momentum space so that the azimuthal angle, $\theta$, is measured from the positive $p_x$ axis. Given the spherical angle of the original momentum, $\theta$, such that $\cos{\theta} = p_x / p$, we can calculate the spherical angle of the scattered momentum, $\theta'$, from: $$\cos{\theta'} = \cos{\theta}\cos{\delta \theta} +
\sin{\theta}\sin{\delta \theta} \cos{\delta \phi}$$ The spherical angles $\phi$ and $\phi'$ don’t matter in our 1-dimensional, axially-symmetric model.
0.5in
The diagram illustrating the process is shown in Figure \[fig-pas\]. The initial momentum vector ${{\bf p}}$ and the final (scattered) momentum vector ${{\bf p}}'$ are shown with thick arrows, and the dotted lines crossing at the tails of ${{\bf p}}$ and ${{\bf p}}'$ show the maximal scattering cone with the half-opening angle of $\Delta \theta_\mathrm{max}$. The vector ${{\bf p}}'$ is obtained from ${{\bf p}}$ by rotating the latter by a random angle $\delta \theta$ (such that $0 < \delta \theta < \Delta \theta_\mathrm{max}$) about the tail of ${{\bf p}}$, and then by turning it by a random angle $\delta \phi$ (such that $0 < \delta \phi < 2 \pi$) about the axis of ${{\bf p}}$.
Note that the term ‘pitch angle’ in plasma physics means the angle between the magnetic field vector and the particle momentum vector. This term was used in the name of this procedure because initially it was assumed that a uniform magnetic field, ${\bf B}_0$, dominates the magnetization, with small fluctuations of this field providing the scattering. In the case of strong turbulence, however, the uniform pre-existing field will be overwhelmed by the self-generated fluctuations $\Delta B \gg B_0$, so the term ‘pitch angle scattering’ is actually a misnomer. By the pitch angle in this scheme I simply mean the angle between the momentum vector ${{\bf p}}$ and the positive direction of the $x$-axis (the direction of upstream plasma flow).
#### Tests
We illustrate the trajectories of the particles subject to the pitch angle scattering in Figure \[fig-dxvst\]. For about 10 particles injected at some position at $t=0$, the program recorded their deviations from the original position, $\Delta x$, versus time, $t$. It can be seen that the particles frequently change the direction of motion, which results in a stochastic transport. In the plot, the time $t$ is normalized to the collision time, $t_c$, which is defined as the ratio of the mean free path, $\lambda$, to the particle speed, $v$.
0.5in
In order to verify that the properties of this particle transport correspond to diffusion, I plotted in Figure \[fig-dx2vst\] the mean square of deviation of particle coordinates, $\left<\Delta x^2\right>$, as a function of time. The random walk process (i.e., such particle propagation that every step has the length $\lambda$ and is taken in a random direction) is a well-known textbook problem, and the solution predicts that the displacement $\sqrt{ \left< \Delta r^2 \right>} = \sqrt{N} \lambda$, where $N$ is the number of the steps, and coordinate $r^2=x^2 + y^2 + z^2$. Therefore $\left<\Delta x^2\right> = D t$, where $D=v \lambda/3$, and $t=N t_c$. This dependence is shown in Figure \[fig-dx2vst\] with the dashed line labelled “Theory”, while the result of the Monte Carlo pitch-angle scattering simulation, averaged over 1000 particles, is shown with the solid line.
0.5in
One can clearly see that there is a linear dependence of the mean square displacement, $\left<\Delta x^2\right>$, on time, $t$. However, the slope of the solid line is some $20$% greater than in the random walk theory. This discrepancy is due to the definition of the mean free path made in [@EJR90] in the derivation of the pitch angle scattering scheme. This definition is slightly different from the definition of the MFP in the random-walk model, where particles make discrete steps of length $\lambda$ in a completely random direction. However, a $20$% difference in the value of the diffusion coefficient is a small factor compared to the uncertainties in the models of particle transport, and one can conclude that both models (random walk and pitch-angle scattering) describe the process of particle diffusion reasonably well.
It must be explained why the authors of the Monte Carlo transport simulation chose the pitch angle scattering scheme instead of a simpler version of a random walk process with the step size being equal to the particle mean free path. The solution may, in principle, have sharp gradients of flow speed, magnetic turbulence, or particle pressure, in which case the momentum distribution of some particles will be anisotropic. For example, the thermal particles first crossing the subshock, and finding themselves downstream, initially have a strongly anisotropic distribution of momentum. The random walk process assumes isotropy of particles in $p$-space, which may limit the physical veracity of the model, while pitch angle scattering accounts for the anisotropies exactly. In this sense, the Monte Carlo model goes one step beyond the diffusion approximation adopted in the simpler analytic models. This allows us to calculate the particle injection rate in the thermal leakage model, where the downstream thermal particles get injected by returning upstream in the process of their stochastic propagation, while some simpler analytic models resort to introducing an additional free parameter to fix particle injection rate (e.g., [@BGV2005]).
### Motion of the scattering medium {#subsec-motion}
#### Theory
With the diffusive transport of particles developed and tested, one needs to incorporate the advection of the plasma. The paradigm of the Monte Carlo model (as well as of other approximations of the NL DSA problem) is that there is a bulk flow of thermal plasma with respect to the shock, with magnetic fields frozen into it. Therefore, the scattering is elastic and isotropic in the plasma reference frame (elastic, because the scattering represents the action of the magnetic force, which doesn’t perform work on the particle, and isotropic due to the assumption of strong developed turbulence adopted in the model; in some cases, anisotropic scattering is a better approximation). If there is a spatial variation in the speed of the bulk flow, then two subsequent particle scatterings may take place in two different reference frames, which may increase the energy of the particle (resulting eventually in the Fermi-I process).
It is important to properly account for all effects of special relativity in order to model relativistic particle propagation. In order to model particle propagation in the moving plasma along with the diffusive transport, let us assume the following process. Suppose the particle is at the location $x$ with the local plasma flow speed $u(x)$. The code will allow this particle to travel a certain time in the plasma frame, and accordingly change its coordinate in the shock frame. Therefore, one may introduce an effective speed $$v_{x,\;\mathrm{eff}} =
\frac{ v_x + u(x) }{\sqrt{1-\displaystyle\frac{u^2(x)}{c^2}}} .$$ Here $v_x$ is the $x$-component of the particle’s velocity in the plasma frame, and the physical meaning of $v_{x,\;\mathrm{eff}}$ is that, given a time $\Delta t$ in the plasma frame, the particle’s displacement in the shock frame will be $\Delta x = v_{x,\;\mathrm{eff}} \Delta t$. Then the program chooses the time the particle will be allowed to travel in the plasma frame, $\Delta t$, so that the resulting $\Delta \theta_\mathrm{max}$ will be small enough, as given by equation (\[deltathetamax\]). After that, we change the particle’s coordinate in the shock frame by $\Delta x = v_{x,\;\mathrm{eff}} \Delta t$ and proceed with the pitch angle scattering routine.
An important new aspect of this process is that in a model with efficient magnetic field amplification, one expects large gradients of the mean free path as well as of $u(x)$. This means that when $\Delta x$ is large enough for the particle to cross one or more numerical grid planes at which all the physical quantities are defined (see Section \[subsec-calcfp\]), care must be taken to account for the changing properties of the medium. The simulation deals with this in the following manner. I choose a single numerical value of the angle $\Delta \Theta_\mathrm{max}$ for all particles throughout the simulation. Then the code allows each particle to propagate just enough time, so that the ‘accumulated’ maximal scattering angle is exactly $\Delta \Theta_\mathrm{max}$. If a particle is to cross several grid planes in the course of this time, then I define a cumulative maximal scattering angle as $$\Delta \Theta_\mathrm{max, \; cml}^{2} = 6 \sum_{i}{\frac{\Delta t_{i}}{\tau_\mathrm{coll, \; i}}},$$ where the summation index $i$ runs over all the spatial bins that the particle had crossed, each bin with a different value of ${\tau_\mathrm{coll}}$, and $\Delta t_{i}$ is the amount of time that this particle spent in bin $i$. Only after $\Delta \Theta_\mathrm{max, \; cml} = \Delta \Theta_\mathrm{max}$, does the Monte Carlo routine scatter the particle. This makes the results independent of the choice of grid plane locations, as long as the separation between them is small enough.
#### Test
Let us perform a test of the advection superimposed on diffusion in the Monte Carlo code. With a bulk plasma flow of speed $u_0$ set up, I introduce the test particles at $x=0$ with their plasma frame velocity in the positive $x$ direction, and let them propagate. Particles are assumed to move according to the pitch angle scattering scheme described in the previous section; between the scatterings, the motion of the particles is ballistic in the plasma frame, which moves at the speed $u_0$ with respect to the stationary frame. The scatterings are isotropic and elastic in the plasma frame, with the corresponding momenta in the stationary frame Lorentz transformed.
0.5in
In Figure \[fig-adv\], I illustrate the results of the test. I introduced 3 particles with different speeds in the plasma frame: a slow particle with $v=u_0/5$, a moderately fast particle with $v=u_0$, and a fast particle with $v=5u_0$ (here and below, the letter $u$ will denote the speed of the flow, and the letter $v$ will refer to the speed of a particle, measured either in the stationary, or in the plasma reference frame). The solid line represents the motion of the first, the dashed line – of the second, and the dash-dotted line – of the third particle, respectively. The spatial coordinate, $x$, is measured in the units of ${r_\mathrm{g0}}$, the latter being the mean free path of the particle with speed $v=u_0$, and time is measured in units of $t_\mathrm{g0}={r_\mathrm{g0}}/ u_0$. It was assumed that the mean free path is proportional to the speed of the particle in the plasma frame. One can see from the Figure \[fig-adv\] that the slow particle moves almost synchronously with the flow (the solid line is very close to $x=u_0 t$). The faster particle, with $v=u_0$, on the average moves along with the plasma, but sometimes slower, and sometimes faster, because its x-component of velocity in the stationary frame, $v_x+u_0$, varies between $0$ and $2u_0$, depending on the orientation of the particle’s momentum. The fastest particle, $v>u_0$, can move backwards, as the dash-dotted line shows. However, its motion is still affected by the flow, shifting the average location at the advection speed $u_0$.
Because the purpose of the model under development is to model nonlinear shock acceleration, where the flow speed $u(x)$ can vary with distance, smoothly (in the shock precursor) or discontinuously (across the subshock), one must see how the code treats such varying flow speeds. Let us study three cases: a uniform flow speed, a smoothly varying flow speed, and a discontinuity in the flow speed (representing a shock). In a separate test, I will introduce a slow particle ($v=0.3u_0$) at $x=-100 \; {r_\mathrm{g0}}$, where $u(x)=u_0$, and trace it as it propagates in the flow. The code will record the positions of the particle, measured in ${r_\mathrm{g0}}$ (the latter is, again, the mean free path of a particle with $v=u_0$, and the mean free path for any other particle energy is proportional to the particle speed), and the $x$-components of the particle’s velocity in the plasma frame, $v_x$.
0.5in ![$ $ Particle heating in a compressing flow.[]{data-label="fig-compr"}](images/plot_compression.eps "fig:"){height="7in"}
Figure \[fig-compr\] shows the results for these three cases. In the first case (top panel), with constant flow speed, $v_x$ varies with time in the range $-0.3 u_0 < v_x < +0.3u_0$, with the average $\left<v_x\right>=0$, but the dispersion $\left<v_x^2\right>$ remains constant. This case is similar to the situation studied in the previous test. In the second case (middle panel of Figure \[fig-compr\]), where the flow speed linearly drops from $u(x=-100\;{r_\mathrm{g0}})=u_0$ to $u(x=0)=u_0/10$ and then remains constant, we see a different behavior. The average particle motion is still locked with the plasma ($\left<v_x\right>=0$), but the dispersion $\left<v_x^2\right>$ increases as $u(x)$ drops. This means that the particle’s energy in the plasma frame grows. Such energizing of the particles is, in fact, the adiabatic heating of a gas put in a slowly shrinking volume (see Appendix B of [@VBE2008] or Section 1.2 in [@Wentzel74]). In the third case (bottom panel of Figure \[fig-compr\]), where the flow speed is constant at $x<0$, but drops abruptly from $u(x=-0)=u_0$ to $u(x=+0)=u_0/10$, similarly to what it looks like in a shock, the particle is energized significantly at the shock crossing. I, actually, had to introduce a reflecting boundary at $x=0$ that doesn’t allow the particles to cross the shock backwards, from $x>0$ to $x<0$, in order to show a concise plot. Such crossing back becomes possible because the speed of the particle in the plasma frame is greater than the shock speed.
### Calculating particle distribution and its moments {#subsec-calcfp}
To calculate the particle distribution in the simulation, the simulation registers particles crossing certain locations, that we hereafter refer to as ‘grid planes’, because these locations also define the spatial grid, at the nodes of which all the quantities: $u(x)$, $W(x,k)$, etc., are defined. One may think of this as detection of particles by imaginary detectors placed at discrete locations upstream and downstream of the shock. This calculation may seem a bit tricky because each crossing of a detector by a particle contributes not to the density, but to the flux of particles, so in order to extract the particle distribution information, one needs to properly weight the detected information. However, this weighting is a standard procedure for simulations like ours, and below I demonstrate the reasoning leading to it and examples of the scheme at work.
The Monte Carlo simulation does not populate the whole space with particles; instead, it introduces $N_p$ particles upstream and propagates them one by one, until each leaves the system; yet, it is simulating a steady state solution with this process. This means that if one wants to calculate the particle distribution function $f(x,{{\bf p}})$ and its moments (momentum and energy fluxes) at some spatial locations, one must collect the information about the particles in such a way that all the data collected in the course of one iteration (i.e., during the propagation of all the $N_p$ simulation particles) represents the information that would be collected by particle detectors placed in the plasma [*in a unit time*]{} (e.g., in one second).
The simulation only registers the particles’ contribution to $f(x, {{\bf p}})$ when they cross one of the ‘detectors’. Consider an infinite plane detector in a spatially uniform plasma with no bulk motion ($u_0=0$) and an isotropic distribution of particle momenta; assume also that all particles have the same speed $v$. Clearly, in a unit time such a detector will register more particles incident normally onto it than tangentially to its plane. It is easy to understand that the number of detected particles with a certain $v_x$ is proportional to $P(v_x) \propto | v_x |$, where $v_x$ is the x-component of the particle’s velocity in the rest frame of the detector and $P(v_x)$ is the probability density of its detection in a unit time.
When a ‘detector’ in the simulation registers a particle with small $| v_x |$, we must interpret it as that there are many similar particles at this location, but, because of an unfavorable direction of motion, only a few reach this parallel-plane detector in a unit time that one iteration represents.
Quantitatively, if one wants to calculate the number density of particles at the location of the detector, the code must compute the following sum: $$\label{dens_calc}
n(x_i) = \sum_{j} {w_j w_p} = \sum_{j} {\left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}} \right| w_p }$$ where $i$ is the number of the grid plane, and $x_i$ – its coordinate, $n(x_i)$ is the number density of particles at $x_i$, and the summation index $j$ runs over all the events of a particle crossing this detector in the course of an iteration. The weight $w_j$ is the statistical weight of the $j$-th event, and $w_p$ is the statistical weight of the particle participating in the event. The statistical weight of a particle, if $N_p$ particles are introduced upstream, representing a plasma density $n_0$, is simply $w_p = n_0 / N_p$. The statistical weight of the event is expressed by the ratio $| u_0 / v_{x,\;j} |$, where the denominator $v_{x,\;j}$ is the $x$-component of the particle velocity measured in the rest frame of the detector, at the $j$-th event, and $u_0$ acts as the appropriate normalization factor.
If one wants to calculate the particle distribution function, i.e., the number of particles in a unit phase space volume $dxdydzdp_xdp_ydp_z$, then the summation must be restricted to the events corresponding to that phase space volume. In practice, one may be interested in the distribution function $f(x, {{\bf p}})$ such that $$\label{norm_of_fp}
\int{f(x_i, {{\bf p}})\; d^3 p} = \int{f(x_i,{{\bf p}}) p^2 dp d\Omega}= n(x),$$ where $d\Omega$ represents the infinitesimal spherical angle corresponding to the momentum space volume $d^3p=dp_xdp_ydp_z$. In the simulation, given a phase space binned so that $\Delta p_k$ is the width of the $k$-th momentum bin centered at the momentum value $p_k$, and averaging over the angles, one gets $$\label{calculation_of_fp}
\bar{f}(x_i,p_k) = \frac{1}{4\pi}\int{f(x_i, {{\bf p}})\;d\Omega} =
\frac{1}{4\pi p_k^2 \Delta p_k}
\sum_{p_j \in \Delta p_k} \left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x, \; j}}\right| w_p,$$ where $d\Omega$ is the differential of the solid angle in $p$-space, and the index $j$ runs over all particles whose momentum falls into the $k$-th momentum bin. Indeed, with $\bar{f}(x,p)$ defined this way, $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
\int{f(x_i, {{\bf p}})\; d^3 p} &\equiv& \int{f(x_i,{{\bf p}}) p^2 dp d\Omega} = \\
\nonumber
&&=\sum_{k} \bar{f}(x_i,p_k) 4\pi p_k^2 \Delta p_k \\
\nonumber
&&=\sum_{k} \frac{1}{4\pi p_k^2 \Delta p_k} \sum_{p_{j} \in \Delta p_k} {\left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}}\right| w_p }
\cdot 4\pi p_k^2\Delta p_k=\\
\nonumber
&&=\sum_{k} \sum_{p_{j} \in \Delta p_k} {\left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}}\right| w_p }=\\
\label{eq_finddens}
&&= \sum_{j} {\left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}}\right| w_p } = n(x_i),\end{aligned}$$ as expected (in the summation, the index $k$ runs over all the momentum bins defined in the simulation, and in the last summation, $j$ runs over all the events of particle crossing of the detector). In the future, the plots showing $f(x,p)$ actually show $\bar{f}(x,p)$, but I omit the bar representing the angular averaging for simplicity.
Calculating the angle-averaged distribution function may be informative, but for practical purposes one needs the moments of the distribution function (i.e., the mass, momentum and density fluxes) that require the information about the angular dependence. From the above reasoning (namely, Equation \[eq\_finddens\]) one may conclude that the correspondence between the integration over the momentum space and summation over particle detection events is as follows: $$f(x, {{\bf p}}) d^3p =
\sum_{p_j \in \Delta p_k} \left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}} \right| w_p,$$ Therefore, for any function of coordinate and momenta ${\mathcal{M}}(x, {{\bf p}})$, its expectation value may be calculated directly in the simulation as $$\int{ {\mathcal{M}}(x_i, {{\bf p}}) f(x_i, {{\bf p}}) \;d^3p} =
\sum_{j} {\mathcal{M}}(x, {{\bf p}}_j)\left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}} \right| w_p.$$ Namely, for ${\mathcal{M}}(x, {{\bf p}})=1$ one finds the particle density, for ${\mathcal{M}}(x, {{\bf p}}) = m_p v_x$ – the mass flux in the $x$-direction, for ${\mathcal{M}}(x, {{\bf p}}) = p_x v_x$ – the flux of the $x$-component of momentum in the $x$-direction, and for ${\mathcal{M}}(x, {{\bf p}}) = K(p) v_x$ – the energy flux in the $x$-direction ($K(p)$ is the relativistic kinetic energy corresponding to the momentum $p=|{{\bf p}}|$). The expectation value of the function ${\mathcal{M}}(x, {{\bf p}}) = e {{\bf v}}$ is the diffusive current $j_d(x)$, and ${\mathcal{M}}(x, {{\bf p}}) = \frac13 p v$ in the case of isotropic momentum distribution gives the pressure. $$\begin{aligned}
n(x_i) &=& \int{ f(x, {{\bf p}}) \; d^3p} =
\sum_{j} \left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}} \right| w_p, \\
\Phi_\mathrm{M, \, p}(x_i) &=& \int{ m_p v_x f(x, {{\bf p}}) \; d^3p} =
\sum_{j} m_p v_{x,\;j} \left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}} \right| w_p, \\
\Phi_\mathrm{P, \, p}(x_i) &=& \int{ p_x v_x f(x, {{\bf p}}) \; d^3p} =
\sum_{j} p_{x,\;j} v_{x, \; j} \left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}} \right| w_p, \\
\Phi_\mathrm{E, \, p}(x_i) &=& \int{ K v_x f(x, {{\bf p}}) \; d^3p} =
\sum_{j} K_j v_{x, \; j} \left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}} \right| w_p, \\
j_d(x_i) &=& \int{ e v_x f(x, {{\bf p}}) \; d^3p} =
\sum_{j} e v_{x,\;j} \left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}} \right| w_p, \\
{P_\mathrm{th}}(x_i) &=& \int\limits_\mathrm{th}{ \frac13 v p f(x, {{\bf p}}) \; d^3p} =
\sum_{j \in \mathrm{th}} \frac13 v_j p_j \left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}} \right| w_p, \\
{P_\mathrm{cr}}(x_i) &=& \int\limits_\mathrm{cr}{ \frac13 v p f(x, {{\bf p}}) \; d^3p} =
\sum_{j \in \mathrm{cr}} \frac13 v_j p_j \left| \frac{u_0}{v_{x,\;j}} \right| w_p,\end{aligned}$$ etc. In the last two equations, the integration was limited to the thermal or to CR particles only. In this way I define the thermal pressure and the CR pressure. I must remind the reader here that a peculiarity of the approach I adopted is that in order to separate the CR particles from the thermal ones, the code uses their history, and not their energy. By my definition, a thermal particle is one that had been introduced into the simulation upstream with a random thermal energy and that may have crossed the subshock going downstream, but has never crossed it back. Once a particle crosses the subshock (the coordinate $x=0$, to be more precise) in the upstream direction, it by my definition is injected and becomes a CR particle.
Let us note here that, assuming that the particle distribution is isotropic, the fluxes of energy and momentum can be expressed via gas pressure as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{momentumviapressures}
\int p_x v_x f(x,{{\bf p}})d^3p &=&
\rho(x) u^2(x) + P_p(x), \\
\label{energyviapressures}
\int K v_x f(x,{{\bf p}})d^3p &=&
\frac{1}{2} \rho(x) u^3(x) + w_p(x)u(x) \ ,\end{aligned}$$ where $P_p(x)$ is the pressure and $w_p(x)$ is the enthalpy of the particles. These are well known results of the kinetic theory of gases.
### Introducing particles into the simulation {#subsec_particleintro}
#### Theory
In order to start the Monte Carlo simulation of particle transport, we must introduce thermal particles far upstream, or close to the subshock (the latter method is described in Appendix B of [@VBE2008]). This task has two components: generating a particle population with the proper energy distribution, and choosing the appropriate angular distribution for these particles.
We normally assume that the unshocked plasma is thermal and has a certain temperature $T_0$ (a typical cold interstellar plasma has $T_0 \approx 10^4$ K). In order to generate a thermal population, we randomly choose the momentum of every particle introduced into the simulation so that the resulting distribution is Maxwellian: $$\label{eq_maxwellian}
f(p) = n_0\left( \frac{1}{2 \pi m k_B T_0} \right)^{3/2}
\exp{\left({-\frac{p^2}{2 m k_B T_0}}\right)}.$$ In order to accomplish this, consider the function $F(p)$ such that $F(p)\Delta p$ is the fraction of the thermal particles with momenta in the interval $[p-\Delta p/2 ; p+\Delta p/2]$, i.e., $$F(p)=\frac{4\pi p^2f(p)}{n_0} = \frac{4}{\sqrt{\pi}} \left( \frac{1}{2 m k_B T_0} \right)^{3/2}
p^2 \exp{\left({-\frac{p^2}{2 m k_B T_0}}\right)}.$$ By substitution $$y = \frac{p^2}{2 m k_B T_0},$$ using the identity $G(y)dy=F(p)dp$, we find that $y$ has the following distribution function: $$G(y) = \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}}y^{\frac{1}{2}}e^{-y}$$ (here $G(y)\Delta y$ is the fraction of particles with momenta corresponding to the interval $[y-\Delta y/2; y+\Delta y/2]$). The latter is a Gamma distribution with parameter $a = 3/2$. To generate a quantity $y$ with the above distribution, one can use the following recipe: $$\label{maxwinj}
y= \frac12 \mathcal{Z}^2 - \ln \mathcal{X}.$$ Here $\mathcal{X}$ is a random deviate with a uniform distribution in $(0;\;1]$, and $\mathcal{Z}$ is a deviate the the normal (Gaussian) distribution with the mean equal to $0$ and the dispersion equal to $1$. The above method was adopted from [@Devroye86].
#### Test
I tested the implementation of this procedure, and verified the distribution function in the Monte Carlo simulation, and the test results are shown in Figure \[fig-pdftest\].
0.5in
The code introduced $N_p = 10^4$ particles into the simulation, assuming that their temperature is $T_0=10^4$ K, and the density $n_0=0.3$ [cm$^{-3}$]{}. The thick line shows the desired Maxwellian distribution calculated according to Equation (\[eq\_maxwellian\]). The thin line shows the result of the detection of the introduced particles at some grid plane, as described in Section \[subsec-calcfp\], according to Equation (\[calculation\_of\_fp\]). The local deviations of the Monte Carlo result from the theoretical curve are statistical fluctuations, and these decrease for greater number of particles. Otherwise, the match is excellent, demonstrating the correct implementation of the introduction and the detection of particles in my code.
The angular distribution of momenta of the introduced particles is a major issue of concern for a simulation like ours, because it determines the rate of particle injection into the acceleration process. When the simulation introduces particles at the coordinate $x$, it is replacing the dynamics of these particles upstream of $x$ with an analytic description, consequently it must distribute particles in $p$-space at $x$ the way they would be distributed having traveled from far upstream and reaching $x$ [*for the first time*]{}. This is equivalent to calculating a $p$-space distribution of particles incident on a [*fully absorbing boundary*]{} at $x$ after scattering in a non-uniform flow $u(x)$. This is easy to do analytically if all particles have a plasma frame speed $v$ less than the flow speed $u(x)$ (because then all particles crossing position $x$ do it for the first and the last time), and fairly complicated otherwise (see Appendix B). Let us assume $v<u(x)$ in further reasoning, which is justified as long as the local sonic Mach number at the introduction position is large.
The problem is now reduced to the following. We know how to designate an introduced particle’s momentum, $p$. But how do we choose its direction, identified by the angle $\mu$ such that $\cos{\mu}=p_x/p$? As was stated earlier, it is assumed that the angular distribution of momenta of the introduced thermal particles is isotropic in the plasma frame, and there is an overall drift speed $u$ superimposed over this motion in the plasma. Therefore, it may seem natural (but is incorrect) to just choose $p_x$ isotropically in the plasma frame, and then transform them into the shock frame. The correct solution must account for the fact that when these particles cross a grid plane, their flux must be ‘flux-weighted’ as seen in Equation (\[dens\_calc\]), because the number of particles arriving at $x$ in a unit time is proportional to the cosine of the angle that their shock frame velocity ${{\bf v}}_\mathrm{sf}$ makes with the $x$-axis. This can be done by assuming a probability density of of $v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}$ as $$F(v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}) = \left\{
\begin{array}{l r}
A v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}, & \quad v_\mathrm{min} < v_\mathrm{sf,\:x} < v_\mathrm{max}, \\
0, & \mathrm{otherwise}. \end{array} \right.$$ Here $v_\mathrm{min} = u - v$, $v_\mathrm{max} = u + v$, and $v$ is the particle speed in the plasma frame chosen using a random number generator according to (\[maxwinj\]). The constant $A$ can be found from the normalization condition $$\int\limits_{v_\mathrm{min}}^{v_\mathrm{max}} F(v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}) dv_\mathrm{sf,\:x} = 1$$ as $$A = \frac{2}{v_\mathrm{max}^2 - v_\mathrm{min}^2},$$ so $$\label{fastpushslowdistr}
F(v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}) = \left\{
\begin{array}{l r}
\displaystyle\frac{2 v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}}{v_\mathrm{max}^2 - v_\mathrm{min}^2}, & \quad v_\mathrm{min} < v_\mathrm{sf,\:x} < v_\mathrm{max}, \\
0, & \mathrm{otherwise} \end{array} \right.$$ In order to generate such a particle distribution, we use a random number $\mathcal{Z}$ uniformly distributed between $0$ and $1$ and calculate $v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}$ as a function of $\mathcal{Z}$. The identity $$F(v'_x) dv'_x = H(z') dz',$$ and substitution of the uniform distribution $$H(z') = \left\{ \begin{array}{l r} 1, & \quad 0 < z' < 1, \\ 0, & \quad \mathrm{otherwise} \end{array} \right.$$ lead to: $$\label{vxvsx}
\int\limits_0^{v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}} F(v'_x) dv'_x = \int\limits_{0}^{z} dz' = z,$$ which is where we can derive $v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}(\mathcal{Z})$ from. Substituting (\[fastpushslowdistr\]) into (\[vxvsx\]), we get $$\label{slowanginj}
v_\mathrm{sf,\:x} = \sqrt{(v_\mathrm{max}^2 - v_\mathrm{min}^2)\mathcal{Z} + v_\mathrm{min}^2}.$$
Note that, if we did not account for the flux weighting and just prepared an isotropic distribution of particles in the plasma frame and then transformed it into the shock frame, then instead of the prescription (\[slowanginj\]) we would use $$\label{wrongslowinj}
v_\mathrm{sf,\:x} = (2\mathcal{Z}-1)v + u,$$ which is incorrect, as I show below.
If properly implemented, the introduced particle population as detected by the grid plane detectors should have a uniform distribution of $\mu$ in the plasma frame, $g(\mu)=1/2$. This corresponds to isotropy of $f({{\bf p}})$. Let us perform two tests to confirm that the procedure (\[slowanginj\]) gives the correct particle distribution isotropic in the plasma frame.
In the first test, let us introduce $N_p=10^5$ particles into the simulation with a supersonic flow (sonic Mach number $M_s =2.5$) using the incorrect recipe (\[wrongslowinj\]). At the grid plane very close to the introduction position, the model will measure the angular distribution of particles, $g(\mu)$. Several (approximately 20) diffusion lengths downstream of the introduction position, it will measure $g(\mu)$ again. By the time of the second measurement, the particles must have scattered enough to assume an isotropic velocity distribution in the plasma frame corresponding to $g(\mu)=1/2$. The results of the test are shown in Figure \[fig-angtest\].
0.5in
0.5in
As expected, the thick line in Figure \[fig-angtest\] is $g(\mu)=1/2$, meaning that after many scatterings, particles isotropize their velocities, and also confirming that I implemented correctly the calculation of particle distribution and the pitch angle scattering routine. At the same time, the tilt of the thin line tells us that the introduced particle distribution was not isotropic in the plasma frame, thus the recipe (\[wrongslowinj\]) is incorrect.
In the second test, $N_p=10^5$ particles will be introduced, now using the recipe (\[slowanginj\]) to choose their angular distribution. Let the model measure the angular distribution immediately, and some distance downstream of the introduction position. The results are shown in Figure \[fig-angtest2\]. The two angular distributions match exactly, which means that the introduced angular distribution was isotropic, and remained such after many scatterings.
These tests conclude the verification of particle propagation methods of Monte Carlo, and now we can get to testing the particle acceleration properties.
### Test particle case of DSA {#tp_dsa_test}
A crucial test that the nonlinear simulation of DSA must pass is the production of a power-law spectrum of accelerated particle in the test particle case. Similarly to the solution shown in Section \[sec\_dsa\_tp\], a shock characterized by a sharp transition at $x=0$, in which the flow speed jumps from the $u_0$ to $u_2$, with a compression ratio $r=u_0/u_2 > 1$ and particle injection taking place at the shock via thermal leakage, must produce a power-law spectrum of accelerated particles with the power law index $s$ given by Equation (\[pl\_index\_tp\]). Verifying the power law index is a strong argument for the correctness of the model.
We ran 3 simulations with a discontinuous flow speed. In each simulation, $u_0 = 10^4$ [km s$^{-1}$]{}, $T_0=10^4$ K, $n_0=0.3$ [cm$^{-3}$]{}, and to define the mean free path, the model assumed Bohm scattering in a magnetic field $B_0=3\cdot 10^{-6}$ G (see Section \[sec\_bohm\]). The difference between the 3 models was the compression ratio, $r$. I chose $r=7.0$ for the first model, $r=4.0$ for the second and $r=3.0$ for the third. Note that I did not require consistency of these compression ratios with the laws of hydrodynamics, and was only interested in particle acceleration and its properties. Namely, according to Equation (\[pl\_index\_tp\]), one expects to get power-law distributions of accelerated particles downstream with the indices $s=3.5$, $s=4.0$ and $s=4.5$, for the first, second and the third model, respectively. In these runs I took advantage of the procedure of particle introduction developed in Section \[subsec\_particleintro\] and introduced particles close to the shock instead of far upstream. This allowed us to speed up the calculation significantly, and thus I put the free escape boundary rather far upstream, at ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}=-10^6\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}$.
0.5in
The results of the test – the particle distributions measured in the shock rest frame – are shown in Figure \[fig-tptest\]. The solid lines are the particle distributions in the shock frame measured in the downstream region. The $x$-axis shows proton momentum in units of $m_p c$, and the $y$-axis – the distribution function $f(p)$ multiplied by $p^4$ for convenience. This multiplication factor makes the $r=4.0$ case with the corresponding $s=4.0$ appear as a horizontal line, which is a desirable feature of this plot. In the future, all particle distribution functions shown will have this multiplication factor. The thin solid line shows the detected distribution function for $r=7.0$, the medium thickness solid line – for $r=4.0$ and the thick solid line – for $r=3.0$ case. The dashed lines are added for a comparison. They have the slopes predicted by Equation (\[pl\_index\_tp\]), and for the correct result, the dashed lines must be parallel to the high-energy parts of the distribution functions, which is certainly the case in the presented results.
I would also like to illustrate the physical process that leads to particle acceleration in these tests. In a separate simulation similar to the $r=7.0$ case, but with a free escape boundary close to the shock, at ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}=-50\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}$, the code traced several particles, and I show their motion in the phase space in Figure \[fig-dsamech\]
0.5in ![$ $ Particle trajectories in DSA.[]{data-label="fig-dsamech"}](images/plot_dsa_mechanism.eps "fig:"){height="7in"}
The top panel of Figure \[fig-dsamech\] shows the shocked flow speed. Upstream, at $x<0$, the flow is uniform and fast, $u_0=10^4$ [km s$^{-1}$]{}, and at the shock located at $x=0$, the flow speed drops down to $u_2 = u_0/r$. This flow speed is measured in the system where the shock is stationary, so the flow of matter is directed from the left end to the right end of the plot, and the shock is directed to the left.
The second panel shows a particle introduced far upstream, that crossed the shock, got heated, but never returned upstream and escaped trapped in the downstream flow (the particle’s motion is from the left to the right end of the plot). This is what happens to all particles in collisional shocks that are usually observed on Earth, and no particle acceleration occurs.
The third panel shows a particle initially introduced far upstream as a thermal particle, but its random motion in the stochastic magnetic fields, induced by the pitch angle scattering, lead the particle back upstream, and it crossed the shock from the $x>0$ region into the $x<0$ region. In several such subsequent crossings, the particle gained energy due to the flow speed difference across $x=0$ (the trajectory moved up). Eventually this particle’s energy became so large that it was able to protrude quite far upstream, to $x\approx -10\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}$, but eventually it was advected downstream with the flow.
The fourth (bottom) panel in Figure \[fig-dsamech\] shows the phase space trajectory of a ‘lucky’ particle that not only got injected (crossed the shock against the flow), but gained enough energy to find itself very far upstream, to the left of the free escape boundary located at $x=-50\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}$. There such particles were assumed to escape from the system in the upstream direction – this is how the finite size of the accelerator is modeled in the Monte Carlo simulation. The energy of this particle at the moment of escape was close to the maximum achievable particle energy in this shock. The particle’s speed greatly exceeded the shock speed at this moment, with the particle actually being mildly relativistic $p\approx 0.6 \; m_p c$. In a model representing a real SNR shock, the free escape boundary would have been located much farther upstream, and particles would be able to make many more crossings before escaping upstream, and the maximum particle momenta could be ultrarelativistic, $p \approx 10^6 \; m_p c$.
### Shock compression ratio in nonlinear DSA {#sec-rtot}
#### Theory
In a standard steady state hydrodynamic shock, the relationship between the pre-shock macroscopic quantities: $u_0$, $n_0$, $T_0$ and their post-shock values: $u_2$, $n_2$, $T_2$ is determined by the sonic Mach number of the shock, and can be derived from the Rankine-Hugoniot equations: $$\begin{aligned}
\rho_2 u_2 &=& \rho_0 u_u, \\
\rho_2 u_2^2 + P_2 &=& \rho_0 u_0^2 + P_0, \\
\frac12 \rho_2 u_2^3 + w_2 u_2 &=& \frac12 \rho_0 u_0^3 + w_0 u_0,\end{aligned}$$ which express the conservation of mass, momentum and energy fluxes, respectively. Here $P$ is the gas pressure, and $w$ – its enthalpy, $w=\epsilon + P$, and the internal energy $\epsilon$ of the gas is proportional to the pressure $P$. For an adiabatic gas with the ratio of specific heats $\gamma$, one can write $w = \gamma P/(\gamma-1)$, and the upstream gas pressure $P_0$ can be related to the sonic Mach number $M_s$ as $M_s^2 = (u_0 / c_s)^2 = \rho_0 u_0^2 / (\gamma P_0)$. This leads to a solution of the Rankine-Hugoniot equations, relating the pre-shock and the post-shock flow speed and temperature. That solution is called the Hugoniot adiabat: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{hugoniot_u}
\frac{u_0}{u_2} &=& \frac{\gamma + 1}{\gamma + 2 / M_s^2 - 1}, \\
\label{hugoniot_T}
\frac{T_2}{T_0} &=&
\frac{\left( 2 \gamma M_s^2 - (\gamma-1)\right)
\left( 2 / M_s^2 + (\gamma-1)\right)}
{(\gamma + 1)^2},\end{aligned}$$ where $u_0 / u_2 = \rho_2 / \rho_0 \equiv {r_\mathrm{tot}}$ is the compression ratio[^9].
In a nonlinear shock with magnetic field amplification, the situation is complicated by the contributions of cosmic ray pressure and magnetic turbulence pressure, and by particle escape far upstream. The procedure of the search of the self-consistent compression ratio, developed in [@Ellison85], is based on the requirement that in a steady-state system, mass, momentum and energy fluxes must be constant in space. I generalized this procedure for the problem of magnetic field amplification by including the contributions of magnetic turbulence to the conservation relations, and developed an iterative procedure for an automated search of the self-consistent ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$. Consider the conservation relations $$\begin{aligned}
\label{fluxmass}
\rho(x) u(x) &=& \rho_0 u_0\\
\label{fluxmomentum}
{\Phi_P}(x) &=& {\Phi_\mathrm{P0}},\\
\label{fluxenergy}
{\Phi_E}(x) + {Q_\mathrm{esc}}(x) &=& {\Phi_\mathrm{E0}}.\end{aligned}$$ Here $\rho$ and $u$ are the mass density and the flow speed, ${\Phi_P}(x)$ is the flux of the $x$-component of momentum in the $x$-direction including the contributions from particles and turbulence, and ${\Phi_\mathrm{P0}}$ is the far upstream value of momentum flux, i.e., $${\Phi_\mathrm{P0}}=
\rho_0 u_0^2 + {P_\mathrm{th0}}+ {P_\mathrm{w0}}\ .$$ The quantity ${\Phi_P}$ is defined as $$\label{mfasmoment}
{\Phi_P}(x) = \int p_x v_x f(x, {{\bf p}}) d^3p + P_w(x),$$ where $p_x$ and $v_x$ are the $x$-components of momentum and velocity of particles, and $f(x,{{\bf p}})$ is their distribution function, all measured in the shock frame. The quantity ${\Phi_E}(x)$ is the energy flux of particles and turbulence in the $x$-direction, ${Q_\mathrm{esc}}$ is the energy flux of escaping particles at the FEB,[^10] and the far upstream value of the energy flux is $${\Phi_\mathrm{E0}}= \frac{1}{2} \rho_0 u_0^3 +
\frac{\gamma}{\gamma-1}{P_\mathrm{th0}}u_0 + {F_\mathrm{w0}}.$$ The quantity ${\Phi_E}(x)$ is defined as $$\label{efasmoment}
{\Phi_E}(x) = \int K v_x f(x,{{\bf p}}) d^3 p + F_w(x),$$ $K$ being the kinetic energy of a particle with momentum $p$ measured in the shock frame. $P_w$ and $F_w$ are the momentum and energy fluxes of the turbulence defined in Section \[turb\_fluxes\].
Writing equations (\[fluxmass\]), (\[fluxmomentum\]) and (\[fluxenergy\]) for a point downstream of the shock, sufficiently far from it that the distribution of particle momenta is isotropic, and the approximations (\[momentumviapressures\]) and (\[energyviapressures\]) are valid, and denoting the corresponding quantities by index ‘2’, we get the equivalent of the Rankine-Hugoniot relations, that accounts for particle acceleration and escape, and for the presence of magnetic turbulence: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{cons1}
\rho_2 u_2 &=& \rho_0 u_0, \\
\label{cons2}
\rho_2 u_2^2 + {P_\mathrm{p2}}+ {P_\mathrm{w2}}&=& \rho_0 u_0^2 + {P_\mathrm{p0}}+ {P_\mathrm{w0}}\equiv{\Phi_\mathrm{P0}}, \\
\label{cons3}
\frac12 \rho_2 u_2^3 + {w_\mathrm{p2}}u_2 + {F_\mathrm{w2}}+ {Q_\mathrm{esc}}&=&
\frac12 \rho_0 u_0^3 + {w_\mathrm{p0}}u_0 + {F_\mathrm{w0}}\equiv{\Phi_\mathrm{E0}}.\end{aligned}$$ The particle gas enthalpy $w_p$ is $w_p=\epsilon_p + P_p$, and the internal energy $\epsilon_p$ of gas is proportional to the pressure $P_p$. Introducing the quantity ${\bar{\gamma}}$ so that $\epsilon_p = P_p/({\bar{\gamma}}-1)$, one can write $$\label{fppp}
w_p u=\frac{{\bar{\gamma}}}{{\bar{\gamma}}-1}P_p u$$ The value of ${\bar{\gamma}}$ is averaged over the whole particle spectrum, and it ranges between $5/3$ for a nonrelativistic and $4/3$ for an ultra-relativistic gas. The local value of ${\bar{\gamma}}$ can be easily calculated in our code from the particle distribution, along with $P_p$ and $\epsilon_p$, as ${\bar{\gamma}}=1 + P_p / \epsilon_p$. Similarly, one can define ${\bar{\delta}}=F_w/(u P_w)$ and calculate a local value of ${\bar{\delta}}$ anywhere in the code in order to express $$\label{fwpw}
F_w={\bar{\delta}}\cdot P_w u \ .$$ The value of ${\bar{\delta}}$ depends on the nature of the turbulence. For instance, in [Alfvén]{}ic turbulence, one expects ${\bar{\delta}}\approx 3$, \[see Equation (\[fwdef\])\].
Substituting (\[fppp\]) and (\[fwpw\]) into the above equations and introducing ${r_\mathrm{tot}}=u_0 / u_2$, we can eliminate $\rho_2$ using (\[cons1\]) and ${P_\mathrm{p2}}$ using (\[cons2\]), which allows us to express from (\[cons3\]) the quantity ${q_\mathrm{esc}}\equiv {Q_\mathrm{esc}}/
{\Phi_\mathrm{E0}}$ as $$\label{qescrtot}
{q_\mathrm{esc}}= 1 + \frac{A/{r_\mathrm{tot}}^2 - B/{r_\mathrm{tot}}}{C},$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
A&=& \frac{{\bar{\gamma}}_2 + 1}{{\bar{\gamma}}_2 - 1} ,\\
B&=& \frac{2 {\bar{\gamma}}_2}{{\bar{\gamma}}_2 - 1}
\left( 1 + \frac{{P_\mathrm{p0}}+ {P_\mathrm{w0}}- {P_\mathrm{w2}}}{\rho_0 u_0^2}\right) +
\frac{2 {\bar{\delta}}_2 {P_\mathrm{w2}}}{ \rho_0 u_0^2 },\\
C&=& 1 + \frac{2 {\bar{\gamma}}_0}{{\bar{\gamma}}_0 - 1}\frac{{P_\mathrm{p0}}}{\rho_0 u_0^2} +
\frac{2 {\bar{\delta}}_0 {P_\mathrm{w0}}}{\rho_0 u_0^2}.\end{aligned}$$ Note that $\rho_0 u_0^2 / {P_\mathrm{p0}}= {\bar{\gamma}}_0 M_s^2$, where ${\bar{\gamma}}_0=\gamma=5/3$ due to the absence of CRs far upstream. The pressure of stochastic magnetic fields ${P_\mathrm{w0}}$ can be found from the spectrum of seed turbulence far upstream (see Section \[mfa\_in\_mc\]).
The quantity ${q_\mathrm{esc}}$ is readily available in the simulation after the end of any iteration. Comparing it to the value predicted by (\[qescrtot\]), one may evaluate the self-consistency of the solution and make the correction to ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$, if necessary, for further iterations. For making these corrections it is helpful to use in the simulation the inverse of (\[qescrtot\]), the physically relevant branch of which is $$\label{rtotqesc}
{r_\mathrm{tot}}= \frac{2 A}{B - \sqrt{B^2 - 4 A C (1-{q_\mathrm{esc}})}}.$$
It is important to emphasize here that an iterative procedure is required to find the compression ratio ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ of a non-linearly modified shock, because quantities ${q_\mathrm{esc}}$, ${P_\mathrm{w2}}$ and ${\bar{\gamma}}_2$ depend on ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$, so (\[rtotqesc\]) only provides a practical way to perform the iterations. The code employs the following procedure: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{iteration_rtot}
{r_\mathrm{tot}}'= (1-\zeta) {r_\mathrm{tot}}+ \zeta \frac{2 A}{B - \sqrt{B^2 - 4 A C (1-{q_\mathrm{esc}})}},\end{aligned}$$ where $\zeta$ is a small number (typically $\zeta = 0.01 \dots 0.1$). Here ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ is the compression ratio assumed for the last iteration, and ${r_\mathrm{tot}}'$ – the compression ratio chosen for the following iteration. The weighting using the parameter $\zeta$ is chosen so that, when the deviation of the nonlinear structure of the shock from the self-consistent solution is large, this iterative procedure would not overcompensate the discrepancy, which may lead to the breakdown of the model (for example, ${r_\mathrm{tot}}<1$ is unphysical, and ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ too high may stall the particle transport procedure).
Another complication that may arise with the procedure described by (\[iteration\_rtot\]) is that instead of converging to a solution that satisfies the conservation relations (\[cons1\]), (\[cons2\]) and (\[cons3\]), the procedure may find an attracting cycle around the self-consistent value of ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$. For example, ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ may be too low in one iteration, underestimating particle acceleration efficiency, which leads to a shock with a high ${r_\mathrm{tot}}'$ predicted by (\[iteration\_rtot\]). The latter, in turn, overestimates particle acceleration, leading to a low compensatory ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ prediction again. These cycles may be merely a mathematical consequence of our numerical model of particle accelerating shocks. On the other hand, it is conceivable that a real shock, instead of evolving into a steady-state system, may behave periodically or even chaotically, turning particle acceleration on and off. However, these effects are beyond the scope of the present research, because we look for the steady-state structure of collisionless shocks. The simulation avoids the attractors other than the self-consistent solution by randomizing the value of $\zeta$, so that it varies between a finite value and $0$ in every iteration. This way, any attracting cycle that the system (\[iteration\_rtot\]) may have with a constant value of $\zeta$ will eventually be broken, but if ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ is at its self-consistent value (${r_\mathrm{tot}}'\approx{r_\mathrm{tot}}$), the randomization of $\zeta$ will not take the solution away from this point. The latter is expected as long as statistical fluctuations of quantities $A$, $B$, $C$ and ${q_\mathrm{esc}}$ keep ${r_\mathrm{tot}}'$ in the attracting domain. This only requires that a high enough number of particles is used in the Monte Carlo routine.
#### Test of the implementation
We test the procedure of the iterative estimation of the compression ratio (\[iteration\_rtot\]) by confirming that it reproduces the solid predictions of the Hugoniot adiabat (\[hugoniot\_u\]) and (\[hugoniot\_T\]). In 10 runs described below, the shocks propagate in a gas with density $n_0=0.3$ [cm$^{-3}$]{}, temperature $T_0 = 7.3\cdot 10^3$ K (corresponding to a sound speed $c_s = 10$ [km s$^{-1}$]{}), and magnetic field $B_0 = 10^{-9}$ G determining the Bohm diffusion (this magnetic field is too small to influence the momentum and energy balance, therefore the Hugoniot adiabat should apply). I performed 9 runs, in which the flow speed, $u_0$, varied from $5$ [km s$^{-1}$]{} to $1000$ [km s$^{-1}$]{}, corresponding to the sonic Mach number, $M_s$, varying from $0.5$ to $100$. In these simulations, I artificially eliminated particle acceleration by assuming that the subshock is fully reflective for particles trying to cross it from the downstream into the upstream region. Additionally, I ran simulation number 10, for which the subshock is assumed fully transparent, and particle acceleration occurs (limited by a free escape boundary at $x=-80\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}$). We start the simulations off by assuming a flow with the speed $u_0$, which at the point $x=0$ abruptly slows down by $0.1\%$ to $u_2 = u_0/1.001$. This tiny flow speed jump heats the particles a little, just enough to make the procedure (\[iteration\_rtot\]) start converging to a self-consistent ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$. Setting the parameter $\zeta=0.3$ and randomizing it between $0$ and $0.3$, in $30$ iterations the simulation obtains the self-consistent value of ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$. I averaged the ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ prediction over the last $10$ iterations out of $30$, and showed the results in Table \[search\_rtot\]. Additionally, the simulation measured the downstream gas temperature, $T_2$, by detecting thermal particle pressure ${P_\mathrm{th2}}$ and relating it to the temperature by the ideal gas law.
[lccccccc]{} Model & $u_0$, km/s & $M_s$ & Accel. & $\left({r_\mathrm{tot}}\right)_\mathrm{HA}$ & $\left({r_\mathrm{tot}}\right)_\mathrm{MC}$ & $\left(T_2/T_0\right)_\mathrm{HA}$ & $\left(T_2/T_0\right)_\mathrm{MC}$ – MC\
1 & 5 & 0.5 & no & 1.0\* & 1.022$\pm$ 0.003& 1.0\* & 0.99 $\pm$ 0.08\
2 & 10 & 1.0 & no & 1.0 & 1.05 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.0 & 1.02 $\pm$ 0.05\
3 & 12 & 1.2 & no & 1.30 & 1.31 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.19 & 1.19 $\pm$ 0.06\
4 & 15 & 1.5 & no & 1.71 & 1.73 $\pm$ 0.01 & 1.49 & 1.48 $\pm$ 0.06\
5 & 20 & 2.0 & no & 2.29 & 2.29 $\pm$ 0.01 & 2.08 & 2.0 $\pm$ 0.1\
6 & 30 & 3.0 & no & 3.00 & 2.99 $\pm$ 0.01 & 3.67 & 3.7 $\pm$ 0.1\
7 & 50 & 5.0 & no & 3.57 & 3.58 $\pm$ 0.02 & 8.68 & 8.4 $\pm$ 0.3\
8 & 100 & 10 & no & 3.88 & 3.90 $\pm$ 0.01 & 32.1 & 31 $\pm$ 1\
9 & 300 & 30 & no & 3.99 & 4.00 $\pm$ 0.01 & 282 & 290 $\pm$ 10\
10 & 300 & 30 & yes & 3.99\*\*& 3.11 $\pm$ 0.09 & 282\*\*& 230 $\pm$ 10\
-0.2in
Column ‘Model’ in Table \[search\_rtot\] shows the number of the model, $u_0$ is the upstream flow speed, $M_s$ – the corresponding Mach number, ‘Accel.’ shows whether the Fermi-I acceleration was allowed, as described above. The columns ‘$\left({r_\mathrm{tot}}\right)_\mathrm{HA}$’ and ‘$\left(T_2/T_0\right)_\mathrm{HA}$’ are the predictions of the Hugoniot adiabat (\[hugoniot\_u\]) and (\[hugoniot\_T\]) corresponding to the Mach number $M_s$ and the adiabatic index of a non-relativistic ideal gas $\gamma=5/3$. The columns ‘$\left({r_\mathrm{tot}}\right)_\mathrm{MC}$’ and ‘$\left(T_2/T_0\right)_\mathrm{MC}$’ show the result of the simulation, i.e., the average of the last $10$ of the $30$ iterations, along with the $1 \sigma$ standard deviation. For $M_s=0.5$, the Hugoniot adiabat doesn’t apply, because the flow is subsonic, and no shock should form, corresponding to ${r_\mathrm{tot}}= 1$ and $T_2 = T_1$ (values marked with the asterisk ‘\*’).
It is clear that, within statistical errors, the simulation n Models 1-9 reproduced the Hugoniot adiabat results for nonrelativistic hydrodynamic shocks. Note that the physics that the simulation is based on at this point involves only the isotropic particle scattering, the Lorentz transformations between the reference frame of the flow and that of the shock, and the requirement that the calculated momentum, energy and mass fluxes be conserved.
0.5in
Figure \[fig-rtot\_iter\] illustrates how the prediction of the self-consistent compression ratio for Model 9 starts off with a trivial initial guess of ${r_\mathrm{tot}}=1.001$, rises up to the value predicted by the Hugoniot adiabat in 15 iterations, and stays there.
0.5in ![$ $ Momentum and energy conservation illustration.[]{data-label="fig-sharpshock_pe"}](images/plot_flux_cons_test1.eps "fig:"){height="7.00in"}
Figure \[fig-sharpshock\_pe\] confirms the conservation of momentum and energy across the shock in Model 9. The top panel shows the flow speed with the compression ratio ${r_\mathrm{tot}}=4.0$, the middle panel shows the momentum flux measured in the units of the upstream flux, and the bottom panel shows the energy flux. These fluxes remain constant throughout the shock for Model 9 (the dashed thick line).
Now let’s analyze the results for Model 10, which is the same as Model 9, but with the shock transparent to the particles, so that the process of diffusive shock acceleration can occur. The Hugoniot adiabate is not applicable in this case, and the corresponding values in Table \[search\_rtot\] are marked with a double asterisk ‘\*\*’. Indeed, the values of the compression ratio and the downstream temperature determined by the simulation and shown in Table \[search\_rtot\] are ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\approx 3.09$, and $T_2/T_0 \approx 230$. These values are is lower than the prediction of the Hugoniot adiabat for a shock with the sonic Mach number $M_s=30$. In Figure \[fig-rtot\_iter\], the thick solid line demonstrates that the iterative procedure given by Equation (\[iteration\_rtot\]) has converged, but the fluxes shown with the solid lines in Figure \[fig-sharpshock\_pe\] are not constant, meaning that the derived solution is not physical. This is the effect of particle acceleration studied by Ellison and co-workers using the Monte Carlo model, and the commonly accepted solution is that a shock precursor must form, i.e., the upstream flow speed $u(x<0)$ must decrease towards the shock. The procedure that models it is demonstrated in Section \[subsec\_smoothing\].
### Nonlinear structure of the shock precursor {#subsec_smoothing}
#### Theory
In the test-particle limit, the aftermath of particle acceleration by a shock with the compression ratio $r$ is the power law spectrum of accelerated particles every point in space, $f(x,p)\propto p^{-s}$. The power law index of the spectrum for a strong shock with $r=4.0$ is $s=4.0$, which has the unphysical property that, if it were to stretch from $p=0$ to $p=\infty$, the pressure (and the internal energy) of the particles with such a spectrum, $P \propto \int p f(p) p^2 \;dp \propto \int p^{-1}\;dp$, would logarithmically diverge at the high momentum end. In reality, of course, the spectrum is limited by the maximum momentum determined by the size of the shock or the acceleration time. However, the logarithmic divergence of pressure at high energies means that there may be a large amount of energy in the highest momentum particles. Of course, the actual amount of energy is determined by the rate of particle injection.
Initially, the shock in the simulation doesn’t have a [self-consistent]{}structure because it starts with an unmodified shock and ${\Phi_P}(x)$ is overestimated at all locations where accelerated particles are present (see, e.g., the plots for Model 10 in Figure \[fig-sharpshock\_pe\]). Therefore, it must choose $u(x)$ to reduce the mismatch between the local momentum flux and the far upstream value of it ${\Phi_\mathrm{P0}}$ for $x<0$, as described by Equation (\[fluxmomentum\]). It can be done by calculating $$\begin{aligned}
\label{iteration_ux}
u'(x)=u(x) + \zeta \cdot \frac{{\Phi_P}(x) - {\Phi_\mathrm{P0}}}{\rho_0 u_0},\end{aligned}$$ where $u'(x)$ is the predicted flow speed for the next iteration, and $\zeta$ is a small positive number (typically around 0.1), characterizing the pace of the iterative procedure. The value of the parameter $\zeta$ is randomly chosen between $0$ and a finite value for reasons similar to those described in Section \[sec-rtot\]. If magnetic field amplification is invoked, then at this point the simulation also refines its estimate for the particle diffusion coefficient (see Section \[advanced\_transport\]).
The predicted $u(x)$ and $D(x,p)$ are then used in a new iteration where particles are injected and propagated. The calculated CR pressure, momentum flux, etc. are then used to refine the guesses for $u(x)$ and $D(x,p)$ for the next iteration, along with the guess for the compression ration ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$. This procedure is continued until all quantities converge.
#### Test of implementation
In order to test the implementation and the effects of the precursor smoothing, I complemented Model 10 with the procedure (\[iteration\_ux\]). I had to reduce the maximum value of $\zeta$ from $0.3$ to $0.1$ and make many more iterations in order to restrict the self-consistent compression ratio ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$. As Figure \[fig-rtot\_iter\_smoothing\] shows, the iterative procedure converged to a value ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\approx 11$, much higher than the Hugoniot adiabat predicted[^11].
0.5in
In Figure \[fig-smoothshock\_pe\], I show the spatial structure of the smoothed shock. In the top panel, a reduction of the flow speed from $u_0$ in the upstream region, $x<0$, is apparent. Let us refer to the smoothed region as a shock precursor. A subshock at $x=0$ has a compression ratio, ${r_\mathrm{sub}}= u(x=-0)/u(x=+0) \approx 2.5$. Momentum flux shown in the second panel is conserved within a few percent, and its deviation from conservation is statistical (the shown plots are an average of 14 iterations at the end of the 500 iterations leading to a consistent solution). The energy flux (third panel from top) drops at the upstream free escape boundary, $x=-80\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}$, by 60%, which is explained by particle escape. Downstream of the free escape boundary, the energy flux is almost constant (within statistical deviations). The thin dashed line in this panel shows the self-consistent value of energy flux accounting for particle escape, as determined by equation (\[qescrtot\]); as one can see, the actual value of ${\Phi_E}$ is in excellent agreement with this quantity. The bottom panel shows the constituents of the momentum flux ${\Phi_P}$, the dynamic pressure $\rho u^2$, the thermal particle pressure ${P_\mathrm{th}}$ and the cosmic ray pressure ${P_\mathrm{cr}}$. One can easily see that the shock is dominated by the accelerated particles in this case.
0.5in ![$ $ Precursor smoothing for momentum and energy conservation.[]{data-label="fig-smoothshock_pe"}](images/plot_flux_cons_test2.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
### Summary
I would like to conclude this lengthy section with a summary. The simulation of nonlinear shock acceleration presented here features a Monte Carlo code of particle transport and an iterative procedure for deriving a self-consistent shock structure.
The tests I presented here confirm that:
- [Particle propagation simulated by the Monte Carlo method is diffusive, and that it reproduces qualitatively and quantitatively the expected behavior of such particle transport;]{}
- [The simulation reproduces the well-known results for hydrodynamic shocks (i.e., the Hugoniot adiabat), if particle acceleration is artificially blocked;]{}
- [Accelerated particle spectra predicted by the simulation in the test-particle regime agree with the solid predictions of analytic models of test-particle acceleration;]{}
- [When the feedback of accelerated particles in the nonlinear regime is accounted for, the simulation obtains a stable solution that conforms with mass, momentum and energy conservation laws.]{}
The methods of the Monte Carlo simulation of particle transport and the idea of iterative derivation of nonlinear shock structure presented here are not original to this dissertation, they were developed by Ellison and co-workers. I will not elaborate any more on the subject of nonlinear shock acceleration and refer the reader to the literature for more information (e.g., [@JE91] and [@MD2001]).
The original part of the model – magnetic field amplification and self-consistent particle transport – will be presented in the rest of this Chapter. The reason I presented and tested the Monte Carlo part of the model in such detail is that the actual computer code used in the research was written by the author of this dissertation and had to be tested to confirm that it reproduces the well known, previously established results. Besides that, some details of the currently employed methods did not appear in our publications, and I would like to make a record of these details here.
Magnetic Field Amplification {#mfa_in_mc}
----------------------------
In this section I will describe two theoretical models of magnetic turbulence amplification by streaming particles available in the modern scientific literature. Then I will proceed with a generalization of these models for the problem of nonlinear DSA, and present the analytic description of magnetic field amplification adopted for the model, and its numerical solution. I will conclude by describing the feedback of the amplified magnetic turbulence on the plasma flow.
The physical conditions in which the instabilities take place are representative of the conditions in a collisionless shock precursor. A fully ionized plasma is moving at a speed $u(x)$ from the far upstream, unshocked region ($x\to -\infty$) towards the subshock located at $x=0$, where it gets non-adiabatically compressed. We assume that a pre-existing uniform magnetic field $\bf{B}_0$ parallel to the plasma flow fills the space. The instabilities are induced by the accelerated particles produced by diffusive shock acceleration, and described by $f(x,\bf{p})$. These particles are subject to diffusion in the plasma and advection along with it. Therefore, in the reference frame locally co-moving with the plasma, the CRs appear to move against the bulk flow, away from the subshock. The CR density and pressure increase from $0$ at $x\to
-\infty$ to a finite value at $x=0$, and so does the diffusive current of CR measured in the plasma reference frame[^12].
We describe the fluctuations of magnetic field in the plasma by the energy spectrum of turbulence, $W(x,k)$. The latter is a quantity such that $W(x,k)\Delta k$ is the volume density of turbulent energy (i.e., the energy of the waves, including the magnetic field energy and that of the associated stochastic plasma motions) in the waveband $\Delta k$. This means that, instead of the the spatial structure of the turbulent magnetic fields, the simulation only follows the evolution of its Fourier transform, locally calculated over a large enough volume, and averaged over a large enough time interval. This approach relieves our model from the computational expenditure of PIC plasma simulations, because the latter have to have a spatial resolution finer than the size of the smallest turbulent vortex, while our simulation gets away with a resolution that is more coarse than the largest turbulent harmonic by describing the processes on smaller scales statistically. Obviously, this advantage is gained at the cost of having to rely on theoretical models of processes in plasmas instead of performing a numerical experiment based on more fundamental physical principles.
Magnetic turbulence amplification is modeled under the assumption of a steady state situation, i.e., the time derivatives $\partial/\partial t$ in the respective equations are set to $0$. It is also postulated that in the interstellar medium (i.e., far upstream), there exists seed turbulence, which is expressed by the boundary condition $$\label{eq_seed_turb}
W(- \infty, k) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\frac{\left({\Delta B_\mathrm{seed}}\right)^2}{4\pi}
\displaystyle\frac{k^{-1}}{\ln{\left({k_\mathrm{max}}/{k_\mathrm{min}}\right)}},
\; \mathrm{if} \; {k_\mathrm{min}}< k < {k_\mathrm{max}}, \\
0, \; \mathrm{otherwise}.
\end{array}
\right.$$ Expression (\[eq\_seed\_turb\]) describes a far upstream seed turbulence with a power law spectrum, $W \propto k^{-1}$, normalized so that ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x \to -\infty) = {\Delta B_\mathrm{seed}}$, where ${\Delta B_\mathrm{seed}}$ is a parameter of the model representing the assumed effective magnetic field of the seed turbulence. The values ${k_\mathrm{min}}$ and ${k_\mathrm{max}}$ limiting the wavenumber range of the seed turbulence spectrum are also parameters of the model. Normally, the code will choose them so that for particles of all energies found in the simulation, the resonant wavenumber (defined later) is between ${k_\mathrm{min}}$ and ${k_\mathrm{max}}$.
The effective magnetic field ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)$ at any point is a quantity that I define as $$\label{eq_beff}
\frac{{B_\mathrm{eff}}^2(x)}{8 \pi} = \frac12 \int_{0}^{\infty} W(x,k) \: dk.$$ The fraction $1/2$ before the integral in the right-hand side of Equation (\[eq\_beff\]) expresses the assumption that one half of the turbulence energy is contained in the magnetic field fluctutaions, and the other half is carried by the stochastic fluctuations of the plasma velocity associated with the waves. The factor $1/2$ is exactly correct when the turbulence is purely [Alfvén]{}ic (see Section \[turb\_fluxes\]). The expression (\[eq\_beff\]) is therefore a good approximation if the turbulence is generated by the resonant streaming instability (see Section \[res\_desc\]), but does not apply, for example, to the waves generated by the nonresonant Bell’s instability (see Section \[bells\_nonres\_desc\]). For the latter case, the relationship between the plasma velocity fluctuations, $\delta u$, and the magnetic field fluctuations, $\delta B$, can be inferred, for example, from Equation (17) in [@Bell2004]. It can be shown that for wavelengths at the peak of the amplification rate, $k=k_c/2$ (defined in Section \[bells\_nonres\_desc\]) magnetic field contains $3/4$, and velocity fluctuations – $1/4$ of the total energy density $W(x,k)$. However, I use the ‘50/50’ distribution of the turbulent energy between magnetic and kinetic fluctuations, expressed by the factor $1/2$ in Equation (\[eq\_beff\]), for turbulence produced by any source. I do so for the following reasons. First, considering the much larger uncertainties in some other factors of the model (e.g., the diffusion coefficient), an adjustment of the expression (\[eq\_beff\]) to account for the nature of the turbulence would be a minor correction. Second, nonlinear turbulent processes like dissipation and cascading may change the energy distribution between magnetic and velocity fluctuations, and there exists no analytic description of this process adequate for the strong turbulence considered in this model.
### Resonant cosmic ray streaming instability {#res_desc}
Charged particles streaming along a uniform magnetic field are able to resonantly amplify [Alfvén]{} waves traveling along the same field ([@Kulsrud2005; @Tsytovich1966; @Wentzel74; @Bell78a], etc.). The mechanism of [Alfvén]{} wave amplification is similar to that used to amplify electromagnetic waves in the electronic device known as the [*traveling-wave tube*]{} [@Gittins65]. [Alfvén]{} waves exchange energy with fast particles of resonant momenta. If the particle distribution is anisotropic, [Alfvén]{} waves traveling in one direction get amplified, and waves traveling in the opposite direction get dampened by the interactions with the particles close to the resonance. I will not describe this instability in detail and refer the reader to the sources cited above.
Assuming a steady state and that the particle distribution is controlled by advection of the flow and resonant turbulent diffusion (see Section \[subsec\_resonant\_mfp\]), and that the generated waves are a weak perturbation of the uniform magnetic field, $\Delta B \ll B_0$, the evolution of $W(x,k)$ may be described (see [@LC83] and references therein) as $$\label{eq_turb_evol_res}
u(x)\frac{\partial W(x,k)}{\partial x} = {\Gamma_\mathrm{res}}(x,k) W(x,k),$$ if all other effects accompanying wave generation are ignored. Here the growth rate $$\label{resonant_increment}
{\Gamma_\mathrm{res}}(x,k) = v_A
\frac{\partial {P_\mathrm{cr}}(x,{p_\mathrm{res}})}{\partial x}
\left| \frac{d{p_\mathrm{res}}}{dk} \right|
\frac{1}{W(x,k)},$$ and $$\frac{c {p_\mathrm{res}}}{e B_0} k = 1.$$ defines the resonant momentum, ${p_\mathrm{res}}$. Here $v_A$ is the [Alfvén]{} wave speed, and ${P_\mathrm{cr}}(x,p)$ is the spectrum of particle pressure, normalized so that ${P_\mathrm{cr}}\Delta p$ is the pressure of accelerated particles in the momentum range $\Delta p$.
It was usually assumed that the fluctuations grow until $\Delta B \approx B_0$, after which the instability saturates (e.g., [@MV82]). Recently, Bell and Lucek [@BL2001] suggested that, if the instability can grow beyond this point, to $\Delta B \gg B_0$, the observations of large magnetic fields in some SNRs can be explained by generation of magnetic fields in the process of DSA. Simulations done by the same authors [@LB2000] support such a possibility. Here, I adopt Bell and Lucek’s idea and assume that the streaming of CRs is able to produce strong magnetic field fluctuations.
As the perturbations grow and reach $\Delta B \gtrsim B_0$, however, it is likely that waves with wave vectors ${\bf k}$ not aligned with ${\bf B}_0$ will be generated, due to local CR pressure gradients along the total ${\bf
B}={\bf B}_0 + \Delta{\bf B}$. With $\Delta B \gtrsim B_0$, it becomes impossible to predict the average value of the transverse pressure gradients and the resulting magnetic field structure without knowing the relative phases of different wave harmonics. The problem is further complicated by the fact that this longitudinal, compressible turbulence may produce a strong 2nd order Fermi particle acceleration effect which, in turn, can damp the longitudinal fluctuations (see, for example, [@SchlickeiserEtal1993]).
These complications place a precise description of plasma turbulence beyond current analytic capabilities. However, valuable conclusions about MFA in efficient DSA can be made by considering the two limiting cases of the resonant instability development in the nonlinear regime. The first assumes there is no longitudinal turbulence, in which case the wave growth rate is determined by the [Alfvén]{} speed in the non-amplified field $B_0$. This gives a lower bound to the growth rate. The upper limit assumes that the turbulence is isotropic, in which case the growth rate is determined by the [Alfvén]{} speed in the much larger amplified field ${B_\mathrm{eff}}$ (defined in Equation (\[eq\_beff\])). The real situation should lie between these two cases, and while I consider these limits, I do not explicitly include second-order Fermi acceleration in the calculations. Section \[res2006\] describes the parameterization of the growth rate of the resonant instability that encompasses the minimum and the maximum growth rate in the regime of strong fluctuations.
### Bell’s nonresonant instability {#bells_nonres_desc}
A nonresonant instability, theoretically described by Bell in 2004 ([@Bell2004]), occurs when a strong external electric current of CRs is put through the plasma. The instability develops because the thermal plasma must provide a current in response to the external current of streaming CRs, in order to maintain quasi-neutrality. This current makes certain MHD modes unstable; these modes can be described as driven circularly polarized [Alfvén]{} waves. Again, I will not discuss the details of the instability; the reader may find more information in [@Bell2004; @ZPV2008; @AB2009].
In the linear regime ($\Delta B \ll B_0$) the growth of the unstable modes can be described by the following equation: $$\label{eq_turb_evol_nr}
u(x)\frac{\partial W(x,k)}{\partial x} = {\Gamma_\mathrm{nr}}(x,k) W(x,k).$$
The dispersion relation of waves subject to Bell’s instability is $$\label{bell_dispersion}
\omega^2 - v_A^2 k^2 \pm \frac{B_0 k j_d}{c \rho} = 0,$$ where $\omega$ and $k$ are the frequency and the wavenumber of the generated waves, and $j_d$ is the diffusive current of CRs directed along the magnetic field ${\bf B_0}$. The frequency $\omega$ has an imaginary part when $$\label{bell_cond_kcrit}
k < k_c \equiv \frac{B_0 j_d}{c \rho v_A^2},$$ and the reasoning leading to (\[bell\_dispersion\]) is applicable when the wavelengths of the generated waves are shorter than the smallest energetic particle gyroradius in the system, ${r_\mathrm{g1}}$: $$\label{bell_cond_shortwave}
\frac{1}{{r_\mathrm{g1}}} < k.$$ Along with its applicability conditions (\[bell\_cond\_kcrit\]) and (\[bell\_cond\_shortwave\]), the growth rate of the energy of the waves ${\Gamma_\mathrm{nr}}(k) \equiv 2{\operatorname{Im}}{\omega(k)}$ is $$\label{bell_increment}
{\Gamma_\mathrm{nr}}= \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
2 v_A k\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{k_c}{k}-1}, \quad
\mathrm{if} \quad 1/{r_\mathrm{g1}}< k < k_c,\\
0, \quad \mathrm{otherwise}.
\end{array}
\right.$$ Here $v_A=B_0/\sqrt{4 \pi \rho}$ is the [Alfvén]{} speed, and the critical wavenumber $k_c$ is $$\label{bell_kcrit}
k_c = \frac{B_0 j_d}{c \rho v_A^2}.$$
This instability has been studied theoretically and using MHD and PIC simulations ([@Bell2004; @ZPV2008; @ABG2008; @AB2009; @RS2008]), which show that it is capable of generating large magnetic fields, and may even dominate the resonant CR streaming instability in young shocks of SNRs [@PLM2006].
It is informative for future reasoning to point out the dependence of ${\Gamma_\mathrm{nr}}$ on $k$: the rate ${\Gamma_\mathrm{nr}}$ becomes non-zero at large wavelengths at $k=1/{r_\mathrm{g1}}$, and then grows as $k^{1/2}$ towards the smaller wavelengths, until it peaks at $k=k_c/2$, and then rapidly falls off down to zero at $k=k_c$.
### Nonresonant long-wavelength instability {#nonres_long_inst}
Other instabilities possibly leading to magnetic field amplification may exist in an interstellar plasma in vicinity of a particle accelerating shock. Bykov and Toptygin [@BT2005] suggested a model in which streaming cosmic rays may amplify waves in plasma with wavelengths much larger than the gyroradii of the particles.
The model presented in [@BT2005] requires the presence of a neutral component in the plasma (i.e., unionized hydrogen atoms) that suppresses the transverse conductivity. The Balmer series lines of neutral hydrogen have been observed in the emission spectra of forward shocks of Type Ia SNRs (e.g., in SN 1006 and Tycho’s SNR [@KWC1987]. See also the references in [@GRSH2001]). It is also possible that short-scale turbulence may act similarly to neutral plasma component at suppressing the transverse conductivity, which will make the model of nonresonant long-wavelength instability applicable to fully ionized plasmas as well (A. M. Bykov, in private communication, and [@BOT2008], in press).
I have not incorporated this effect into the simulation, because the details of this model are being developed. However, if this instability operates in the precursor of a collisionless shock, it may have a very strong impact on the maximum momentum of the accelerated particles due to its long-wavelength nature.
### Evolution of turbulence in a nonlinear shock – other effects {#turb_effects}
#### Flow compression
Equations of the form (\[eq\_turb\_evol\_res\]) and (\[eq\_turb\_evol\_nr\]) generally apply to a uniform flow $u(x)=const$, and do not take into account the possibility of a changing flow speed in the precursor. In the geometric optics approximation, the propagation of waves in a medium with changing properties may lead to modulation of the wavelengths and of the amplitudes of the waves. Different instabilities generate different types of waves, which may evolve differently. Namely, the resonant CR streaming instability in the quasi-linear approximation $\Delta B \ll B_0$ generates [Alfvén]{} waves propagating against the flow, and Bell’s nonresonant instability generates almost purely growing harmonics that can be described as driven [Alfvén]{} waves [@Bell2004]. Considering that compression ratios in strong SNR may reach ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\approx 5-15$ (see, e.g, observational arguments [@WarrenEtal2005; @Gamil2008], and theoretical predictions [@JE91; @MD2001]), these effects may change the wavelengths and amplitudes of the generated waves by a large factor, and should be considered.
I propose to include the effects of flow compression in the model by adding the corresponding terms to the equation of turbulence evolution. Consider the equation $$u \frac{\partial W}{\partial x} + {\alpha_g}W \frac{du}{dx}
- {\beta_g}\frac{\partial}{\partial k} \left( k W \frac{du}{dx} \right) = 0.$$ Given a boundary condition $W(x_0, k) = W_0(k)$, one can readily solve this equation for $x>x_0$ using the method of characteristics: see Equation (\[wxk\_nocasc\_noamp\]). The ratio $u(x_0)/u(x)$ in this equation is the factor by which the plasma is compressed, because due to Equation (\[fluxmass\]), $\rho(x)/\rho(x_0) = u(x_0) / u(x)$. Equation (\[wxk\_nocasc\_noamp\]) shows that the parameter $\alpha$ determines how the amplitudes of the waves react to compression, namely, $W\propto \rho^{\alpha}$. For [Alfvén]{} waves, the correct value of this parameter is $\alpha = 1.5$ (see the wave generation equations and the corresponding explanation in [@VEB2006]). The parameter $\beta$ describes what happens to the wavenumber of the waves as they propagate in the compressing medium, that is, $k \propto \rho^{\beta}$.
#### Dissipation
The amplified turbulence may be dissipated through collisional and/or collisionless mechanisms and these include: [=0]{}[by 1 [ ]{}]{}linear and [nonlinear]{} Landau damping (e.g., [@AB86; @Kulsr78; @VBT93; @Z2000]), [by 1 [ ]{}]{}particle trapping (e.g., [@Medvedev99]), and [by 1 [ ]{}]{}ion-neutral wave damping (e.g, [@DDK96; @BT2005]). Existing analytic descriptions of MHD wave damping rely on the quasi-linear approximation $\Delta B \ll B_0$, which is inapplicable for strong turbulence, and numerical models with varying ranges of applicability have been proposed which offer a compromise between completeness and speed (e.g., [@Bell2004; @AB2006; @VEB2006; @ZPV2008]). Because no consistent analytic description of magnetic turbulence generation with $\Delta B \gtrsim B_0$ exists, and because an numerical (MHD or PIC) description of this process in the framework of non-linear DSA is very computationally expensive, we propose a parameterization of the turbulence damping rate. In doing this, we are pursuing two goals. First, we make some predictions connecting cosmic ray spectra, turbulent magnetic fields and plasma temperatures, which, in principle, can be tested against high resolution X-ray observations in order to estimate the heating of the thermal gas by turbulence dissipation. And second, once heating is included in our simulation in a parameterized fashion, we will be ready to implement more realistic models of turbulence generation and dissipation as they are developed.
The heating of the precursor plasma by dissipation modifies the subshock Mach number (e.g., [@EBB2000; @VBE2008]) and this in turn modifies injection. The overall acceleration efficiency and, of particular importance for X-ray observations, the temperature of the shocked plasma (e.g., [@DEB2000; @HRD2000; @EDB2004]) will depend on wave dissipation.
The generalized way of including the dissipation of turbulence into the simulation is introducing a corresponding term into the equation of turbulence evolution: $$u\frac{\partial W}{\partial x} = G - L,$$ where $G$ stands for the rate of growth of the instability driving the turbulence (i.e., $G=\Gamma W$), and $L=L(x,k)$ is the rate of turbulence dissipation (measured in ergs$\cdot$cm$^{-3}$s$^{-1}$). In the simulation, I allow for one of two prescriptions for the dissipation rate to be realized.
In the absence of a better model, one may assume that the dissipation rate $L$ is proportional to the amplification rate $G$, i.e. $$\label{diss_param}
L_F = {\alpha_H}G,$$ where ${\alpha_H}$ is a number between $0$ and $1$. Equation (\[diss\_param\]) is a mere parameterization of the dissipation rate, in which ${\alpha_H}$ is the fraction of the instability generation rate that is assumed to go directly into particle heating rather than magnetic fields (in $L_F$, the subscript $F$ stands for ‘fraction’). In particular, ${\alpha_H}= 0$ corresponds to no dissipation, and ${\alpha_H}= 1$ describes a situation where all the turbulence generated by a particle streaming instability immediately gets dissipated and transformed into heat.
Another prescription for the rate of dissipation is $$\label{diss_ksq}
L_V = \frac{v_A}{{k_d}}k^2 W.$$ The wavenumber at which the dissipation begins to dominate, ${k_d}$, is identified with the inverse of a thermal proton gyroradius: $$\label{kdiss_def}
{k_d}= \frac{eB_0}{c\sqrt{m_pk_BT}},$$ where $m_p$ is the proton mass, $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant and $T=T(x)$ is the local gas temperature. This prescription is a relaxation-time approximation, defined in such a way that at $k={k_d}$, the dissipation time equals the period of an [Alfvén]{} wave with the wavenumber $k$, and the $k$-dependence is $L\propto k^2$. The $k^2$ dependence of the dissipation rate is based on the assumption that viscosity (i.e., magnetic viscosity in this case) drives the dissipation (see, e.g., [@VBT93]).
#### Influence of turbulence dissipation on thermal plasma heating
Dissipation of turbulence acts as an energy sink, in which the magnetic and kinetic energy of turbulent fluctuations are transformed into the internal energy of the thermal particle gas. This means that, in order to conserve energy, the appearance of the term $L$ in the equation of turbulence evolution must be accompanied by the corresponding correction to the equations of motion of the thermal plasma. The way to incorporate the thermal plasma heating due to turbulence dissipation was shown in [@MV82], who derived the equation of thermal pressure evolution in the shock precursor: $$\label{pressuregrowth}
\frac{ u\rho^{\gamma}}{\gamma-1}
\frac{d}{dx}\left({P_\mathrm{th}}\rho^{-\gamma} \right) = L
\ .$$ Here the ratio of specific heats of an ideal nonrelativistic gas is $\gamma=5/3$. For $L=0$, equation (\[pressuregrowth\]) reduces to the adiabatic heating law, ${P_\mathrm{th}}\sim \rho^{\gamma}$ and, for a non-zero $L$, it describes the heating of the thermal plasma in the shock precursor due to the dissipation of magnetic turbulence. The fluid description of heating given by equation (\[pressuregrowth\]), while it doesn’t include details of individual particle scattering, can be used in the [Monte Carlo]{} simulation to replace particle scattering and determine heating in the shock precursor. This merging of analytic and [Monte Carlo]{} techniques, or [Analytic Precursor Approximation]{} ([APA]{}), is described in detail in Appendix B of [@VBE2008], and briefly summarized below.
When the heating rate, $L$, becomes available from the solution of the turbulence growth equation (\[eq-genmfa\]), the code solves (\[pressuregrowth\]) and substitutes the solution, ${P_\mathrm{th}}(x)$, for the thermal pressure calculated from particle trajectories. It is done in the upstream region up to the point ${x_\mathrm{APA}}$, at which thermal particles are subsequently introduced into the simulation for the next iteration. In order to include the effects of heating in the model, we must introduce thermal particles at ${x_\mathrm{APA}}$ as if they were heated in the precursor, i.e., their temperature $T({x_\mathrm{APA}})$ must be determined by (\[pressuregrowth\]) and the ideal gas law: $$\label{idealgaslaw}
T(x)=\frac{{P_\mathrm{th}}(x)}{k_B n_0 (u_0/u(x))},$$ The simulation therefore chooses the magnitude of every introduced particle’s momentum $p$ in the local plasma frame distributed according to Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution with temperature $T$ determined by (\[idealgaslaw\]) at $x={x_\mathrm{APA}}$. As long as the local sonic Mach number at this location is large (i.e., ${M_\mathrm{s1}}> 3$), it can be done using the results of the section \[subsec\_particleintro\] for the angular distribution of the introduced particles. If the ${M_\mathrm{s1}}< 3$ (which does not usually happen in a self consistent solution), then the results described in Appendix B may be applicable.
#### Spectral energy transfer
Observations of turbulence, including the MHD turbulence in the interplanetary plasma, often report spectra that look like power law functions of $k$ over many decades. This phenomenon can successfully be explained by spectral energy transfer (cascading). After the energy has been generated by an instability on some dominant spatial scale, nonlinear motions in the turbulent fluid cause splitting and merging of the turbulent vortices (i.e., a cascade), leading to a re-distribution of energy between different scales. This way, turbulence initiated by large-scale vortex formation due to an external power source can cascade into smaller vortices, producing a power-law distribution of energy in the so-called inertial range (i.e., the interval in $k$-space where the turbulence spectrum is populated by cascading rather than directly by the instability). This cascade continues until the size of the vortices is small enough so that dissipation \[e.g., (\[diss\_ksq\])\] terminates it by converting the energy of motion into heat in the so-called dissipative region of $k$-space (e.g., [@Biskamp2003]).
There are various ways to describe spectral energy transfer (see, e.g., [@MoninYaglom]). One of the simplest methods, listed in [@MoninYaglom] as the Kovazhny hypothesis, involves a dimensional analysis argument. If one writes the equation of turbulence evolution in the inertial range as $$\frac{dW}{dt} - \frac{\partial}{\partial k}\Pi = 0,$$ then by the physical meaning, $\Pi$ is the flux of energy through $k$-space towards larger $k$. Assuming that $\Pi$ is a product of powers of the minimum set of relevant quantities, one can find the simplest form of the corresponding cascading rate. That is, if $\Pi = W^{a} k^{b} \rho ^{c}$, then the only combination of $a$, $b$ and $c$ that gives $\Pi$ the correct units is $$\label{pi_kolmogorov}
\Pi_{K} = W^{3/2} k^{5/3} \rho^{-1/2},$$ As we will see later, this cascading rate gives a stationary solution $W \propto k^{-5/3}$, which is known as the Kolmogorov spectrum, and the corresponding cascade will be referred to as Kolmogorov-type cascade (here denoted by the subscript ‘K’).
When MHD turbulence is considered, the simple dimensional argument shown above does not work because the magnetic field is another relevant quantity. There are two approaches to describing nonlinear effects (spectral energy transfer) in MHD turbulence. One, proposed by Iroshnikov and, independently, by Kraichnan [@Iroshnikov1964; @Kraichnan1965], treats the MHD turbulence as weakly interacting plasma waves that can undergo mergers and splitting. The bottom line of this approach is that a stationary spectrum $W \propto k^{-3/2}$ is predicted. Because $5/3$ and $3/2$ are so close, it is difficult to distinguish between the two indices in the analysis of observations. Goldreich and Sridhar [@GS95] point out that the MHD turbulence is inherently anisotropic (even if there is no mean magnetic field, the effective field of the large scale harmonics can play its role for the processes in the inertial interval), and the weak-turbulence approach is not applicable. These authors proposed another theoretical approach: they suggested a certain anisotropic damping rate and postulated a critical balanced state, which allowed them to derive an anisotropic turbulence spectrum. Their results predict that harmonics with wavevectors transverse to the uniform magnetic field experience a Kolmogorov-like cascade, while the cascade in wavevectors parallel to the field is suppressed. The waves generated with streaming instabilities are transverse; therefore the diffusion coefficient for particle transport parallel to the flow depends on the wavenumbers parallel to the magnetic field. Biskamp [@Biskamp2003] shows that the Goldreich-Sridhar spectrum for parallel wavenumbers may be expressed as $W \propto k_{\parallel}^{-5/2}$.
We can find the corresponding cascading rate, such that $\Pi = W^{a} k^{\frac52 a} \rho^{b} v_A^{c}$, which would lead to a steady state spectrum with $W \propto
k^{-5/2}$. From the dimensional argument, $$\label{pi_gs}
\Pi_\mathrm{GS} = W^{2/3} k^{5/3} \rho^{1/3} v_A^{5/3}.$$ One may do a simple estimate and compare the Kolmogorov and the Goldreich-Sridhar cascading rates: $$\frac{\Pi_\mathrm{GS}}{\Pi_K} =
\frac{W^{2/3} k^{5/3} \rho^{1/3} v_A^{5/3}}{W^{3/2} k^{5/2}
\rho^{-1/2}}=\left( \frac{B_0^2}{4 \pi k W}\right)^{5/6}.$$
#### Transition to turbulence
One may pose a relevant question: at what point do the linear plasma waves acquire the nonlinear behavior that leads to their cascade and dissipation at short wavelengths? We assume that it happens when some of the waves reach strong amplitudes, i.e., $\Delta B(k) \approx B_0$. In terms of the quantities that we use to describe the turbulence spectrum, I postulate that if, at the coordinate $x$, there is a wavenumber $k$ such that $$\frac12 kW(x,k) \geq \frac{B_0^2}{8\pi},$$ then downstream of this coordinate, the turbulent cascade and dissipation start (i.e., a transition to turbulence occurs). In accordance with that, upstream of this coordinate, the energy transport $\Pi$ and the dissipation rate $L$ are both set to zero.
#### Anisotropy relaxation
The resonant streaming instability of [Alfvén]{} waves amplifies the waves traveling in the direction of the diffusive particle stream (i.e., in the upstream direction) and damps the waves traveling in the opposite direction. The distribution of energy between the upstream and downstream traveling waves may be important for some applications: for example, the mean speed of scattering centers, if it is not negligible compared to the flow speed, calls for the appropriate reference frame transformations for particle scattering. This may be important for low [Alfvén]{} Mach number shocks. In the strong, fast shocks of young SNRs, the generated waves predominantly travel upstream, but for older shocks, nonlinear interactions between upstream and downstream traveling structures may lead to the appearance of downstream traveling waves (e.g., [@BL2001]).
Following [@BL2001], one can notionally separate the turbulence spectrum as in the plasma frame $$W(x,k) = U_-(x,k) + U_+(x,k),$$ where $U_-$ is the spectral energy density of waves traveling upstream, and $U_+$ – that of the downstream-directed waves. The equation of turbulence growth due to a streaming instability, accounting only for the wave advection, growth and the nonlinear interactions between the waves traveling in different directions can be written (see also [@VEB2006]) as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{uminuskp_int}
[u(x) - v_A]\frac{\partial}{\partial x}U_- &=& {\Gamma_\mathrm{res}}U_-
-v_A k \left( U_- - U_+ \right)
\ ; \\
\label{upluskp_int}
[u(x) + v_A]\frac{\partial}{\partial x}U_+ &=& -{\Gamma_\mathrm{res}}U_+
+v_A k \left( U_- - U_+ \right)
\ ,\end{aligned}$$ where $r_g = cp / (e B_0)$ and $v_A$ is the [Alfvén]{} speed. The factor $u\pm v_A$ represents the fact that the considered waves travel at a velocity $v_A$ with respect to the plasma along the magnetic field. The term proportional to $U_- - U_+$ in the right-hand side describes nonlinear interactions between the oppositely directed waves that lead to isotropization of the wave spectrum (i.e., to $U_- = U_+$) with a relaxation time of about the [Alfvén]{} wave period. This effect may be important for weaker shocks.
### Generalized model of magnetic turbulence amplification {#generalized_mfa}
Considering the effects described above (except for the interactions with the waves traveling downstream), let us write the equation of turbulence spectrum evolution in the following parameterized form: $$\label{eq-genmfa}
u\frac{\partial W}{\partial x}
+{\alpha_g}W \frac{du}{dx}
-{\beta_g}\frac{\partial}{\partial k} \left( k W \frac{du}{dx} \right)
-{\gamma_g}G
+{\delta_g}\frac{\partial}{\partial k} \Pi
+{\varepsilon_g}L
= 0,$$ and assume that a boundary condition is given at the coordinate $x=x_0$ in the form $$\label{bc-genmfa}
W(x_0, k) = W_0(k).$$ The coordinate $x_0$ is typically located far upstream of the shock, and the function $W_0(k)$ describes the seed turbulence spectrum that, we assume, exists in the unshocked interstellar medium.
In Equation (\[eq-genmfa\]), the first term describes the advection of turbulence with the flow. In the Lagrangian view, one may think of the turbulence amplification process as the evolution of a matter element advected towards and across the subshock, compressed and penetrated by cosmic ray flux on the way, which leads to a buildup of stochastic magnetic fields in this element. In the Eulerian perspective, this term represents the full derivative of $W$ with respect to time, $d/dt = \partial/\partial t + u\partial/\partial x$, with the local derivative $\partial / \partial t$ set to zero to model the steady-state solution.
The second term, proportional to ${\alpha_g}$, represents the effect of plasma compression on the amplitude of the waves, as described in the previous section. The parameter ${\alpha_g}$ measures the degree of this effect. With all other terms set to zero, equation (\[eq-genmfa\]) has the solution $W\propto
u^{-{\alpha_g}}$, i.e., the amplitude of the waves grows proportionally to the power ${\alpha_g}/2$ of the plasma density. For [Alfvén]{} waves, $\alpha = 1.5$.
The third term, containing ${\beta_g}$, describes the effect of compression on the wavenumber of the waves. With all other effects inactive, (\[eq-genmfa\]) has the solution $W(k)\propto W(k u^{\beta})u^{\beta}$, which means that the spectrum $W(k)$ shifts in $\log{k}$ space, while preserving the normalization: $\int{W(k)} dk = const$. Setting $\beta$ to 0 may be used to ‘turn off’ this effect in the model.
The term that contains ${\gamma_g}$ is the driving term of instability growth. The function $G$ is $G=\Gamma W$, where the growth rate $\Gamma$ can take on values: ${\Gamma_\mathrm{res}}$ from (\[resonant\_increment\]), or ${\Gamma_\mathrm{nr}}$ defined by (\[bell\_increment\]), or the sum of the two, depending on which instability one wishes to consider in the model. The value ${\gamma_g}= 1$ can be used to ‘turn on’, and ${\gamma_g}= 0$ – to ‘turn off’ the turbulence amplification for purposes of testing the code or making predictions relevant to the physics of shock acceleration.
The parameter ${\delta_g}$ in the fourth term of (\[eq-genmfa\]) controls the rate of cascading. For the energy flux $\Pi=\Pi_K$ given by (\[pi\_kolmogorov\]), the quantity ${\delta_g}$ is essentially the Kolmogorov constant, a factor that complements the dimensional analysis leading to the derivation of (\[pi\_kolmogorov\]), and that should be taken from experiments or numerical simulations. There seems to be a universal value of the Kolmogorov constant (see [@Sreenivasan1995] for a review of experiments (note that this article has a different definition of the constant) and [@GF2001] for simulation results), ${\delta_g}= 1.6 - 1.7$. As was mentioned earlier, MHD turbulence may have cascade properties different from those of hydrodynamic turbulence, and $\Pi$ may assume different forms, for example $\Pi_\mathrm{GS}$ from (\[pi\_gs\]). For lack of better knowledge, I will use the value ${\delta_g}=1$ to include turbulent cascading and ${\delta_g}=0$ to omit it from the model.
Dissipation of turbulence is controlled by the last term in (\[eq-genmfa\]), and the parameter ${\varepsilon_g}$ can be set to $1$ or $0$ to include or omit the dissipation. The function $L$ can assume the parameterized form $L_F$ from (\[diss\_param\]) or in the form of viscous dissipation $L_V$ defined in (\[diss\_ksq\]).
### Analytic solutions for turbulence spectrum
The expression (\[eq-genmfa\]) is a nonlinear partial differential equation of first order for a function of two variables, $W(x,k)$. Its particular solution is determined by the initial conditions (\[eq\_seed\_turb\]) and by the nonlinear dynamics of the system that couples $W(x,k)$ to particle propagation, and the latter to the driving term $G$ in (\[eq-genmfa\]) and to the flow speed $u(x)$ determined with the iterative procedures (\[iteration\_rtot\]) and (\[iteration\_ux\]). Therefore, the solver of (\[eq-genmfa\]) has to be run after every Monte Carlo iteration to advance the solution towards self-consistency.
A powerful tool for tackling first order nonlinear equations is the method of characteristics [@Lopez99]. In fact, in some simple cases, i.e. when the terms in (\[eq-genmfa\]) assume a simple form, analytic solution is possible. Although these simple cases are not directly applicable to the physical system we are studying, I would like to derive these solutions below, because not only do they reveal the influence of various effects on the solution, but they will also be used for testing of the numerical solver.
#### Parametric form
In order to apply the method of characteristics to Equation (\[eq-genmfa\]), let us re-write it, collecting the terms containing the partial derivatives of $W$, and assuming that $\Pi$ is given by (\[pi\_kolmogorov\]): $$u\frac{\partial W}{\partial x} +
\left(-{\beta_g}k \frac{du}{dx} + \frac32 {\delta_g}\frac{W^{1/2}k^{5/2}}{\rho^{1/2}}\right)
\frac{\partial W}{\partial k} = \qquad \qquad$$ $$\qquad\qquad =
({\beta_g}-{\alpha_g}) \frac{du}{dx} W -
\frac52 {\delta_g}\frac{W^{3/2}k^{3/2}}{\rho^{1/2}} +
{\gamma_g}G - {\varepsilon_g}L.$$ In the spirit of the method of characteristics, this equation can be written in a parametric form [@Lopez99], describing $x$, $k$ and $W$ as functions of a new parameter $t$: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dx}{dt}&=& u, \\
\label{dkdt_param}
\frac{dk}{dt}&=& -{\beta_g}k \frac{du}{dx} + \frac32 {\delta_g}\frac{W^{1/2}k^{5/2}}{\rho^{1/2}}, \\
\frac{dW}{dt}&=& ({\beta_g}-{\alpha_g}) \frac{du}{dx} W -
\frac52 {\delta_g}\frac{W^{3/2}k^{3/2}}{\rho^{1/2}} +
{\gamma_g}G - {\varepsilon_g}L\end{aligned}$$ The other two parametric equations form a system of nonlinear mutually dependent equations, which cannot be solved in a closed form, but the solution can be expressed in a form suitable for analysis. Consider the substitution $p(t)=W(x(t), k(t))u^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}}(x(t))$, $q(t)=k(t)u^{{\beta_g}}(x(t))$, and notice that $(d/dx)=u^{-1}(x(t))(d/dt)$. Then the above system of equations can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{xoft}
\frac{dx}{dt}&=& u, \\
\label{qoft}
\frac{dq}{dt} &=&
\frac32 {\delta_g}\frac{p^{1/2}q^{5/2}}{\rho^{1/2}}u^{-{\alpha_g}/2-{\beta_g}},\\
\label{poft}
\frac{dp}{dt}&=&
- \frac52 {\delta_g}\frac{p^{3/2}q^{3/2}}{\rho^{1/2}}u^{-{\alpha_g}/2-{\beta_g}} +
\left({\gamma_g}G - {\varepsilon_g}L\right) u^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}} .\end{aligned}$$ Equations (\[xoft\]), (\[qoft\]) and (\[poft\]) are the desired parametric form of the generalized equation of turbulence evolution (\[eq-genmfa\]). This form will be used in the numerical solver. The physical meaning of the parameter $t$ is obvious from equation (\[xoft\]): it is the time elapsed since a particular harmonic at $k=k_0$ started evolving at $x=x_0$ (corresponding to $t=0$).
I must point out that this system is strongly nonlinear, because the quantities $G$ and $L$ depend not only on the coordinate $x$ and the wavenumber $k$, but also on the values of $p$ and $q$, and not only locally, but also on the integrals of $W\propto p$ with respect to $x$ and $q$, via the transport and particle acceleration properties of the turbulence.
However, assuming simplified expressions for $G$ and $L$, we may obtain analytic solutions, as shown in the next two sections.
#### Solution without cascades
In the absence of cascading (${\delta_g}=0$), equations (\[xoft\]), (\[qoft\]) and (\[poft\]) are not coupled, and have the obvious solution $$\begin{aligned}
t &=& \int\limits_{x_0}^{x}\frac{dx'}{u(x')}, \\
q(t) &=& q_0, \\
p(t) &=& p_0 +
\int\limits_{0}^{t}
\left({\gamma_g}G - {\varepsilon_g}L\right)u^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}}\;dt'.\end{aligned}$$ or, in terms of $k$ and $W$, $$\begin{aligned}
t &=& \int\limits_{x_0}^{x}\frac{dx'}{u(x')}, \\
k(t)\left[u(x(t))\right]^{{\beta_g}} &=& k_0 \left[u(x_0)\right]^{{\beta_g}}, \\
W(t)\left[u(x(t))\right]^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}} &=&
W(x_0,k_0)\left[u(x_0)\right]^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}}+ \\
& & +
\int\limits_{t_0}^{t}
\left({\gamma_g}G(x',k')
- {\varepsilon_g}L(x',k') \right)
\left[u(x')\right]^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}}\;dt',\end{aligned}$$ where $x'\equiv x(t')$, $k'\equiv k(t')$. Finally, for the spectrum in terms of the original variables, $W(x,k)$, we may write $$W(x,k) = W_0\left(k\left(\frac{u(x)}{u(x_0)}\right)^{{\beta_g}}\right)
\left[ \frac{u(x_0)}{u(x)} \right]^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}} +
\qquad$$ $$\label{wxk_nocasc}
\qquad + \int\limits_{x_0}^{x}
\left\{
{\gamma_g}G\left(x',k\left[\frac{u(x)}{u(x')}\right]^{{\beta_g}}\right)-
{\varepsilon_g}L\left(x',k\left[\frac{u(x)}{u(x')}\right]^{{\beta_g}}\right)
\right\}
\left[\frac{u(x')}{u(x)}\right]^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}}
\;\frac{dx'}{u(x')}$$ Expression (\[wxk\_nocasc\]) is the solution of equation (\[eq-genmfa\]) with the boundary condition (\[bc-genmfa\]) for ${\delta_g}=0$ (no cascading).
In particular, setting ${\alpha_g}={\beta_g}=0$ in (\[wxk\_nocasc\]), we get the solution describing the turbulence evolution with only amplification $G$ and dissipation $L$ accounted for: $$\label{wxk_onlyamp}
W(x,k) = W_0(k) + \int\limits_{x_0}^{x}
\left\{{\gamma_g}G(x',k) - {\varepsilon_g}L(x',k)\right\}\frac{dx'}{u(x')}.$$
Assuming the opposite, ${\gamma_g}={\varepsilon_g}=0$, but ${\alpha_g}\neq 0$ and ${\beta_g}\neq 0$, one obtains $$\label{wxk_nocasc_noamp}
W(x,k) = W_0\left(k\left(\frac{u(x)}{u(x_0)}\right)^{{\beta_g}}\right)
\left[ \frac{u(x_0)}{u(x)} \right]^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}},$$ which describes the effect of compression on the plasma turbulence: the energy density increases in proportion to $\rho^{{\alpha_g}}$, and the wavenumber grows as $\rho^{{\beta_g}}$ (see also Section \[turb\_effects\]).
#### Integral form with cascades
Now let us return to the parametric form of the turbulence evolution equation given by (\[xoft\]), (\[qoft\]) and (\[poft\]). This time let us not set ${\delta_g}=0$, but try to derive a solution that accounts for cascading. The last two equations are coupled via the cascading terms, so in order to get an integral form of the solution, let us express $p$ as a function of $q$ by dividing equation (\[poft\]) by equation (\[qoft\]), which is a correct operation because ${\delta_g}\neq 0$. This leads to: $$\frac{dp}{dq} =
-\frac53 \frac{p}{q} +
\frac23 \frac{\rho^{1/2}}{p^{1/2}q^{5/2}}
\frac{1}{{\delta_g}} ({\gamma_g}G - {\varepsilon_g}L) u^{3 {\alpha_g}/2},$$ or $$\frac{d}{dq} \left[ \left(pq^{5/3}\right)^{3/2} \right]=
\rho^{1/2} \frac{1}{{\delta_g}}({\gamma_g}G - {\varepsilon_g}L) u^{3{\alpha_g}/2},$$ which gives the dependence of $p$ on $q$ in the following form: $$\label{pofq}
p=q^{-5/3}
\left[\left(p_0 q_0^{5/3}\right)^{3/2} +
\frac{1}{{\delta_g}}
\int_{q_0}^{q} \rho^{1/2}
({\gamma_g}G(x', k') - {\varepsilon_g}L(x', k'))
u^{3\alpha/2}(x') dq'
\right]^{2/3},$$ where $x' \equiv x(t')$, $k' \equiv k(t')$, and $t'$ is the moment in time corresponding to $q(t')=q'$. Constants $p_0$ and $q_0$ define the characteristic curve by its initial conditions as: $p_0=W(x_0, k_0)u^{\alpha-\beta}(x_0)$, and $q_0=k_0u^{\beta}(x_0)$. Substituting (\[pofq\]) into (\[qoft\]) gives: $$\frac{d}{dt}\left[ q^{-2/3} \right] =
- {\delta_g}u^{-{\alpha_g}/2 - {\beta_g}} \rho^{-1/2} \times \qquad\qquad$$ $$\label{qoftsol}
\qquad \times \left[
\left( p_0 q_0^{5/3} \right)^{3/2} +
\frac{1}{{\delta_g}} \int_{q_0}^{q}
\rho^{\frac 12}(x')
({\gamma_g}G(x',k') - {\varepsilon_g}L(x',k'))
u^{3\alpha/2}(x') dq'
\right]^{1/3}.$$ Expressions (\[xoft\]), (\[pofq\]) and (\[qoftsol\]) are almost a solution to equation (\[eq-genmfa\]). We collect them below: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{xoftsol_c}
\frac{dx}{dt}&=& u, \\
\nonumber
\frac{d}{dt}\left[ q^{-2/3} \right] &=&
- {\delta_g}u^{-{\alpha_g}/2 - {\beta_g}} \rho^{-1/2} \left[
\left( p_0 q_0^{5/3} \right)^{3/2} + \right. \\
\label{qoftsol_c}
& &\quad \left. +
\frac{1}{{\delta_g}} \int_{q_0}^{q}
\rho^{\frac 12}(x')
({\gamma_g}G(x',k') - {\varepsilon_g}L(x',k'))
u^{3\alpha/2}(x') dq'
\right]^{1/3}, \\
\nonumber
p&=&q^{-5/3}
\left[\left(p_0 q_0^{5/3}\right)^{3/2}\right. + \\
\label{poftsol_c}
& & \quad \left.
\frac{1}{{\delta_g}}
\int_{q_0}^{q} \rho^{1/2}
({\gamma_g}G(x', k') - {\varepsilon_g}L(x', k'))
u^{3\alpha/2}(x') dq'
\right]^{2/3}\end{aligned}$$ The system (\[xoftsol\_c\]), (\[qoftsol\_c\]) and (\[poftsol\_c\]), the integral (integro-differential) form of the solution to equation (\[eq-genmfa\]), is rather unsightly for a physicist, so we will simplify it by setting ${\alpha_g}={\beta_g}={\varepsilon_g}=0$, ${\gamma_g}={\delta_g}= 1$, and assuming that $u(x)=u_0$, $\rho(x)=\rho_0$, and $G(x,k) = G_0 \delta_D(k-k_c)$, where $\delta_D$ is the Dirac delta function. This corresponds to the case where energy is supplied to the turbulence at a wavenumber $k_c$ throughout the spatial extent of the system. In addition, let us assume that there is no seed turbulence, i.e., $W_0(k)=0$. Then (\[qoftsol\_c\]) and (\[poftsol\_c\]) yield: $$\begin{aligned}
k(t) &=&
\left\{ \begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle
\left[k_0^{-2/3} - F_0^{1/3}t\right]^{-3/2}, \quad t<t_c, \\
\displaystyle
\left[k_0^{-2/3} - \left(
F_0 + \frac{G_0}{\rho_0}\right)^{1/3}t\right]^{-3/2}, \quad t \geq t_c;
\end{array} \right.\\
W(x(t), k(t)) &=&
\left\{ \begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle
\left[k_0^{-2/3} - F_0^{1/3}t\right]^{5/2}
\rho_0 F_0^{2/3}, \quad t<t_c, \\
\displaystyle
\left[k_0^{-2/3} - \left( F_0 + \frac{G_0}{\rho_0}\right)^{1/3}t\right]^{5/2}
\rho_0 \left( F_0 + \frac{G_0}{\rho_0} \right)^{2/3}, \quad t \geq t_c.
\end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$ Here $$F_0 = \left( \frac{W(x_0,k_0)k_0^{5/3}}{\rho_0} \right)^{3/2}$$ and $$t_c = \frac{k_0^{-2/3} - k_c^{-2/3}}{F_0^{1/3}}.$$ Assuming $G_0/\rho_0 \gg F_0$ (that is, the generation of the turbulence at the wavenumber $k_c$ overpowers the seed turbulence), the solution for $t>t_c$ (in other words, for $k>k_c$) is: $$\begin{aligned}
k(t) &=&
\left[k_0^{-2/3} -
\left(\frac{G_0}{\rho_0}\right)^{1/3}t\right]^{-3/2}, \\
\label{amp_with_cascades}
W(x(t), k(t)) &=&
\left[k_0^{-2/3} - \left( \frac{G_0}{\rho_0}\right)^{1/3}t\right]^{5/2}
\rho_0 \left(\frac{G_0}{\rho_0} \right)^{2/3}=k^{-5/3}(t)\rho_0 \left(\frac{G_0}{\rho_0} \right)^{2/3}.\end{aligned}$$ The expression for $W(x,k)$ does not depend on $k_0$, $x_0$ or $W(x_0, k_0)$, and therefore it describes explicitly the turbulence spectrum at $k>k_0$. Namely, shortward of $k_c$, the effect of cascading leads to a formation of a power-law spectrum of turbulence $W(k) \propto k^{-5/3}$, which is the Kolmogorov spectrum, as discussed in Section \[turb\_effects\]. This result can directly be used for testing of the numerical routine solving the equation (\[eq-genmfa\]).
### Development of the numerical integrator
In order to calculate the spectrum of MHD turbulence produced by the instabilities of the precursor plasma in the presence of the accelerated particle stream, the model solves equation (\[eq-genmfa\]). The driving term in this equation, $G$, is calculated using the information about particle streaming simulated in the Monte Carlo transport module. The numerical procedure that will be run in the simulation must solve Equation (\[eq-genmfa\]) with arbitrary driving term $G$ and with or without all the other terms in this equation, parameterized by ${\alpha_g}$, ${\beta_g}$, ${\gamma_g}$, ${\delta_g}$ and ${\varepsilon_g}$. I have developed such an integrator, and the algorithm of integration is presented in this section.
In brief, equation (\[eq-genmfa\]) is solved by integrating the system of coupled first-order ordinary differential equations: (\[xoft\]), (\[qoft\]) and (\[poft\]). This system is derived using the method of characteristics, and its solutions for different values of $k_0$ are the characteristic curves. The numerical method used for integration is a finite differencing scheme (based on the implicit Gauss’s method), with an adaptive step size in $x$-space and adaptive mesh refinement in $k$-space. The implicit nature of Gauss’s method is beneficial for the stability of the results, and is achieved with an iterative procedure.
Here is the outline of the procedure. Integrating from $x=-\infty$ to $x>0$, the scheme will make $N_x$ steps, $N_x$ being the number of grid planes. For every $k$-bin, every spatial step from $x_{(i-1)}$ to $x_{(i)}$ will consist of $N_{sub}$ substeps, enumerated by the index $l$, in which the code will propagate $k$ and $W$ from $x_{(i-1)}$ to $x_{(i)}$; the size of each substep will be adaptively chosen to ensure the stability of Gauss’s method. After all $k$-bins have been propagated from $x_{(i-1)}$ to $x_{(i)}$, the program will use the $k$-grid modified by compression and cascading to project the amplified $W$ onto the fixed $k$-grid of the simulation at $x_{(i)}$, and then proceed with the step to the next grid plane. If the code finds that the evolved $k$-grid has too large a spacing between some nodes, it will refine the problematic regions of the $k$-grid at $x_{(i-1)}$ and repeat the integration of the equation. The scheme will keep refining the $k$-grid at $x_{(i-1)}$ until the resulting $k$-grid at $x_{(i)}$ is satisfactory (i.e., fine enough).
#### Notation for this section
An index in round parentheses, as in $x_{(i)}$, enumerates the $x$-grid plane, and one in square parentheses, as in $k_{[j]}$, indicates the number of $k$-space bin. Subscripts without parentheses (e.g., in $p_l$) mean the number of the substep between $x_{(i-1)}$ and $x_{(i)}$, and superscripts in parentheses (e.g., $q_l^{(m)}$) are reserved for the number of the cycle in the iteration used to achieve the implicitness of the method.
For brevity, we re-write equations (\[xoft\]), (\[qoft\]) and (\[poft\]) as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{casc_par_x}
\frac{dx}{dt}&=& u, \\
\label{casc_par_q}
\frac{dq}{dt} &=& {\delta_g}C q,\\
\label{casc_par_p}
\frac{dp}{dt}&=&
- \frac53 {\delta_g}C p +
({\gamma_g}G - {\varepsilon_g}L)u^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}} ,\end{aligned}$$ where $$C = \frac32 \frac{p^{1/2}q^{3/2}}{u^{{\alpha_g}/2 + {\beta_g}} \rho^{1/2}}.$$
#### Making a substep
The substeps will be enumerated by the index $l$, so that $q_l$ and $p_l$ are the quantities $q$ and $p$ at the end of the $l$-th substep. The code starts making the $l$ substeps by initializing the following quantities: $$\begin{aligned}
x_0 &=& x_{(i-1)}, \\
t_0 &=& 0, \\
q_0 &=& k_{[j]}(x_{(i-1)}) u^{{\beta_g}}(x_{(i-1)}), \\
p_0 &=& W_{[j]}(x_{(i-1)}) u^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}}(x_{(i-1)}).\end{aligned}$$ To make the $l$-th substep, let us first assign the following quantities: $$\begin{aligned}
x_{l} &=& x_{l-1} + \Delta x_{l},\\
u_{l} &=& u(x_{l}), \\
\rho_{l} &=& \rho(x_{l}).\end{aligned}$$ The step width $\Delta x_{l}$ will be initially (for $l=1$) set as $$\Delta x_{1} = x_{(i)} - x_{(i-1)},$$ and if this attempted substep succeeds, there will be only one substep ($l=1$), after which the scheme will move on to the next grid plane $i$. If the scheme finds this substep too large, it will choose a smaller substep. For the subsequent substeps we will set $$\Delta x_l = X_l \cdot \Delta x_{l-1},$$ where $X_l$ is a number, greater or smaller than 1, depending on whether the previous substep was estimated as too short or too long, as discussed later. The program can integrate (\[casc\_par\_x\]) to get: $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta t_{l} &=& \frac{\Delta x_{l}}{u_l}, \\
t_{l} &=& t_{l-1} + \Delta t_{l}.\end{aligned}$$ To derive $q_{l}$ from $q_{l-1}$ and $p_{l}$ from $p_{l-1}$, the code will need to use an iterative procedure in order to implement an implicit finite differencing scheme for solving (\[casc\_par\_q\]) and (\[casc\_par\_p\]). The superscript $(m)$ will denote the cycle of iteration, and it will run from $0$ as far as it takes for convergence, restarting as $m=0$ with each new $l$. The initial step in this iteration will be $$\begin{aligned}
q_{l}^{(0)}&=&q_{l-1},\\
p_{l}^{(0)}&=&p_{l-1}.\end{aligned}$$ and the subsequent iterations will be derived from $$\begin{aligned}
\label{qlmiter}
q_{l}^{(m)} &=& q_{l-1} \exp\left( \left[\frac{d \ln{q}}{dt}\right]_{l}^{(m-1)} \Delta t_{l}\right), \\
\label{plmiter}
p_{l}^{(m)} &=&
(p_{l-1} - p_{\star}) \exp\left( \left[\frac{d \ln{p}}{dt}\right]_{l}^{(m-1)} \Delta t_{l}\right) + p_{\star},\end{aligned}$$ The values of the above mentioned derivatives and of the quantity $p_{\star}$ are discussed later. Before making the $(m)$-th iteration, the code must check whether the substep size $\Delta x_l$ was small enough. It does so by comparing the arguments of the above mentioned exponentials to a pre-set number $\eta$. The value $\eta=0.01$ seems to work well as the target step size. If at any step the arguments of the exponentials are greater than $\eta$, the $(m)$ iteration terminates, the code chooses a proportionally lower $\Delta x_{l}$ by setting $X_l<1$, and tries making the $l$-th substep again. If the value of the arguments of the exponentials in (\[qlmiter\]) and (\[plmiter\]) are by a factor of a few smaller than $\eta$ in all $(m)$ iterations, then for the $(l+1)$-th substep the code chooses $X_{l+1}>1$ in order to speed up the integration. Choosing the spatial step size this way makes the scheme adaptive in $x$-space.
The value $p_{\star}$ is used to tend to a nasty property of our equations: the cascading and dissipation terms eventually drive the solution to $p(t \to \infty)\to 0$, which happens to be the boundary of the range of definition of some of the functions in the equations. For the analytic solution, it is not a problem, because at $p=0$ processes further decreasing $p$ (cascading and dissipation) naturally cease. But in a numerical solution, there is a danger of marginally running into the $p<0$ region, if $p$ is evolved with a finite differencing scheme, which will cause an error, because the factor $p^{1/2}$ in some of the functions is not defined for a negative $p$. I eliminate the possibility of getting $p<0$ by evolving $\ln{p}$ instead of $p$ with the finite differencing method. However, when $p\to 0$, the program risks dividing by zero. To avoid zero values of $p$, I re-define the point at which the processes decreasing $p$ stop: from $p=0$ to $p=p_{\star}$. The solution in each bin subject to dissipation then converges to $p=p_{\star}$ instead of $p=0$. The value of $p_{\star}$ is chosen small enough so that it doesn’t affect the physical solution, but large enough to be treated numerically without problems.
One danger possible with an iteration on $q_l^{(m)}$ and $p_l^{(m)}$ like (\[qlmiter\]) and (\[plmiter\]) is that the solution may find an attractor cycle around the equilibrium point instead of converging to it, in which case we may find ourselves stuck in an infinite cycle (the equilibrium point is the point at which $q_{l}^{(m)}=q_{l}^{(m-1)}$ and $p_{l}^{(m)}=p_{l}^{(m-1)}$). Theory suggests that there is a finite domain of attraction around the attracting equilibria of this system, so all we have to do to ensure convergence in the end is perturb the solution occasionally. If the iteration is stuck in an attractor cycle, with the perturbation it usually jumps into the domain of attraction of the equilibrium point and converges (or finds another cycle, which it will be driven out of with a later perturbation). In practice, the code perturbs the solution whenever $m$ equals a multiple of a large integer, for example, 1000. Then it adjusts $q_{l}^{(m)}$ and $p_{l}^{(m)}$ only half way from $q_{l}^{(m-1)}$ and $p_{l}^{(m-1)}$ to what (\[qlmiter\]) and (\[plmiter\]) suggest (this going half way is the perturbation). Experience shows that this procedure successfully finds the equilibrium points of the above system of equations, thus yielding the implicit Gauss’s integration scheme.
The iteration deriving $q_l^{(m)}$ from $q_l^{(m-1)}$ and $p_l^{(m)}$ from $p_{l}^{(m-1)}$ will continue until it converges, that is, the relative difference between the values obtained at the previous and the current step becomes small enough. Suppose it happens at step $m=N_m$. Then the code will assign $$\begin{aligned}
q_l &=& q_l^{(N_m)},\\
p_l &=& p_l^{(N_m)}.\end{aligned}$$ and increment $l$. As soon as the last substep is completed ($x_l = x_{(i)}$), the program names $N_{sub}=l$ and assigns $$\begin{aligned}
q(t_{fin}) &=& q_{N_{sub}}, \\
p(t_{fin}) &=& p_{N_{sub}}.\end{aligned}$$ Having $q(t_{fin})$ and $p(t_{fin})$ allows one to revert back to the physical quantities and assign $$\begin{aligned}
k_{[j]}(x_{i}) &=& q(t_{fin}) u(x_{i})^{-{\beta_g}}, \\
W_{[j]}(x_{i}) &=& p(t_{fin}) u(x_{i})^{-{\alpha_g}+{\beta_g}}.\end{aligned}$$
#### Calculating the derivatives
In equations (\[qlmiter\]) and (\[plmiter\]), the derivatives of $\ln{q}$ and $\ln{p}$ are calculated, according to (\[casc\_par\_q\]) and (\[casc\_par\_p\]), as: $$\begin{aligned}
\left[\frac{d \ln{q}}{dt}\right]_{l}^{(m-1)} &=& {\delta_g}C_{l}^{(m-1)},\\
\left[\frac{d \ln{p}}{dt}\right]_{l}^{(m-1)} &=& -\frac53 {\delta_g}C_{l}^{(m-1)} +
\left({\gamma_g}G_{l}^{(m-1)} - {\varepsilon_g}L_{l}^{(m-1)}\right)\frac{u^{{\alpha_g}-{\beta_g}}}{p_l^{(m-1)}},\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
C_{l}^{(m-1)} &=& \frac32
\frac{\left(p_l^{(m-1)} - p_{\star}\right)^{\frac12} \left(q_l^{(m-1)}\right)^{\frac32}}
{u_l^{{\alpha_g}/2+{\beta_g}} \rho_l^{1/2}}, \\
\label{gl_num}
G_{l}^{(m-1)} &=& V_{G,\,l} \left[
\left( \frac{d{P_\mathrm{cr}}}{dx} \right)
\left|\frac{dp}{dk}\right|
\right]
\left| \begin{array}{l}\\ \\\left(x_{i,\,l},k\right)\end{array}\right., \\
\label{ll_num}
L_{l}^{(m-1)} &=& \frac{\left(p_{l}^{(m-1)}-p_{\star}\right)u_l^{-{\alpha_g}+{\beta_g}}}
{\tau_D\left(x_{i,\,l},k\right)}
H\left(x_{i,\,l},k\right)\end{aligned}$$ More details on evaluating quantities from (\[gl\_num\]) and (\[ll\_num\]) are given in the next subsection.
#### Details of the the growth and damping rate calculations
In expressions (\[gl\_num\]) and (\[ll\_num\]) the following notation is used: $$\begin{aligned}
k &\equiv& k_l^{(m-1)} = q_l^{(m-1)} u^{-{\beta_g}}_l, \\
V_{G, \, l} &=& \frac{B_0}{\sqrt{4 \pi \rho_l}}.\end{aligned}$$
The instability growth term, $G$, in the resonant case is determined by the gradient of CR pressure at the resonant momentum. The quantity ${P_\mathrm{cr}}$ is the pressure per unit interval of particle momentum, thus the factor $|dp/dk|$ in (\[gl\_num\]). To calculate the pressure gradient in such a way that the discontinuity of ${P_\mathrm{cr}}$ in $p$-space doesn’t lead to a discontinuity of $G$ in $k$-space, I chose to average the pressure over a finite wavenumber interval $\Delta k$. The code sets $\Delta k = 0.05 k$ and defines $$\begin{aligned}
k^{left}(k) &=& k - \frac12 \Delta k, \\
k^{right}(k)&=& k + \frac12 \Delta k,\end{aligned}$$ after which it can calculate the corresponding range of the particle momenta that interact with the current bin: $$\begin{aligned}
p^{high}(k) &=& \frac{e B_0}{c k^{left}(k)}, \\
p^{low}(k) &=& \frac{e B_0}{c k^{right}(k)}.\end{aligned}$$ Then the instantaneous gradient of the CR pressure that powers the instability (to the best of one’s knowledge at the $(m)$-th iteration of the $l$-th substep from $x_{i-1}$ to $x_{i}$) can be estimated as $$\left[
\left( \frac{d{P_\mathrm{cr}}}{dx} \right)
\left| \frac{dp}{dk} \right|
\right]
\left| \begin{array}{l}\\ \\(x_{l},k) \end{array}\right.
=
\frac{1}{\Delta x_{(i)}}
\left(
P_{(i)}\left(k\right) \left|\frac{dp}{dk}\right|-
P_{(i-1)}\left( k \right) \left|\frac{dp}{dk}\right|
\right),$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
P_{(i-1)}\left( k \right) \left|\frac{dp}{dk}\right| &=&
\frac{1}{\Delta k}
\int\limits_{p^{low}(k)}^{p^{high}(k)} {P_\mathrm{cr}}(x_{(i-1)}, p) dp, \\
P_{(i)}\left( k \right) \left|\frac{dp}{dk}\right| &=&
\frac{1}{\Delta k}
\int\limits_{p^{low}(k)}^{p^{high}(k)} {P_\mathrm{cr}}(x_{(i)}, p) dp.\end{aligned}$$ This allows us to calculate (\[gl\_num\]). Note that I used the grid nodes $x_{(i-1)}$ and $x_{(i)}$ as reference points for calculating the gradient. That is done because the CR pressure is evaluated in the Monte Carlo simulation directly at these locations.
In the dissipation rate $L$, calculated in (\[ll\_num\]), $$\begin{aligned}
\tau_D\left(x_{l},k\right) &=&
\frac{k^{-1}}{V_{G,\,l}},\\
H\left(x_{l},k\right) &=&
\frac{1}{1+{k_d}\left(x_{l}\right)/k}, \\
{k_d}\left(x_{l}\right) &=&
\frac{e B_0}{c \sqrt{m_p k_B T\left(x_{l}\right)}}.\end{aligned}$$
#### Adaptive $k$-grid
I use the parametric form of the turbulence growth equation, in which the $k$-grid evolves in time. It may happen that two $k$-grid nodes that were adjacent far upstream will move apart significantly by the time the turbulence advects downstream. In practice, starting off at $x=-\infty$ with 80 $k$-grid nodes equally spaced in $\log {k}$ space and spanning 10 orders of magnitude of $k$, we are likely to get two adjacent nodes that move apart by several orders of magnitude (!) at $x>0$. This makes it problematic to interpolate the wave spectrum $W(x,k)$ between these two nodes, and, in fact, a lot of information about this $k$-region is missing from the solution. An attempt to boost the $k$-resolution by increasing the density of $k$-grid nodes uniformly throughout $k$-space leads to a significant increase of computation time and to the need to have tens of thousands of $k$-nodes.
To solve this problem, I use an iterative approach to the refinement of the $k$-grid. After the system is integrated to $x_{(i)}$, the code evaluates the $k$-grid at this final point. If it finds two $k$-nodes that are too far apart at $x_{(i)}$ (by too far apart I usually mean $\Delta \ln{k}\equiv\ln(k_{[j]}/k_{[j-1]}) \geq 0.5$), it inserts a number of new nodes into the integration grid at $x_{(i-1)}$ and interpolates the seed turbulence spectrum into these nodes to repeat the calculation. Several (less than 10) iterations like that allow to get enough resolution in $k$-space throughout the system with minimal time (in practice, the whole computation takes a few seconds) and minimal memory (I usually have to have only a few hundred $k$-bins).
#### Turning over in $k$-space
Equation (\[dkdt\_param\]), for ${\beta_g}=0$, shows that cascading leads to the motion of a harmonic with wavenumber $k$ at a speed of $V_k=1.5 W^{1/2}k^{5/2}\rho^{-1/2}$ (for ${\delta_g}=1$) in $k$-space. This dispersion relation has an interesting feature: if the spectrum $W(k)$ has a power-law shape, $W \propto k^{s}$, then $V_k$ is an increasing function of $k$ for $s>-5$, but a decreasing function of $k$ for $s<-5$. That is, for the parts of the spectrum in which it rapidly drops off with $k$ (more quickly than $k^{-5}$), the lower $k$ harmonics increase their $k$ [*faster*]{} than the greater $k$. In this situation the fast-moving low-$k$ harmonics may catch up and overrun the slow-moving high-$k$ harmonics.
This situation is common for waves in gases and fluids, where the phase speed of waves increases with density or wave height. It leads to waves turning over in water, and to shocks in fluid dynamics, when viscosity is accounted for. Obviously, in this model the turning over of waves in $k$-space doesn’t have a physical meaning and simply reflects the limited applicability of the Kolmogorov cascade to steep wave spectra. However, straightforward application of this model to non-linear particle accelerating shocks does lead to the turning over in $k$-space in the numerical solution.
The place where turning over is most likely to occur is the dissipative region of the spectrum. There the turbulence dissipation term, $L$, makes the wave spectrum drop off exponentially, creating the situation in which turning over is likely to happen. Another possibility is turning over in the inertial region, if the generation of waves occurs on top of a ‘seed’ spectrum, and the generated waves cascade faster than the seed waves.
I ignore the wave turnover in $k$-space in the dissipative region, assuming that it will not affect the energetics of the process very much. As for the inertial spectrum, the physical solution for a steady-state nonlinearly modified shock must not have wave turnover there, if the model is self consistent (otherwise we must conclude that the Kolmogorov cascade is not a good approximation for the plasma physics of self-generated turbulence). There is a natural property of the accelerated particle distribution in shock precursors that seems to help the situation, if resonant amplification of waves is assumed. Very far upstream, only the highest energy particles resonantly generate the smallest $k$ waves. These waves start to cascade and would outrun the higher $k$ seed waves, but as the plasma advances toward the subshock, it encounters lower energy particles, whose pressure builds up exponentially with time. These lower energy particles should energize the higher $k$ waves, facilitating their escape from the lower $k$ waves pre-amplified farther upstream. This way wave turnover in $k$-space may be avoided naturally due to the properties of particle accelerating shocks.
### Tests of the numerical integrator
In this section I will present the tests of the integrator which compare the results of the numerical solution to the analytic solutions described above. All these test involve introducing a seed turbulence spectrum upstream, at $x=x_0<0$, and numerically integrating Equation (\[eq-genmfa\]) from $x=x_0$ to $x=0$. In order to test and understand the effects of different processes parameterized by ${\alpha_g}$, ${\beta_g}$, ${\gamma_g}$, ${\delta_g}$ and ${\varepsilon_g}$, I executed several runs, in which some of these parameters were set to finite values, while the other were set to zero.
First, I tested the effects of the compression of the flow: the increase in the amplitude and the wavenumber of the harmonics. At $x=x_0$ I introduced a Bohm seed spectrum with a Gaussian feature on top of it, located at $k=10^{-4}\,{r_\mathrm{g0}}^{-1}$ (see the thin line in Figure \[fig-turb\_test\_compr\]). I imposed a flow speed that drops by a factor of $r=10^2$ from $x=x_0$ to $x=0$. Then the code solved Equation (\[eq-genmfa\]) using ${\alpha_g}=1.0$ and ${\beta_g}=2.0$ (these values were used just for testing; physically justified values are discussed in Section \[turb\_effects\]). The resulting spectrum at $x=0$, shown with the thick line in Figure \[fig-turb\_test\_compr\], agrees with one’s expectation based on the analytic solution (\[wxk\_nocasc\_noamp\]): the feature moved to the right, towards greater $k$ by a factor of $r^{{\beta_g}}=10^4$ and upward, to greater amplitudes, by a factor of $r^{{\alpha_g}}=10^2$. Note that in the plots, the spectrum $W(x,k)$ is multiplied by $k$, so a horizontal line represents the seed spectrum, $W\propto k^{-1}$.
The second test, illustrated in Figure \[fig-turb\_test\_amp\], confirms that the amplification term proportional to ${\gamma_g}$ in (\[eq-genmfa\]) is handled correctly by the numerical solver. The introduced seed spectrum (shown with the thin line) is the boundary condition at $x=x_0$ for (\[eq-genmfa\]), in which ${\alpha_g}={\beta_g}={\delta_g}={\varepsilon_g}=0$, and ${\gamma_g}=1$. The growth term $G$ is modeled using the assumption that the resonant instability operates, i.e., $G={\Gamma_\mathrm{res}}W$ \[see Equation (\[resonant\_increment\])\], where an artificial CR pressure spectrum was imposed, described by the expression $${P_\mathrm{cr}}(x,p) = 0.5 \rho_0 u_0^2 \frac{1}{p_0}
e^{-(\ln{p}-\ln{p_0})^2}
\exp\left( -\frac{x}{x_0}\frac{p_0}{p} \right).$$ (this pressure was simulated and binned into the momentum and spatial grids in order to emulate the actual run, where the pressure ${P_\mathrm{cr}}$ is calculated by the Monte Carlo particle transport routine). The corresponding solution given by (\[wxk\_onlyamp\]) is: $$W(0,k) = W(x_0,k) + \int_{x_0}^{0} v_A
\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left[
0.5 \rho_0 u_0^2 \frac{1}{p_0}
e^{-(\ln{p}-\ln{p_0})^2}
\exp\left( -\frac{x'}{x_0}\frac{p_0}{p} \right)\right]
\frac{p}{k}\frac{dx'}{u_0}=$$ $$\label{test_amp_sol}
\qquad\qquad =
W(x_0,k) + 0.5 \rho_0 u_0^2 \frac{v_A}{u_0} \frac{k_0}{k^2}
e^{-(\ln{k}-\ln{k_0})^2}
\left[1 - \exp\left(-\frac{k}{k_0}\right)\right],$$ where $k_0 = eB_0/cp_0 = (mu_0/p_0) \, {r_\mathrm{g0}}^{-1}$, and $p_0 = m_p c$. The result of the numerical integration, shown with the solid thick line, coincides perfectly with the analytic solution (\[test\_amp\_sol\]) shown with the triangular markers.
The cascading term, proportional to ${\delta_g}$, along with the viscous dissipation in the term proportional to ${\varepsilon_g}$, are tested in the following two runs.
In Figure \[fig-turb\_test\_ampcasc\], I illustrate the third test – the solution of (\[eq-genmfa\]) with ${\alpha_g}={\beta_g}=0$ and ${\gamma_g}={\delta_g}={\varepsilon_g}=1$; the growth rate, $G$, was chosen similarly to the previous example, but with $p=10^2
m_pc$; the cascading rate, $\Pi$, was taken in the form (\[pi\_kolmogorov\]); and I chose the viscous dissipation model described by (\[diss\_ksq\]) with ${k_d}\approx 1.1\cdot 10^{3}\,{r_\mathrm{g0}}$, corresponding to a temperature $T_0 = 10^4$ K in (\[kdiss\_def\]). The resulting turbulence spectrum is consistent with the predictions of the Kolmogorov theory. The energy-containing interval of wavenumbers is around $k_0=eB_0/cp_0\approx 3\cdot 10^{-4}\,{r_\mathrm{g0}}^{-1}$, where the turbulence amplification takes place (see the previous example for the amplified spectrum not modified by cascading). Then follows the inertial interval, where the energy is carried from small $k$ to the greater $k$ by cascading; the power law index of the spectrum matches very well the Kolmogorov’s $k^{-5/3}$ law described by the analytic solution (\[amp\_with\_cascades\]). Finally, at short wavelengths, the dissipative interval is marked by the spectrum turning down exponentially due to the effect of viscous dissipation, $L$. It happens at $k\approx 0.1 \, {k_d}$.
In another test of cascading, I confirm that, if the seed turbulence has a power-law form, and is not amplified, the cascading leads to the formation of an inertial interval with $W\propto k^{-5/3}$ followed by the dissipative interval, where the spectrum turns down exponentially. The setup of the run shown in Figure \[fig-turb\_test\_casc\] is similar to that of the previous example, but ${\gamma_g}=0$, and the seed turbulence spectrum contains more energy by a factor $10^3$ (the solid thin line). The evolution with cascading leads to the formation of the spectrum shown with the thick solid line. Its slope is in agreement with the Kolmogorov’s law indicated with the dashed line.
The tests presented above are only a few of the multitude of tests that I performed in order to confirm that my major contribution to the model, the magnetic field amplification module, adequately solves equation (\[eq-genmfa\]) and calculates the effects of turbulence generation and dissipation on the flow. These effects are: plasma heating due to the turbulence dissipation \[see equation (\[pressuregrowth\] and the text explaining it\], the contribution of turbulence to the momentum and energy balance, which affects the plasma flow (see Section \[turb\_fluxes\]), and the determination of particle transport by the spectrum $W(x,k)$ (Section \[advanced\_transport\]). I should note that in several publications we used a model for magnetic field amplification that included the generation of waves traveling in both directions, but did not include cascading. This model and the corresponding numerical integrator are described in Appendix A.
0.5in
0.5in
0.5in
0.5in
### Turbulence and equations of motion {#turb_fluxes}
The fundamental idea on which the Monte Carlo model, as well as simpler analytic models, is based, is that the dynamics of matter, particles and magnetic fields are described on scales much larger than the scale of turbulent fluctuations. That is, the model does not contain and describe the information about the spatial structure of stochastic flows and magnetic fields, substituting an averaged statistical description. This is expressed in the following approximations:
- [Instead of a field of turbulent fluctuations of the plasma velocities, the model has the averaged flow speed $u(x)$;]{}
- [Instead of the spatial structure of magnetic fields ${\bf B}({\bf r}, t)$, the Fourier spectrum of fluctuations, averaged over a large enough volume surrounding a coordinate $x$, is used, denoted as $W(x,k)$;]{}
- [Instead of describing particle transport using the equations of motion based on the Lorentz force, the model employs a diffusion model, in which the mean free paths depend on $W(x,k)$. This diffusion approach applies on scales on which the particles ‘lose memory’ of their initial direction of motion, and these scales must be greater than the size of the turbulent structures scattering the particles.]{}
The above approximations mean that the equations of motion describing $u(x)$ must contain the properly averaged contributions of the turbulence to the fluxes of mass, momentum and energy. In this section, we present and explain these contributions. The equations and reasoning shown here are pertinent to the discussions in Sections \[sec-rtot\] and \[subsec\_smoothing\].
One may calculate the flux of momentum and energy, accounting for the turbulent contribution, using the general expression for the energy density $W_t$, the stress tensor $T_{ik}$, and the energy flux ${\bf q}$ (e.g., equations (2.48), (2.49) and (2.67) in [@VBT93]) $$\begin{aligned}
\label{totenergy}
W_t &=&
\rho\left( \frac12 u^2 + \frac{\epsilon}{\rho} \right) + \frac{B^2}{8\pi},\\
\label{totstresstens}
T_{ik} &=&
P \delta_{ik} + \rho u_i u_k + \frac{B^2}{8\pi}\delta_{ik} -
\frac{B_i B_k} {4\pi} \\
\label{totengyflux}
{\bf q} &=& \rho {\bf u}
\left(\frac12 u^2 + \frac{\epsilon}{\rho} + \frac{P}{\rho}\right)
+ \frac{{\bf B} \times ({\bf u} \times {\bf B})}{4\pi}.\end{aligned}$$ Here $\delta_{ik}$ is the Kronecker delta-symbol, and the index ‘t’ in $W_t$ indicates that this is the total energy density of the bulk flow, accelerated particles, and turbulence.
For simplicity (also see the comment at the end of this section), let us assume that the spectrum of turbulence, $W(x,k)$, is a power spectrum of [Alfvén]{} waves traveling along the magnetic field ${\bf B}_0$ in a plasma moving at a constant speed ${\bf u}_0$ with mass density $\rho_0$. Such waves induce perturbations of the matter velocity and magnetic field, and the total flow velocity ${\bf u}$ and total magnetic field ${\bf B}$ can be written as: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ualf}
{\bf u} &=& {\bf u}_0 +
\delta{\bf u}_m \exp{\left[ i k (x - (u_x \mp v_A))\omega t
\right]} = {\bf u}_0 + \delta{\bf u}\\
\label{balf}
{\bf B} &=& {\bf B}_0 +
\delta{\bf B}_m \exp{\left[ i k (x - (u_x \mp v_A))\omega t
\right]} = {\bf B}_0 + \delta{\bf B},\end{aligned}$$ where $\delta{\bf B}$ and $\delta{\bf u}$ are the time and coordinate-dependent values of the fluctuations of the magnetic field and the plasma velocity in the wave, $\delta{\bf B}_m$ and $\delta{\bf u}_m$ are the amplitudes of these fluctuations, and $u_x$ is the average x-component of the flow velocity, also denoted throughout this work as $u$. The $\pm$ signs correspond to different polarization (i.e., directions of motion). For [Alfvén]{} waves, the following properties must be listed: $\delta{\bf u} = \pm\delta{\bf B}/\sqrt{4\pi\rho_0}$, ${\bf B}_0 \parallel {\bf u_0}$, $\delta{\bf B} \perp {\bf B}_0$, $\delta{\bf u} \perp {\bf u}_0$. Also, because [Alfvén]{} waves are an incompressible motion of plasma, one may add these conditions: $\rho = \rho_0$, $\epsilon = \epsilon_0$ and $P = P_0$ (here $\epsilon$ is the internal energy, and $P$ – the pressure of the gas).
Substituting the expressions for ${\bf u}$ and ${\bf B}$ from (\[ualf\]) and (\[balf\]) into (\[totenergy\]), (\[totstresstens\]) and (\[totengyflux\]), one may derive the quantities that interest us in the 1-D simulation: $W(x,k)$, $T_{xx}$ and $q_x$. Note that these quantities have also been denoted above as ${\Phi_P}$ and ${\Phi_E}$. $$\begin{aligned}
W_t &=& \rho_0 \left(\frac12 ({\bf u_0} + \delta{\bf u})^2
+ \frac{\epsilon_0}{\rho_0} \right) +
\frac{({\bf B}_0 + \delta{\bf B})^2}{8\pi},\\
{\Phi_P}\equiv T_{xx} &=&
P_0 + \rho u_0^2 +
\frac{({\bf B} + \delta{\bf B})^2}{8\pi} -
\frac{B_0^2}{4\pi},\\
\nonumber
{\Phi_E}\equiv q_x &=&
\rho_0 u_0\left(
\frac12 ({\bf u}_0 + \delta{\bf u})^2
+ \frac{\epsilon_0}{\rho_0}
+ \frac{P_0}{\rho_0}
\right) + \\
& &
+ \frac{ ({\bf B}_0 + \delta{\bf B})\times
[ ({\bf u}_0 + \delta{\bf u})\times
({\bf B}_0 + \delta{\bf B}) ]}{4\pi}.\end{aligned}$$ Simplifying the vector operations and averaging over many wavelengths in $x$ and many cycles in $t$ (this leads to $\left< \delta{\bf B}^2 \right>=\delta{\bf B}_m^2/2$ and $\left< \delta{\bf u}^2 \right>=\delta u_m^2/2$), one gets: $$\begin{aligned}
\left< W_t \right> &=& \frac12 \rho_0 u_0^2 + \epsilon_0 + \frac{B_0^2}{8\pi} +
\left( \frac12 \rho_0\delta u_m^2 +
\frac{\delta B_m^2}{8\pi}\right)/2,\\
\left<{\Phi_P}\right> \equiv \left< T_{xx} \right> &=&
\rho u_0^2 + P_0 - \frac{B_0^2}{8\pi} +
\left(\frac{\delta B_m^2}{8\pi}\right)/2,\\
\nonumber
\left<{\Phi_E}\right> \equiv \left< q_x \right> &=&
\frac12 \rho_0 u_0^3 +
(P_0 + \epsilon_0)u_0 + \\
& &
+ \left(\frac12 \rho_0 u_0 \delta u_m^2 +
\frac{u_0 \delta B_m^2 \mp B_0 \delta u_m^2}{4\pi}
\right)/2.\end{aligned}$$ In the following, we omit the averaging signs $\left<\right.$ $\left.\right>$. Associating the last terms in the above equations with the contributions of turbulence we have: $$\begin{aligned}
W &=& \left( \frac12 \rho_0\delta u_m^2 +
\frac{\delta B_m^2}{8\pi}\right)/2,\\
P_w &=& \left(\frac{\delta B_m^2}{8\pi}\right)/2,\\
F_w &=& \left(\frac12 \rho_0 u_0 \delta u_m^2 +
\frac{u_0 \delta B_m^2 \mp B_0 \delta B_m \delta u_m}{4\pi}
\right)/2.\end{aligned}$$ Now, using the ‘equipartition’ characteristic of [Alfvén]{} waves, i.e., the identity $\delta u_m^2 = \delta B_m^2 / (4\pi\rho_0)$, and the definition of [Alfvén]{} velocity $v_A = B_0/\sqrt{4\pi\rho_0}$, we arrive at: $$\begin{aligned}
W &=& W_k + W_m =
\frac12 \frac{\rho_0 \delta u_m^2}{2} +
\frac12 \frac{B_m^2}{8\pi}, \\
\label{pwdef}
P_w &=& \frac12 W, \\
\label{fwdef}
F_w &=& \frac32 (u_0 \mp v_A) W.\end{aligned}$$ In these equations, $W_k=W_m$ are the energy densities of, respectively, kinetic and magnetic turbulent fluctuations. Equations (\[pwdef\]) and (\[fwdef\]) define the ‘pressure’ (i.e., flux of the $x$-component of momentum in the $x$-direction) and the energy flux (in the $x$-direction) of turbulence. These quantities should be added to the corresponding fluxes of particles in order to account for turbulence in the momentum and energy balance; in other words, in order to account for turbulence in the equations of averaged motion.
Let us discuss the equations (\[pwdef\]) and (\[fwdef\]) defined above. First of all, they only strictly apply to [Alfvén]{} waves (but, thankfully, of arbitrary amplitude). Nonlinear interactions between high amplitude waves and particles may, as explained in earlier sections, lead to the turbulent behavior characterized by cascading and by significant changes in the geometry of magnetic fields and random plasma velocities, invalidating (\[pwdef\]) and (\[fwdef\]). Also, even without the transition to turbulence, these equations do not rigorously apply to any waves other than [Alfvén]{}. For instance, the short-wavelength harmonics generated by Bell’s instability are not [Alfvén]{}ic; one may show that for waves at $k=k_c/2$ (the peak of the growth rate), the balance between the kinetic and magnetic energy density of these waves, $W_k$ and $W_m$, is $W_m = 3 W_k$, as opposed to $W_k = W_m$ for [Alfvén]{} waves.
In the absence of a more detailed model of turbulence evolution that describes the geometry and dynamics of stochastic motions and fields in the plasma, one cannot expect to significantly improve the calculation of $P_w$ and $F_w$. However, I argue that, as shown by the example of Bell’s harmonics, different geometry or dynamics of turbulence may just lead to changes in the factors such as $1/2$ and $3/2$ in equations (\[pwdef\]) and (\[fwdef\]). One may hope that this would be a minor change, where by ‘minor’ I mean a change by a factor of a few. This is as much certainty as one may expect to achieve without describing the spatial structure of turbulence with a PIC or MHD model. That approach, as we saw earlier, is extremely computationally expensive, especially for nonlinear shocks that require a large spatial and temporal dynamic range, and I accept the equations (\[pwdef\]) and (\[fwdef\]) in the model for the sake of achieving the designated goal of this work: studying the nonlinear structure of shocks undergoing efficient particle acceleration and strong magnetic field amplification.
Particle transport {#advanced_transport}
------------------
The problem of diffusive transport of charged particles in magnetized plasmas is fundamental for plasma physics. In collisionless plasmas typically found in astrophysics, this transport is generally turbulent diffusion as particles propagate in stochastic magnetic fields and the associated stochastic plasma motions. The question usually asked is, given the spectrum (or a more complete description – correlation tensors) of turbulence, find the diffusion coefficient of a particle with a certain momentum ${{\bf p}}$. In this work I used several approximations of diffusion coefficients, as described below. Each of these approximations has a its own domain of applicability.
### Bohm diffusion limit {#sec_bohm}
Bohm diffusion was first observed for electrons in a magnetized laboratory plasma [@Kaufman90], but the Bohm diffusion model is often applied in astrophysics due to its simplicity. The principal assumption is that the plasma is magnetized and turbulent, so that a particle’s mean free path between strong deflections is equal to its gyroradius, $$\label{mfp_bohm}
{\lambda_\mathrm{Bohm}}= \frac{c p}{e B}.$$ Here $p$ is the momentum of the particle, and $B$ is the magnetic field in the plasma. The corresponding diffusion coefficient, assuming isotropic diffusion, is $$\label{dif_bohm}
{D_\mathrm{Bohm}}= \frac{{\lambda_\mathrm{Bohm}}v}{3},$$ where $v$ is the speed of the particle corresponding to momentum ${{\bf p}}$. Note that for non-relativistic particles ($p=mv \ll mc$), ${D_\mathrm{Bohm}}\propto p^2$, and for ultra-relativistic ones ($p \gg mc$, $v \equiv c$), the scaling is ${D_\mathrm{Bohm}}\propto p$.
The Bohm approximation is clear and intuitive. It features two most important dependencies: the diffusion coefficient increases with the particle momentum, $p$, and decreases with the magnetic field $B$. This diffusion model rests on the assumption that $B$ is rather strong: it confines the particle gyromotion to scales on which the field itself varies significantly (so that the diffusive character of motion is effectuated).
### Resonant scattering by [Alfvén]{} waves {#subsec_resonant_mfp}
When a uniform field, $B_0$, exists in a plasma on scales much larger than the sizes of particle gyroradii and turbulent harmonics, and a train of low amplitude $\Delta B \ll B_0$ [Alfvén]{} waves travels along this field, the mean free path of an energetic particle along the uniform field can be estimated as $$\label{mfp_resonant}
{\lambda_\mathrm{res}}= \frac{4}{\pi} \frac{cp_{\perp}/eB_0}{\mathcal{F}},$$ where $$\label{F_quantity}
\mathcal{F} = \frac{{k_\mathrm{res}}W({k_\mathrm{res}})}{B_0^2 / 8\pi}.$$ and $$\label{kres_in_b0}
{k_\mathrm{res}}= \frac{1}{cp_{\parallel}/eB_0}$$ (see [@Wentzel74] or [@LC83]). In expression (\[mfp\_resonant\]), the numerator of the second fraction is the gyroradius of the particle ($p_{\perp}$ is the component of the particle’s momentum transverse to the field $\bf{B}_0$), and the denominator $\mathcal{F}$ is, within a factor, the energy density of [Alfvén]{} waves (per unit logarithmic waveband $d\ln{k}=1$) normalized to the energy density of the underlying uniform field. The energy density $W(k)$ in (\[F\_quantity\]) is taken at the resonant wavenumber ${k_\mathrm{res}}$ defined by (\[kres\_in\_b0\]). When $\mathcal{F}$ approaches $1$, the mean free path shrinks down to the particle gyroradius, and the Bohm limit is realized. Increasing $\mathcal{F}$ further takes this theory beyond its applicability limits.
### Diffusion in short scale turbulent fluctuations
If the bulk of the turbulence energy is in small-scale harmonics with respect to the particle mean free path, then the motion of the particle is nearly ballistic, with frequent and small deflections from the stochastic Lorentz force. The collision length of such motion can be expressed ([@DT68], see also [@Toptygin1985] and [@Jokipii1971]) as: $$\label{mfp_shortscale_1}
{\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}(x,p) = \frac{4}{\pi}\frac{p^2 c^2}{e^2}
\left[4\pi\int\limits_{0}^{\infty}\frac{W(x,k)}{k}\;dk\right]^{-1}.$$ This corresponds to a mean free path in the small-scale field, ${\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}$, given by the expression ${\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}={r_\mathrm{ss}}^2/{l_\mathrm{cor}}$, where ${r_\mathrm{ss}}=cp/e{B_\mathrm{ss}}$ is the gyroradius of the particle with momentum $p$ in the effective small-scale field, ${B_\mathrm{ss}}$, and ${l_\mathrm{cor}}$ is equal to the correlation length of the small-scale magnetic field (see below for exact definitions). This relationship is easy to understand. Consider a thought experiment: an energetic particle with momentum $p$ is propagating through a medium consisting of regions of scale ${l_\mathrm{cor}}$, each of which contains a magnetic field with magnitude ${B_\mathrm{ss}}$, pointing in a different random direction in each region. In the course of the path ${\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}\gg {l_\mathrm{cor}}$, the particle encounters $N={\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}/{l_\mathrm{cor}}\gg 1$ such regions, and in each of them its momentum gets a random scattering in the amount $\Delta p_\mathrm{v} \approx F\Delta t = e {B_\mathrm{ss}}{l_\mathrm{cor}}/ c$ (here $F$ is the magnitude of Lorentz force, and $\Delta t$ is the time of the particle crossing the region). Considering this process a random walk in $p$-space, the mean square deflection of momentum along the path ${\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}$ is $\left<\Delta p\right>^2=N (\Delta p_\mathrm{v})^2={\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}/ {l_\mathrm{cor}}(e {B_\mathrm{ss}}{l_\mathrm{cor}}/c)^2$, and setting $\left<\Delta p\right>^2 = p^2$, corresponding to ${\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}$ being the mean free path, one can solve this equation to find ${\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}=(cp/e{B_\mathrm{ss}})^2 / {l_\mathrm{cor}}={r_\mathrm{ss}}^2 / {l_\mathrm{cor}}$. This mean free path depends on the particle momentum as ${\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}\propto p^2$, as opposed to the Bohm behavior $\propto p$, which is a significant difference.
### Low energy particle trapping by turbulent vortices
Suppose the turbulence has a power law spectrum that contains a significant fraction of energy in the smallest scales (such a spectrum may be produced by cascading as described in Section \[turb\_effects\]). A particle with a low enough energy will be effectively confined by resonant scattering on the small scale turbulence fluctuations. But its transport on scales greater than the correlation length of the turbulence (i.e., greater than the largest turbulent harmonics), which is of interest for the Monte Carlo code, may be significantly different from the directly applied model of resonant scattering transport. The efficient resonant scattering effectively confines the particles to the large-scale turbulent structures, and their diffusion on large scales is determined by the motions of the turbulence rather than the particles’ own motion. A theoretical description of such transport is described by Bykov and Toptygin in [@BT92], [@BT93] and [@VBT93]. A rough approximation of their result is that, if the mean free path of a low energy particle due to resonant scattering is ${\lambda_\mathrm{res}}\ll {l_\mathrm{cor}}$, where ${l_\mathrm{cor}}$ is the correlation length of the turbulence, then the diffusion coefficient of such particle on scales greater than ${l_\mathrm{cor}}$ is on the order of $$\label{diff_largescale_trapped}
D \approx u_c {l_\mathrm{cor}},$$ where $u_c$ is the typical speed of turbulent motions with correlation length ${l_\mathrm{cor}}$. This applies when $D \gg v {\lambda_\mathrm{res}}$, where $v$ is the speed of the particle, and ${\lambda_\mathrm{res}}$ is its mean free path between the resonant scatterings, meaning that the ‘convective’ diffusion coefficient (\[diff\_largescale\_trapped\]) is much greater than the resonant scattering coefficient. This situation is analogous to the convective diffusion of cream in a coffee cup. Pour the cream into the coffee and, even without stirring, it will spread through the cup in minutes. If one naively assumes molecular diffusion and estimates the time it takes the cream to diffuse from one end of the cup to another, this time will be much longer, on the order of hours. The discrepancy is successfully explained with a model similar to (\[diff\_largescale\_trapped\]): molecules of the admixture are confined to the turbulent vortices in the medium (in the coffee cup, those are induced by the temperature difference between the top and the bottom, and by the energy introduced during the pouring of the coffee into the cup and of the cream into the coffee), and the propagation of the admixture is determined by the motion of these vortices rather than of the admixture with respect to the vortices.
Another possibility of particle trapping in turbulent structures is when there is no short-scale turbulence to produce effective resonant scattering, but a particle has a low enough energy so that its gyroradius in the large scale turbulent magnetic field, $r_g$, is small compared to the correlation length of the turbulence, ${l_\mathrm{cor}}$. Then the particle will gyrate around the turbulent magnetic fields, losing the memory of its initial direction of motion on the length comparable to ${l_\mathrm{cor}}$. If the particle’s speed $v \gg u_c$ (so that the turbulence is essentially stationary for the particle), then one may estimate the coefficient of diffusion of the particle on scales greater than ${l_\mathrm{cor}}$ as $$D \approx v {l_\mathrm{cor}},$$ or the effective mean free path of the particle as $$\label{diffusion_trapping}
\lambda \approx {l_\mathrm{cor}}.$$ This means that particles trapped in the turbulent vortices by gyration in the turbulent large-scale magnetic fields have a mean free path nearly independent of the particle energy and equal to the size of the turbulent vortices. More realistic models of this process may be necessary, because effects such as drifts in magnetic fields and time dependence of the vortex structure may change the dependence of the mean free path on the particle energy.
The above approximation applies to particle transport on scales greater than the turbulence correlation length. The transport of very low energy particles on smaller scales depends on geometry and evolution of the turbulent structures, which is beyond the reach of our model. The motion of magnetic field lines (sometimes called magnetic field line wandering) may be non-diffusive on small spatial scales, resulting in CR transport that cannot be described as diffusion (e.g., [@Ragot99]).
### Implementation of diffusion models in the Monte Carlo code
Based on the theoretical models of particle transport outlined above, I implemented the corresponding mean free path prescriptions into the Monte Carlo code. When the model is run, the user can specify which prescription is to be used in the simulation. It allows the application of transport models of various degrees of physical accuracy and applicability to study their effects on the self-consistent shock structure.
#### Bohm diffusion
If the user specifies the Bohm regime of diffusion in the simulation, then given the momentum of the particle, $p$, measured in the plasma frame, the code will calculate the mean free path ${\lambda_\mathrm{Bohm}}$ using (\[mfp\_bohm\]), where for $B$ it substitutes the effective local magnetic field, ${B_\mathrm{eff}}$, defined in (\[eq\_beff\]).
This is the simplest method of describing diffusion in the presence of efficient MFA. It should give an accurate (within an order of magnitude) estimate of the collision mean free paths for moderate energy cosmic rays. For the highest energy cosmic rays, with gyroradii greater than the magnetic field correlation length, the turbulence acts as small-scale magnetic fluctuations, an Bohm diffusion is an overestimate of the confinement strength. For the lowest energy CRs and thermal particles, Bohm diffusion is also not a good approximation, because the particles may be trapped in magnetic structures, in which case their diffusion is determined by the evolution of the small scale turbulence rather than their own motion.
#### Resonant scattering
I have the option of describing the particle scattering with a form similar to (\[mfp\_resonant\]) in the simulation. If this model is adopted, it calculates the resonant wavenumber as given by (\[kres\_in\_b0\]), except that it uses the total momentum $p$ instead of $p_{\parallel}$, and to calculate the mean free path, it uses (\[mfp\_resonant\]), but with $p$ instead of $p_{\perp}$. This replacement of the components of the particle momentum with its magnitude is done in order to account for the strong nature of the turbulence. Actually, if $\Delta B \gg B_0$, then (\[mfp\_resonant\]) is not applicable in all rigorousness, but I use this theory in order to grasp the most important qualitative behavior of the turbulent transport: the stronger the turbulent structures of scales comparable to the particle gyroradius, the more efficient is particle scattering.
If the turbulence spectrum has the shape $W = W_0 (k/k_0)^{-1}$, which will hereafter be called the Bohm spectrum, then (\[mfp\_resonant\]) gives a mean free path similar to the Bohm prescription (\[mfp\_bohm\]). Namely, when $\sqrt{4 \pi W_0 k_0}=B_0^2$, and $\mathcal{F}=1$, the two models match within a factor of $4/\pi$. The latter condition is equivalent to the condition that a unit logarithmic waveband $d\ln{k}=1$ contains the same amount of turbulent energy as the underlying magnetic field $B_0$.
Thus, for relativistic particles, ${\lambda_\mathrm{res}}\propto p$ in a Bohm spectrum $W(k) \propto k^{-1}$. Steeper spectra of turbulence ($W \propto
k^{-q}$ for $q>1$) give weaker dependencies of ${\lambda_\mathrm{res}}$ on $p$. The spectrum $W(k) \propto k^{-2}$ gives a constant ${\lambda_\mathrm{res}}(p)$.
#### Hybrid model of diffusion in strong turbulence {#subsec_hybr_diff}
It is useful to re-write equation (\[mfp\_shortscale\_1\]) as $$\label{mfp_shortscale}
{\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}(x,p) = \frac{{r_\mathrm{ss}}^2}{{l_\mathrm{cor}}},$$ where ${r_\mathrm{ss}}$ is the particle gyroradius in the effective magnetic fields of the short-scale magnetic perturbations. In the model, I adopt the prescription (\[mfp\_shortscale\]), and generalize it with two assumptions, as outlined below, so it can be applied to particles of lower energies as well. The first assumption is that for a particle of momentum $p$, the local turbulence spectrum can be divided into the large-scale and the short-scale part, the wavenumber ${k_\mathrm{*}}$ being the boundary between them. The effective large-scale magnetic field is then $$\frac{{B_\mathrm{ls}}^2(x, {k_\mathrm{*}})}{8\pi} =
\frac{B_0^2}{8\pi} +
\frac12 \int\limits_{0}^{{k_\mathrm{*}}} W(x,k') \; dk',$$ the effective small-scale field is $$\frac{{B_\mathrm{ss}}^2(x, {k_\mathrm{*}})}{8\pi} =
\frac12 \int\limits_{{k_\mathrm{*}}}^{\infty} W(x,k') \; dk',$$ and the correlation length of short-scale field ${l_\mathrm{cor}}$ can be estimated as $${l_\mathrm{cor}}= \frac{\int_{{k_\mathrm{*}}}^{\infty} W(x,k')/k'\;dk'}
{\int_{{k_\mathrm{*}}}^{\infty} W(x,k') \;dk'}.$$ I define ${k_\mathrm{*}}$ using the condition $r_g({B_\mathrm{ls}}){k_\mathrm{*}}=1$, where $r_g({B_\mathrm{ls}})=cp/e{B_\mathrm{ls}}$ is the gyroradius of the particle in the large-scale magnetic field ${B_\mathrm{ls}}$. The latter is dependent on ${k_\mathrm{*}}$, therefore a nonlinear equation must be solved at every point in space for every particle momentum in order to determine ${k_\mathrm{*}}$. The second assumption is that the calculated ${\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}(p)$ does not increase as momentum $p$ decreases.
Let us comment on the physics behind the assumptions outlined above. Equation (\[mfp\_shortscale\]) applies if the turbulence is predominantly short scale. However, if the turbulence spectrum incorporates a wide range of wavenumbers (for example, the assumed upstream spectrum $W \propto k^{-1}$) then a good quasi-linear approximation to the particle transport properties is the resonant scattering prescription (\[mfp\_resonant\]) (see, e.g., [@AB2006; @VEB2006] and references therein). However, for a spectrum similar to (\[eq\_seed\_turb\]) and ${k_\mathrm{*}}\ll {k_\mathrm{max}}$, the mean free path (\[mfp\_shortscale\]) can be represented after some simple mathematical transformations as $$\label{diff_res_eff}
\lambda = \frac{cp}{e {B_\mathrm{ls}}} \frac{{B_\mathrm{ls}}^2}{4 \pi k W(x,k)},$$ where $k = e{B_\mathrm{ls}}/(cp)$. For ${B_\mathrm{ls}}\approx B_0$ (weak turbulence case), this is precisely the resonant scattering mean free path (\[mfp\_resonant\]), and for ${B_\mathrm{ls}}> B_0$ (strong perturbations), it may be a good generalization of the latter. Therefore, dividing the turbulence spectrum at ${k_\mathrm{*}}$ allows one to correctly describe the mean free path of intermediate-energy particles using (\[mfp\_shortscale\]), along with the high energy particles.
The second assumption, that of monotonic behavior of $\lambda(x,p)$ with respect to $p$, doesn’t influence the case of a power-law turbulence spectrum, but affects the diffusive transport of low energy particles in case of turbulence with a marked concentration of energy around a wavenumber ${k_\mathrm{v}}$, i.e. containing strong vortices of size $1/{k_\mathrm{v}}$. Indeed, assume for simplicity a Gaussian spectrum $W(x,k) \propto \exp{\left[(k-{k_\mathrm{v}})^2/(2\sigma^2)\right]}$, where $\sigma$ is the width of the spectrum. If the particle momentum $p$ is large enough so that ${k_\mathrm{*}}< {k_\mathrm{v}}$, and ${r_\mathrm{ss}}\gg {l_\mathrm{cor}}$ holds, then the particle is scattered by frequent deflections in the short-scale magnetic field of the vortices, and equation (\[mfp\_shortscale\]) applies unconditionally. However, a particle with a low enough momentum so that ${k_\mathrm{*}}\gg {k_\mathrm{v}}$ will find itself trapped in the large-scale magnetic fields of the vortices, and one may assume that its transport on scales larger that $1/{k_\mathrm{v}}$ is diffusive (see equation (\[diffusion\_trapping\]), with the effective mean free path $$\label{diff_whirl}
\lambda \approx 1/{k_\mathrm{v}}.$$ Now consider the above Gaussian spectrum. The prescription (\[mfp\_shortscale\]), with ${r_\mathrm{ss}}$ and ${l_\mathrm{cor}}$ determined using the ${k_\mathrm{*}}$ formalism, does not describe the trapping of the low energy particles. However, at such momentum ${p_\mathrm{tr}}$ that ${k_\mathrm{*}}\approx {k_\mathrm{v}}$ for this momentum, the magnetic field ${B_\mathrm{ls}}\approx {B_\mathrm{ss}}\gg B_0$, (assuming strong turbulence), and lowering the value of $p$ will lead to an exponentially rapid decrease of ${B_\mathrm{ss}}$, and an equally rapid increase in ${r_\mathrm{ss}}$, which will make $\lambda={r_\mathrm{ss}}^2/{l_\mathrm{cor}}$ unphysically increase for smaller $p$. The monotonicity assumption will correct this unphysical behavior by fixing $\lambda(x,p)$ at the value $\lambda(x,{p_\mathrm{tr}})$ for $p<{p_\mathrm{tr}}$. And this value will approximately be (\[diff\_whirl\]), because ${p_\mathrm{tr}}$ corresponds to ${r_\mathrm{ss}}\approx 1/{k_\mathrm{v}}\approx {l_\mathrm{cor}}$.
Summarizing, I state that I choose the mean free path of particles with momentum $p$ according to (\[mfp\_shortscale\]), where ${r_\mathrm{ss}}$ and ${l_\mathrm{cor}}$ are calculated for the short-scale part of the magnetic field, $k>{k_\mathrm{*}}$, and force this prescription to be monotonic in $p$ for low momenta. The reasoning provided above shows that our prescription properly describes particle transport a) for high $p$ particles in short-scale field, as per the derivation of (\[mfp\_shortscale\]); b) for intermediate to low $p$ in a power-law turbulence spectrum, assuming resonant scattering, and c) for low energy particles in large-scale turbulent vortices, assuming particle trapping. In between these important regimes, the prescription provides an interpolation.
Parallel computing with MPI {#parallel_computing}
---------------------------
The code used for this dissertation is written for parallel processing using the MPI (Message Passing Interface) protocol. In this section I will summarize the parallelization algorithm, outline its advantages and drawbacks, and present a performance test.
By far the most time consuming part of the simulation is the Monte Carlo transport of particles that simulates the Fermi-I acceleration process. This procedure is intrinsically very well suited for parallel computing, because particles are propagated one after another, and each particle’s motion within an iteration is completely independent of any other particle’s history. Multiple particles are only required in order to decrease random deviations of the results, i.e. to ‘improve statistics’. This also means that the quality of random numbers is not a major issue of concern for this Monte Carlo code, because even if the random numbers are correlated within a sequence, correlated between different processors, or do not continuously fill their range of definition, it does not affect the quality of results. That is because the trajectory of each particle depends not only on the latest scattering outcome, but also on the previous history of acceleration of this particle, which effectively diminishes any possible correlations in particle histories due to the imperfections of the random numbers used by the Monte Carlo code[^13].
I implemented the following algorithm of parallelization of the calculations. First, a ‘master’ processor divides the user-specified number of particles equally between the available processors, including itself. Then each processor (the ‘slaves’ and the ‘master’) performs one iteration, i.e. propagates the particles it is responsible for until they reach the highest achievable energies, and the iteration terminates. After a processor completes its iteration, it returns the output, (the particle distribution function $f({{\bf p}})$ and its moments) to the ‘master’ processor (which also performs its iteration equally with the other processors, and returns the collected information to itself). The ‘master’ processor then averages the incoming results (which improves the statistical certainty of the calculated particle distribution, of momentum and energy fluxes, and of the increments of field-amplifying instabilities) and uses them to calculate magnetic field amplification and precursor smoothing. These procedures are not easily parallelized, but they take relatively little time, and I chose to leave them to just one processor. After that, the ‘master’ processor gives the other processors the updated flow speed $u(x)$, the re-iterated magnetic turbulence $W(x,k)$, and each processor computes the corresponding mean free path prescription $\lambda(x,p)$ and performs another iteration. This cycle continues until the self-consistent solution is derived.
The primary advantage of this procedure is its ultimate simplicity. In terms accepted in the parallel computing field, this is an ‘embarrassingly parallel’ code, which means that the interactions between processors take place very infrequently (in practice, they exchange several megabytes of data once every several minutes). Another advantage is that one processor’s runtime performance does not affect another processor’s particle history. It is a welcome feature of the method, because it makes it easier to debug, if problems arise: the results, including the run-time errors, are reproducible. We must note here that the sequences of random numbers generated by the code are, in fact, deterministic: in two identical runs executed at different times, the random number sequences and the final results will be identical. The same applies to the version of the code with parallel computing performed as described above.
A disadvantage of this method is that there may be situations when most processors had finished their iterations, but must wait for one processor working on a particle with an ‘unfortunate’, long history of acceleration. Computing time is lost in this case, because the duration of every Monte Carlo iteration is as long as the worst processor’s performance. This is not a major issue of concern when the number of particles per processor is large, but when many processors are available, and each gets only a few particles, the deviation of the worst processor’s performance from the average performance may be significant.
In Table \[test\_parallel\] I listed the results of a simulation similar to that done in Section \[subsec\_smoothing\]. I executed 5 runs, with identical input parameters, but with different numbers of processors: 1, 2, 4, 8 and 16. Each run obtained a self-consistent shock structure, and the results were identical in all runs within small statistical deviations.
$N_\mathrm{proc}$ $N_p/N_\mathrm{proc}$ Time, s Speedup
------------------- ----------------------- --------- ---------
1 160 7622 1.0
2 80 5614 1.4
4 40 3049 2.5
8 20 2092 3.6
16 10 1688 4.5
: $ $ Test of performance boost with parallel computing[]{data-label="test_parallel"}
Column ‘$N_\mathrm{proc}$’ lists the number of processors used in the run. There were a total of $N_p=160$ particles in each run[^14], and they were equally divided between the processors, as shown in column ‘$N_p/N_\mathrm{proc}$’. The time that the each simulation took is listed in seconds, and the column ‘Speedup’ shows the ratio of the time of the iteration with 1 processor (i.e., without parallel computing) to that of the parallelized run.
The results show that the parallelization does lead to an increase in the speed of the calculations, but the speedup is proportional to, approximately, $(N_\mathrm{proc})^{0.6}$, which is not very efficient. An alternative parallelization algorithm that may improve the efficiency is reserving the ‘master’ processor for dispatching particles between the ‘slaves’ in the run-time, i.e., each ‘slave’ gets a new particle from the ‘master’ as soon as it finishes with the previous one. This way the situation when many processors await a few ‘unlucky’ ones to finish with their iterations will not last as long.
However, because this procedure is incompatible with the reproducibility of results (unless each particle has its own random number sequence, that is stored and passed between the processors; care must be taken in this case to ensure that correlations between particle histories do not occur when particle splitting is performed). This makes it difficult to debug the code (see above), I chose to stay with the currently implemented, less efficient, but more predictable scheme. Despite the less than perfect scaling of performance with the number of processors, it allows me to achieve reasonable computation times even with the available modest computational resources (8-16 processors per run). Typical run times are seconds to minutes for test runs, and around one day for a self-consistent simulation with a realistic dynamic range and small enough statistical deviations.
Applications of the model {#ch-applications}
=========================
In this chapter I will show the basic results of the model of magnetic field amplification in collisionless shocks based on the Monte Carlo simulation of DSA. Some of these results have appeared in peer-reviewed publications (Sections \[res2006\], \[res2007\] and \[res2008\]), and some will soon be submitted for publication (section \[res2009\]).
For the published material, in this Chapter I only provide a condensed version of the articles. For the work that has not yet appeared in press (Sections \[res\_scalings\], \[res\_angular\]), the reader will find an outline of the proposed direction of research, a presentation of the preliminary results and a discussion of the applicability to astrophysical research.
Turbulence growth rate and self-consistent solutions {#res2006}
----------------------------------------------------
In [@VEB2006][^15], we introduced a [Monte Carlo]{} model of [nonlinear]{} diffusive shock acceleration allowing for the generation of large-amplitude magnetic turbulence, i.e., $\Delta
B \gg B_0$, where $B_0$ is the ambient magnetic field. The model is the first to include strong wave generation, efficient particle acceleration to [relativistic]{} energies in [nonrelativistic]{} shocks, and thermal particle injection in an internally [self-consistent]{} manner. In order to describe the field growth rate in the regime of strong fluctuations, we use a parameterization that is consistent with the resonant quasi-linear growth rate in the weak turbulence limit. We believe our parameterization spans the range between maximum and minimum rates of fluctuation growth.
We find that the upstream magnetic field $B_0$ can be amplified by large factors and show that this amplification depends strongly on the ambient [Alfvén]{} Mach number. We also show that in the nonlinear model large increases in $B$ do not necessarily translate into a large increase in the maximum particle momentum a particular shock can produce. The most direct application of our results will be to estimate magnetic fields amplified by strong cosmic-ray modified shocks in supernova remnants.
### Model
In [@VEB2006], we described the amplification of magnetic turbulence by the following set of equations: $$[u(x) - V_G]\frac{\partial}{\partial x}U_- + U_-\frac{d}{dx} \left(
\frac32 u(x) - V_G \right) =
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad$$ $$\label{uminuskp}
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \frac{U_-}{U_+ + U_-} V_G \frac{\partial
{P_\mathrm{cr}}(x,p)}{\partial x}\left|\frac{dp}{dk}\right|- \frac{V_G}{{r_\mathrm{g0}}}
\left( U_- - U_+ \right)
\ ;$$ $$[u(x) + V_G]\frac{\partial}{\partial x}U_+ + U_+\frac{d}{dx} \left(
\frac32 u(x) + V_G \right) =
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad$$ $$\label{upluskp}
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad -\frac{U_+}{U_+ + U_-} V_G
\frac{\partial {P_\mathrm{cr}}(x,p)}{\partial x}\left|\frac{dp}{dk}\right|+
\frac{V_G}{{r_\mathrm{g0}}} \left( U_- - U_+ \right)
\ ,$$ which were solved iteratively in the MC simulation. This system describes the development of the resonant cosmic ray streaming instability of [Alfvén]{} waves along with the processes of wave amplitude increase due to the plasma compression, and of interactions between waves traveling in opposite directions (see Section \[turb\_effects\] and Appendix A). For the growth of [Alfvén]{} waves in [quasi-linear]{} theory, $V_G={v_A}$, where ${v_A}= B_0/\sqrt{4\pi \rho(x)}$ is the [Alfvén]{} speed calculated with the non-amplified field and $\rho(x)$ is the matter density at position $x$. This choice of $V_G$ provides a lower limit on the amplification rate for the nonlinear regime, $\Delta B \gg B_0$, and was used in [@AB2006]. If, on the contrary, we define $V_G$ using the amplified field, i.e., $V_G = {B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)/\sqrt{4 \pi \rho(x)}$, it reflects the situation where the growth rate is determined by the maximum gradient of ${P_\mathrm{cr}}(x,p)$ along the fluctuating field lines. This provides an upper limit on the wave growth rate and was used in [@BL2001]. The real situation should lie between the two extremes for $V_G$. For this preliminary work, we vary $V_G$ between the two limits, i.e., we introduce a parameter, $0 \le
{f_\mathrm{alf}}\le 1$, such that $$\label{VG}
V_G = {v_A}\left \{ 1 + \left [\frac{{B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)}{B_0} -1 \right ]
{f_\mathrm{alf}}\right \}
\ ,$$ and $V_G$ varies linearly between ${v_A}$ (for ${f_\mathrm{alf}}=0$) and ${B_\mathrm{eff}}/\sqrt{4 \pi \rho(x)}$ (for ${f_\mathrm{alf}}=1$).
Finally, we assume a Bohm model for diffusion. The mean free path of a particle with momentum $p$ at position $x$ is taken to be equal to the gyroradius of this particle in the amplified field, i.e., $\lambda(x,p)
= r_g(x,p) = pc/[q {B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)]$, and the diffusion coefficient is then ${D(x,p)}= \lambda v/3$, where $v$ is the particle speed, and ${B_\mathrm{eff}}$ was defined according to (\[eq\_beff\]).
The Monte Carlo code used here was the original simulation developed by Ellison and co-workers, not the version developed by the author of this dissertation for the problem of magnetic field amplification. I have confirmed that the latter model reproduces the results presented here.
### Results
In all of the following examples we set the shock speed $u_0=5000$[km s$^{-1}$]{}, the unshocked proton number density $n_{p0}=1$[cm$^{-3}$]{}, and the unshocked proton temperature $T_0=10^6$K. For simplicity, the electron temperature is set to zero and the electron contribution to the jump conditions is ignored. With these parameters, the sonic Mach number ${M_\mathrm{s}}\simeq 43$ and the [Alfvén]{} Mach number ${M_\mathrm{alf}}\simeq 2300
(1\mu \mathrm{G}/B_0)$.
#### With and Without Magnetic Field Amplification
Figure \[BL\_noBL\] shows self-consistent solutions for four shocks, obtained with ${f_\mathrm{alf}}=0$. Note that the horizontal scale has units of ${r_g}(u_0)=m_pu_0/(e B_0)$ and is divided at $x=-5{r_g}(u_0)$ between a linear and log scale. The the heavy dotted curves show results without amplification and all other curves are with amplification. The heavy solid and dotted curves have ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}=-10^4\,{r_g}(u_0)$, the dashed curve has ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}=-1000\,{r_g}(u_0)$, the light solid curve has ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}=-10^5\,{r_g}(u_0)$.
0.5in ![$ $ Shock structure with and without MFA\[BL\_noBL\]](images/p1_f1.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
First, we compare the results shown with heavy-weight solid curves to those shown with heavy-weight dotted curves. The heavy solid curves were determined with $B$-field amplification while the dotted curves were determined with a constant ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)=B_0$. All other input parameters were the same for these two models, and an upstream free escape boundary was placed at ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}=-10^4\,{r_g}(u_0)$, where ${r_g}(u_0) \equiv m_p u_0 c/(eB_0)$. The most striking aspect of this comparison is the increase in ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)$ when field amplification is included (bottom panels). The magnetic field goes from ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x\to -\infty) = 30$[$\mu$G]{}, to ${B_\mathrm{eff}}>
1000$[$\mu$G]{} for $x > 0$, and this factor of $>30$ increase in $B$ will influence the shock structure and the particle distributions in important ways. The solution without $B$-field amplification (dotted curves) has a considerably larger ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ than the one with amplification, i.e., for no $B$-field amplification, ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\simeq 22$, and with $B$-field amplification (heavy solid curves), ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\simeq 11$.[^16] This difference in overall compression results because the wave pressure ${P_w}$ is much larger in the field amplified case making the plasma less compressible. A large ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ means that high energy particles with long diffusion lengths get accelerated very efficiently and, therefore, the fraction of particles injected must decrease accordingly to conserve energy. The shock structure adjusts so weakened injection (i.e., a small ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$) just balances the more efficient acceleration produced by a large ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$. Since ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ largely determines the plasma heating, the more efficiently a shock accelerates particles causing ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ to increase, the less efficiently the plasma is heated.
0.5in ![$ $ Phase space distributions with and without MFA\[BL\_noBL\_fp\]](images/p1_f2.eps "fig:"){width="5.0in"}
In Figure \[BL\_noBL\_fp\] we show the phase space distributions, $f(p)$, for the shocks shown in Figure \[BL\_noBL\]. These spectra are multiplied by $[p/(m_pc)]^4$ and are calculated downstream from the shock in the shock rest frame. For the two cases with the same parameters except field amplification, we note that the amplified field case (heavy solid curve) obtains a higher ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ and has a higher shocked temperature (indicated by the shift of the “thermal” peak and caused by the larger ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$) than the case with no field amplification (heavy dotted curves). It is significant that the increase in ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ is modest even though $B$ increases by more than a factor or 30 with field amplification. We emphasize that ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ as such is not a free parameter in this model; ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ is determined [self-consistently]{} once the size of the shock system, i.e., ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}$, and the other environmental parameters are set.
In order to show the effect of changing ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}$, we include in Figs. \[BL\_noBL\] and \[BL\_noBL\_fp\] field amplification shocks with the same parameters except that ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}$ is changed to $-1000\,{r_g}(u_0)$ (dashed curves) and $-10^5\,{r_g}(u_0)$ (light-weight solid curves). From Figure \[BL\_noBL\_fp\], it’s clear that ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ scales approximately as ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}$ and that the concave nature of $f(p)$ is more pronounced for larger ${p_\mathrm{max}}$. The field amplification also increases with ${p_\mathrm{max}}$, but the increase between the ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}=-1000\,{r_g}(u_0)$ and ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}=
-10^5\,{r_g}(u_0)$ cases is less than a factor of two (bottom panels of Figure \[BL\_noBL\]).
0.5in ![$ $ Turbulence and particle spectra with MFA\[U\_D\_fp\]](images/p1_f3.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
0.5in ![$ $ Acceleration efficiency with and without MFA\[inj\_eff\]](images/p1_f4.eps "fig:"){width="5.0in"}
In Figure \[U\_D\_fp\] we show the energy density in magnetic turbulence, $U_+(x,k) + U_-(x,k)$, the diffusion coefficient, $D(x,p)$, and particle distributions as functions of $k$ and $p$ at three different positions in the shock. All of these plots are for the example shown with dashed curves in Figs. \[BL\_noBL\] and \[BL\_noBL\_fp\] (i.e., with ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}=-1000\,{r_g}(u_0)$). The solid curve is calculated downstream from the shock, the dashed curve is calculated at $x = - {r_g}(u_0)$ upstream from the subshock, and the dotted curve is calculated at $x = -100{r_g}(u_0)$ upstream from the subshock.
The efficiency of the shock acceleration process can be inferred from Figure \[inj\_eff\]. It shows the number density of particles with momentum greater than $p$, i.e., $N(>p)$, the energy density in particles with momentum greater than $p$, i.e., $E(>p)$, for the shocks shown in Figs. \[BL\_noBL\] and \[BL\_noBL\_fp\] with heavy solid and dotted curves. The plots in Figure \[inj\_eff\] indicate that the shocks are extremely efficient accelerators with $>50\%$ of the energy density in $f(p)$ placed in [relativistic]{} particles (i.e., $p \ge m_pc$). The actual energy efficiencies are considerably higher since the escaping particles carry away a larger fraction of the total energy than is placed in magnetic turbulence. With ${Q_\mathrm{esc}}$ included, well over 50% of the total shock energy is placed in [relativistic]{} particles. Despite this high energy efficiency, the fraction of total particles that become [relativistic]{} is small, i.e., $N(>p=m_pc) \sim 10^{-5}$ in both cases.
The effect of magnetic field amplification on the number of particles injected is evident in the left-hand curves. The larger ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ (solid curve) results in more downstream particles being injected into the Fermi mechanism with amplification than without. While it is hard to see from Figure \[inj\_eff\], when the escaping energy flux is included, the shock with [$B$-field amplification]{} puts a considerably smaller fraction of energy in [relativistic]{} particles than the shock without amplification. Again, injection depends in a [nonlinear]{} fashion on the shock parameters and the subshock strength will adjust to ensure that just the right amount of injection occurs so that momentum and energy are conserved.
#### Alfvén Mach Number Dependence
In Figure \[vary\_Bz\] we show three examples where $B_0$ was varied and all other input parameters were kept constant.
0.5in ![$ $ Comparison of shocks with different far upstream fields $B_0$. \[vary\_Bz\]](images/p1_f5.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
In all panels, the solid curves are for $B_0=0.3$[$\mu$G]{}, the dashed curves are for $B_0=3$[$\mu$G]{}, and the dotted curves are for $B_0=30$[$\mu$G]{}. The FEB is placed at the same physical distance in all cases with ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}=-1.7{\!\times\!10^{10}}$m. Note that ${B_\mathrm{eff}}$ increases most strongly for $B_0=0.3$[$\mu$G]{}, but that the pressure in magnetic turbulence (bottom panel) does not gets above $\sim 10$% of the total pressure, which but still contains a significant fraction of the total pressure.
The resulting overall compression ratios are: ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\simeq 9$ for $B_0=0.3$[$\mu$G]{}, ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\simeq 12$ for $B_0=3$[$\mu$G]{}, ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\simeq 8$ for $B_0=30$[$\mu$G]{}, values consistent, within statistical errors, with ${Q_\mathrm{esc}}$, as indicated in the energy flux panels. As for the self-consistent amplified magnetic fields in these examples, $B_2/B_0 \simeq 400$ for $B_0=0.3$ [$\mu$G]{}, $B_2/B_0 \simeq 150$ for $B_0=3$ [$\mu$G]{}, and $B_2/B_0 \simeq 30$ for $B_0=30$ [$\mu$G]{}.
#### Wave Amplification factor, ${f_\mathrm{alf}}$
All of the examples shown so far have used the minimum amplification factor ${f_\mathrm{alf}}=0$ (equation \[VG\]). We now investigate the effects of varying ${f_\mathrm{alf}}$ between 0 and 1 so that $V_G$ varies between $v_a(x)$ and ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)/\sqrt{4 \pi \rho(x)}$. The other shock parameters are the same as used for the dashed curves in Figure \[BL\_noBL\], i.e., $u_0=5000$[km s$^{-1}$]{}, $B_0=30$[$\mu$G]{}, and ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}=-1000\,{r_g}(u_0)$.
0.5in ![$ $ Shocks with varying ${f_\mathrm{alf}}$\[amp\_grid\]](images/p1_f7.eps "fig:"){width="5.0in"}
Figure \[amp\_grid\] shows $u(x)/u_0$ and ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)/B_0$ for ${f_\mathrm{alf}}= 0$, $0.1$, $0.5$, and 1 as indicated. In all cases, $u_0=5000$[km s$^{-1}$]{}, $B_0=30$[$\mu$G]{}, and ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}=-1000\,{r_g}(u_0)$. The top panels show that increasing the growth rate (increasing ${f_\mathrm{alf}}$ and therefore $V_G$) produces a large change in the shock structure and causes the overall shock compression ratio, ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$, to decrease. The decrease in ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ signifies a decrease in the acceleration efficiency and a decrease in the fraction of energy that escapes at the FEB, and the subshock compression adjusts to ensure conservation of momentum and energy. It is interesting to note that ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ increases as ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ decreases and becomes greater than 4 for ${f_\mathrm{alf}}\gtrsim 0.5$. In contrast to the strong modification of $u(x)$, there is little difference in ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)/B_0$ (bottom panels of Figure \[amp\_grid\]) and little change in ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ (Figure \[amp\_fp\]), between these examples. The fact that increasing the wave growth rate decreases the acceleration efficiency shows the [nonlinear]{} nature of the wave generation process. The most important reason for this is that the magnetic pressure ${P_w}$, becomes significant compared to $\rho(x)u^2(x)$ when ${f_\mathrm{alf}}\rightarrow 1$. The wave pressure causes the shock to be less compressive overall and forces ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ down.
0.5in ![$ $ Distribution functions for the shocks shown in Figure \[amp\_grid\]. \[amp\_fp\]](images/p1_f8.eps "fig:"){width="5.0in"}
In Figure \[amp\_fp\] we show the distribution functions for the four examples of Figure \[amp\_grid\] and note that the low momentum peaks shift upward significantly with increasing ${f_\mathrm{alf}}$. As we have emphasized, the injection efficiency, i.e., the fraction of particles that enter the Fermi process, must adjust to conserve momentum and energy and the low momentum peaks shift as a result of this. The solid dots in Figure \[amp\_fp\] roughly indicate the injection point separating “thermal” and superthermal particles for the two extreme cases of ${f_\mathrm{alf}}= 0$ and 1. The first thing to note is that this injection point is not well defined, a consequence of the fact that the MC model doesn’t distinguish between “thermal” and “nonthermal” particles. Once the shock has become smooth, the injection process is smooth and the superthermal population smoothly emerges from the quasi-thermal population.[^17] Nevertheless, the approximate momentum where the superthermal population develops, ${p_\mathrm{inj}}$, can be estimated and we mark this position with solid dots for ${f_\mathrm{alf}}=0$ and $1$. What is illustrated by this is that the injection point shifts, [*relative to the post-shock distribution*]{}, when ${f_\mathrm{alf}}$ is varied. This implies that, if injection is parameterized, the parameterization must somehow be connected to modifications in the shock structure.
### Discussion
We have introduced a model of diffusive shock acceleration which couples thermal particle injection, [nonlinear]{} shock structure, [magnetic field amplification]{}, and the [self-consistent]{}determination of the maximum particle momentum. This is a first step toward a more complete solution and, in this preliminary work, we make a number of approximations dealing mainly with the plasma physics of wave growth. Keeping in mind that our results are subject to the validity of our approximations, we reach a number of interesting conclusions.
First, our calculations find that efficient shock acceleration can amplify ambient magnetic fields by large factors and are generally consistent with the large fields believed to exist at blast waves in young SNRs, although we have not attempted a detailed fit to SNR observations in this paper. More specifically, we find that the amplification, in terms of the downstream to far upstream field ratio $B_2/B_0$, is a strong function of [Alfvén]{} Mach number, with weak ambient fields being amplified more than strong ones. For the range of examples shown in Figure \[vary\_Bz\], $B_2/B_0 \sim 30$ for ${M_\mathrm{alf}}\sim 80$ and $B_2/B_0 \sim 400$ for ${M_\mathrm{alf}}\sim 8000$. Qualitatively, a strong correlation between amplification and ${M_\mathrm{alf}}$ should not depend strongly on our approximations and may have important consequences. Considering that evidence for radio emission at reverse shocks in SNRs has been reported (see [@GotthelfEtal2001], for example) and the strong amplification of low fields we see here, it may be possible for reverse shocks in young SNRs to accelerate electrons to [relativistic]{} energies and produce radio [synchrotron]{} emission. If similar effects occur in [relativistic]{} shocks, these large amplification factors will be critical for the internal shocks presumed to exist in [$\gamma$-ray]{} bursts (GRBs). Even if large [$B$-field amplification]{} is confined to [nonrelativistic]{}shocks, amplification will be important for understanding GRB afterglows, in the stages when the expanding fireball has slowed down.
As expected, amplifying the magnetic field leads to a greater maximum particle momentum, ${p_\mathrm{max}}$, a given shock can produce. Quantifying ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ is one of the outstanding problems in shock physics because of the difficulty in obtaining parameters for typical SNRs that allow the production of cosmic rays to energies at and above the CR knee near $10^{15}$eV. Assuming that acceleration is truncated by the size of the shock system, we determine ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ from a physical constraint: the relevant parameter is the distance to the free escape boundary in diffusion lengths. Our results show that ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ does increase when field amplification is included, but the increase is considerably less than the amplification factor at the shock $B_2/B_0$ (compare the heavy dotted and heavy solid curves in Figure \[BL\_noBL\_fp\]). The main reason for this is that high momentum particles have long diffusion lengths, and the weak precursor magnetic field well upstream from the subshock determines ${p_\mathrm{max}}$. If the shock size, in our case ${d_\mathrm{FEB}}$, limits acceleration, ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ will be considerably less than crude estimates using a spatially independent $B_2$ (see also Section \[res2007\]). On the other hand, particles spend a large fraction of their time downstream from the shock where the field is high and collision times are short. If shock age limits acceleration rather than size, we expect the increase in ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ from the amplified field to be closer to the amplification factor, $B_2/B_0$.
Finally, it is well known that DSA is inherently efficient. Field amplification reduces the fraction of shock ram kinetic energy that is placed in [relativistic]{} particles but, at least for the limited examples we show here, the overall acceleration process remains extremely efficient. Even with large increases in ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)$, well over 50% of the shock energy can go into [relativistic]{} particles (Figure \[inj\_eff\]). As in all [self-consistent]{} calculations, the injection efficiency must adjust to conserve momentum and energy. In comparing shocks with and without field amplification, we find that field amplification lowers ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ and, therefore, individual energetic particles are, on average, accelerated less efficiently. In order to conserve momentum and energy, this means that more thermal particles must be injected when amplification occurs. The shock accomplishes this by establishing a strong subshock which not only injects a larger fraction of particles, but also more strongly heats the downstream plasma. This establishes a [nonlinear]{} connection between the field amplification, the production of cosmic rays, and the X-ray emission from the shocked heated plasma.
Impact of MFA on the maximum particle energy {#res2007}
--------------------------------------------
Evidence is accumulating[^18] suggesting that collisionless shocks in supernova remnants (SNRs) can amplify the interstellar magnetic field to hundreds of microgauss or even milligauss levels, as recently claimed for [SNR RX J1713.7-3946]{} [@Uchiyama07]. Ironically, the evidence for large magnetic fields and, therefore, nonlinear MFA is obtained exclusively from radiation emitted by [relativistic]{}electrons, while the nonlinear processes responsible for MFA are driven by the efficient acceleration of [relativistic]{} ions, mainly protons.
Here we address a single question: Can, as asserted by Uchiyama et al. [@Uchiyama07], the large amplified fields inferred for [*electrons*]{} from radiation losses in a [nonlinear]{} shock also determine the maximum [*proton*]{} energy produced in the SNR shock? We find the answer to be no because the inevitable [nonlinear]{} shock modification (due to efficient DSA) and the magnetic field variation in the shock precursor (due to MFA) make the maximum proton energy smaller than what is expected without accounting for these effects.
Our result is similar to that found by [@BAC2007] in a time-dependent calculation of DSA where the acceleration is limited by the age of the shock rather than the size, an indication that the [nonlinear]{} effects we discuss are robust.
### Model
In a size limited shock, the proton maximum energy, ${E^\mathrm{max}_p}$, will be determined when the upstream diffusion length of the most energetic protons becomes comparable to the confinement size of the shock, typically some fraction of the shock radius. We model the confinement size with a free escape boundary (FEB) at a distance ${L_\mathrm{FEB}}$ in front of the shock. Protons that reach this position stream freely away from the shock without producing any more magnetic turbulence. Therefore, for Bohm diffusion (see [@EV2008] for details), $${E^\mathrm{max}_p}\propto {L_\mathrm{FEB}}{u_\mathrm{sk}}{B_\mathrm{sk}},
\label{Emax}$$ where ${u_\mathrm{sk}}$ is the upstream flow speed. For a quasi-parallel, [unmodified]{} (UM) shock with no MFA, ${u_\mathrm{sk}}{B_\mathrm{sk}}= u_0 B_0 = u_0 B_2$, $u_0$ being the shock speed and $B_2$ being the downstream magnetic field derivable from synchrotron emission of accelerated electrons. However, for a [nonlinear]{} (NL) CR modified shock of the same physical confinement size, ${L_\mathrm{FEB}}$, the maximum proton energy ${E^\mathrm{max}_p|_\mathrm{NL}}$ will be determined by some mean value $\left<u(x)B(x)\right>$, giving $$\frac{{E^\mathrm{max}_p|_\mathrm{NL}}}{{E^\mathrm{max}_p|_\mathrm{UM}}}=\frac{\left<u(x) B(x) \right>}{u_0 B_2}
\ .$$ For a strongly modified shock, $\left < u(x) B(x)\right > \ll u_0
B_2$, and in the following we determine $\left <
u(x) B(x)\right >/ (u_0 B_2)$ using the Monte Carlo model described in detail in [@VEB2006].
The [Monte Carlo]{} model we use (see [@VEB2006] for full details) calculates NL DSA and the magnetic turbulence produced in a steady-state, plane-parallel shock precursor by the CR streaming instability. We [self-consistently]{} determine the [nonlinear]{} shock structure \[i.e., $u(x)$ vs. $x$\], the MFA \[${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)$ vs. $x$\], and the thermal particle injection.[^19]
The NL results we investigate do not depend qualitatively on the particular shock parameters as long as the sonic Mach number is large enough to result in efficient DSA. Here, we use a shock speed = $u_0 = 3000$[km s$^{-1}$]{}, sonic Mach number $M_s \approx 30$, plasma density $n_\mathrm{ISM} = 1$ protons cm$^{-3}$, and $B_0={B_\mathrm{ism}}=10$[$\mu$G]{}, yielding an [Alfvén]{} Mach number $M_A \approx 140$. To these parameters we add a FEB boundary at ${L_\mathrm{FEB}}\sim 0.1$pc, corresponding to $10^8\, {r_\mathrm{g0}}$, where ${r_\mathrm{g0}}\equiv m_p u_0 c /(e B_0)$. This size is comparable to the hot spots in [SNR RX J1713.7-3946]{} and produces a proton energy $\sim 10^{15}$eV in our [unmodified]{} shock approximation. Using the above parameters, we simulate two cases: a [nonlinear]{} solution, where $B$ is amplified from an upstream value $B_0=10$[$\mu$G]{} to a downstream value $B_2=450$[$\mu$G]{} (obtained self-consistently by our model), and an [unmodified]{} solution with a magnetic field set equal everywhere to $B_2=450$[$\mu$G]{}. In these two cases we look at ${E^\mathrm{max}_p}$ to see how the prediction of the NL model, conserving momentum and energy, compares to the prediction of the UM model, implicitly assumed by [@Uchiyama07]. The information about the maximum energy of electrons (which are not included in our calculations) can be inferred graphically from the plot of the acceleration time (see Fig. \[fp\]).
### Results
Figure \[shock\_profile\] shows the shock structure, $u(x)$, the effective magnetic field after amplification, ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)$, and $u(x)
{B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)/(u_0 B_2)$, for the [unmodified]{} case (dashed lines), and the [nonlinear]{}case (solid lines). The bottom panel shows the energy flux, normalized to the far upstream value, for the NL case. The smoothing of $u(x)$, the weak subshock (${r_\mathrm{sub}}\simeq
2.9$), and the increase in ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ above 4 (${r_\mathrm{tot}}\simeq 9$) are clearly present in the top panel for the NL case. These three effects must occur to conserve momentum and energy if CRs are efficiently accelerated. The quantity $u(x) {B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)/(u_0 B_2) \sim 0.1$ over most of the precursor in the NL case.
0.5in ![$ $ Flow structure: unmodified versus [nonlinear]{}.\[shock\_profile\]](images/p2_f1.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
0.5in ![$ $ Proton spectra and acceleration times: unmodified versus [nonlinear]{}.\[fp\]](images/p2_f2.eps "fig:"){width="5.0in"}
In Figure \[fp\] we show the momentum distributions functions, $f(p)$ (multiplied by $p^4$), and the acceleration time, ${\tau_\mathrm{acc}}$. The NL effects evident in Fig. \[shock\_profile\] result in, $${p_\mathrm{NL}^\mathrm{max}}/ {p_\mathrm{UM}^\mathrm{max}}\lesssim 0.1
\ ,$$ and a longer ${\tau_\mathrm{acc}}$ to a given momentum. Here, ${p_\mathrm{NL}^\mathrm{max}}= {E^\mathrm{max}_p|_\mathrm{NL}}/c$ and ${p_\mathrm{UM}^\mathrm{max}}= {E^\mathrm{max}_p|_\mathrm{UM}}/c$. We have not attempted a detailed fit to [SNR RX J1713.7-3946]{}, but note that the concave shape of our proton spectrum, above the thermal peak, is similar to that obtained by [@BV2006] who find a good fit to the data, including the HESS TeV observations [@AharonianJ1713_2006].
The UM result is obtained from the [Monte Carlo]{} simulation assuming the same “thermal leakage” model for injection as in the NL result (e.g., [@JE91]). This injection scheme works [self-consistently]{} with modifications in the shock structure and overall compression ratio, ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$, to conserve momentum and energy in the NL case. In the UM case, the shock structure and ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ are [*not*]{} adjusted and the thermal leakage model produces far too many injected particles to conserve momentum and energy. For the UM shock to become a [test-particle]{} shock with energy conservation, far fewer particles would need to be injected so that the normalization of the superthermal $f(p) \propto p^{-4}$ power law becomes low enough, relative to the thermal peak, so that in contains an insignificant fraction of the total shock ram kinetic energy. Since we are only interested in comparing ${p^\mathrm{max}_p}$ in the two cases, the normalization of the unmodified power law is unimportant since ${p_\mathrm{UM}^\mathrm{max}}$ only depends on ${L_\mathrm{FEB}}$.
### Discussion
The possibility of strong MFA in SNR shocks has been strengthened by the recent observations of rapid time variability in hot spots in [SNR RX J1713.7-3946]{} by [@Uchiyama07]. If we accept the conclusions of [@Uchiyama07], the $\sim 1$ yr variations in X-ray emission in some hot spots stem from radiation losses for electrons and indicate magnetic fields on the order of 1mG. Such large fields would almost certainly be caused by MFA occurring simultaneously with the efficient production of CR ions in DSA.
While a number of other interpretations of the X-ray and broadband emission in [SNR RX J1713.7-3946]{} have concluded that the magnetic field present in the particle acceleration site is considerably less than 1mG (e.g., [@ESG2001; @Lazendic2004; @BV2006; @PMS2006]), we have shown that even if the magnetic field inferred from electron radiation losses is as high as [@Uchiyama07] claim, the underlying physics of MFA in DSA shows that this field cannot be simply applied to protons to estimate their maximum energy.
The essential point is that, if MFA to milligauss levels is occurring as part of DSA, the acceleration must be efficient and the system is strongly [nonlinear]{}. The accelerated particles and the pressure from the amplified field feedback on the shock structure (Fig. \[shock\_profile\]) and this feedback makes the precursor less confining \[i.e., ${\left< u(x)B(x) \right >}\ll u_0 B_2$\]. Therefore, a shock of a given physical size will not be able to accelerate protons to an energy as large as estimated ignoring NL effects. Despite the reduction in ${E^\mathrm{max}_p}$ compared to [test-particle]{} predictions that our results imply, a remnant such as [SNR RX J1713.7-3946]{} might still produce CRs up to the knee. The NL example we have presented with $B_2 \simeq
450$[$\mu$G]{} produces protons up to $\sim 100$TeV in $\sim
100$yr in a confinement region of $\sim 0.1$pc. If instead we had taken ${L_\mathrm{FEB}}= 1$pc, a size comparable to the western shell of [SNR RX J1713.7-3946]{}, our NL model would produce $\sim 1$PeV protons in $\sim 1000$yr. Protons of this energy are consistent with the $\sim 30$TeV [$\gamma$-rays]{} observed from [SNR RX J1713.7-3946]{}[@AharonianJ1713_2006] and when the acceleration of heavy ions such as Fe$^{+26}$ is considered, the maximum particle energy extends to $> 10^{16}$eV.
As a final comment we emphasize a point also made by [@BAC2007]. If MFA is occurring and the system is highly NL, it may not be possible to explain temporal variations in nonthermal X-ray emission simply as a radiation loss time. There cannot be variations in X-ray emission on short time scales unless the accelerator changes in some fashion on these time scales, otherwise the radiation would be steady, or varying on the shock dynamic timescale, regardless of how short the radiation loss time was. Since the injection and acceleration of protons and electrons is nonlinearly connected to the amplified magnetic field, changes in the electron particle distribution and changes in the field producing the [synchrotron]{} emission, will go together and it may be difficult to unambiguously determine the field strength from temporal variations.
Turbulence dissipation in shock precursor {#res2008}
-----------------------------------------
Here we present the results of our model regarding the effects of dissipation of turbulence upstream of the shock and the subsequent precursor plasma heating[^20]. The magnetic turbulence generated by the instability is assumed to dissipate at a rate proportional to the turbulence generation rate, and the dissipated energy is pumped directly into the thermal particle pool (i.e., the model described by Equation (\[diss\_param\]) is assumed). An iterative scheme is employed to ensure the conservation of mass, momentum, and energy fluxes, thus producing a self-consistent solution of a steady-state, plane shock, with particle injection and acceleration coupled to the bulk plasma flow modification and to the magnetic field amplification and damping.
Our results show that even a small rate of turbulence dissipation can significantly increase the precursor temperature and that this, in turn, can increase the rate of injection of thermal particles. The [nonlinear]{} feedback of these changes on the shock structure, however, tend to cancel so that the spectrum of high energy particles is only modestly affected.
### Model
We model the evolution of the turbulence, as it is being advected with the plasma and amplified, with the following equations: $$\label{ampeq}
E_{\pm}[U] = (1-{\alpha_H})G_{\pm}[U] + I_{\pm}[U].$$ Here, for readability, we abbreviated as $E$ the evolution operator, as $G$ the growth operator and as $I$ the wave-wave interactions operator, acting on the spectrum of turbulence energy density $U=\{U_-(x,k), U_+(x,k)\}$. These quantities are defined as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
E_{\pm}[U] & = &
\left(u \pm V_G\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial x} U_{\pm} +
U_{\pm}\frac{d}{dx}\left(\frac32 u \pm V_G\right), \\
G_{\pm}[U] & = &
\mp\frac{U_\pm}{U_+ + U_-} V_G \times
\frac{\partial {P_\mathrm{cr}}(x,p)}{\partial x}
\left| \frac{dp}{dk} \right|, \\
I_{\pm}[U] & = &
{\pm} \frac{V_G}{{r_\mathrm{g0}}}\left(U_- - U_+\right).\end{aligned}$$ The parameter ${\alpha_H}$ describes the turbulence dissipation rate, and for ${\alpha_H}=0$, the equations (\[ampeq\]) becomes exactly the system of equations (\[uminuskp\]) and (\[upluskp\]). In this system $u=u(x)$ is the flow speed and $V_G=V_G(x)$ is the parameter defining the turbulence growth rate and the wave speed[^21]. The parameter ${\alpha_H}$ enters the equations of turbulence evolution (\[ampeq\]) through the factor $(1-{\alpha_H})$, which represents the assumption that at all wavelengths only a fraction $(1 -{\alpha_H})$ of the instability growth rate goes into the magnetic turbulence, and the remaining fraction ${\alpha_H}$ is lost in the dissipation process. See Equation (\[diss\_param\]) and the corresponding part of Section \[turb\_effects\].
Equation (\[pressuregrowth\]) is used to account for the precursor plasma heating by the dissipated turbulence. For ${L}(x)=0$, equation (\[pressuregrowth\]) reduces to the adiabatic heating law, ${P_\mathrm{th}}\sim \rho^{\gamma}$ and, for a non-zero ${L}(x)$, it describes the heating of the thermal plasma in the shock precursor due to the dissipation of magnetic turbulence. The main effects of turbulence dissipation in our model are: [=0]{}[by 1 [ ]{}]{}a decrease in the value of the amplified field ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x)$, which determines the diffusion coefficient, $D(x,p)$; [by 1 [ ]{}]{}an increase in the temperature of particles just upstream of the subshock, which influences the injection of particles into the acceleration process, and [by 1 [ ]{}]{}an increase in the thermal particle pressure ${P_\mathrm{th}}(x<0)$, and a decrease in the turbulence pressure $P_w(x)$, which enter the conservation equations described in Section \[sec-rtot\] and \[subsec\_smoothing\]. Since all of these processes are coupled, a change in dissipation influences the overall structure of the shock.
### Results
#### Particle Injection in Unmodified Shocks (Subshock Modeling) {#injectionvsdissipation}
In order to isolate the effects of plasma heating on particle injection, we first show results for unmodified shocks, i.e., $u(x<0)=u_0$ and $u(x>0)=u_0/{r_\mathrm{tot}}$, with fixed ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$. In these models particle acceleration, [magnetic field amplification]{} and turbulence damping are included consistently with each other, but we do not obtain fully [self-consistent]{} solutions conserving momentum and energy, since this requires the shock to be smoothed, while we intentionally fix $u(x)$.
0.5in ![$ $ Dissipation effects in unmodified shocks \[fig\_unmod\_inj\]](images/p3_f1.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
0.5in ![$ $ Dissipation effects in nonlinear shocks \[fignlsum\]](images/p3_f2.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
In Fig. \[fig\_unmod\_inj\] we show results where the compression ratio is varied between ${r_\mathrm{tot}}=3$ and $3.6$ as indicated. In all models, $u_0 =
3000$ [km s$^{-1}$]{}, $T_0 = 10^4$ K, $n_0 = 0.3$[cm$^{-3}$]{} and $B_0 = 3$[$\mu$G]{}(the corresponding sonic and [Alfvén]{} Mach numbers are ${M_\mathrm{s0}}\approx
{M_\mathrm{A0}}\approx 250$). The FEB was set at ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}= -3\cdot 10^4\:
{r_\mathrm{g0}}$ (our spatial scale unit ${r_\mathrm{g0}}=m_p u_0 c / (eB_0)$), and for each ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ we obtained results for different values of ${\alpha_H}$ between 0 and 1. The values plotted in the top three panels of Fig. \[fig\_unmod\_inj\] are the amplified magnetic field downstream, ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$, the Mach number right before the shock, ${M_\mathrm{s1}}$ (this is not equal to ${M_\mathrm{s0}}$ because of the plasma heating due to turbulence dissipation), and the fraction of thermal particles in the simulation that crossed the shock in the upstream direction at least once (i.e., got injected), ${f_\mathrm{cr}}$. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the calculated downstream effective magnetic field ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$ to trend values ${B_\mathrm{trend}}({\alpha_H})$; what is meant by “trend” is the equation (\[btwotrend\]) explained in [@VBE2008]: $$\label{btwotrend}
{B_\mathrm{trend}}^2({\alpha_H}) =
\left(B_0 {r_\mathrm{tot}}^{3/4}\right)^2 + (1-{\alpha_H})
\left[ \left. {B_\mathrm{eff2}}^2 \Big.\right|_{{\alpha_H}=0}
- \left(B_0 {r_\mathrm{tot}}^{3/4}\right)^2 \right].$$
Looking at the curve for ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$ in the ${r_\mathrm{tot}}=3.0$ and ${r_\mathrm{tot}}=3.2$ models, one sees an easy to explain behavior: as the magnetic turbulence dissipation rate, ${\alpha_H}$, increases, the value of the amplified magnetic field decreases, going down to $B_0 {r_\mathrm{tot}}^{3/4}$ (the upstream field compressed at the shock) for ${\alpha_H}=1$. Increasing ${\alpha_H}$ simply causes more energy to be removed from magnetic turbulence and put into thermal particles, thus decreasing the value of ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$.
The plots for ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\gtrsim 3.4$ present a qualitatively different behavior from those with ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\lesssim
3.2$. The downstream magnetic field ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$ does decrease with increasing ${\alpha_H}$, but not as rapidly as in the previous two cases, and there is a switching point at ${\alpha_H}\approx
0.95$ in the curves for ${M_\mathrm{s1}}$ and ${f_\mathrm{cr}}$. The bottom panel of Fig. \[fig\_unmod\_inj\] shows a deviation of ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$ from the trend (\[btwotrend\]) by a large factor in the ${r_\mathrm{tot}}= 3.4$ case. This effect becomes even more dramatic for ${r_\mathrm{tot}}=3.5$ and ${r_\mathrm{tot}}=3.6$ where ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$, contrary to expectations, [**increases**]{} with ${\alpha_H}$ before ${\alpha_H}\rightarrow 1$. The fact that the final energy in turbulence can increase as more energy is transferred from the turbulence to heat indicates the [nonlinear]{} behavior of the system and shows how sensitive the acceleration is to precursor heating.
It is worth mentioning that the observed increase of particle injection due to the precursor plasma heating is a consequence of the thermal leakage model of particle injection adopted here (see [@VBE2008] for the explanation of this connection). In this model, a downstream particle, thermal or otherwise, with plasma frame speed $v>u_2$, has a probability to return upstream which increases with $v$ (see [@Bell78a] for a discussion of the probability of returning particles). An alternative model of injection (see, for example, [@BGV2005]) is one where only particles with a gyroradius greater than the shock thickness can get injected. In the [@BGV2005] model the fraction of injected particles may be insensitive to the precursor heating if the parameter controlling the injection in that model, $\xi$, is fixed. While both models are highly simplified descriptions of the complex subshock (see, e.g., [@Malkov98; @GE2000]), they offer two scenarios for grasping a qualitatively correct behavior of a shock where particle injection and acceleration are coupled to turbulence generation and flow modification. Hopefully, a clearer view of particle injection by self-generated turbulence in a strongly magnetized subshock will become available when relevant full particle PIC or hybrid simulations are performed.
With the general trends observed here in mind, we now show how [nonlinear]{} effects modify the effect dissipation has on injection and MFA.
#### Fully Nonlinear Model {#nlresults}
In this section we demonstrate the results of the fully nonlinear models, in which the flow structure, compression ratio, magnetic turbulence, and particle distribution are all determined [self-consistently]{}, so that the fluxes of mass, momentum and energy are conserved across the shock.
We use two sets of parameters, one with the far upstream gas temperature $T_0=10^4$ K and the far upstream particle density $n_0 =
0.3$ [cm$^{-3}$]{}, typical of the cold interstellar medium (ISM), and one with $T_0=10^6$ K and $n_0=0.003$ [cm$^{-3}$]{}, typical of the hot ISM. In both cases we assumed the shock speed $u_0 = 5000$ [km s$^{-1}$]{}, and the initial magnetic field $B_0 = 3$ [$\mu$G]{} (giving an equipartition of magnetic and thermal energy far upstream, $n_0 k_B T_0 \approx
B_0^2/(8\pi)$). The corresponding sonic and [Alfvén]{} Mach numbers are $M_s
\approx M_A \approx 400$ in both cases). The size of the shocks was limited by a FEB located at ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}= -10^5 {r_\mathrm{g0}}\approx -3 \cdot
10^{-4}$ pc. For both cases, we ran seven simulations with different values of the dissipation rate ${\alpha_H}$, namely ${\alpha_H}\in \{ 0; 0.1; 0.25; 0.5; 0.75; 0.9;
1.0\}$. Also, for the [hot ISM ($T_0=10^6$ K)]{} case we ran a simulation neglecting the streaming instability effects, i.e., keeping the magnetic field constant throughout the shock and assuming that the precursor plasma is heated only by adiabatic compression (this model will be referred to as the ‘no MFA case’).
${\alpha_H}$ 0.00 0.10 0.25 0.50 0.75 0.95 1.00
------------------------------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------
${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ 16.0 16.2 14.5 14.6 14.0 13.2 13.0
${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ 2.95 2.83 2.75 2.59 2.50 2.50 2.51
${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$, [$\mu$G]{} 345 323 284 232 158 71 21
${B_\mathrm{trend}}$, [$\mu$G]{} 345 327 299 245 174 80 21
$\left<T(x<0)\right>$, $10^4$ K 1.06 4.3 9.0 17 26 37 56
$T_1$, $10^4$ K 3.3 68 160 330 490 610 650
$T_2$, $10^4$ K 1400 1500 1600 1600 1800 2000 2200
${M_\mathrm{s1}}$ 44 9.5 6.3 4.2 3.5 3.3 3.2
${f_\mathrm{cr}}$, % 1.0 1.2 1.6 2.1 2.6 3.1 3.2
${p_\mathrm{max}}/ m_pc$ 500 450 400 350 250 150 80
$\left<\gamma(x<0)\right>$ 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.33 1.34 1.34 1.34
$\gamma_2$ 1.38 1.38 1.38 1.39 1.39 1.40 1.41
${x_\mathrm{tr}}/ {r_\mathrm{g0}}$ -0.005 -0.001 -0.001 -0.001 -0.002 -0.004 -0.02
${x_\mathrm{APA}}/ {r_\mathrm{g0}}$ -0.04 -0.06 -0.06 -0.09 -0.23 -0.57 -2.1
: Summary of Non-linear Simulation in a Cold ISM \[sumnl\_cold\]
${\alpha_H}$ 0.00 0.10 0.25 0.50 0.75 0.95 1.00 No MFA
------------------------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------
${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.0 7.8 7.4 7.3 13
${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ 2.92 2.75 2.55 2.44 2.22 2.15 2.12 2.75
${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$, [$\mu$G]{} 62 60 55 44 32 17 14 21
${B_\mathrm{trend}}$, [$\mu$G]{} 62 59 54 45 33 19 13 -
$\left<T(x<0)\right>$, $10^6$ K 1.04 1.3 1.7 2.3 3.1 3.9 4.2 1.1
$T_1$, $10^6$ K 2.0 6.0 13 23 34 42 43 2.7
$T_2$, $10^6$ K 53 49 47 55 62 72 75 22
${M_\mathrm{s1}}$ 10.9 5.8 3.7 2.6 2.1 1.9 1.9 4.7
${f_\mathrm{cr}}$, % 1.2 1.6 2.5 4.0 6.4 6.9 6.4 2.4
${p_\mathrm{max}}/ m_pc$ 150 120 110 100 90 70 60 80
$\left<\gamma(x<0)\right>$ 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.35 1.34
$\gamma_2$ 1.43 1.43 1.43 1.44 1.45 1.45 1.45 1.41
${x_\mathrm{tr}}/ {r_\mathrm{g0}}$ -0.04 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.07 -0.05 -0.02
${x_\mathrm{APA}}/ {r_\mathrm{g0}}$ -0.1 -0.1 -0.2 -0.2 -0.4 -0.9 -1.4 -0.1
: Summary of Non-linear Simulation in a Hot ISM \[sumnl\_hot\]
Tables \[sumnl\_cold\] and \[sumnl\_hot\] summarize some of the results of these models. The effect of the turbulence dissipation into the thermal plasma is evident in the values of the pre-subshock temperature $T_1$, the downstream temperature $T_2$, and the volume-averaged precursor temperature $\left< T(x<0) \right>$ (the averaging takes place between $x={x_\mathrm{FEB}}$ and $x=0$). The value of $T_1$ depends drastically on the level of the turbulence dissipation ${\alpha_H}$, increasing from ${\alpha_H}=0$ to ${\alpha_H}=0.5$ by a factor of 100 in the [cold ISM]{} case, and by a factor of 11 in the [hot ISM]{} case. The values of the temperature as high as $T_1$ are achieved upstream only near the subshock; the volume-averaged upstream temperature, $\left< T(x<0) \right>$, is significantly lower. The downstream temperature, $T_2$, varies less with changing ${\alpha_H}$, because it is largely determined by the compression at the subshock, which is controlled by many factors. It is worth mentioning the case without MFA reported in Table \[sumnl\_hot\]. Besides having a much larger compression factor than the shocks with MFA (${r_\mathrm{tot}}=13$ as opposed to ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\lesssim 8$), it has a much smaller downstream temperature ($T_2=2.2\cdot 10^7$ K as opposed to $T_2 \gtrsim 5.3\cdot 10^7$ K) These effects of dissipation on the precursor temperature may be observable.
In Figure \[fignlsum\] we show results for ${f_\mathrm{cr}}$, ${M_\mathrm{s1}}$, ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$, and ${B_\mathrm{trend}}$ which can be compared to the results for unmodified shocks shown in Figure \[fig\_unmod\_inj\]. For the modified shocks, the fraction of the thermal particles crossing the shock backwards for the first time, ${f_\mathrm{cr}}$, clearly increases by a large factor with ${\alpha_H}$, which can be explained by the connection between $T_1$ and the injection rate. One could expect that the amplified effective magnetic field ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$ would behave similarly to the ${r_\mathrm{tot}}=3.5$ case in Section \[injectionvsdissipation\], i.e. that ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$ would not decrease or even would increase for larger ${\alpha_H}$. Instead, ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$ behaves approximately according to the trend (\[btwotrend\]), as the values of ${B_\mathrm{trend}}$ from Tables \[sumnl\_cold\] and \[sumnl\_hot\] show and the bottom panel of Fig. \[fignlsum\] illustrates. The important point is that, even though precursor heating causes the [*injection efficiency*]{} to increase substantially, the [*efficiency of particle acceleration*]{} (i.e., the fraction of energy in CRs) and magnetic turbulence generation is hardly changed. We base this assertion on the fact that ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$ remains close to ${B_\mathrm{trend}}$, which was derived under the assumption that changing ${\alpha_H}$ preserves the total energy generated by the instability, but re-distributes it between the turbulence and the thermal particles.
Considering how much the injection rate ${f_\mathrm{cr}}$ increases with ${\alpha_H}$, and how much the upstream temperature of the thermal plasma, $T_1$, is affected by the heating, it is somewhat surprising that the trend of the amplified effective field ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$ is unaffected. The mechanism by which the shock adjusts to the changing heating and injection in order to preserve the MFA efficiency can be understood by looking at the trend of the total compression ratio ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ and the subshock compression ratio ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ in Tables \[sumnl\_cold\] and \[sumnl\_hot\]: they both decrease significantly for higher ${\alpha_H}$. The decrease in ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ is easy to understand: with the turbulence dissipation operating in the precursor ${M_\mathrm{s1}}$ goes down, which lowers ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$. Additionally, decreasing ${P_\mathrm{w1}}$ helps to reduce ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$, and with a boost of the particle injection rate, the particles returning for the first time increase in number and build up some extra pressure just upstream of the shock, which causes the flow to slow down in that region, thus reducing the ratio ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$. Further understanding of the shock adjustment to the changing dissipation can be gained by studying Figures \[fig\_ubt\_1e4\_1e4\] - \[fig\_fnp\_1e4\_1e6\], in which we plot the spatial structure and the momentum-dependent quantities of the shocks in the [cold ISM]{} and the [hot ISM]{} cases for ${\alpha_H}\in \{0; 0.5; 1\}$.
0.5in ![$ $ Nonlinear shocks with dissipation, [cold ISM]{}\[fig\_ubt\_1e4\_1e4\]](images/p3_f3a.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
0.5in ![$ $ Nonlinear shocks with dissipation, [hot ISM]{}\[fig\_ubt\_1e4\_1e6\]](images/p3_f3b.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
0.5in ![$ $ Particle distribution with dissipation, [cold ISM]{}\[fig\_fnp\_1e4\_1e4\]](images/p3_f5a.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
0.5in ![$ $ Particle distribution with dissipation, [hot ISM]{}\[fig\_fnp\_1e4\_1e6\]](images/p3_f5b.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
Figures \[fig\_ubt\_1e4\_1e4\] and \[fig\_ubt\_1e4\_1e6\] show an overlap in the curves for the flow speed $u(x)$ in the ${\alpha_H}=0$ and ${\alpha_H}=0.5$ models, differing only close to the subshock, where $u(x)$ falls off more rapidly towards the subshock in the ${\alpha_H}=0.5$ case, resulting eventually in a lower ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$. This means that for the high energy particles, which diffuse far upstream, the acceleration process will go on in about the same way with and without moderate turbulence dissipation (and the acceleration efficiency will be preserved with changing ${\alpha_H}$). For lower energy particles, however, there will be observable differences in the energy spectrum. The ${\alpha_H}=1.0$ case has a significantly smoother precursor, which is not unusual, given the lower maximal energy of the accelerated particles in this case (because of the magnetic field remaining low). The thermal gas temperatures $T(x)$, plotted in the bottom panels of Figures \[fig\_ubt\_1e4\_1e4\] and \[fig\_ubt\_1e4\_1e6\], show that the temperature becomes high well in front of the subshock.
The low energy parts of the particle distribution functions shown in Figures \[fig\_fnp\_1e4\_1e4\] and \[fig\_fnp\_1e4\_1e6\] are significantly different for models with and without dissipation in both the [cold ISM]{} and the [hot ISM]{}cases. The apparent widening of the thermal peak reflects the increase in the downstream gas temperature $T_2$. The differences extend from the thermal peak to mildly superthermal momenta $0.2\: m_p c$, indicating an increased population of the ‘adolescent’ particles with speeds up to $v\approx 0.2 c \approx 12 u_0$ when the turbulence dissipation operates. The high energy ($p>0.2 \: m_p c$) parts of the spectra for ${\alpha_H}=0$ and ${\alpha_H}=0.5$ are similar (except for a lower ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ due to a lower value of the amplified field in the ${\alpha_H}=0.5$ case), confirming our assertion about the preservation of the particle acceleration efficiency. The increased population of the low-energy particles just above the thermal peak should influence the shock’s X-ray emission.
The characteristic concave curvature of the particle spectra above the thermal peak is clearly seen in the top panels of Figures \[fig\_fnp\_1e4\_1e4\] and \[fig\_fnp\_1e4\_1e6\]. These shocks are strongly [nonlinear]{} and, as the pressure spectra in the bottom panels show, most of the pressure is in the highest energy particles. For these examples, 60 to 80 percent of the downstream momentum flux is in CR particles. The number of particles producing this pressure is small, however, and as the plots in the middle panels show, the fraction of particles above the thermal peak is on the order of $10^{-3}$, and the fraction of particles above 1 GeV is around $10^{-6}$ in all cases. In addition to the pressure (and energy) in the distributions shown, a sizable fraction of shock ram kinetic energy flux escapes at the FEB.
0.5in ![$ $ Enlarged subshock region in the [hot ISM]{} case.\[fig\_partpress\]](images/p3_f4.eps "fig:"){height="7.0in"}
In Figure \[fig\_partpress\] the subshock region for the [hot ISM]{}case is shown enlarged for the models with (${\alpha_H}=0.5$) and without dissipation (${\alpha_H}=0.0$). For ${\alpha_H}=0$, the thermal pressure ${P_\mathrm{th}}$ remains low upstream (middle panel), and the subshock transition is dominated by the magnetic pressure $P_w$. For ${\alpha_H}=0.5$ (bottom panel) the thermal pressure ${P_\mathrm{th}}$ just before the shock becomes comparable with $P_w$, but also the heating-boosted particle injection brings up the pressures of the ‘adolescent’ particles. For ${\alpha_H}=0.5$ the pressures produced by the first and second time returning particles ($P_1$ and $P_2$) are not small compared to ${P_\mathrm{th}}$ and $P_w$ just upstream of the shock, which contributes to the reduction of ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ described above. However, the pressure of the ‘mature’ particles, $P_\mathrm{>5}$, doesn’t change much, due to the non-linear response of the shock structure to the increased injection.
To summarize, for both the unmodified (Fig. \[fig\_unmod\_inj\]) and modified (Fig. \[fignlsum\]) cases, ${M_\mathrm{s1}}$ drops and ${f_\mathrm{cr}}$ grows as ${\alpha_H}$ increases. The surprising result is that ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$ can increase in the unmodified shock as ${\alpha_H}$ goes up if ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ is large enough. This indicates that the boosted injection efficiency (i.e., larger ${f_\mathrm{cr}}$) outweighs the effects of field damping. This doesn’t happen in the modified case (top panel of Fig. \[fignlsum\]) because of the [nonlinear]{} effects from the increased injection. From Fig. \[fig\_partpress\] we see that the boosted injection results in a smoother subshock and this makes it harder for low energy adolescent particles to gain energy. Once particles reach a high enough momentum ($p\gtrsim 0.2 m_pc$; see the top panel of Fig. \[fig\_fnp\_1e4\_1e6\]) they diffuse far enough upstream where the boost in injection has a lesser effect. We must emphasize again that these results are very sensitive to the physics of particle injection at the subshock. It is difficult to predict how the [nonlinear]{} results would change if a different model of injection was used, but we can refer the reader to the analytic model [@AB2006] that uses the threshold injection model with a different diffusion coefficient.
### Discussion
Our two most important results are, first, that even a small rate ($\sim 10$%) of turbulence dissipation can drastically increase the precursor temperature, and second, that the precursor heating boosts particle injection into DSA by a large factor. The increase in particle injection modifies the low-energy part of the particle spectrum but, due to [nonlinear]{} feedback effects, does not significantly change the overall efficiency or the high energy part of the spectrum. Both the precursor heating and modified spectral shape that occur with dissipation may have observable consequences.
The parameterization we use here is a simple one and a more advanced description of the turbulence damping may change our results. In our model the energy drained from the magnetic turbulence, at all wavelengths, is directly ‘pumped’ into the thermal particles. Superthermal particles only gain extra energy due to heating because the thermal particles were more likely to return upstream and get accelerated. In a more advanced model of dissipation, where energy cascades from large-scale turbulence harmonics to the short-scale ones, the low energy CRs might gain energy directly from the dissipation. It is conceivable that cascading effects might increase the overall acceleration efficiency, the magnetic field amplification, and the maximum particle energy a shock can produce.
It is also possible that non-resonant turbulence instabilities play an important role in magnetic field amplification (e.g., [@PLM2006]). This opens another possibility for the turbulence dissipation to produce an increase in the magnetic field amplification. For instance, [@BT2005] proposed a mechanism for generating long-wavelength perturbations of magnetic fields by low energy particles. If such a mechanism is responsible for generation of a significant fraction of the turbulence that confines the highest energy particles, then the increased particle injection due to the precursor heating may raise the maximum particle energy and, possibly, the value of the amplified magnetic field.
Bell’s nonresonant instability and cascading in nonlinear model {#res2009}
---------------------------------------------------------------
These results are currently in preparation for publication by Vladimirov, Bykov and Ellison. We will present the results of the model of nonlinear shock acceleration with amplification of strong stochastic magnetic fields by Bell’s nonresonant streaming instability. We compare the assumption that the spectral energy transfer in the generated MHD turbulence is suppressed to the assumption that the Kolmogorov cascade determines the transfer.
The results confirm that the nonresonant instability alone may produce a steady state shock structure with a very strong effective magnetic field. In addition, we find that, in the absence of cascading, the spectrum of the MHD turbulence is not a power law, as usually assumed, but has a prominent multiple-peak structure. The sharp peaks indicate the presence of eddies of different distinct scales. Also, the precursor of the shock is no longer smooth, but has several layers (i.e., it is stratified), where lower and lower energy cosmic rays are overtaken by the eddies and quickly accelerated. However, if the Kolmogorov cascade is assumed, the amplification of magnetic field is not as efficient, but the stratification is eliminated.
We argue that the physically realistic solution is in between the two extreme cases that we presented here, and discuss the consequences of both scenarios for the process of particle acceleration by shocks and for the observable features of emitted radiation.
### Model
We describe the evolution of turbulence by equation (\[eq-genmfa\]) with boundary condition (\[bc-genmfa\]), and set ${\alpha_g}={\beta_g}=0$, and ${\gamma_g}={\delta_g}={\varepsilon_g}=1$. For the turbulence amplification model, we choose the Bohm nonresonant instability, i.e., with ${\Gamma_\mathrm{nr}}$ given by Equation (\[bell\_increment\]).
The flux of energy along the spectrum, $\Pi(x,k)$, reflects the cascade of turbulent structures. Cascade of MHD turbulence may be anisotropic [@GS95], harmonics with wavenumbers transverse to the uniform magnetic field experiencing a Kolmogorov-like cascade, while the cascade in wavenumbers parallel to the field is suppressed. The waves generated in the nonresonant instability are transverse, so the diffusion coefficient for particle transport parallel to the flow depends on the wavenumbers parallel to the magnetic field. It is uncertain whether the regime in which the instability operates will lead to a Kolmogorov cascade, or to a suppression of the parallel cascade. We therefore consider two extreme cases: Model A, in which the cascading is fully suppressed, i.e., $\Pi_A=0$, and Model B, in which the cascading is efficient and has the Kovazhny form (e.g., [@VBT93]) given by equation (\[pi\_kolmogorov\]), i.e., $\Pi_B = \Pi_K$. The dissipation term, $L$, is assumed to be zero for Model A, and to have the form (\[diss\_ksq\]) for Model B, i.e., $L_B = L_V$. For Model B, we also assume that the seed wave spectrum represents linear waves that are not subject to cascading or dissipation, and that the transition to the turbulent regime takes place at a point $x_0$ where the amplified wave spectrum reaches the value $kW(x_0,k)=B_0^2/4\pi$ at some $k$. At this point, $\Pi$ and $L$ are set from zero to the values (\[pi\_kolmogorov\]) and (\[diss\_ksq\]). The wavenumber at which the dissipation begins to dominate, ${k_d}$, is identified with the inverse of a thermal proton gyroradius: ${k_d}= eB_0/(c\sqrt{m_pk_BT})$, where $m_p$ is the proton mass, $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant and $T=T(x)$ is the local gas temperature determined from the gas heating induced by $L$, as described in Section \[turb\_effects\].
Particle transport is described by the hybrid model of diffusion in strong turbulence, laid out in Section \[advanced\_transport\].
To calculate the diffusive current $j_d(x)$, we propagate the particles using the diffusion properties described above, and then compute the moment of the particle distribution function $j_d(x) = e \int v_x f(x,{\bf p}) d^3 p$ by summing over all particles crossing certain positions.
In order to determine the minimal particle gyroradius, ${r_\mathrm{g1}}$, that limits the long-wavelength generation by the instability as defined by Equation (\[bell\_increment\]), we define the lowest CR momentum at the current position, $p_1$, as the momentum below which the CRs contribute $1\%$ of the total CR pressure. Then ${r_\mathrm{g1}}$ is defined as ${r_\mathrm{g1}}= c p_1/(e {B_\mathrm{ls}})$ with ${B_\mathrm{ls}}$ calculated for the momentum $p_1$.
We use the iterative procedures (\[iteration\_rtot\]) and (\[iteration\_ux\]) to achieve a self-consistent shock structure, in which particle distribution, turbulence spectrum and flow structure are all consistent with each other, and the fundamental conservation laws are fulfilled.
### Results
We ran the Monte Carlo simulations of a shock with a speed $u_0=10^4$ [km s$^{-1}$]{} propagating along a uniform magnetic field $B_0=3$ [$\mu$G]{} in a plasma with a proton density $n_0=0.3$ cm$^{-3}$ and a temperature $T_0 = 10^4$ K. We assumed that the seed magnetic fluctuations have an effective value ${\Delta B_\mathrm{seed}}=B_0$, and that the acceleration process is size-limited with a free escape boundary located at $x=-10^7\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}$, where ${r_\mathrm{g0}}\equiv mu_0c/eB_0 \approx 3.5\cdot 10^{10}\;\mathrm{cm}$. Two simulations were performed, which as described in the previous section, we will call Model A and Model B.
0.5in
The result for model A was the steady-state structure of a shock modified by efficient particle acceleration and magnetic field amplification, with a self-consistent compression ratio ${r_\mathrm{tot}}=u_0/u_2\approx 15$, a downstream magnetic field ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x>0)\approx 1000$ [$\mu$G]{}, and particle acceleration up to a maximum momentum ${p_\mathrm{max}}\approx 10^5 \; m_p c$. Model B predicted a lower compression ratio, ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\approx 11$, lower magnetic field ${B_\mathrm{eff}}(x>0)\approx 120$ [$\mu$G]{}, and a maximum momentum ${p_\mathrm{max}}\approx 2\cdot 10^4 \; m_p c$.
0.5in
The self-consistent structure of the shocks (the flow speeds, the effective magnetic field, the diffusive CR current and the thermal plasma temperature) are shown in Figure \[fig\_ubj\]. Besides the above mentioned differences in the compression ratio and the amplified magnetic fields, one may notice the difference in the $j_d(x)$ plot. While the $j_d(x)$ curve is smooth for Model B, it has an uneven structure for Model A, which reveals the stratification that becomes more apparent in the spectra of the self-generated magnetic turbulence (see below). Another prominent difference is the significantly increased temperature $T(x)$ in the precursor of the Model B shock, which comes about due to the dissipation of cascading turbulence at large $k$.
In Figure \[fig\_fl\], we show the particle distribution function $f(p)$, the dependence of proton mean free path on momentum $\lambda(p)$, and the acceleration time to a certain momentum, $\tau(p)$. The plots of $f(p)$ show that shocks with either model of spectral energy transfer remain efficient particle accelerators: the concave shape indicates the nonlinear modification of the shock structure, also apparent in the plots of $u(x)$. The thicker thermal peak and the higher low energy parts of the spectrum in the model with cascading are due to the increased turbulence dissipation, similarly to what was observed in [@VBE2008]. The mean free path $\lambda(p)$ for model B is a smooth function of $p$, with $\lambda \propto p$ for intermediate and $\lambda \propto p^2$ for the highest energy particles, but for model A it has plateaus that correspond to the trapping of particles by turbulent vortices of different scales. A similar uneven structure is seen in the acceleration time $\tau(p)$: it has regions of rapid and slow acceleration.
0.5in
The most intriguing result of this simulation is shown in Figure \[fig\_wp\]. Plotted there are the turbulence spectra, $W(x,k)$, multiplied by $k$ (so that a horizontal line represents a Bohm spectrum $W\propto k^{-1}$). As in the other figures, the dotted lines represent Model A, and the dashed lines – Model B, but here we also show the spectra at different locations, which adds lines of the same styles, but different thicknesses. The thickest lines correspond to the downstream region $x>0$, the medium thickness lines – a point upstream of the subshock, $x=-2\cdot 10^{4}\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}$, and the thinnest lines – to the unshocked interstellar medium (i.e., very far upstream). In both models, the spectra of stochastic magnetic fields are described by (\[eq\_seed\_turb\]) and represented by the thin horizontal lines. Closer to the shock, where a small current of streaming accelerated protons is present, fluctuations around $k=10^{-3}\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}^{-1}$ are amplified by the nonresonant instability. In model A, the energy spectrum of these fluctuations peaks around the value $k_c/2$ corresponding to the maximum of ${\Gamma_\mathrm{nr}}$ from (\[bell\_increment\]), but in model B, cascading spreads this energy over an extended inertial range of $k$ (see the medium thickness lines). Closer to the shock, where lower energy particles appear, the generation of waves at $k=10^{-3}\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}^{-1}$ shuts down, according to the limits of applicability in (\[bell\_increment\]), but the increased number of the streaming particles and accordingly raised diffusive current now corresponds to a greater $k_c$, and shorter wavelength structures get amplified, around $k=10^{-1}\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}^{-1}$. In model A, this results in a second peak of the turbulence spectrum at that wavenumber, but in model B, cascading smoothes out the spectrum. By the time the plasma reaches the downstream region (thick lines), three distinct peaks get generated with this mechanism in Model A, while Model obtains an amplified turbulence spectrum close to $W\propto k^{-1}$.
The peaks occur because of the coupling of particle transport with magnetic turbulence amplification. The first (smallest $k$) peak forms far upstream, where only the highest energy particles are present, and their current $j_d$ is low. These particles diffuse in the $\lambda\propto p^2$ regime, scattered by the short-scale magnetic field fluctuations that they themselves generate. As the plasma moves toward the subshock, advecting the turbulence with it, lower energy particles appear. At some $x$, particles with energies low enough to resonate with the turbulence generated farther upstream (in the lowest $k$ peak) become dominant. This strong resonant scattering leads to a high gradient of $j_d$ (seen at $x \sim -10^5\;{r_\mathrm{g0}}$ in the third panel of Fig. \[fig\_ubj\]), and the wavenumber $k_c/2$, at which the amplification rate ${\Gamma_\mathrm{nr}}$ has a maximum, increases rapidly. The increased value of $k_c/2$ leads to the emergence of the second peak between $10^{-2}$ and $10^{-1}\,{r_\mathrm{g0}}^{-1}$, as seen in Fig. \[fig\_wp\]. Similarly, the third peak is generated at distances closer to the subshock than $\sim -2{\!\times\!10^{4}}\,{r_\mathrm{g0}}$ and this is seen in the thick dotted line in Fig. \[fig\_wp\] at $k \sim
10\,{r_\mathrm{g0}}^{-1}$.
The number of peaks depends on the dynamic range, i.e., on ${L_\mathrm{FEB}}$. A smaller ${L_\mathrm{FEB}}$ can result in two peaks, while a larger ${L_\mathrm{FEB}}$, and therefore a larger ${p_\mathrm{max}}$, can yield four or more peaks in the downstream region.
The formation of the spectrum with discrete peaks occurs simultaneously with the stratification of the shock precursor into layers (see the plots of $j_d$), in which vortices of different scales are formed. The peaks are a direct result of Bell’s nonresonant instability, but they will not show up unless ${\lambda_\mathrm{ss}}$ and ${\Gamma_\mathrm{nr}}$ are calculated consistently, and the simulation has a large enough dynamic range in both $k$ and $p$.
### Discussion
Our results show that, similarly to the model with a Bohm diffusion coefficient and a resonant streaming instability [@VEB2006; @VBE2008], the predictions of efficient particle acceleration, shock modification and magnetic field amplification by a large factor remain in force. However, compared to the previous results, the precursor structure is strikingly different: instead of a smooth, gradual variation of all quantities in the precursor, we observe a stratification into layers, in which vortices of distinct sizes are subsequently generated. The resulting turbulence spectrum has 3 sharp peaks, including one at very short wavelengths. This stratification process is eliminated if the rapid Kolmogorov cascade of turbulence structures is assumed. In the latter case, the amplified turbulence spectrum downstream becomes a power law $W\propto k^{-1}$, and the variation of all quantities in the shock precursor reverts to being smooth. The amplified effective magnetic field, the shock compression ratio and the maximum energy of accelerated particles are smaller in the model with Kolmogorov cascade. Cascading of MHD turbulence with respect to the wavenumbers parallel to the mean magnetic field must be suppressed [@GS95], and the two models (without cascading and with the Kolmogorov cascade) should be perceived as the extremes, between which the more physically realistic answer lies.
If the situation without cascades and with precursor stratification is the better approximation of physical reality, what consequences for astrophysical observations and theory of cosmic accelerators might it have? The calculation performed here derived a steady-state structure of a size-limited particle accelerator, but the information about mean particle acceleration time, ${\tau_\mathrm{acc}}(p)$ (bottom panel of Figure \[fig\_fl\]) allows a peek into the time-dependent process. The time of acceleration to a certain momentum is, on the average, proportional to the momentum, ${\tau_\mathrm{acc}}\propto p$, for $p > m_p c$ is, but there are periods of slow acceleration, when $d\ln{{\tau_\mathrm{acc}}}/d\ln{p}>1$, and fast acceleration, when $d\ln{{\tau_\mathrm{acc}}}/d\ln{p}<1$. Does it mean that in a time-dependent calculation, one would observe quiet periods, when the highest energy particles escape ahead of the shock into the interstellar medium and generate large-scale turbulent vortices, intermittent with bursts of particle acceleration, when the lower energy particles are trapped by these vortices and vigorously accelerated? The large amount of energy observed in the shortest-scale (largest $k$) peak may influence the synchrotron radiation of electrons. Its location was around $0.1 \; {r_\mathrm{g0}}\approx 3.5 \cdot 10^{9} \; \mathrm{cm}$, and it contained roughly $1/3$ of the magnetic field energy corresponding to the $1000$ [$\mu$G]{} magnetic field. Will this rapidly varying field affect the radio or the X-ray (e.g., [@BUE2008]) part of the SNR shock synchrotron spectrum?
On the other hand, if the Kolmogorov cascade is the better representation of the spectral energy transfer in the problem of diffusive shock acceleration, it means that the amplified magnetic fields may not be as large as the quasi-linear theory suggests. Also, the heating of the shock precursor by the dissipation of turbulence must have significant effects. Indeed, in the model with cascades, the upstream plasma temperature $T(x)$ is increased to values above $10^6$ K (bottom panel of Figure \[fig\_ubj\]), and the accelerated particle spectrum is elevated up to $p\approx m_p c$ with respect to model A. These features of the solution indicate that the X-ray emission of shocks must carry the fingerprints of the turbulent cascade.
Fits for the nonlinear shock structure {#res_scalings}
--------------------------------------
The predictions of the model: how efficient magnetic field amplification and particle acceleration are, how much the nonlinearly modified shocks compress and heat the medium that they propagate in, are important for many applications where strong shocks exist. Although nonlinear shock structure is likely to emerge in many problems, there exists no simple description for physicists working in other areas for to incorporating the nonlinear effects into calculations.
In an effort to fix this situation, I derived simple scaling laws to replace the Hugoniot adiabat, when nonlinearly modified shocks are considered (see also one such scaling in [@Bykov2002]). I did it by performing the derivation of the self-consistent shock structure for a set of input parameters spanning a certain range. After that, using the least squares method, I derived the best fit coefficients for power-law scalings fitting the obtained data.
### Model
The nonlinear shock model used here is identical to that described in Section \[res2008\].
### Results
I ran a total of 81 Monte Carlo simulations with different parameters and obtained a self-consistent solution in each case. I chose the parameter range that represents the conditions in galaxy gluster shocks: ${\alpha_H}=0 \dots 1$, $T_0=2\times 10^4$ K, $B_0=0.1 \dots 1.0$ [$\mu$G]{}, $n_0=10^{-5}\dots 10^{-4}$ [cm$^{-3}$]{}, and $u_0=1000 \dots 3000$ [km s$^{-1}$]{}. For densities at the lower end of the range, magnetic field was only varied between $0.1$ [$\mu$G]{} and $0.5-0.6$ [$\mu$G]{}, because [Alfvén]{} Mach numbers are too low for high $B_0=1$ [$\mu$G]{} for low density. The upstream free escape boundary was chosen as ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}=-10^7\,{r_\mathrm{g0}}$.
The raw data I collected are shown in the tables \[clusterdata\_0p0\], \[clusterdata\_0p5\] and \[clusterdata\_1p0\]. In these tables, the input parameters of the models are listed to the left of the vertical divider: ${\alpha_H}$ is the dissipation rate parameter, $u_0$ is the shock speed, $T_0$ is the far upstream gas temperature, $n_0$ is the far upstream plasma density, and $B_0$ is the far upstream magnetic field. The rest of the columns are the self-consistent results of the simulation: ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ and ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ are the self-consistent total and subshock compression ratios, $T_1$ is the temperature right before the subshock, ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$ is the downstream amplified effective magnetic field and $T_2$ is the downstream gas temperature.
I fitted $T_2$ and ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ from these data with power law fits in the form: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Tfitform}
T_2 =A u_0^{a_1}B_0^{a_2} n_0^{a_3}, \\
\label{Rfitform}
{r_\mathrm{tot}}=C u_0^{c_1} B_0^{c_2} n_0^{c_3}.\end{aligned}$$ I chose to fit the ${\alpha_H}=0$, ${\alpha_H}=0.5$ and ${\alpha_H}=1$ cases separately. The results are shown below. The temperature scales as
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{Tfit0p0}
\left.
\left(
\frac{T_2}{10^6 \, \mathrm{K}}
\right)
\right|_{{\alpha_H}=0.0}
& = &
0.99
\left( \frac{u_0}{10^3\, \mathrm{km\,s}^{-1}} \right)^{ 1.40 \pm 0.17}
\left( \frac{B_0}{1 \, \mathrm{\mu G} } \right)^{ 0.47 \pm 0.10}
\left( \frac{n_0}{1 \, \mathrm{cm^{-3}} } \right)^{-0.22 \pm 0.08}, \\
\label{Tfit0p5}
\left.
\left(
\frac{T_2}{10^6 \, \mathrm{K}}
\right)
\right|_{{\alpha_H}=0.5}
& = &
1.11
\left( \frac{u_0}{10^3\, \mathrm{km\,s}^{-1}} \right)^{ 1.34 \pm 0.07}
\left( \frac{B_0}{1 \, \mathrm{\mu G} } \right)^{ 0.45 \pm 0.04}
\left( \frac{n_0}{1 \, \mathrm{cm^{-3}} } \right)^{-0.23 \pm 0.03},\\
\label{Tfit1p0}
\left.
\left(
\frac{T_2}{10^6 \, \mathrm{K}}
\right)
\right|_{{\alpha_H}=1.0}
& = &
1.51
\left( \frac{u_0}{10^3\, \mathrm{km\,s}^{-1}} \right)^{ 1.40 \pm 0.06}
\left( \frac{B_0}{1 \, \mathrm{\mu G} } \right)^{ 0.44 \pm 0.03}
\left( \frac{n_0}{1 \, \mathrm{cm^{-3}} } \right)^{-0.21 \pm 0.03}.\end{aligned}$$
The compression ratio scales as
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{Rfit0p0}
\left.
{r_\mathrm{tot}}\right|_{{\alpha_H}=0.0}
& = &
12.9
\left( \frac{u_0}{10^3\, \mathrm{km\,s}^{-1}} \right)^{ 0.34 \pm 0.10}
\left( \frac{B_0}{1 \, \mathrm{\mu G} } \right)^{-0.25 \pm 0.06}
\left( \frac{n_0}{1 \, \mathrm{cm^{-3}} } \right)^{ 0.12 \pm 0.05}, \\
\label{Rfit0p5}
\left.
{r_\mathrm{tot}}\right|_{{\alpha_H}=0.5}
& = &
12.0
\left( \frac{u_0}{10^3\, \mathrm{km\,s}^{-1}} \right)^{ 0.37 \pm 0.06}
\left( \frac{B_0}{1 \, \mathrm{\mu G} } \right)^{-0.25 \pm 0.03}
\left( \frac{n_0}{1 \, \mathrm{cm^{-3}} } \right)^{ 0.13 \pm 0.03},\\
\label{Rfit1p0}
\left.
{r_\mathrm{tot}}\right|_{{\alpha_H}=1.0}
& = &
10.7
\left( \frac{u_0}{10^3\, \mathrm{km\,s}^{-1}} \right)^{ 0.35 \pm 0.04}
\left( \frac{B_0}{1 \, \mathrm{\mu G} } \right)^{-0.25 \pm 0.02}
\left( \frac{n_0}{1 \, \mathrm{cm^{-3}} } \right)^{ 0.12 \pm 0.02}.\end{aligned}$$
The deviations of the parameters shown above come from the standard least squares method and are $2\sigma$ (95% confidence). To estimate the fit quality, I also calculated the mean square relative error and the maximum error of the fits in each case. For the temperature fits the mean square deviations of the fits (\[Tfit0p0\]), (\[Tfit0p5\]) and (\[Tfit1p0\]) from the data were 18%, 7% and 6%, respectively, and the maximum errors were 41%, 25% and 17%, respectively. For the compression ratio fits the mean square deviations of the fits (\[Rfit0p0\]), (\[Rfit0p5\]) and (\[Rfit1p0\]) from the data were 12%, 7% and 5%, respectively, and the maximum errors were 42%, 26% and 18%, respectively.
### Discussion
I calculated the self-consistent structure of nonlinear shocks that power particle acceleration and magnetic field amplification. The parameter range I spanned makes these calculations applicable to cosmological shocks [@BDD2008], except for free escape boundary location, ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}$. Galaxy cluster formation shocks may have much larger spatial scale than defined by ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}$, but running the Monte Carlo simulation with a much greater ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}$ is too time consuming. However, I argue and cans show with simulation results that as soon as ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}$ is large enough to ensure that the fraction of ultra-relativistic particles in the shock precursor is significant, increasing ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}$ further does not affect the self-consistent compression ratio and the downstream temperature too much (see also [@VBE2008]).
By fitting the results of a number of simulations, I derived simple scaling laws for the downstream temperature and the shock compression ratio, expressed by the equations (\[Tfit0p0\]) – (\[Rfit1p0\]).
These predictions are, of course, very different from the hydrodynamic shock solution. For instance, the Hugoniot adiabat (\[hugoniot\_u\]) and (\[hugoniot\_T\]) provides the following scaling for $M_s \gg 1$: $$\begin{aligned}
\left( \frac{T_2}{10^6\,\mathrm{K}}\right) &=&
1.2 \cdot 10^2 \left(
\frac{u_0}{10^3 \, \mathrm{km\,s}^{-1}}
\right)^2, \\
{r_\mathrm{tot}}&=& 4.\end{aligned}$$ In the fits that I found, the temperature is orders of magnitude lower, and the compression ratio several times greater, than in the hydrodynamic shock solution.
This method can be extended to different parameter ranges, and our model can make similar predictions of macroscopic parameter scalings for shocks in other systems. For example, the emission spectra of radiative shocks (from the infrared to the X-ray ranges) may be influenced by particle acceleration and magnetic field amplification.
I am grateful to A. M. Bykov for the idea of this direction of research.
[ccccc|cccccccccc]{} ${\alpha_H}$ & $u_0$, [km s$^{-1}$]{}& $T_0$, K & $n_0$, [cm$^{-3}$]{}& $B_0$, G & ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ & ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ & $T_1$, K & ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$, G & $T_2$, G\
0.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-07 & 7.19 & 2.87 & 3.63E+04 & 2.25E-06 & 2.70E+06\
0.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-07 & 8.50 & 2.91 & 4.06E+04 & 3.84E-06 & 7.94E+06\
0.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-07 & 8.96 & 2.94 & 4.25E+04 & 5.13E-06 & 1.64E+07\
0.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 3.0E-07 & 6.61 & 2.86 & 3.50E+04 & 2.76E-06 & 3.16E+06\
0.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 3.0E-07 & 7.13 & 2.89 & 3.71E+04 & 4.70E-06 & 1.10E+07\
0.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 3.0E-07 & 8.12 & 2.92 & 4.09E+04 & 6.82E-06 & 1.94E+07\
0.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-06 & 3.92 & 2.81 & 2.54E+04 & 3.30E-06 & 8.29E+06\
0.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-06 & 5.69 & 2.89 & 3.28E+04 & 5.74E-06 & 1.70E+07\
0.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-06 & 6.39 & 2.91 & 3.69E+04 & 8.20E-06 & 3.07E+07\
0.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 6.95 & 2.85 & 3.60E+04 & 1.31E-06 & 2.83E+06\
0.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 8.05 & 2.92 & 4.00E+04 & 2.57E-06 & 8.90E+06\
0.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 9.01 & 2.91 & 4.37E+04 & 3.42E-06 & 1.57E+07\
0.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 5.68 & 2.83 & 3.22E+04 & 1.65E-06 & 4.13E+06\
0.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 6.81 & 2.90 & 3.66E+04 & 2.98E-06 & 1.20E+07\
0.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 7.20 & 2.92 & 3.90E+04 & 4.14E-06 & 2.43E+07\
0.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 6.0E-07 & 3.62 & 2.80 & 2.42E+04 & 1.85E-06 & 9.53E+06\
0.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 6.0E-07 & 5.60 & 2.88 & 3.28E+04 & 3.19E-06 & 1.73E+07\
0.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 6.0E-07 & 6.13 & 2.92 & 3.67E+04 & 4.52E-06 & 3.32E+07\
0.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 6.57 & 2.83 & 3.56E+04 & 8.83E-07 & 3.11E+06\
0.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 7.52 & 2.90 & 3.86E+04 & 1.60E-06 & 9.99E+06\
0.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 8.00 & 2.91 & 4.09E+04 & 2.24E-06 & 1.99E+07\
0.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 4.02 & 2.82 & 2.59E+04 & 1.02E-06 & 7.89E+06\
0.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 5.96 & 2.88 & 3.41E+04 & 1.83E-06 & 1.55E+07\
0.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 6.41 & 2.91 & 3.77E+04 & 2.54E-06 & 3.03E+07\
0.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 5.0E-07 & 2.63 & 2.60 & 2.01E+04 & 1.20E-06 & 1.47E+07\
0.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 5.0E-07 & 4.51 & 2.88 & 2.95E+04 & 1.95E-06 & 2.62E+07\
0.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 5.0E-07 & 5.49 & 2.92 & 3.51E+04 & 2.75E-06 & 4.09E+07\
[ccccc|cccccccccc]{} ${\alpha_H}$ & $u_0$, [km s$^{-1}$]{}& $T_0$, K & $n_0$, [cm$^{-3}$]{}& $B_0$, G & ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ & ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ & $T_1$, K & ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$, G & $T_2$, G\
0.5 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-07 & 6.68 & 2.36 & 1.28E+06 & 1.54E-06 & 3.30E+06\
0.5 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-07 & 7.95 & 2.55 & 1.95E+06 & 2.36E-06 & 8.68E+06\
0.5 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-07 & 8.74 & 2.62 & 2.87E+06 & 3.11E-06 & 1.62E+07\
0.5 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 3.0E-07 & 5.39 & 2.24 & 2.18E+06 & 1.68E-06 & 4.91E+06\
0.5 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 3.0E-07 & 6.73 & 2.34 & 4.71E+06 & 3.07E-06 & 1.24E+07\
0.5 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 3.0E-07 & 7.44 & 2.42 & 7.49E+06 & 4.43E-06 & 2.27E+07\
0.5 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-06 & 3.65 & 2.40 & 2.40E+06 & 2.99E-06 & 8.58E+06\
0.5 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-06 & 4.96 & 2.26 & 9.29E+06 & 4.19E-06 & 2.18E+07\
0.5 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-06 & 5.72 & 2.26 & 1.67E+07 & 5.66E-06 & 3.82E+07\
0.5 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 5.98 & 2.29 & 1.68E+06 & 8.36E-07 & 3.97E+06\
0.5 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 7.45 & 2.40 & 3.53E+06 & 1.59E-06 & 1.02E+07\
0.5 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 8.32 & 2.48 & 4.85E+06 & 2.10E-06 & 1.77E+07\
0.5 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 4.66 & 2.21 & 2.74E+06 & 1.16E-06 & 6.06E+06\
0.5 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 5.94 & 2.25 & 7.20E+06 & 1.92E-06 & 1.59E+07\
0.5 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 6.63 & 2.29 & 1.21E+07 & 2.77E-06 & 2.89E+07\
0.5 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 6.0E-07 & 3.44 & 2.46 & 2.04E+06 & 1.72E-06 & 9.52E+06\
0.5 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 6.0E-07 & 4.82 & 2.25 & 9.95E+06 & 2.43E-06 & 2.28E+07\
0.5 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 6.0E-07 & 5.58 & 2.30 & 1.68E+07 & 3.14E-06 & 3.98E+07\
0.5 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 5.36 & 2.20 & 2.30E+06 & 5.46E-07 & 5.05E+06\
0.5 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 6.70 & 2.29 & 5.58E+06 & 1.04E-06 & 1.29E+07\
0.5 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 7.52 & 2.36 & 7.68E+06 & 1.42E-06 & 2.16E+07\
0.5 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 3.78 & 2.38 & 2.47E+06 & 9.24E-07 & 8.21E+06\
0.5 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 4.96 & 2.27 & 9.51E+06 & 1.30E-06 & 2.19E+07\
0.5 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 5.77 & 2.26 & 1.64E+07 & 1.77E-06 & 3.81E+07\
0.5 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 5.0E-07 & 2.62 & 2.58 & 1.41E+05 & 1.20E-06 & 1.46E+07\
0.5 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 5.0E-07 & 4.17 & 2.37 & 9.86E+06 & 1.68E-06 & 2.84E+07\
0.5 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 5.0E-07 & 4.93 & 2.30 & 2.04E+07 & 2.09E-06 & 4.86E+07\
[ccccc|cccccccccc]{} ${\alpha_H}$ & $u_0$, [km s$^{-1}$]{}& $T_0$, K & $n_0$, [cm$^{-3}$]{}& $B_0$, G & ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$ & ${r_\mathrm{sub}}$ & $T_1$, K & ${B_\mathrm{eff2}}$, G & $T_2$, G\
1.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-07 & 5.86 & 2.12 & 2.63E+06 & 3.82E-07 & 4.72E+06\
1.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-07 & 7.52 & 2.29 & 4.66E+06 & 4.57E-07 & 1.04E+07\
1.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-07 & 8.35 & 2.44 & 5.96E+06 & 4.93E-07 & 1.84E+07\
1.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 3.0E-07 & 5.08 & 2.07 & 3.46E+06 & 1.03E-06 & 5.88E+06\
1.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 3.0E-07 & 5.91 & 2.02 & 1.10E+07 & 1.16E-06 & 1.82E+07\
1.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 3.0E-07 & 6.96 & 2.23 & 1.36E+07 & 1.30E-06 & 2.80E+07\
1.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-06 & 3.43 & 2.25 & 4.06E+06 & 2.74E-06 & 1.00E+07\
1.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-06 & 4.49 & 2.07 & 1.66E+07 & 3.18E-06 & 2.89E+07\
1.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-04 & 1.0E-06 & 5.17 & 2.09 & 3.01E+07 & 3.50E-06 & 5.12E+07\
1.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 5.48 & 2.07 & 3.07E+06 & 3.63E-07 & 5.16E+06\
1.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 6.87 & 2.25 & 5.70E+06 & 4.26E-07 & 1.24E+07\
1.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 7.69 & 2.28 & 9.80E+06 & 4.67E-07 & 2.22E+07\
1.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 4.25 & 2.08 & 4.74E+06 & 9.19E-07 & 7.98E+06\
1.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 5.32 & 2.08 & 1.30E+07 & 1.07E-06 & 2.19E+07\
1.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 5.96 & 2.10 & 2.18E+07 & 1.16E-06 & 3.89E+07\
1.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 6.0E-07 & 3.32 & 2.38 & 3.47E+06 & 1.63E-06 & 1.05E+07\
1.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 6.0E-07 & 4.42 & 2.12 & 1.67E+07 & 1.90E-06 & 2.93E+07\
1.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 3.0E-05 & 6.0E-07 & 5.01 & 2.11 & 3.21E+07 & 2.06E-06 & 5.47E+07\
1.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 4.95 & 2.04 & 3.85E+06 & 3.40E-07 & 6.33E+06\
1.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 6.04 & 2.12 & 1.01E+07 & 3.92E-07 & 1.75E+07\
1.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 1.0E-07 & 6.96 & 2.18 & 1.42E+07 & 4.32E-07 & 2.81E+07\
1.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 3.56 & 2.29 & 4.12E+06 & 8.44E-07 & 9.65E+06\
1.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 4.55 & 2.06 & 1.68E+07 & 9.66E-07 & 2.88E+07\
1.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 3.0E-07 & 5.24 & 2.09 & 2.95E+07 & 1.06E-06 & 4.95E+07\
1.0 & 1.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 5.0E-07 & 2.62 & 2.56 & 3.71E+05 & 1.20E-06 & 1.44E+07\
1.0 & 2.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 5.0E-07 & 3.87 & 2.25 & 1.64E+07 & 1.47E-06 & 3.47E+07\
1.0 & 3.0E+03 & 2.0E+04 & 1.0E-05 & 5.0E-07 & 4.51 & 2.17 & 3.49E+07 & 1.60E-06 & 6.35E+07\
Spectrum and angular distribution of escaping particles {#res_angular}
-------------------------------------------------------
Using our model, we calculated the spectra of particles escaping from the shock at the free escape boundary. We provide simple fits to the energy and angular distribution of the escaping particles.
### Model
For Bohm diffusion, the momentum distribution $f(p)$ of the escaping particles can be described as $$\label{escfofp}
f(p) \propto p^{-s}
\frac{
\exp{\left(
-s \int\limits_{0}^{p/{p_\mathrm{max}}} \frac{dx/x}{e^{1/x}-1}
\right)}
}
{
\exp{\left({p_\mathrm{max}}/p\right)} - 1
}.$$ Here $s$ is the power-law index corresponding to the compression ratio $r$, $s=3r/(r-1)$ and ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ is defined below. The numerator describes the exponential turn-over of the high energy particles, and the denominator describes the low-energy part of the escaping particle distribution. Equation (\[escfofp\]) is similar to equations (7) and (8) of [@ZP2008], but assumes a diffusion coefficient $D(p)\propto p$, as opposed to $D(p) \propto p^2$ assumed in [@ZP2008].
To find the normalization of the escaping particle distribution $f(p)$, one needs to use the quantity ${q_\mathrm{esc}}$ self-consistently defined by the simulation as (\[qescrtot\]): $$4\pi \int\limits_0^{\infty} p^2 dp \int\limits_{-1}^0 d\mu
f(p) g(\mu) c p = -{q_\mathrm{esc}}\rho_0 u_0^2,$$ where ${q_\mathrm{esc}}$ is the fraction of energy flux carried away by escaping particles, and $g(\mu)$ is their angular distribution. The latter function is defined so that $\int_{-1}^{+1}g(\mu)d\mu=1$, and $\mu = p_x/p$.
The quantity ${p_\mathrm{max}}$ (the maximum particle momentum) can be estimated from the test-particle theory of particle acceleration as ${p_\mathrm{max}}\approx 3 u_0 e B_0 |{x_\mathrm{FEB}}|/c^2$ (i.e., the momentum at which the Bohm diffusion length equals $|{x_\mathrm{FEB}}|$). The function $g(\mu)$ is the distribution of particles incident on a fully absorbing boundary in a flow moving at a speed $u$. It can be estimated using the Monte Carlo simulation, as shown below.
### Results
I ran a simulation of a nonlinearly modified shock with a speed $u_0=5000\;$[km s$^{-1}$]{}, compression ratio $r\approx 10$, no magnetic field amplification, and Bohm model of diffusion. Then I plotted and fitted the particle distribution (angular and momentum-space) determined by the simulation at the free escape boundary located at ${x_\mathrm{FEB}}$, as as shown in Figures \[escmu\] and \[escmom\]. The histograms shown in these figures are the results of the Monte Carlo simulation, and the smooth lines are the fits, equations for which are provided in the figures.
0.5in -0.4in
0.5in -0.3in
It turns out that the angular distribution of the particles can successfully be fitted with the equation shown in Figure \[escmu\]: $$g(\mu) = \left\{
\begin{array}{l}
0.70 |\mu|^2 + 0.65 |\mu|, \; \mathrm{if} \; \mu<0, \\
0, \; \mathrm{if} \; \mu>0.
\end{array}
\right.$$ This represents the case when all the particles are moving to the left, i.e., away from the shock (because $g(\mu>0)=0$). The momentum distribution of escaping particles has the shape described by equation (\[escfofp\]) with $${p_\mathrm{max}}= 1.2 \frac{3 u_0 e B_0}{c^2}|{x_\mathrm{FEB}}|.$$ The factor $1.2$ is a minor correction to the above mentioned analytic estimate.
I would like to thank T. Kamae and S.-H. (Herman) Lee for the discussions that have led to the results presented here.
### Discussion
I used our model to quantitatively describe the spectrum and the anisotropic angular distribution of particles leaving the shock at the upstream free escape boundary. The calculations accounted for the nonlinear modification of the shock by efficient particle acceleration.
While the particular results derived here have limited applicability, because they apply to just a single set of parameters of a plane shock, I provided them to indicate a possible direction of research applying the model presented in this dissertation.
One application may be the description of the interaction between the CRs escaping from a shock and the interstellar medium. For instance, the streaming of these particles, carrying a large fraction of the shock’s energy flux, may amplify magnetic field fluctuations in the interstellar medium.
Another interesting astrophysical application of these results is the recently discovered diffuse gamma ray sources identified as molecular clouds illuminated by cosmic ray particles produced in a nearby supernova remnant shock wave (e.g., [@IC443_MAGIC]). A major uncertainty for the interpretation of these observations is whether the particle accelerating shocks are traversing through the cloud, or located far away from it (see, e.g., [@GAB2007]). In the first case, the angular distribution of accelerated protons is far from isotropic, while in the second case the CRs may have had time to isotropize in the interstellar medium before they reach the cloud. The gamma ray emission of these protons via the decay of pi-mesons produced in collisions with the cloud gas protons will be different in these two cases, because the relativistic process produces gamma rays with strong dependence of energy spectrum on the angle of emission.
Conclusions
===========
I have developed a model of nonlinear shock acceleration that self-consistently includes the amplification of stochastic magnetic fields in the shock precursor by the accelerated particles produced in the first order Fermi process. The model is based on the Monte Carlo simulation of particle transport developed by Ellison and colleagues, and my contribution to the model was the incorporation of the analytic description of magnetic turbulence amplification and evolution, and the implementation of particle transport consistent with the generated magnetic turbulence.
In this dissertation, I provided the details of the model to a degree that, I believe, make it reproducible. I presented the tests of the various parts of the simulation, which confirm that the results of the computer code I built agree with the known analytic results. This dissertation also contains an outline of our three refereed publications, in which we presented the applications of our model. It also features some results that have not yet been published.
The applicability of the Monte Carlo model to shock acceleration in space was tested well before my work in this project by Ellison, Baring and others [@Ellison85; @BOEF97], who used the most direct data available – spacecraft observations of the Earth’s bow shock and of interplanetary shocks. The physical correctness of the magnetic field amplification that I implemented is yet to be tested. Nevertheless, the predictions of the model are able to explain the observations that inspired it (i.e., the large magnetic fields and increased shock compression ratios in SNRs).
The most important limitations of the model are the uncertainty of the extrapolations of linear models of magnetic turbulence evolution into the nonlinear regime, and the statistical description of particle transport in stochastic magnetic fields, which is subject to various conjectures. However, the strength of the presented model compared to the simplified analytic treatments of particle acceleration and magnetic field amplification in shocks is the self-consistency. Our model allows one to determine the shock structure, the accelerated particle spectrum and the turbulence generation all consistently with each other, through an iterative procedure. Even compared to the advanced analytic nonlinear models of particle acceleration (e.g., [@AB2006]), our simulation stands out because the Monte Carlo technique can handle anisotropic particle distributions, which is essential for a more precise description of plasma physics; for instance, the injection of particles into the acceleration process is predicted self-consistently in our model, yet it requires an additional parameter in others. Also, the inclusion of various factors that determine the plasma physics (e.g., turbulent cascades) is straightforward in our approach, and may be complicated in the analytic calculations.
The applications of the model developed here are numerous and exist wherever strong non-relativistic collisionless shocks are present. This includes, to some degree, shocks in interplanetary space, supernova remnants, shocks in galaxy clusters, etc. Our results help answer questions regarding the sources of galactic cosmic rays up to the ‘knee’ of the CR spectrum, and they may be used in the modeling of supernova remnants, galaxy clusters and other objects.
The dissertation contains the results of the model in Chapter \[ch-applications\]. Sections \[res2006\] presents our first refereed publication [@VEB2006] featuring the model. In this work we studied the self-consistent structure of particle accelerating shocks in the presence of the resonant CR streaming instability (see Section \[res\_desc\]). We confirmed that the efficient particle acceleration and strong magnetic field amplifications can exist in collisionless shocks in a wide range of the possible rates of nonlinear development of the streaming instability. In Section \[res2007\], I present our article [@EV2008] that discusses the impact of magnetic field amplification on the maximum energy of the accelerated particles. We showed that the amplified magnetic field does increase the maximum achievable particle energy, but by a smaller factor the increase of the field. Section \[res2008\] contains the results of our investigation of the effect of turbulence dissipation in the shock precursor. These results, presented in [@VBE2008], show that the conversion of turbulent energy into heat increases the pre-shock temperature, which affects particle injection into the acceleration process. In addition to presenting the published articles, I included some work in progress in this dissertation. In Section \[res2009\] I demonstrate the results of the simulation of the nonlinear shock structure with the nonresonant Bell’s instability (see Section \[bells\_nonres\_desc\]) and the hybrid model of particle diffusion (see Section \[subsec\_hybr\_diff\]). We find that, if turbulent cascade is suppressed, the self-consistent steady state shock structure has a stratified precursor, and the spectrum of turbulence has an unusual multiple-peak structure. Section \[res\_scalings\] contains an outline of the calculations that can be done with the simulation in order to obtain simple power-law fits to the results of nonlinear DSA. Such fits can be used in the models of supernova remnants, galaxy cluster shocks, or other objects where strong particle-accelerating shocks are present. Finally, in Section \[res\_angular\] I describe how the escaping particle distribution can be fitted with simple functions and where these fits may be used.
Considering the rapid growth of observational X-ray and gamma ray facilities that reveal the ‘high energy Universe’, such as Chandra, Fermi, H.E.S.S., etc., I believe that the development of this model is very timely and beneficial for the research in different areas of astrophysics.
[ ]{}
0.8in
Appendix A\
Numerical integrator for model with isotropization {#appendix-a-numerical-integrator-for-model-with-isotropization .unnumbered}
---------------------------------------------------
In our works [@VEB2006], [@EV2008] and [@VBE2008], we were including the generation by the streaming instability of waves traveling in both direction, and used the version of the wave amplification equation that accounts for the interaction between these waves. In fact, this effect is only important for the weaker shocks that we did not consider, and in the more recent version we neglected the waves traveling downstream. In order to make a record of the previous work, I provide here the numerical integrator of the previously used model.
The equations we will now consider are (\[uminuskp\]) and (\[upluskp\]). They include the resonant streaming instability (generating and damping waves traveling in both direction), the effect of wave amplitude increase with plasma compression, and the nonlinear interactions between the waves traveling in different directions.
These equations, by introducing quantities $$\begin{aligned}
\xi(x,k_{j}) & = & \int\limits_{\Delta k_j}(U_-(x,k) + U_+(x,k))\: dk, \\
\eta(x,k_{j})& = & \int\limits_{\Delta k_j}(U_-(x,k) - U_+(x,k))\: dk,\end{aligned}$$ are transformed into $$\begin{aligned}
\label{xieq2007_copy}
u\xi' - v_w\eta' + \frac32u'\xi - v_w'\eta -
\frac{\eta}{\xi}v_w\frac{dP}{dx}&=&0, \\
\label{etaeq2007_copy}
u\eta' - v_w\xi' + \frac32u'\eta - v_w'\xi -
v_w\frac{dP}{dx} + \frac{2}{\tau_r}\eta &=&0.\end{aligned}$$ Here $dP/dx$ is the gradient of CR pressure produced by particles resonant with waves in the bin $\Delta k_j$ (see resonance condition below). Then the latter are re-written as $$\label{compact_copy}
A \vec{y}' + B\vec{y}+\vec{c}=0,$$ where $$\begin{array}{c}
\vec{y}=\left( \begin{array}{cc} \xi \\
\eta \end{array} \right), \quad
\\
A=\left( \begin{array}{cc} u & -v_w \\
-v_w & u \end{array} \right),\quad
B=\left( \begin{array}{cc}
\displaystyle\frac32u' & -v_w' \\
-v_w' & \displaystyle\frac32u'+ \frac{2}{\tau_r} \end{array} \right),\quad
\vec{c}=\left(\begin{array}{cc} \displaystyle-\frac{\eta}{\xi}v_w\frac{dP}{dx} \\
\displaystyle-v_w\frac{dP}{dx} \end{array}
\right).
\end{array}$$ If equation (\[compact\_copy\]) was linear (i.e., the matrices $A$, $B$ and $\vec{c}$ did not depend on $\vec{y}$), then solving it would be straightforward. I will skip the details and leave it to the reader to verify that the solution of equation (\[compact\_copy\]) with the initial condition $$\label{xinit}
\vec{y}(0)=\vec{y}_0,$$ assuming that $A$ is reversible (otherwise, the system is not consistent) is $$\label{simpsolform}
\vec{y}_0(x) = \exp \left( -A^{-1}Bx \right) \vec{y}_0
- \left[ \int\limits_0^x \exp \left( - A^{-1}Bs \right) ds \right]
A^{-1} \vec{c}.$$ However, $\vec{c}$ explicitly depends on $\vec{y}$, and for ${f_\mathrm{Alf}}>0$, the magnetic field determining $v_w$ depends on the integral of $U_{\pm}$ with respect to $k$ (see Section \[res2006\]), making the matrices $A$ and $B$ depend on $\vec{y}$ in a non-trivial way, and therefore a numerical solution is required.
To integrate (\[compact\_copy\]), let us start off by assuming that $\vec{y}(x)=\vec{y}_0$ for any $x$. Then let the integrator perform a ‘[*level-1*]{}’ iterative procedure, the purpose of which is to deal with the fact that in (\[compact\_copy\]) the matrices $A$ and $B$ depend on the unknown functions $\xi(x,k)$, $\eta(x,k)$ in all $x$-space and $k$-space through $v_w(x)$ depending on $U_{\pm}(x,k)$. Here is what the ‘[*level-1*]{}’ iterative procedure involves. Given a $k$-bin, integrate the equations (\[compact\_copy\]) for that bin from far upstream to downstream. The values of $U_-(x,k)$ and $U_+(x,k)$ used to form matrices $A$ and $B$ are the ones obtained from the previous iteration. After all $k$-bins have been integrated, the iteration is over. Then the just obtained values of $\vec{y}(x,k)=(\xi(x,k), \; \eta(x,k))^T$ are used to run the next iteration. Iterating on ‘[*level-1*]{}’ ends when the current iteration gives results that are close enough to the results of the previous iteration.
Integrating from one grid plane (at $x_0$) to the next one (at $x_1$), the routine is not likely to encounter a very strong variation of $v_w$ determining the matrices $A$ and $B$ (because the latter depend on an integral of $\vec{y}$ with respect to $k$), but the quantities $\eta$ and $\xi$ that enter $\vec{c}$ may vary by a large factor, and care must be take with using (\[simpsolform\]). I employ another iterative procedure (’[*level-2*]{}’) to tend to the dependence of the vector $\vec{c}$, on $\xi(x,k)$, $\eta(x,k)$ in (\[compact\_copy\]). This iterative procedure is described below. First, divide the step from $x_0$ to $x_1$ into $N_{sub}$ equal substeps between the following points: $$x_{i_{sub}} = x_0 + (x_1 - x_0) \frac{i_{sub}}{N_{sub}}, \quad i_{sub} = 0\: .. \: N_{sub}.$$ Then use (\[simpsolform\]) to obtain $\xi(x_{i_{sub}},k)$ and $\eta(x_{i_{sub}},k)$ from $\xi(x_{i_{sub}-1},k)$ and $\eta(x_{i_{sub}-1},k)$. Here $i_{sub}$ is the number of the substep. When $x_1$ is reached, remember the values $\xi(x_1, k)$, $\eta(x_1, k)$ and increase $N_{sub}$ twice and do another iteration. Eventually, stop iterating on ‘[*level-2*]{}’ after $N_{sub}$ becomes large enough so that the resulting pair $\xi(x_1, k)$, $\eta(x_1, k)$ obtained at the current iteration is close enough to that from the previous iteration.
What values should the integrator use at the ‘[*level-2*]{}’ iteration in the vector $\vec{c}$ to obtain $\vec{y}(x_{i_{sub}},k)$ from $\vec{y}(x_{i_{sub}-1},k)$? The easiest way would be to form $\vec{c}$ from $\xi(x_{i_{sub}-1},k)$ and $\eta(x_{i_{sub}-1},k)$. But expecting this explicit method to have little stability, as typical of such methods, I decided to use an implicit method and to form $\vec{c}$ from $\xi(x_{i_{sub}},k)$ and $\eta(x_{i_{sub}},k)$. Of course, the code does not know the values at $x_{i_{sub}}$ when it integrates from $x_{i_{sub}-1}$ to $x_{i_{sub}}$, which is what the explicit methods are all about. So I use a ‘[*level-3*]{}’ iterative procedure for that matter. First, assume that values of $\xi$ and $\eta$ at the end of the substep are the same as at the beginning, and obtain the preliminary values at $x_{i_{sub}}$. These values are then used to repeat the substep as many times as it takes to get $\vec{y}(x_{i_{sub}})$ at the current iteration close enough to the one in the previous iteration.
Throughout the solution, for I assume the following:
- [Quantities $u(x)$, $v_w(x)$, ${P_\mathrm{cr}}(x, p)$, $\tau_r(x)$, which are defined at x-grid planes, are interpolated linearly in between the planes;]{}
- [Spatial derivatives of the above quantities, $u'(x)$, $v'_w(x)$, $P'_{cr}(x,p)$, are uniform between the grid planes. Their values correspond to the slopes of the linear interpolation of the above quantities;]{}
- [Wave speed $v_G$ according to Equation (\[VG\]);]{}
- [The resonant wavenumber ${k_\mathrm{res}}$ is related to the momentum ${p_\mathrm{res}}$ as ${k_\mathrm{res}}\frac{c {p_\mathrm{res}}}{e B_0}=1$. ]{}
0.8in
Appendix B\
Diffusive flow incident on a moving absorbing boundary {#appendix-b-diffusive-flow-incident-on-a-moving-absorbing-boundary .unnumbered}
------------------------------------------------------
It was mentioned in Section \[subsec\_particleintro\] that particles must be introduced into the simulation as if they are crossing the position, at which they are placed, for the first time in their histories. The angular distribution of these particles is thus equal to the angular distribution of particles diffusively moving with respect to a flowing background medium, and incident on a fully absorbing boundary (the flow is directed into the boundary in our one-dimensional case). If the speed of the flow, $u$, is greater than the speed of the particles, with respect to the flow, $v$, then, assuming isotropic distribution of particles in the reference frame tied to the flow, their angular distribution may be written as (\[fastpushslowdistr\]). This is simple, because for $v<u$ all particles cross every position in the flow just once, because they cannot move upstream in the stationary reference frame. However, for $v>u$, this situation becomes more complicated, because particles are able to move forward as well as backward (against the flow) and the flux of such particles on a fully absorbing boundary is more difficult to estimate.
To solve this problem, I ran the Monte Carlo simulation, injecting the particles far upstream and propagating them downstream till they cross the fully absorbing boundary at $x=0$ for the first time. I recorded the angular distribution of these particles and fitted them with a simple scaling. I chose to search for the distribution in the power law form $$F(v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}) =
\left\{ \begin{array} {l l}
C v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}^{\alpha}, & \; \mathrm{if} \; v_\mathrm{min} < v_\mathrm{sf,\:x} < v_\mathrm{max},\\
0, & \;\mathrm{otherwise}.
\end{array} \right.$$ where $v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}$ is the $x$-component of the incident particle velocity measured in the shock frame (i.e., in the frame in which the absorbing boundary is at rest), $v_\mathrm{min}=0$, $v_\mathrm{max}=u+v$, and $C$ is found from condition $$\int\limits_{v_\mathrm{min}}^{v_\mathrm{max}} F(v_x) \; dv_x =
\int\limits_{v_\mathrm{min}}^{v_\mathrm{max}} C v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}^{\alpha} \; dv_x = 1$$ as $$C = \frac{\alpha + 1}{v_\mathrm{max}^{\alpha + 1} - v_\mathrm{min}^{\alpha + 1}},$$ making $$\label{singleplang}
F(v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}) =
\left\{ \begin{array} {l l}
\displaystyle\frac{\alpha + 1}{v_\mathrm{max}^{\alpha + 1} - v_\mathrm{min}^{\alpha + 1}} v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}^{\alpha},
& \; \mathrm{if} \; v_\mathrm{min} < v_\mathrm{sf,\:x} < v_\mathrm{max},\\
0, & \; \mathrm{otherwise}.
\end{array} \right.$$ In order to derive $\alpha$, one needs to minimize the following function of $\alpha$ to find the least squares fit: $$\Delta(\alpha) =
\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{N}
\left[ \frac{\alpha + 1}{v_\mathrm{max}^{\alpha + 1} - v_\mathrm{min}^{\alpha + 1}} v_i^{\alpha} - f_i \right]^2,$$ where the index $i$ runs over all numerical bins of the speed $v_\mathrm{sf,\:x}$, the values $v_i$ are the centers of these bins, and $f_i$ is the properly normalized fraction of incident particles that had the $x$-component of velocity in the $i$-th bin upon their incidence. I used a bracketing method to find the minimum, searching for it in the region $\alpha \in [0.5, 2.0]$.
In order to collect the data, I ran 30 simulations, introducing particles that were mono-energetic in the plasma frame, with a speed $v$, into a flow with speed $u$. The angular distribution that I used for these particles did not matter, because they were given enough time to scatter in the flow an isotropize before they reached the absorbing boundary. I covered the range $v/u \in [1 \dots 15]$. For each such run, I fitted the angular distribution of particles first entering the shock with a single parameter power law and derived an $\alpha$ for this run. Then I plotted the resulting power law index $\alpha$ versus the ratio $v/u$ of a run. The resulting curve $\alpha(v/u)$ can be described by the following simple equation: $$\label{fittedalpha}
\alpha\left(\frac{v}{u}\right) =
1.5 - 0.5\cdot\left(\frac{v}{u}\right)^{-1.15}.$$
The angular distribution function (\[singleplang\]) with $\alpha$ given by (\[fittedalpha\]) is simulated in the code in order to introduce particles with a plasma frame speed $v$ greater than the local flow speed $u$. Note that for $v \gg u$, the power law index approaches $\alpha \to 1.5$, and for $v \to u$ the power law index approaches $\alpha \to 1.0$, and it stays $\alpha = 1$ for $v < u$, where (\[fastpushslowdistr\]) becomes applicable. The last statement was demonstrated separately, in other simulations, and is obvious: for small $v$ there are no backward-moving particles in the shock frame, so every particle crossing a plane crosses it for the first and the last time.
[^1]: The determination of the location of the shock is a complicated problem, and the contour in Figure \[fig-g19\] should be perceived as an artist’s impression.
[^2]: There also exists a model of the second order Fermi process, in which particles are accelerated by magnetohydrodynamic turbulence in the absence of shocks.
[^3]: For example, relativistic gases with a polytropic index $\gamma = 4/3$ allow the strongest shocks to have a compression ratio up to $r=7$, which results in a power law index $s=3.5$ – an even more strongly diverging distribution.
[^4]: For relativistic shocks, which are beyond the scope of the present research, the Weibel instability may be important for magnetic field generation, as long as the upstream magnetic field is low (see, e.g., [@ML99; @LE2006; @Spitkovsky2008b]).
[^5]: Note that this publication is relatively recent, but it has laid the groundwork for MHD turbulence research from a new vantage point, possible only with modern computational resources.
[^6]: We must also mention the MHD models (e.g., [@Bell2004], [@ZPV2008], [@ZP2008]) that ignore or treat in a simplified way the spectral properties of the particle distribution; while they may be important for describing certain aspects of plasma physics, their application to nonlinear DSA is limited
[^7]: Parallel geometry is where the upstream magnetic field is parallel to the shock normal.
[^8]: Note that in the collisionless shocks discussed in this dissertation, particles with superthermal energies do not lose energy in particle-particle collisions and can therefore be easily accelerated once they are injected.
[^9]: Hereafter let us replace the notation of the total shock compression ratio. Instead of $r$, we will now denote it as ${r_\mathrm{tot}}\equiv u_0/u_2$, to distinguish it from the subshock compression ${r_\mathrm{sub}}\equiv u_1/u_2$.
[^10]: Particle escape at an upstream FEB also causes the mass and momentum fluxes to change but these changes are negligible as long as $u_0 \ll c$ (see [@Ellison85]).
[^11]: This and other nonlinear effects are discussed in [@Ellison85].
[^12]: Speaking of CR current and CRs streaming, I will always mean the apparent drift of CRs in the plasma reference frame.
[^13]: The random number generator used in the code is an excellent match for the single-processor version of the Monte Carlo simulation, but was not specifically designed for parallel processing. This, however, turns out not to be a problem for the reasons stated in the text.
[^14]: This is not the number of thermal particles. A numerical procedure called ‘particle splitting’ is used in the Monte Carlo model, which allows to maintain nearly equal number of particles at any energy – a necessary condition to simulate rapidly decreasing particle spectra over many decades of the energy. I did not describe the ‘particle splitting’ in this dissertation, because it is purely technical, and was explained in the literature (e.g., [@JE91]).
[^15]: The results presented here first appeared in [@VEB2006] and largely are reproduced from this publication.
[^16]: See [@BE99] for a discussion of how very large ${r_\mathrm{tot}}$’s can result in high Mach number shocks if only adiabatic heating is included in the precursor. The uncertainty on the compression ratios for the examples in this paper is typically $\pm 10\%$.
[^17]: We note that the smooth emergence of a superthermal tail has been seen in spacecraft observations of the quasi-parallel Earth bow shock (i.e., [@EMP90]) and at interplanetary traveling shocks (i.e., [@BOEF97]).
[^18]: This section presents, in a condensed form, our publication [@EV2008].
[^19]: Note that the [Monte Carlo]{} model ignores the dynamic effects of electrons and the NL shock structure is determined solely from the pressure of the accelerated protons and of the amplified magnetic fields. While electron acceleration can be modeled (e.g., [@BaringEtal99]), we only show proton spectra here.
[^20]: Results presented here were a part of our article [@VBE2008].
[^21]: As explained in [@VEB2006], in the quasi-linear case, $\Delta B \ll B_0$, the wave speed and the speed determining turbulence growth rate are both equal to the [Alfvén]{} speed, $V_G (x) = v_A = B_0 / \sqrt{4 \pi \rho(x)}$. In the case of strong turbulence, $\Delta B \gtrsim B_0$, we hypothesize that the resonant streaming instability can still be described by equations (\[ampeq\]) with $V_G$ being a free parameter ranging from $B_0 / \sqrt{4 \pi \rho(x)}$ to ${B_\mathrm{eff}}/ \sqrt{4 \pi \rho(x)}$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- |
Huang Hu$^{1}$[^1], Xianchao Wu$^3$, Bingfeng Luo$^1$, Chongyang Tao$^{1}$,\
**Can Xu$^2$, Wei Wu$^2$ Zhan Chen$^3$**\
$^1$Peking University, Beijing, China\
$^2$Microsoft Corporation, Beijing, China\
$^3$Microsoft Development Co., Ltd, Tokyo, Japan\
[$^1${tonyhu,bf\_luo,chongyangtao}@pku.edu.cn]{}\
[$^{2,3}${xiancwu,can.xu,wuwei,zhanc}@microsoft.com]{}\
bibliography:
- 'emnlp2018.bib'
title: 'Playing 20 Question Game with Policy-Based Reinforcement Learning'
---
[^1]: The work was done when the first author was an intern in Microsoft XiaoIce team.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The performance in finite time of a discrete heat engine with internal friction is analyzed. The working fluid of the engine is composed of an ensemble of noninteracting two level systems. External work is applied by changing the external field and thus the internal energy levels. The friction induces a minimal cycle time. The power output of the engine is optimized with respect to time allocation between the contact time with the hot and cold baths as well as the adiabats. The engine’s performance is also optimized with respect to the external fields. By reversing the cycle of operation a heat pump is constructed. The performance of the engine as a heat pump is also optimized. By varying the time allocation between the adiabats and the contact time with the reservoir a universal behavior can be identified. The optimal performance of the engine when the cold bath is approaching absolute zero is studied. It is found that the optimal cooling rate converges linearly to zero when the temperature approaches absolute zero.'
address: ' Department of Physical Chemistry the Hebrew University, Jerusalem 91904, Israel\'
author:
- Tova Feldmann and Ronnie Kosloff
title: 'Performance of Discrete Heat Engines and Heat Pumps in Finite Time.'
---
psfig.sty
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
Analysis of heat engines has been a major source of thermodynamic insight. The second law of thermodynamics resulted from Carnot’s study of the reversible heat engine [@carnot]. Study of the endo-reversible Newtonian engine [@curzon75] began the field of finite time thermodynamics [@salamon77; @salamon80; @andresen83; @bejan96]. Analysis of a virtual heat engine by Szilard led to the connection between thermodynamics and information theory [@szilard29; @brillouin]. Recently this connection has been extended to the regime of quantum computation [@lloyd].
Quantum models of heat engines show a remarkable similarity to engines obeying macroscopic dynamics. The Carnot efficiency is a well established limit for the efficiency of lasers as well as other quantum engines [@geusic59; @scovil59; @geusic67; @levine74; @benshaul79]. Moreover, even the irreversible operation of quantum engines with finite power output has many similarities to macroscopic endo-reversible engines [@k24; @geva0; @geva1; @geva2; @wu98].
It is this line of thought that serves as a motivation for a detailed analysis of a discrete four stroke quantum engine. In a previous study [@feldmann96], the same model served to find the limits of the finite time performance of such an engine but with the emphasis on power optimization. In that study the working medium was composed of discrete level systems with the dynamics governed by a master equation. The purpose was to gain insight into the optimal engine’s performance with respect to time allocation when external parameters such as: the applied fields, the bath temperatures and the relaxation rates were fixed.
The present analysis emphasizes the reverse operation of the heat engine as a heat pump. For an adequate description of this mode of operation inner friction has to be a consideration. Without it the model is deficient with respect to optimizing the cooling power. Another addition is the optimization of the external fields. This is a common practice when cold temperatures are approached. With the addition of these two attributes, the four stroke quantum model is analyzed both as a heat engine and as a refrigerator.
Inner friction is found to have a profound influence on performance of the refrigerator. A direct consequence of the friction is a lower bound on the cycle time. This lower bound excludes the non-realistic global optimization solutions found for frictionless cases [@feldmann96] where the cooling power can be optimized beyond bounds. This observation, has led to the suggestion of replacing the optimization of the cooling power by the optimization of the cooling efficiency per unit time [@Velasco; @Velasco97; @Velasco98; @yan98]. Including friction is therefore essential for more realistic models of heat engines and refrigerators with the natural optimization goal becomes either the power output or the cooling power. The source of friction is not considered explicitly in the present model. Physically friction is the result of non-adiabatic phenomena which are the result of the rapid change in the energy level structure of the system. For example friction can be caused by the missalignement of the external fields with the internal polarization of the working medium. For a more explicit description of the friction the interactions between the individual particles composing the working fluid have to be considered. The present model is a microscopic analogue of the Ericsson refrigeration cycle [@chen98] where the working fluid consists of magnetic salts. The advantage of the microscopic model is that the use of the phenomenological heat transfer laws can be avoided [@geva0]. The results of the present model are compared to a recent analysis of macroscopic chillers [@gordon97]. In that study, a universal modeling was demonstrated. It is found that the discrete quantum version of heat pumps has behavior similar to that of macroscopic chillers.
There is a growing interest in the topic of cooling atoms and molecules to temperatures very close to absolute zero [@cohen]. Most of the analysis of the cooling schemes employed are based on quantum dynamical models. New insight can be gained by employing a thermodynamic perspective. In particular the temperatures achieved are so low that the third law of thermodynamics has to be considered. The discrete level heat pump can serve as a model to study the third law limitations. The finite time perspective of the third law is a statement on the asymptotic rate of cooling as the absolute temperature is approached. These restrictions are imposed on the optimal cooling rate. The behavior of the optimal cooling rate as the absolute temperature is approached is a third law upper bound on the cooling rate. The main finding of this paper is that the optimal cooling rate converges to zero linearly with temperature, and the entropy production reaches a constant when the cold bath temperature approaches absolute zero.
Basic Assumptions and Formal Background for the Heat Engine and the Heat Pump {#sec:engine}
=============================================================================
Heat engines and heat pumps are characterized by three attributes: the working medium, the cycle of operation, and the dynamics which govern the cycle. Heat baths by definition are large enough so that their temperatures is constant during the cycle of operation. The heat engine and the heat pump are constructed from the same components and differ only by their cycle of operation.
The Working Medium {#subsec:medium}
------------------
The working medium consists of an ideal ensemble of many non-interacting discrete level systems. Specifically, the analysis is carried out on two-level systems (TLS) but an ensemble of harmonic oscillators [@feldmann96] would lead to equivalent results.
The TLS systems are envisioned as spin-1/2 systems. The lack of spin-spin interactions enables the description of the energy exchange between the working medium and the surroundings in terms of a single TLS. The state of the system is then defined by the average occupation probabilities $P_+$ and $P_-$ corresponding to the energies ${1 \over 2}
\omega$ and $-{ 1\over 2} \omega$, where $\omega$ is the energy gap between the two levels. The average energy per spin is given by $$\begin{aligned}
E= {P_+} \cdot \left( {1 \over 2} \omega \right)
+ {P_-} \cdot \left( - {1 \over 2} \omega \right)
\label{energy}\end{aligned}$$ The polarization, $S$, is defined by $$\begin{aligned}
S~=~ {1 \over 2} (P_+ ~-~ P_-) ~~~,
\label{S}\end{aligned}$$ and thus the energy can be written as $E= \omega S$. Energy change of the working medium can occur either by population transfer from one level to the other (changing S) or by changing the energy gap between the two levels (changing $ \omega$). Hence $$\begin{aligned}
dE ~ = ~ Sd \omega ~+~ \omega dS~~.
\label{dE}\end{aligned}$$ Population transfer is the microscopic realization of heat exchange. The energy change due to external field variation is associated with work. Eq. (\[dE\]) is therefore the first law of thermodynamics: $$\begin{aligned}
D {\cal W} ~\equiv~ S d \omega ~~;~~ D {\cal Q} ~\equiv~ \omega dS~~.
\label{workheat}\end{aligned}$$ Finally, for TLS the internal temperature, $T^\prime$, is always defined via the relation $$\begin{aligned}
S~=~-{1 \over 2} \tanh \left( {{\omega} \over {2 k_B T^\prime}} \right)~~.
\label{Tinternal}\end{aligned}$$ Note that the polarization $S$ is negative as long as the temperature is positive.
The Cycle of Operation {#subsec:cycle}
----------------------
### Heat engines cycle
The cycle of operation is analyzed in terms of the polarization and frequency $(S, \omega)$. A schematic display is shown in Fig.(\[fig:cycle1\]) for a constant total cycle time, $ \tau$. The present engine is an irreversible four stroke engine [@feldmann96] resembling the Stirling cycle, with the addition of internal friction. The direction of motion along the cycle is chosen such that net positive work is produced.
The four branches of the engine will be now briefly described.
On the first branch, $A \rightarrow B$, the working medium is coupled to the hot bath of temperature $T_h$ for period $ \tau_h$, while the energy gap is kept fixed at the value $ \omega_b$. The conditions are such that the internal temperature of the medium is lower than $T_h$. In this branch, the polarization is changing from the initial polarization $S_2$ to the polarization $S_1$. The inequality to be fulfilled is therefore: $$\begin{aligned}
S_1< ~-{1 \over 2} \tanh \left( {{\omega_b} \over {2 k_B T_h}} \right)~~.
\label{ineqhb}\end{aligned}$$ Since $ \omega$ is kept fixed, no work is done and the only energy transfer is the heat $\omega_b (S_1-S_2)$ absorbed by the working medium.
In the second branch, $B \rightarrow C$ the working medium is decoupled from the hot bath for a period $ \tau_a$, and the energy gap is varied linearly in time, from $ \omega_b$ to $ \omega_a$. In this branch work is done to overcome the inner friction which develops heat, causing the polarization to increase from $S_1$ to $S_3$ (Cf. Fig. \[fig:cycle1\]). The change of the internal temperature is the result of two opposite contributes. First lowering the energy gap leads to a lower inner temperature for constant polarization $S$. Second increase in polarization due to friction, leads to an increase of the inner temperature for fixed $\omega$. The inner temperature $T^\prime$ at point C might therefore be lower or higher than the initial temperature at point B.
The third branch $C \rightarrow D$, is similar to the first. The working medium is now coupled to a cold bath at temperature $T_c$ for time $ \tau_c$. The polarization changes on this branch from $S_3$ to the polarization $S_4$. For the cycle to close, $S_4$ should be lower than $S_2$. At the end of the cycle the internal temperature of the working medium should be higher than the cold bath temperature, $T^\prime > {T_c}$, leading to:
$$\begin{aligned}
S_4~ > ~-{1 \over 2} \tanh \left( {{\omega}_a \over {2 k_B T_c}} \right)~~.
\label{ineqcb}\end{aligned}$$
Since $ S_4 < S_1 $ (Fig. \[fig:cycle1\]), it follows from Eq. ( \[ineqhb\]) and Eq.( \[ineqcb\]), that: $$\begin{aligned}
\left (\omega_a \over T_c \right)~ >~ \left (\omega_b \over T_h \right)
\label{ineqwt}\end{aligned}$$ Inequality (\[ineqwt\]) is equivalent to the Carnot efficiency bound, from Eq. (\[ineqwt\]) one gets:
$$\begin{aligned}
1~~-~~
\left (\omega_a \over \omega_b \right)~ <~1~~-~~
\left (T_c \over T_h \right)~=~ \eta_{Carnot}
\label{ineqwt1}\end{aligned}$$
The present model is a quantum analogue of the Stirling engine which also has Carnot’s efficiency as an upper bound.
The polarization $S$ changes uni-directionally along the ’adiabats’ due to the increase of the excited level population as a result of the heat developed in the working fluid when work is done against friction, irrespective of the direction of the field change.
The fourth branch $D \rightarrow A$, closes the cycle and is similar to the second. The working medium is decoupled from the cold bath. In a period $ \tau_b$ the energy gap is changing back to its original value, $ \omega_b$. The polarization increases from $S_4$ to the original value $S_2$.
[||c|c|c||]{} branch & work+\[work against friction\] & heat\
$A \rightarrow B$ & $0$ & $ \omega_b (S_1-S_2) $\
$B \rightarrow C$ & $(\omega_a - \omega_b) (S_1 + \sigma^2/
(2 \tau_a) )$ + \[ $ \sigma^2 (\omega_a + \omega_b)/(2 \tau_a) $ \] & $0$\
$C \rightarrow D$ & $0$ & $ \omega_a ((S_2-S_1)- \sigma^2
(1/\tau_a +1 / \tau_b)) $\
$D \rightarrow A$ & $(\omega_b - \omega_a) (S_2 - \sigma^2/(2 \tau_b))$ + \[ $ \sigma^2 (\omega_a + \omega_b)/(2 \tau_b) $ \] & $0$\
\[tab:cycle1\]
### Refrigerator cycle
The purpose of a heat pump is to remove heat from the cold reservoir by employing external work. The cycles of operation in the $(S, \omega)$ plane is schematically shown in Fig. \[fig:cycle2\],
The cycle of operation resembles the Ericsson refrigeration cycle [@chen98]. The differences are in the dynamics of the microscopic working fluid which are described in subsection \[subsec:dynamics\]. The work and heat transfer for the heat pump is summarized in Table \[tab:cycle\].
The four branches for the heat pump become:
In the first branch, $D \rightarrow C$, the working medium is coupled to the cold bath of temperature $T_c$ for time $ \tau_c$, while the energy gap is kept fixed at the value $ \omega_a$. The conditions are such that the internal temperature of the medium is lower than $T_c$ during $ \tau_c$. Along this branch, the polarization changes from the initial polarization $S_1$ to the polarization $S_2$. Since $ \omega$ is kept fixed, no work is done and the only energy transfer is the heat $\omega_a (S_2-S_1)$ absorbed by the working medium. On this branch: $$\begin{aligned}
S_2< ~-{1 \over 2} \tanh \left( {{\omega_a} \over {2 k_B T_c}} \right)~~.
\label{ineqcbr}\end{aligned}$$
In the second branch, $C \rightarrow B$ the working medium is decoupled from the cold bath, and the energy gap is varied. In the frictionless case the polarization $S_2$ is constant (Left of Fig. \[fig:cycle2\]). The only energy exchange is the work done on the system ( Table \[tab:cycle\]). When friction is added the polarization is changing from $S_2$ to $S_3$ in a period $ \tau_a$. The energy gap changes from $ \omega_a$ to $ \omega_b$ (Right of Fig. \[fig:cycle2\]), according to a linear law. In addition to work, heat is developing as a result of the inner friction ( Table \[tab:cycle\]).
The third branch $B \rightarrow A$, is similar to the first. The working medium is coupled to the hot bath at temperature $T_h$, for time $ \tau_h$, keeping the energy gap $ \omega_b$ fixed. In this branch the polarization changes from $S_2$ to $S_1$ in the frictionless case, and from $S_3$ to $S_4$ when friction is added. The constraint is that the internal temperature of the working medium should be higher than the hot bath temperature during the time $ \tau_h$, $T^\prime > T_h$, leading to the inequality (Fig. \[fig:cycle2\]), $$\begin{aligned}
S_1>~S_4~>~ ~-{1 \over 2} \tanh \left( {{\omega_b} \over {2 k_B T_h}}
\right)~~.
\label{ineqhbr}\end{aligned}$$ therefore $ S_2 > S_1 $. From Eqs. (\[ineqcbr\]) and (\[ineqhbr\]), the condition for the interrelation between the bath temperatures and the field values becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
\left (\omega_a \over T_c \right)~ <~ \left (\omega_b \over T_h \right)
\label{ineqwtr}\end{aligned}$$ which is just the opposite inequality of the heat engine, (Eq. \[ineqwt\]). In the heat pump work is done [*on*]{} the working fluid and since no useful work is done Carnot’s bound is not violated.
The fourth branch $A \rightarrow D$, closes the cycle and is similar to the second. The working medium is decoupled from the cold bath, and the energy gap changes back, during a period $ \tau_b$ to its original value, $ \omega_b$.
The results are summarized in Table \[tab:cycle\].
\[tab:cycle\]
Dynamics of the working medium {#subsec:dynamics}
------------------------------
The dynamics of the system along the heat exchange branches is represented by changes in the level population of the two-level-system. This is a reduced description in which the dynamical response of the bath is cast in kinetic terms [@geva2]. Since the dynamics has been described previously [@feldmann96] only a brief summary of the main points is presented here, emphasizing the differences in the energy exchanges on the ’adiabats’.
### The dynamics of the heat exchange branches
The dynamics of the population at the two levels, $P_+$ and $P_-$, are described via a master equation $$\begin{aligned}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
{{{d P_+} \over {dt}} = -k_\downarrow P_+ ~+~ k_\uparrow P_-}\\
{{{d P_-} \over {dt}} = ~k_\downarrow P_+ ~-~ k_\uparrow P_-}
\end{array}
\right.~~,
\label{master}\end{aligned}$$ where $k_\downarrow$ and $k_\uparrow$ are the transition rates from the upper to the lower level and vice versa. The explicit form of these coefficients depend on the nature of the bath and the system bath coupling interactions. The thermodynamics partition between system and bath is consistent with a weak coupling assumption [@geva2]. Temperature enters through detailed balance. The equation of motion for the polarization $S$ obtained from Eq. (\[master\]) becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
{{dS} \over {dt}}~=~ - \Gamma (S ~-~ S^{eq})~~
\label{dSdt} \end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma~=~ {k_\downarrow}~+~ {k_\uparrow}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
S^{eq}~=~-{1 \over 2} {{{k_\downarrow}~-~ {k_\uparrow}} \over
{{k_\downarrow}~+~ {k_\uparrow}}}
= -{1 \over 2} \tanh \left( {\omega \over {2 k_B T}} \right)~~
\label{Seq}\end{aligned}$$ where $S^{eq}$ is the corresponding equilibrium polarization. It should be noticed that in a TLS there is a one to one correspondence between temperature and polarization thus internal temperature is well defined even for non-equilibrium situations.
The general solution of Eq (\[dSdt\]) is, $$\begin{aligned}
S(t) ~=~ S^{eq} ~+~ ( S(0)~-~ S^{eq}) e^{- \Gamma t}~~.
\label{Sgeneral}\end{aligned}$$ where S(0) is the polarization at the beginning of the branch.
From Eqs. (\[dSdt\]) and (\[Seq\]) the rate of heat change becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\cal Q}~~=~~ \omega \dot{S}
\label{Qdot}\end{aligned}$$ See also [@geva0].
For convenience, new time variables are defined: $$\begin{aligned}
x~=~e^{-\Gamma_c \tau_c }~~ , ~~y~=~e^{-\Gamma_h \tau_h}
\label{xy}\end{aligned}$$ These expressions represent a nonlinear mapping of the time allocated to the hot and cold branches by the heat conductivity $\Gamma$. As a result, the time allocation and the heat conductivity parameter become dependent on each other.
Figure \[fig:cycle1\] and \[fig:cycle2\] show that the friction induces an asymmetry between the time allocated to the hot and cold branches since more heat has to be dissipated on the cold branch.
### The dynamics on the ’adiabats’
The external field $\omega$ and its rate of change $\dot \omega$ are control parameters of the engine. For simplicity it is assumed that the field changes linearly with time: $$\begin{aligned}
{\omega}(t)~~=~~\dot{\omega} t~~+~~\omega(0)
\label{omegat}\end{aligned}$$
Rapid change in the field causes non-adiabatic behavior which to lowest order is proportional to the rate of change $\dot \omega$. In this context non-adiabatic is understood in its quantum mechanical meaning. Any realistic assumption beyond the ideal non-interacting TLS will lead to such non-adiabatic behavior. It is therefore assumed that the phenomena can be described by a friction coefficient $\sigma$ which forces a constant speed polarization change $\dot{S}$: $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{S}~~=~~ \left( { \sigma} \over {t^ \prime} \right)^ 2
\label{Sdotadiab}\end{aligned}$$ where $t^ \prime$ is the time allocated to the corresponding ’adiabat’. Therefore, the polarization as a function of time becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
S(t)~~=~~ S(0)~~+~~ \left( { \sigma} \over {t^ \prime} \right)^ 2 t
\label{Sadiab}\end{aligned}$$ where $t \geq 0$ , $t \leq t^ \prime$. A modeling assumption of internally dissipative friction, similar to Eq.(\[Sdotadiab\]), was also made by Gordon and Huleihil ([@gordon91]). Friction does not operate on the heat-exchange branches, there is no nonadiabtic effect since the fields $\omega_a$ and $\omega_b$ are constant in time. The irreversibilities on those branches are due to the transition rates ($\Gamma$) of the master equation.
From Fig.(\[fig:cycle1\]), Eq. (\[workheat\]), and Eq. (\[Sadiab\]) the polarization, for the $B \rightarrow C$ branch of the heat engine becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
S_C=S_3~~=~~ S_1~~+~~ \left( { \sigma^2 } \over { \tau_a }~
\right)~.
\label{SadBC}\end{aligned}$$ The work done on this branch is: $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal W}_{BC} ~=~ \int_{0}^{\tau_a} D {\cal W} ~=~
\int_{0}^{\tau_a}{S \dot{\omega}dt}~~
=~{(\omega_a~-~\omega_b)}\left( S_1 ~+~{1
\over 2} \left( {\sigma}^2 \over
{\tau_a} \right) \right)
\label{WadBC}\end{aligned}$$ The heat generated on this branch in the working fluid, which is the work against the friction, becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal Q}_{BC} ~=~ \int_{0}^{\tau_a} D {\cal Q} ~=~
\int_{0}^{\tau_a}{\omega \dot{S}dt}~~
=~{ \sigma^2 (\omega_a+\omega_b)
\over { 2 \tau_a} }
\label{QadBC}\end{aligned}$$ This work is dependent on the friction coefficient and inversely on the time allocated to the ’adiabats’. The computation for the other branches of the heat engine and heat pump are similar.
### Explicit expressions for the polarizations imposed by the closing of the cycle.
By forcing the cycle to close, the four corners of the cycle observed in Fig. \[fig:cycle1\] are linked. Applying Eq. (\[Sgeneral\]) leads to the equations: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{array}{l}
S_1~=~S_2 y~+~ S_h^{eq} (1-y)\\
S_3~=~S_1~+~{ \sigma^2 \over \tau_a } \\
S_4~=~S_3 x~+~ S_c^{eq}(1-x)\\
S_2~=~S_4~+~{ \sigma^2 \over \tau_b }
\end{array}
\label{S2xy}\end{aligned}$$ The solutions for $S_1$, $S_2$ and $S_1-S_2$ are $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{array}{l}
S_1= S_c^{eq}~+~{ \Delta S^{eq} (1-y)~+~ \sigma^2 y G(x) \over (1-xy) }~~
=~~ S_h^{eq}~-~{ \Delta S^{eq} y(1-x)~-~ \sigma^2 y G(x) \over (1-xy) }\\
S_2= S_c^{eq}~+~{ \Delta S^{eq} x(1-y)~+~ \sigma^2 G(x) \over (1-xy) }~~
=~~ S_h^{eq}~-~{ \Delta S^{eq} (1-x)~-~ \sigma^2 G(x) \over (1-xy) }
\end{array}
\label{eqS2}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
S_1-S_2= ( \Delta S^{eq}) F(x,y) ~-~{ \sigma^2 (1-y) G(x)
\over (1-xy) }
\label{eqS1S2}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
F(x,y)= { (1-x) (1-y) \over (1-xy) } ~~~,~~~
\Delta S^{eq}~~=~~(S_h^{eq}- S_c^{eq})
~~~,~~~
G(x)~=~ (x/\tau_a + 1/\tau_b)\end{aligned}$$ The constraint that the cycle must close leads to conditions on the polarizations $S_1$ and $S_2$ and on the minimum cycle time $\tau_{c,min}$. Eqs. (\[eqS2\]) shows that both $S_1$ and $S_2$ are bounded by $S_h^{eq}$ and $S_c^{eq}$. The minimum cycle time is obtained when the polarizations coincide with the hot bath polarization: $S_1$=$S_2$=$S_h^{eq}$. In this case, $\tau_h$=0, and from Eqs. (\[xy\]) and (\[eqS1S2\]) the minimum time allocation on the cold bath $\tau_{c,min}$ is computed, $$\begin{aligned}
x_{max} ~=~{ (S_h^{eq}- S_c^{eq}) ~-~
{ \sigma^2 / \tau_b }
\over
(S_h^{eq}- S_c^{eq}) ~+~
{ \sigma^2 / \tau_a } }
\label{minxc}\end{aligned}$$ or $$\begin{aligned}
\tau_{c,min} ~=~ -{1/ \Gamma_c} \lg { (S_h^{eq}- S_c^{eq}) ~-~
{ \sigma^2 / \tau_b }
\over
{ (S_h^{eq}- S_c^{eq}) ~+~
{ \sigma^2 / \tau_a }} }
\label{mintauc}\end{aligned}$$ From this expression for $\tau_{c,min}$ the lower bound for the overall cycle time, is obtained (The left of Fig.[ \[fig:taumin7\]]{}) : $$\begin{aligned}
\tau ~ \geq ~ \tau_{min} ~=~ \tau_{c,min} + \tau_a + \tau_b
\label{mintau1}\end{aligned}$$ When the minimum cycle time Eq. (\[mintauc\]) diverges, the cycle cannot be closed. This condition imposes an upper bound on the friction coefficient $\sigma$ $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma ~~\leq~~\sigma^{up} ~=~ \sqrt{~\tau_b (S_h^{eq}- S_c^{eq})}.
\label{sigup}\end{aligned}$$ or $$\begin{aligned}
~\tau_b > \tau_{b,min}~=~{ \sigma^2 \over (S_h^{eq}- S_c^{eq}) }.
\label{tbmin}\end{aligned}$$
Closing of the cycle imposes similar constraints on the minimal cycle time under friction for the heat pump. The value of the polarization difference $S_2-S_1$ using the notation of Fig. \[fig:cycle2\] becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
S_2-S_1= ( S_2^{eq}- S_1^{eq}) F(x,y) ~-~
{ \sigma^2 (1-x) (y/\tau_a + 1/\tau_b)
\over (1-xy) }
\label{eqS2S1}\end{aligned}$$ The minimum cycle time is calculated in the limit when $\tau_c$=0, leading to $S_2$=$S_1$=$S_2^{eq}$. From Eqs. (\[xy\]) and (\[eqS2S1\]) the minimum time allocation on the hot branch $\tau_{h,min}$ is computed: $$\begin{aligned}
y_{max} ~=~{ (S_2^{eq}- S_1^{eq}) ~-~
{ \sigma^2 / \tau_b }
\over
(S_2^{eq}- S_1^{eq}) ~+~
{ \sigma^2 / \tau_a } }
\label{maxyh}\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\tau_{h,min} ~=~ -{1/ \Gamma_h} \lg { (S_2^{eq}- S_1^{eq}) ~-~
{ \sigma^2 / \tau_b }
\over
{ (S_2^{eq}- S_1^{eq}) ~+~
{ \sigma^2 / \tau_a }} },
\label{mintauh}\end{aligned}$$
where $S_2^{eq} $ is point F and $S_1^{eq}$ is point E on Fig. \[fig:cycle2\]. Using $\tau_{h,min}$ the lower bound for the overall cycle time, is computed $$\begin{aligned}
\tau ~ \geq ~ \tau_{min} ~=~ \tau_{h,min} + \tau_a + \tau_b
\label{mintau2}\end{aligned}$$ Closing the cycle imposes a minimum cycle time for both the heat engine and the heat pump, which is a monotonically increasing function of the friction coefficient $\sigma$. The divergence of $\tau_{min}$ imposes a maximum value for the friction coefficient $\sigma$.
Finite Time Analysis {#sec:FTT}
--------------------
### Quantities to be Optimized. {#subsec:optquant}
The primary variable to be optimized is the power of the heat engine and the heat-flow extracted from the cold reservoir of the heat pump. For a preset cycle time, optimization of the power is equivalent to optimization of the total work, while optimization of heat flow is equivalent to the optimization of the heat absorbed. The entropy production will also be analyzed.
\(1) **The total work done on the environment per cycle of the Heat Engine.**
The total work of the engine, is the sum of the work on each branch: Cf. (Table \[tab:cycle1\] and Fig. \[fig:cycle1\]): $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal W}_{cyle1} ~=~ \oint D {\cal W} ~=~
-\left( W_{AB}+W_{BC}+W_{CD}+W_{DA} \right)
\label{WcycH1}\end{aligned}$$ which becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal W}_{cyle1} ~=~ (\omega_b-\omega_a)
(S_1 - S_2)~-~ \sigma^2 \omega_a ( 1/ \tau_a ~+~ 1/ \tau_b )
\label{WcycH11}\end{aligned}$$ The negative sign is due to the convention of positive ${\cal W}$ when work is done on the system.
Analyzing Eq. (\[WcycH11\]), the work is partitioned into three positive and negative areas. The positive area (left rotation) $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal W}_p~=~ (\omega_b-\omega_a) (S_1 - S_2)
\label{area1}\end{aligned}$$ is defined by the points $ A,B,C^1,D^1 $ in Fig.[ \[fig:cycle1\]]{}. The two negative areas (right rotation) $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal W}_n~=~ \sigma^2 \omega_a ( 1/ \tau_a )~~+~~ \sigma^2 \omega_a ( 1/ \tau_b )
\label{area23}\end{aligned}$$ are defined by the points $ C,C^1,S_1,S_3$ and $D^1,D,S_4,S_2$ in Fig.[ \[fig:cycle1\]]{}.
The cycle which achieves the minimum cycle time $ \tau$ = $ \tau_{c,min}$, produces zero positive work ${\cal W}_p=0$. The corners A and B coincide at E, and $C^1$ coincides with $D^1$. The negative work of Eq. (\[area23\]), is defined by the corners $C,D,S_4,S_3$ and is ’cut’ by the $S_h^{eq}$ line (Cf. the right of Fig. \[fig:powmin0\]). The cycle has negative total work, meaning that work is done [*on* ]{} the working fluid against friction. When $ \tau$ increases beyond $ \tau_{c,min}$ , $S_1$ diverts from $S_2$, becoming lower than $S_h^{eq}$ (Cf.Eq. (\[eqS2\])). At a certain point, the work done against friction is exactly balanced by the useful work of the engine. The minimum time in which this balance is achieved is designated $ \tau_0$. Its value which can be deduced from Eq. (\[WcycH11\]) is worked out in appendix \[sec:Apptau0\].
The minimum cycle time $ \tau_{min}$ is compared to $ \tau_0$, the minimum time needed to obtain positive power shown in the right of Fig.[ \[fig:taumin7\]]{} as a function of the friction $ \sigma$. Both functions increase with friction, but $\tau_0$ diverges at a much lower friction parameter. Above this friction parameter no useful work can be obtained from the engine. The divergence of $ \tau_{min}$ corresponds to a larger friction value where the cycle cannot be closed.
When the total time allocation is sufficient, i.e. $ \tau~>~\tau_0$, work is done on the environment, and $S_1$ starts to increase. For long cycle times $S_1$ will approach $S_h^{eq}$, while $S_2$ will approach $S_c^{eq}$. The constant negative area will become negligible in comparison to the positive area ( Fig.[ \[fig:powerc3\]]{}).
To study the influence of friction on the work output the polarization difference from Eq. (\[eqS1S2\]) S$_1$-S$_2$ is inserted into the work expression Eq. (\[WcycH11\]), leading to: $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal W}_{cyle1} ~=~(\omega_b-\omega_a)
(S_h^{eq}-S_c^{eq})F(x,y)~-~{\cal W}_{\sigma1}
\label{WcycH2}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal W}_{\sigma1}~=~
\sigma^2 \left(
{ {\omega_b(1-y)} (x/\tau_a~+~1/\tau_b) \over {1-xy} } ~+~
{ {\omega_a(1-x)} (1/\tau_a~+~y/\tau_b) \over {1-xy} } \right)
\label{WcycH3}\end{aligned}$$ ${\cal W}_{\sigma1}$ is the additional ’cost’ due to friction and is always positive.
The emergence of positive power $\cal P$ is shown in Fig. \[fig:powmin0\]. For a fixed cycle time the optimization of work is equivalent to the optimization of power.
The first two cycles have a cycle time shorter than $\tau_0$, and therefore do not produce useful work. For cycle 3, $\tau > \tau_0$ and positive work is obtained when the time allocation on the cold bath is sufficient $ \tau_c~\geq~0.08$.
For longer total cycle times, the ratio between the negative area to the positive area decreases as can be seen in Fig. \[fig:powerc3\].
The position of the cycles in the $S$, $\omega$ coordinates relative to $S_h^{eq}$ and $S_c^{eq}$ changes as a function of the cycle time. Insight to the origin of the behavior of the ’moving’ cycles is presented in Fig. \[fig:s1s2t1\] of Appendix \[sec:MovingCycles\].
The calculation of the total work done on the working fluid per cycle, ${\cal W}^{on}_{cycle3}$ for the heat pump is described in appendix \[totalw\]. See also ( Cf. Table (\[tab:cycle\]) and Cf. Fig. \[fig:cycle2\]).
\(2) **The heat-flow(${\cal Q}_F$)**
The heat-flow, ${\cal Q}_F$, extracted from the cold reservoir is: $$\begin{aligned}
~~~{\cal Q}_F~~~= \omega_a (S_2-S_1)/ \tau
\label{rheatf0}\end{aligned}$$
Due to the dependence of ${\cal Q}_F$ only on $S_2$-$S_1$, the cycle is similar to the cycle of the heat engine.
\(3) **The entropy production ($\Delta {\cal S}^u$).**
The entropy production of the universe, $\Delta {\cal S}^u$, is concentrated on the boundaries with the baths since, for a closed cycle, the entropy of the working fluid is constant. The computational details for both the heat engine and the heat pump are shown in appendix \[sec:entrfricA\]. The entropy production and the power have a reciprocal relation (See Fig. \[fig:entr1\]). For example, the entropy production increases with $\sigma$, while the power decreases.
\(4) **Efficiency.**
The efficiency of the heat engine is the ratio of useful work to the heat extracted from the hot bath. $${\eta}_{H.E.}~=~~{ {{\cal W}_{cycle}} \over {{\cal Q}_{absorbed}} }~~=~~
\eta^{fricles}_{H.E.}~~-~~
\left( {{ \sigma^2 \omega_a (1/\tau_a+1/\tau_b)} \over
\omega_b ( S_1~-~S_2 ) } \right)
\label{etahe}$$
where $ \eta^{fricles}_{H.E.}~=~ ~{(1~-~{ \omega_a / \omega_b})}$
When the cycle time approaches its minimum ${\tau}~~\rightarrow~~{ \tau_{min}},$ the efficiency diverges: $ ~~{\eta}_{H.E.}~~{ \longrightarrow}~~-~{ \infty}$. The efficiency becomes positive only when ${\tau}~~\geq~~{ \tau_{0}}$. Using Eq. (\[etahe\]) a bound for the efficiency is obtained: $$0 ~~ < ~~ {\eta}_{H.E.}~~\leq~~{ \eta^{fricles}_{H.E.}
~~-{T_c \over {T_h}}}
\left( {{
~~ \sigma^2 (1/\tau_a+1/\tau_b)} \over
( S_1~-~S_2 ) } \right)
\label{etahe3}$$
The cooling efficiency of the refrigerator will be: $${\eta}_{Rf}~=~~{ {\cal Q}_{DC} \over {\cal W}_{cycle}^{on} }~=~
{ \omega_a (S_2-S_1) \over \left( (\omega_b-\omega_a) (S_2-S_1)
~+~ \sigma^2 \omega_b (1/\tau_a+1/\tau_b) \right) }
\label{etafr4}$$ or: $${ 1 \over \eta_{Rf} } + 1~=~{ 1 \over COP } + 1~=
~{ \omega_b \over \omega_a } \left( 1+{ \sigma^2 (1/ \tau_a
+1/ \tau_b) \over { (S_2-S_1) }} \right)
~>~{ T_h \over T_c } \left( 1 + { \sigma^2 (1/ \tau_a
+ 1/ \tau_b) \over { (S_2-S_1) }} \right)~~~~~,
\label{etafr5}$$ leading to the expression for the efficiency: $${\eta}_{Rf}~=~~
{ \omega_a \over \omega_b }
{ 1 \over { \eta^{fricles}_{H.E.}~+~ { \sigma^2(1/\tau_a~+~1/\tau_b)
\over {S_2-S_1} } }}~<~
{ T_c \over T_h }
{ 1 \over { \eta^{fricles}_{H.E.}~+~ { \sigma^2(1/\tau_a~+~1/\tau_b)
\over {S_2-S_1} } }}
\label{etafr6}$$ For both the heat engine and the heat pump, the efficiency is explicitly dependent on time allocation, cycle time, and bath temperatures.
### Optimization
The performance of both the heat engine and the heat pump can be optimized with respect to:
- [(a) The overall time period $ \tau$ of the cycle, and its allocation between the hot and cold branches.]{}
- [(b) The overall optimal time allocation between all branches. (This optimization is performed only for the heat pump.)]{}
- [(c) The external fields, ($ \omega_a $, $ \omega_b $).]{}
\(a) **Optimization with respect to time allocation.**
The optimization of time allocation is carried out with the constant fields $ \omega_a $ and $ \omega_b $. The Lagrangian for the work output becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal L}(x,y, \lambda)~=~~{\cal W}_{cycle} +
\lambda
\left(
\tau + {1 \over {\Gamma_c}} \ln (x) + {1 \over {\Gamma_h}} \ln (y)
- \tau_a - \tau_b
\right)~~,
\label{langrange1}\end{aligned}$$ where $\lambda$ is a Lagrange multiplier. Equating the partial derivatives of ${\cal L}(x,y, \lambda)$ with respect to $x$ and $y$ to zero, the following condition for the optimal time allocation becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{array}{l}
\Gamma_c ~x
\left(
(1-y)^2 (S_h^{eq}-S_c^{eq}) ~+~\sigma^2 (1-y) (1/\tau_a~+~y/\tau_b)
\right)
~=~\\
\Gamma_h ~y
\left(
(1-x)^2 (S_h^{eq}-S_c^{eq}) ~-~\sigma^2 (1-x) (x/\tau_a~+~1/\tau_b)
\right)
\end{array}
\label{optimal2}\end{aligned}$$
When $\sigma=0$, the previous frictionless result is retrieved. (Optimizing the entropy production $\Delta S^u$ leads to an identical time allocation to Eq. (\[optimal2\])).
Eq. (\[optimal2\]) can also be written in the following way: $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_c ~x \left( (1-y) (1~-~y~x_{max}) \right)
~=~
\Gamma_h ~y \left( (1-x) (x_{max}~-~x) \right)
\label{optimal10f}\end{aligned}$$ where $ x_{max} $ was defined in Eq. (\[minxc\]). The result is dependent on the time allocations of the ’adiabats’, through the dependence of $ x_{max} $.
For the special case when $ \Gamma_c~=~\Gamma_h $, the relation between the time allocations in contact with the hot and cold baths becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
x~~=~~~x_{max}~y
\label{optimal20f}\end{aligned}$$ For the frictionless case, this result coincides with the former frictionless one$ x=y$, meaning that equal time is allocated to contact with the cold and hot reservoirs. When friction is added this symmetry is broken, Eq. (\[optimal20f\]), to compensate for the additional heat generated by friction the time allocated to the cold branch, becomes larger than the time on the hot branch.
The Lagrangian for the heat-flow, ${\cal Q}_F$, extracted from the cold reservoir is defined in parallel to the Lagrangian for the total work. Substituting $ \Gamma_h $ for $\Gamma_c $, $x$ for $y$ and vice versa, also $ y_{max} $ for $ x_{max} $, where $ y_{max} $ was defined in Eq. (\[maxyh\]), one gets the optimal time allocation for the heat pump.
Optimization of power with respect to time allocation as a function of the cycle time, $ \tau$ for different friction coefficients is shown in Fig.[ \[fig:optimp1\]]{} (Left), together with the corresponding heat-flow (Middle) and the corresponding entropy production (Right). The left part shows that in the frictionless case the power obtains its maximum at zero cycle time with the value consistent with Eq. (\[shorttime\]). When friction is introduced, the maximum power decreases and is shifted to longer cycle times. The figure also shows, that for short times the work done by the system is negative, and as the friction coefficient $ \sigma $ increases, the boundary between positive and negative power shifts to longer cycle times. In the Middle of Fig. \[fig:optimp1\], the heat-flow corresponding to the optimal power on the left is shown. The shapes of the power and heat flow curves are similar. The heat-flow values are always positive and larger than the corresponding power values. The entropy production (Right) shows that unlike the power curves the friction changes significantly the shape of the curves. The entropy production rate for the case with friction sharply decreases. The parallel graphs for the heat pump are similar.
**(b) Time allocation optimization between all branches of the refrigerator**
Further optimization of the performance of the heat pump is possible by relaxing the assumption of constant time on the ’adiabats’. First the time allocation between the two ’adiabats’ is optimized, when $\tau_a~+~\tau_b~=\delta$, where $\delta$ is a constant. Finally the time allocation between the ’adiabats’ and the heat exchange branches, is optimized. These results are compared to the recent analysis of Gordon et. all. [@gordon97].
From Eqs. (\[rheatf0\]) and (\[eqS2S1\]) with constant time allocations along the heat exchange branches one gets for the cooling power: $$\begin{aligned}
~~~{\cal Q}_F~~~= A_0~-~A_1( {y \over \tau_a} ~+~{ 1 \over (\delta-\tau_a)}) ~~~~,
\label{rheatfj}\end{aligned}$$ where $A_0$ and $A_1$ are constant functions of the parameters of the system. And on $\delta$, a double inequality is imposed $ \tau~ > \delta ~ > $ the larger of \[ $(\tau~-~\tau_{h,min}); \tau_{b,min}$\], see Eq. (\[tbmin\]).
The optimal $\tau_a$ depends only on $y$ and on $\delta$. The optimal value of $\tau_{a,opt}$ becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
~~~\tau_{a,opt}~~=~~ \delta { -y~+~ \sqrt{y} \over
1-y }
\label{tauaop}\end{aligned}$$
Further optimization by changing the the value of $\delta$, changes the cycle time $\tau$. This optimization step is done by numerical iteration. Typically the sum of the final optimal values of $\tau_a$ and $\tau_b$ is about twice their value before, and their ratio is about 0.7 of the value which was chosen initially.
The next step is to study the time allocation between the ’adiabats’ and the heat exchange branches when all other controls of the heat pump have optimal values. These controls include also the external fields of optimization which are described later.
For comparison with Gordon et. all. [@gordon97], the results of optimization are plotted in the $ 1/{\cal Q}_F$ ,$1/\eta$ plane for a fixed cycle time $\tau$. The following example demonstrates the method followed: First an optimal starting value for ${\cal Q}_F$ was found which determines the time allocation control parameters, $ ~\tau_c=0.44221,~~ \tau_h=0.31779,~~ \tau_a=0.0084,~~ \tau_b=0.0116$ with a total cycle time of $\tau=0.78$. Under such conditions ${\cal Q}_{F,max}=2.9158$ ($1/{\cal Q}_{F,max}=0.34296$).
Changing the time allocation between the ’adiabats’ and the heat exchange branches changes the balance between optimal cooling power and efficiency. Denoting the sum $ \tau_c $+$ \tau_h $ by $ \tau_{ch} $, the ratio $\tau_h/\tau_c$ by $r_{hc}$, the sum $\tau_a$ + $\tau_b$ by $\tau_{ab}$, the ratio $\tau_a/\tau_b$ by $r_{ab}$, time is transfered from $\tau_{ch}$ by small steps to $\tau_{ab}$, while keeping the the ratios $r_{hc}$ and $r_{ab}$ constant. For each step the corresponding $ 1/{\cal Q}_F$ and $1/\eta$, are calculated as in Fig.[ \[fig:univp1\]]{}. The relation between the reciprocal efficiency and the reciprocal cooling power shows the tradeoff between losses due to friction and losses due to heat transfer. Following the curve in Fig. \[fig:univp1\], starting from point $\bf A$ where the cooling power is optimal, resources represented by time allocation are transferred from the heat exchange branches to the ’adiabats’, reducing the friction losses. At point $\bf B$ an optimum is reached for the efficiency. This point has been found by Gordon et. al. to be the universal operating choice for commercial chillers. Point $\bf B$ represents the optimal compromise between maximum efficiency and cooling power.
Point $\bf A$ is located at the maximum cooling power. If more time is allocated to the heat exchange branches both $1/{\cal Q}_F$ and $1/\eta$ will continue to increase as seen in the insert of Fig. \[fig:univp1\].
\(c) **Optimization with respect to the fields.**
The values of the fields $\omega_a$ and $\omega_b$ are control parameters of the engine. In a spin system these fields are equivalent to the value of the external magnetic field applied on the system. They directly influence the energy spacing of the TLS. The work function ${\cal W}_{cycle}$, or equivalently the power ($\cal P$) is optimized with respect to the fields, subject to the Carnot constraint: $${\omega_a \over T_c }~ \geq~ { \omega_b \over T_h }
\label{langrange2}$$ Optimal power is obtained by equating independently to zero the partial derivatives of $~~{\cal W}_{cycle}$, or of ${\cal P}~=~~{\cal W}_{cycle}/\tau $ by varying $\omega_a$ and $\omega_b$. In addition the optimal solutions have to fulfill the inequality constraints in Eq. (\[langrange2\]). As a result two transcendental equations in $\omega_a$ and $\omega_b$ are obtained which are solved numerically.
The two equations are: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{array}{r}
~{ (1~-~y~x_{max}) \over (\omega_b~-~\omega_a)}
~({ \Delta S^{eq}~+~ \sigma^2/\tau_a})
~ \cosh^2 \left( {{\omega_a} \over {2 k_B T_c} } \right)~=~
{~1-y \over (4~k_B~T_c) }
\\
~{ (x_{max}~-~x) \over (\omega_b~-~\omega_a)}
~({ \Delta S^{eq}~+~ \sigma^2/\tau_a})
~ \cosh^2 \left( {{\omega_b} \over {2 k_B T_h} } \right)~=~
{~1-x \over (4~k_B~T_h) }
\end{array}
\label{optimal4}\end{aligned}$$
Where $ \Delta S^{eq}$= S$_h^{eq}$- S$_c^{eq}$ as defined in Eq. (\[eqS1S2\]). Examining Eq. (\[optimal4\]), and fixing the friction $ \sigma$, it is found that $ \Delta S^{eq}$ is an extensive function of order zero (intensive ) with respect to the quartet of variables $ \omega_a, T_c, \omega_b, T_h$. This means that scaling these parameters simultaneously will not change $ \Delta S^{eq}$. Also x$_{max}$, and $ \cosh^2 \left( {{\omega} \over {2 k_B T}} \right)$ are extensive (order zero). The work function however, is extensive with order one (Eqs. (\[WcycH2\]) and (\[WcycH3\])). This property will be exploited in paragraph III.
The optimization of power with respect to the fields is shown in Fig. \[fig:fig4\] for the frictionless engine, as a function of the fields with fixed time allocation. A global maximum can be identified.
The heat pump optimization of ${\cal Q}_F$ with respect to the fields is different and therefore will be presented in Section \[rrof\].
The analysis for the optimization with respect to the fields for the entropy production $\Delta {\cal S}^u$, is presented in appendix \[sec:entrfricA\]. The optimal solution without friction($\sigma=0$) leads to $\Delta {\cal S}^u_{min}=0$. When $\sigma \neq 0$, the minimum value of $\Delta {\cal S}^u$ is different from zero, and is achieved on the boundary of the region.
Global Optimization of the Heat Engine {#sec:globalopt}
--------------------------------------
Global optimization of the power means searching for the optimimum with respect to the control parameters cycle time, time allocation and the fields. An iterative procedure is used.
The procedure is initiated by setting the optimal time allocation from the corresponding Lagrangian, with $\sigma = 0$. The power becomes a product of two functions, one depending only on time the other only on the fields, and therefore, the fields can be changed independently of time. The optimal fields for the above time allocation are then sought. For the frictionless case, the overall time on the adiabats tends to zero. The optimal field values become independent of time. The value ${\cal P}=107.501$ is the short time limit in accordance with the equation: $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal P}~~\longrightarrow~~( \omega_b - \omega_a )(S_{h}^{eq}-S_{c}^{eq})
(\Gamma_{c} \Gamma_{h})/(\sqrt{\Gamma_c}+\sqrt{\Gamma_h})^2
\label{shorttime}\end{aligned}$$
These fields are inserted into the expression with friction $\sigma \neq 0$, and the new optimal times and fields are computed. The iteration converges after two to three steps, as indicated by Table \[tab:iterat2\] for $ \sigma=0.005$. Notice that the location of the optimum is not very sensitive to the friction parameter.
[||c|c|c|c|c|c|c||]{} $ \sigma$ & $ \tau$ & ${\cal P}^{max}( \omega_a, \omega_b)$ & ${\cal P}^{max}( \tau_c, \tau_h)$ & $ \omega_a$ & $ \omega_b$ & $ \tau_c/ \tau $\
0.005 & 2 & & 84.46 & 1794 & 4239 & 0.5999\
0.005 & 1.367 & & 87.18 & 1794 & 4239 & 0.5891\
0.005 & 1.367 & 88.68 & & 1719.1 & 4036.31 & 0.5891\
0.005 & 1.347 & & 87.47 & 1719.1 & 4036.31 & 0.58856\
0.005 & 1.347 & 88.704 & & 1718.16 & 4033.67 & 0.58856\
\[tab:iterat2\] In Table \[tab:iterat3\], the extensive properties Eq. (\[optimal4\]) are examined for k=2 and k=10 with respect to Table \[tab:iterat2\]. The temperature values will change to T$_c~=~1000$, T$_h~=~5000$ for k=2 and T$_c~=~5000$, T$_h~=~25000$ for k=10 . The results verify the analysis.
[||c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c||]{} $ \sigma$ & k & $ \tau$ & ${\cal P}^{max}( \omega_a, \omega_b)$ & ${\cal P}^{max}( \tau_c, \tau_h)$ & $ \omega_a$ & $ \omega_b$ & $ \tau_c/ \tau $\
0.005 & 2 & 1.367 & & 174.9 & 3438.2 & 8072.6 & 0.58852\
0.005 & 2 & 1.367 & 174.9 & & 3436.7 & 8070.3 & 0.58852\
0.005 & 2 & 1.347 & & 174.94 & 3436.7 & 8070.3 & 0.58856\
0.005 & 2 & 1.347 & 179.8 & & 3437.7 & 8069.4 & 0.58856\
0.005 & 10 & 1.347 & 887.04 & & 17181.6 & 40336.7 & 0.58856\
\[tab:iterat3\]
Asymptotic Properties of the Heat Pump when the cold bath temperature approaches absolute zero. {#rrof}
===============================================================================================
The goal is to obtain an asymptotic upper bound on the cooling power when the heat pump is operating close to absolute zero temperature. This requires optimizing the performance of the heat pump with respect to all control parameters.
Optimization of the heat-flow ${\cal Q}_F$ with respect to the fields and to the cooling power upper bound.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The heat-flow,${\cal Q}_F$ extracted from the cold reservoir now becomes the subject of interest: $$\begin{aligned}
~~~{\cal Q}_F~~~= \omega_a (S_2-S_1)/ \tau
\label{rheatf1}\end{aligned}$$ or from Eq. (\[eqS2S1\]), $$\begin{aligned}
~~~{\cal Q}_F~~~= ( \omega_a/\tau ) \left(
( S_2^{eq}- S_1^{eq}) F(x,y) ~-~
{ \sigma^2 (1-x) (y/\tau_a + 1/\tau_b)
\over (1-xy) } \right)
\label{rheatf2}\end{aligned}$$
No global maximum for the ${\cal Q}_F$ with respect to the fields is found. The derivative of ${\cal Q}_F$ with respect to $ \omega_b$ becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
{ {\partial {{\cal Q}_F}} \over { {\partial {\omega_b} } }~}=
~~{~F(x,y)~\omega_a \over \tau~}~ { 1 \over 4~k_B~T_h~\cosh^2{ \omega_b
\over 2~k_B~T_h } } \geq 0
\label{rheatf5}\end{aligned}$$ leading to the result that ${\cal Q}_F$ is monotonic in $ \omega_b$. Under such conditions, $ \omega_b$ is set, and the optimum with respect to $ \omega_a$ is sought for. The derivative of ${\cal Q}_F$ with respect to $ \omega_a$ becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
{ {\partial {{\cal Q}_F}} \over { {\partial {\omega_a} } } }~=
( S_2^{eq}- S_1^{eq}) ~-~
{ \sigma^2 \over (1-y) } (y/\tau_a + 1/\tau_b)~-~ \omega_a~
{1 \over 4~k_B~T_c~ \cosh^2{\omega_a \over 2~k_B~T_c}}~=~0
\label{rheatf6}\end{aligned}$$ Introducing from Eq. (\[rheatf6\]) the optimal value of $( S_2^{eq}- S_1^{eq}) ~-~
{ \sigma^2 \over (1-y) } (y/\tau_a + 1/\tau_b)$, into Eq. (\[rheatf2\]), leads to the optimal cooling rate: $$\begin{aligned}
~~~{\cal Q}_F^{optimum}~~~=
~~{~F(x,y)~\omega_a^2 \over \tau~}~ { 1 \over 4~k_B~T_c~
\cosh^2{ \omega_a
\over 2~k_B~T_c } }~=~
~{~F(x,y)~ \over 4~k_B~ \tau~}~
\left( { ~\omega_a \over ~T_c~ } \right)^2~{ T_c \over
\cosh^2{ \omega_a
\over 2~k_B~T_c } }
\label{rheatf21}\end{aligned}$$
Due to its extensivity, the ratio ${ \omega_a \over T_c } $ becomes a constant, while both $ \omega_a$ and T$_c$ can approach zero.
From Eq.(\[rheatf21\]), an upper-bound for the cooling rate ${\cal Q}_F$ is obtained: $$\begin{aligned}
~~~{\cal Q}_F^{optimum}~~~ \leq~~
~{~F(x,y)~ \over 4~k_B~ \tau~}~
\left( { ~\omega_a \over ~T_c~ } \right)^2~T_c .
\label{rheatf22}\end{aligned}$$ From Eqs. (\[rheatf22\]), when T$_c$ approaches zero, the cooling rate vanishes, at least linearly with temperature. This is a third law statement which shows that absolute zero cannot be reached since the rate of cooling vanishes as absolute zero is approached.
The asymptotic relation between the internal and external temperature on the cold branch
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the bath temperature tends to zero, the internal working fluid temperature has to follow. This becomes a linear relationship between $T'$ and $T_c$ as $T_c$ tends to zero.
Calculating the polarization at the end of the contact with the cold bath $S_2$: $$\begin{aligned}
S_2= S_2^{eq}~-~{ (S_2^{eq}-S_1^{eq}) x (1-y)~-~ \sigma^2 x
(1/\tau_b~+y/\tau_a) \over (1-xy) }
\label{eqS1r}\end{aligned}$$ Assuming the relation $T_h$ = $\rho$ $T_c$ as $T_c$ tends to zero, the exponents can be expanded to the first order to give: $$\begin{aligned}
{S_2}=~{ T_c \over \omega_a }
{ 1 - x y_{max} + (\omega_a/\omega_b) \rho x(y_{max}-y)
\over (1-xy) }~~
+~~ 1/2~-~{ x (\sigma^2/\tau_a)(y_{max}-y) \over (1-xy) }
\label{eqS2r}\end{aligned}$$ Also, $S_2$ defines the internal temperature $T'$ through the relation: ${S_2}~ = ~-{1 \over 2} \tanh \left( {{\omega}_a
\over {2 k_B T'}} \right)~~$. Expanding the hyperbolic tangent, one gets: $$\begin{aligned}
{T'}~~=~~
{T_c}~{ 1~-~x y_{max}~+~ \rho (\omega_a/\omega_b) x (y_{max}-y)
\over (1-xy) }~~
-~~{ x \omega_a( \sigma^2/\tau_a) (y_{max}-y)
\over (1-xy) }
\label{eqS4r}\end{aligned}$$ proving that $T_c$ and $T'$ both tend asymptotically to zero. It should be noted that the term independent of $T_c$ depends on $\omega_a$, which also tends to zero as $T_c$ tends to zero ( (Eq. \[rheatf22\]). Eq. (\[rheatf22\]) also shows that ${\cal Q}_F^{optimum}$\*T$_c$ is a quadratic function of $ \omega_a$, Cf. Fig. \[fig:qftcwa1\].
Eq. (\[rheatf22\]) represents an upper-bound to the rate of cooling. In order to determine how closely this limit be approached, a strategy of cooling must be devised, which re-optimizes the cooling power during the changing conditions when T$_c$ approaches zero.
Optimal cooling strategy
------------------------
The goal is to follow an optimal cooling strategy, which exploits the properties of the equations and achieves the upper-bound for the rate of cooling, ${\cal Q}_F$.
The properties of the equations employed are;
- [i: The derivative with respect to $\omega_a$ of ${\cal Q}_F$ ( Eq. (\[rheatf6\])), is extensive of order zero in the ’quartet’ ($\omega_a, \omega_b, T_c, T_h$).]{}
- [ii: For $ {\partial {{\cal Q}_F}} \over { {\partial {\omega_a} } } $ the extensivity holds also for the ’doublets’ ($\omega_b~,~T_h$) or ($\omega_a~,~T_c$). Scaling these variables by the same number, leaves Eq. (\[rheatf6\]) equal to zero, and the value of ${\cal Q}_F^{optimum}$ does not change.]{}
- [iii: In spite of ${\cal Q}_F$ being monotonic in $ \omega_b$, $~{\cal Q}_F^{optimum}$ is independent of $ \omega_b$ (and of T$_h$), therefore ${\cal Q}_F$ saturates as $ \omega_b$ is increased.]{}
From property (i) it follows, that once an optimal ’quartet’($ \omega_a, \omega_b, T_c, T_h$) is created, it is possible to cool optimally with a set of quartets, which are scaled by a decreasing set [$r_n~<~1$]{}, $\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty} r_n =0$. For this set the limit of the ratio ${ \omega_a \over T_c } $ is a non zero constant. Therefore in Eq. (\[rheatf21\]) $\omega_a$ and T$_C$ are optimal leading to: $$\begin{aligned}
~~~{\cal Q}_F^{optimum}~~~=
~{~F(x,y)~ \over 4~k_B~ \tau_{optimal}~}~
\left( { ~\omega_{a,optimal} \over ~T_{c,optimal} } \right)^2~
{ T_{c,optimal} \over
\cosh^2{ \omega_{a,optimal}
\over 2~k_B~T_{c,optimal} } }
\label{rheatf25}\end{aligned}$$
In general, the hot bath temperature is constant, and the property (ii) is used to scale back the value of the optimal T$_h$ to the bath temperature. As a result, the optimal high field is also scaled.
Property (iii) will be exploited by changing only $ \omega_b$ in the optimal quartets and checking for saturation. See Fig. \[fig:qftcwamax\] and the dashed curves of Fig. \[fig:qftcwa1\]. Summarizing, for every ’quartet’ the upper-bound in Eq. (\[rheatf22\]) can be reached. The details of the cooling strategy can be found in Appendix \[strategy\]
Fig. \[fig:asympent1\] shows that the cooling strategy ( Tables \[tab:zeroset\] and \[tab:zeroset2\] ) can approach the upper bound leading to a linear relation of the optimal cooling power with temperature. With respect to the fields the optimal strategy leads to a decrease of the field $\omega_a$ which is in contact with the cold bath. This causes the internal temperature of the TLS T’ to be lower than the cold bath temperature T$_c$. On the hot side the optimal solution requires as large an energy separation as possible $\omega_a \rightarrow \infty$ but this effect saturates.
The linear relation of the cooling rate with T$_c$ leads to a constant asymptotic entropy production as can be seen in the right of Fig. \[fig:asympent1\] ( Cf. Appendix C).
Conclusion {#ref:conclusion}
==========
The detailed study of the four stroke discrete heat engine with internal friction serves as a source of insight on the performance of refrigerators at temperatures which are very close to absolute zero. The next step is to find out if the behavior of the specific heat pump described in the study can be generalized. A comparison with other systems studied indicates that the conclusions drawn from the model are generic. As a heat engine the model shows the generic behavior of maximum power as a function of control parameters found in finite time thermodynamics [@salamon77; @salamon80; @andresen83; @bejan96]. This is despite the fact that the heat transfer laws in the microscopic model of the working fluid are different from the macroscopic laws such as the Newtonian heat transfer law [@geva0]. When operated as a heat pump with friction, the present model shows the universal behavior observed for commercial chillers [@gordon97] caused by a tradeoff between allocating resources to the ’adiabats’ or to the heat exchange branches.
Another question is whether the linear scaling of the optimal cooling power at low cold bath temperatures is a universal phenomenon. For low temperatures the results of the present model can be extended to a working fluid consisting of an ensemble of harmonic oscillators or any N-level systems. This is because at the limit of absolute zero only the two lowest energy levels are relevant. When examined, other models with different operating cycles show an identical behavior. For example the continuous model of a quantum heat engine [@geva2] based on reversing the operation of a laser shows this linear scaling phenomena. Another example is the Ericsson refrigeration cycle Cf. Eq. (23) in the study of Chen et al [@chen98] which shows the same asymptotic linear relationship.
A point of concern is the dependence of the heat transfer laws on temperature when absolute zero is approached. The kinetic parameters $k_\downarrow $ and $k_\uparrow$ represent an individual coupling of the two-level-system to the bath. Considering coefficients derived from gas phase collisions they settle to a constant asymptotic value as the temperature is lowered [@forrey]. The reason is that the slow approach velocity is compensated by the increase in the thermal De-Broglie wavelength.
There has been an ongoing interest in the meaning of the third law of thermodynamics [@Blau96; @Lansberg97; @rubia98; @Rose99; @chen88; @Lansberg89; @oppenheim89]. The issue at stake has been: is the third law an independent postulate or it is a consequence of the second law and the vanishing of the heat capacity. This study presents a dynamical interpretation of the third law. The absolute temperature cannot be reached because the maximum rate of cooling vanishes linearly at least with temperature.
This research was supported by the US Navy under contract number N00014-91-J-1498. The authors want to thank Jeff Gordon for his continuous help, discussions and willingness to clarify many fine points. T.F. thanks Sylvio May for his help.
Analysis for the ’moving’ Cycles. {#sec:MovingCycles}
=================================
Insight into the origin of the behavior of the ’moving’ cycles is seen in Fig. \[fig:s1s2t1\], where the polarizations S$_1$, S$_2$ are shown as monotonically decreasing functions of the time allocation on the cold bath. However, the envelope of S$_1$ for maximal power, namely for maximal S$_1$-S$_2$ is worth noticing. It is a decreasing function for short cycle times, achieves a minimum at $ \tau_{0}$, and starts to increase for $ \tau~>~ \tau_{0} $. Thus it is responsible for shifting the cycles to smaller polarization for short cycle times, and for the change of that trend for larger cycle times. The envelope of S$_2$ for maximal S$_1$-S$_2$ is also a monotonically decreasing function of $ \tau_c$, or equivalently of $ \tau$, supporting the increase of S$_1$-S$_2$. The figure also shows, that for a short time allocation both S$_1$ and S$_2$ are close to the equilibrium polarization S$_h^{eq}$, When not enough time is allocated on the hot bath both the polarizations S$_1$ and S$_2$ approach S$_c^{eq}$.
The computation of $ \tau_0$ {#sec:Apptau0}
============================
The computation of $ \tau_0$ Eq. (\[WcycH11\]) is not sufficient since it gives only the relation between the times spent on the cold and hot branches for zero work. The natural additional requirement is to seek for the optimal allocations, $ \tau_{c,0}$ and $ \tau_{h,0}$ using Eq. (\[optimal10f\]): $ \tau_{0}$ = $ \tau_{c,0}$ + $ \tau_{h,0}$ + $ \tau_a$ + $ \tau_b$
Denoting by $x_0$ and $y_0$ the corresponding x and y values defined in Eq. (\[xy\]), the following two equations for x$_0$ and y$_0$ are obtained: $$\begin{aligned}
y_{0} ~=~{ ( x_{max}~-~x_{0}) ~-~
{ R }
\over
( x_{max} ~-x_{0}) ~-~
{ Rx_{0} } }
\label{opty0}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_c ~x_{0} \left( (1-y_{0}) (1~-~y_{0}~x_{max}) \right)
~=~
\Gamma_h ~y_{0} \left( (1-x_{0}) (x_{max}~-~x_{0}) \right)
\label{optimal0f}\end{aligned}$$ Where R is defined as: $$\begin{aligned}
R ~=~{ \sigma^2~\omega_a~(1/\tau_a~+~1/\tau_b)~
\over
(\omega_b~-~\omega_a)~( S_h^{eq} ~-S_c^{eq} ~+~
\sigma^2/{\tau_a} ) }
\label{opty0b}\end{aligned}$$ and x$_{max}$ was defined in Eq. (\[minxc\]) as: $$\begin{aligned}
x_{max} ~=~{ ( S_h^{eq}~-~S_c^{eq}) ~-~
{ \sigma^2/\tau_b }
\over
( S_h^{eq} ~-S_c^{eq}) ~+~
{ \sigma^2/\tau_a } }
\label{xmaxo}\end{aligned}$$ The quadratic equation to be solved for x$_0$ is, $$\begin{aligned}
AA~x_{0}^2~+~BB~x_{0}~+~CC~=~~0
\label{optx00}\end{aligned}$$ Where AA = $\Gamma_h$ (1 + R) BB = - ($\Gamma_h$ ((1 + R) (x$_{max}$-R) + x$_{max}$) + $\Gamma_c$ (1 + R - $x_{max}$)) and CC = $\Gamma_h$ (x$_{max}$-R) x$_{max}$
Entropy production. {#sec:entrfricA}
===================
\(1) **Heat Engine.**
$$\begin{aligned}
\Delta {\cal S}^u_{cyle1}~=~ -({\cal Q}_{AB}/T_h~+~{\cal Q}_{CD}/T_c)
\label{DScycH1}\end{aligned}$$
Or from Table (\[tab:cycle1\]) $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta {\cal S}^u_{cyle1}
~=~(\omega_a/T_c-\omega_b/T_h) (S_1-S_2)
~+~{ \sigma^2 \omega_a \over {T_c} } (1/\tau_a~+~1/\tau_b)
\label{DScycH2}\end{aligned}$$
The entropy production results are shown in Fig. \[fig:entr1\]. The left figure shows $ \Delta {\cal S}^u$ with increasing friction. The middle figure shows the corresponding cycles, while the right figure shows the corresponding power values.
The reciprocal behavior of the entropy production and the power is clear from Fig. \[fig:entr1\]. One also observes, that for the given cycle time the ’free’ time for the cycles with increasing $ \sigma$ becomes more restricted. This follows from the dependence of $ \tau_{c,min}$ on $ \sigma$. See also Fig.( \[fig:taumin7\])
Introducing Eq. (\[eqS1S2\]) into Eq. (\[DScycH2\]). The entropy production becomes, $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta {\cal S}^u_{cyle1}~=~(\omega_a/T_c-\omega_b/T_h)
(S_h^{eq}-S_c^{eq})F(x,y)~+~\Delta {\cal S}^u_{\sigma1}
\label{DScycH3}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta {\cal S}^u_{\sigma1}~=~ \sigma^2 {1 \over (1-xy) } \left(
{ { \omega_a \over T_c} } { (1-x) } (1/\tau_a~+~y/\tau_b)~+~
{ { \omega_b \over T_h} } { (1-y) } (x/\tau_a~+~1/\tau_b) \right)
\label{DScycH4}\end{aligned}$$ Notice, that $\Delta {\cal S}^u_{\sigma1}$ is always positive. For $\sigma = 0$ Eq. (\[DScycH4\]) reduces to the frictionless results [@feldmann96].
\(2) **Heat Pump**
The entropy production for the heat pump becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
{\Delta {\cal S}^u}_{ref} = \left( { \omega_b \over T_h } -
{ \omega_a \over T_c } \right)
(S_2-S_1)~+~\sigma^2
{ \omega_b~ \over T_h } (1/\tau_a~+~1/\tau_b)\\
~~=~~\left( { \omega_b \over T_h }-{ \omega_a \over T_c } \right)
(S_2^{eq}-S_1^{eq})\cdot F(x,y)
\nonumber
~+~\\
\sigma^2 F(x,y)\left\{\frac{\omega_b}{T_h}\frac{1}{1-x}
(\frac{1}{\tau_a}~+~ \frac{x}{\tau_b})
~+~
\frac{\omega_a}{T_c}\frac{1}{1-y}
(\frac{1}{\tau_b}~+~ \frac{y}{\tau_a} ) \right\}
\label{entref}\end{aligned}$$
The asymptotic entropy production as T$_c$ tends to zero can be calculated leading to $$\begin{aligned}
{\Delta {\cal S}^u_{ref}}~=~F(x,y)~[
(\omega_b/(\rho \omega_a))
(1-\rho (\omega_a/\omega_b))^2
\nonumber
~+~\\
\sigma^2
~\left( { \omega_b \over \rho T_c }
{1 \over(1-x) } (1/\tau_a+x/\tau_b)~+~
{ \omega_a~ \over T_c }
{1 \over(1-y) } (1/\tau_b+y/\tau_a)
\right)]
\label{entrefas}\end{aligned}$$
Since $T_h=~\rho T_c$, the r.h.s. of Eq. (\[entrefas\]) tends to a constant, for each term depends on the constant ratios ($\omega_b$/T$_h$), ($\omega_a$/T$_c$) or on their ratio. This result is demonstrated on the right side of Fig. \[fig:asympent1\].
The optimization with respect to time allocation has the same result as for the heat engine. Therefore, only optimization with respect to the fields are presented;
Equating to zero the derivatives with respect to x an y of the entropy production, one gets two similar equation to the total work derivatives: $$\begin{aligned}
~{ (1~-~y~x_{max}) \over ({\omega_a}/{T_c}~-~{\omega_b}{T_h})}
~({ \Delta S^{eq}~+~ \sigma^2/\tau_a})
~ \cosh^2 \left( {{\omega_a} \over {2 k_B T_c} } \right)~+~
{~1-y \over (4~k_B~T_c) } ~\geq 0
\label{optimale6}\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
~{ (x_{max}~-~x) \over ({\omega_a}/{T_c}~-~{\omega_b}{T_h})}
~({ \Delta S^{eq}~+~ \sigma^2/\tau_a})
~ \cosh^2 \left( {{\omega_b} \over {2 k_B T_h} } \right)~+~
{~1-x \over (4~k_B~T_h) } ~\geq 0
\label{optimale7}\end{aligned}$$
Where $ \Delta S^{eq}$, is $S_h^{eq}$- $S_c^{eq}$.
Eqs. (\[optimale6\]) and (\[optimale7\]) show that the entropy production is a monotonic function in the allowed range, namely, for $$\begin{aligned}
{ \omega_a \over T_c } > { \omega_b \over T_h }.
\label{optimal6}\end{aligned}$$
To conclude the entropy production has a minimum value: $\Delta {\cal S}^u_{min}$, will be $$\begin{aligned}
{\Delta {\cal S}^u_{min}}~=~ { \omega_a \over T_c } \sigma^2 (1/\tau_a+1 / \tau_b)
\label{mindsu}\end{aligned}$$ obtained on the boundary of the range.
The Total Work done on the System for the Heat Pump {#totalw}
===================================================
The total work done on the system becomes,
$$\begin{aligned}
{\cal W}_{cyle3}^{on} = (\omega_b-\omega_a) (S_2-S_1)~+~\sigma^2
\omega_b~ (1/\tau_a~+~1/\tau_b)
\label{WcycRf0}\end{aligned}$$
or $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal W}_{cyle3}^{on} = (\omega_b-\omega_a) (S_2^{eq}-S_1^{eq}) F(x,y)~+~
W_{\sigma3}
\label{WcycRf1}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal W}_{ \sigma3 }~=~ { \sigma^2 \over (1-xy)} \left(
\omega_b (1-y)( {1 /\tau_a}~+~{ x /\tau_b} )~~+~~
\omega_a (1-x)( {y /\tau_a}~+~{ 1 / \tau_b} )
\right)~~
\nonumber
\\
~~=~~\sigma^2 F(x,y)\left\{\frac{\omega_b}{1-x}
(\frac{1}{\tau_a}~+~ \frac{x}{\tau_b})
~+~
\frac{\omega_a}{1-y}
(\frac{1}{\tau_b}~+~ \frac{y}{\tau_a} ) \right\}
\label{WcycRf}\end{aligned}$$ Eq. (\[WcycRf0\]) can be interpreted as the work done on the working fluid see (Cf. Fig. \[fig:cycle2\]), as the sum of three positive areas, $ ( \omega_b~-~\omega_a) (S_2~-~S_1)$, $ \sigma^2 \omega_b (1/\tau_a)$ and $ \sigma^2 \omega_b (1/\tau_b)$ with the corresponding corners, D,C,B$^1$,A$^1$, B,B$^1$,S$_2$,S$_3$ and A$^1$,A,S$_4$,S$_1$.
The optimal cooling strategy close to the absolute zero temperature {#strategy}
===================================================================
The first step in the cooling strategy is to create the first optimal quartet;
- [(0) The systems external parameters $\sigma$, $\tau_a$, $\tau_b$, $\Gamma_c$ and $\Gamma_h$ are set.]{}
- [(1) A decreasing set of $\omega_b$ is chosen.]{}
- [(2) A constant ratio ($\rho$) for T$_h$/T$_c$, is chosen which is the ratio of the initial bath temperatures.]{}
- [(3) For the above chosen values, the optimal values of $\omega_a$, T$_c$, $\tau$, and its optimal allocations between the branches to give maximal Q$_F$ are found for each $\omega_b$ in the set in (1) ]{}, by solving numerically the following additional equation to Eq. (\[rheatf6\]), with the condition that T$_h~=~\rho \cdot$T$_c$:
$$\begin{aligned}
~{ {\partial {{\cal Q}_F}} \over { {\partial {T_c} } } }~=
~{F(x,y)~ \over \ {4~ \tau~ ~k_B}~}~\left(~{ \omega_a \over
T_c} \right)^2
~\left(
{ 1 \over
\cosh^2{ \omega_a
\over 2~k_B~T_c } }~-~
{ \omega_b \over \rho \omega_a~
\cosh^2{ \omega_b
\over 2\rho~k_B~T_c } } \right)~=~0
\label{rheatf27}\end{aligned}$$
The above strategy causes the decrease of $T_h$ together with the $T_c$. Nevertheless according to (ii) above, the doublet $\omega_b$ and $T_h$ can be rescaled to increase $T_h$ back to its original value. The solid curves of Fig. \[fig:qftcwa1\] are optimal in the in the above described sense. Increasing [*only*]{} the value of $\omega_b$ in the optimal quartet according to point (iii), leads to larger values of the cooling rate, but eventually the increase of ${\cal Q}_F$ will slow down and saturate. See Fig. \[fig:qftcwamax\] and the dashed curves of Fig. \[fig:qftcwa1\].
Fig. \[fig:qftcwamax\] represents the saturation phenomenon on $\omega_b$. Three points from Fig. \[fig:qftcwa1\] are chosen, and all parameters are fixed, except $\omega_b$, which is allowed to increase.
In order to approach the upper-bound for ${\cal Q}_F$ in Eq. (\[rheatf22\]), a decreasing set of $\omega_a~/~T_c$ is created, achieved in an optimal way:
First step: After having an optimal ’quartet’, T$_c$ and T$_h$, are fixed. Then, by lowering $\omega_b$, one finds the corresponding optimal $\omega_a$ values. This procedure is checked globally, by also iterating the time allocations. The results of a typical example are shown in Table \[tab:zeroset\].
Second step: Using again the property of extensivity, the cooling will be achieved by multiplying the rows of Table \[tab:zeroset\] by a decreasing sequence, e.g. by $2^{-n}$ for the n-th row. Table \[tab:zeroset2\] describes the cooling strategy, checking also the non-divergence of the entropy production both for the frictionless case and the case with friction. The results are also summarized in Fig. \[fig:asympent1\].
Table \[tab:zeroset\] demonstrates, that the procedure shifts down to the Carnot bound. The ratio R = $ { \omega_b \over T_h } $/ $ { \omega_a \over T_c } $. was computed showing only small changes.
[||c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c||]{} $T_c $ & T$_h$ & $ \omega_b$ & $\omega_a^{optimal}$ & $\omega_a^{optimal}/T_c$ & $ \omega_b/T_h$ & R & ${\cal Q}_F $\
0.0025 & 50 & 60 & 1.370(-3) & 0.5392 & 1.2 & 2.226 & 5.812(-5)\
0.0025 & 50 & 55 & 1.273(-3) & 0.5090 & 1.1 & 2.161 & 5.013(-5)\
0.0025 & 50 & 50 & 1.164(-3) & 0.4653 & 1 & 2.149 & 4.241(-5)\
0.0025 & 50 & 45 & 1.051(-3) & 0.4205 & 0.9 & 2.140 & 3.50549(-5)\
0.0025 & 50 & 40 & 9.320(-4) & 0.3728 & 0.8 & 2.146 & 2.826(-5)\
0.0025 & 50 & 35 & 8.250(-4) & 0.3300 & 0.7 & 2.121 & 2.182(-5)\
0.0025 & 50 & 30 & 6.985(-4) & 0.2794 & 0.6 & 2.147 & 1.613(-5)\
\[tab:zeroset\]
[||c|c|c|c|c|c|c||]{} $T_c $ & $ \omega_b$ & $\omega_a^{optimal}$ & $\Delta S^u$ & $\Delta S^{u,fl}$ & ${\cal Q}_F$ & ${\cal Q}_F^{up}$\
0.0025 & 60 & 1.370(-3) & 0.0333353 & 0.0285 & 5.812(-5) & 6.084(-5)\
0.00125 & 55 & 6.365(-4) & 0.0285075 & 0.02406 & 2.457(-5) & 2.626(-5)\
0.000625 & 50 & 2.91(-4) & 0.0242662 & 0.02021 & 1.039(-5) & 1.098(-5)\
0.0003125 & 45 & 1.3138(-4) & 0.020338 & 0.01669 & 4.2939(-6) & 4.467(-6)\
0.00015625 & 40 & 5.825(-5) & 0.016788 & 0.01354 & 1.7239(-6) & 1.759(-6)\
0.0000781 & 35 & 2.578(-5) & 0.013210 & 0.010357 & 6.6772(-7) & 6.888(-7)\
0.0000391 & 30 & 1.0914(-5) & 0.010356 & 0.007915 & 2.4673(-7) & 2.468(-7)\
\[tab:zeroset2\]
S. Carnot, [*R2 sur la Puissance Motrice du Feu et sur les Machines propres à Développer cette Puissance*]{} (Bachelier, Paris, 1824).
F.L. Curzon and B. Ahlborn, Am. J. Phys. [**43**]{}, 22 (1975)
P.Salamon, B. Andresen and R.S. Berry Phys. Rev. A [**15**]{}, 2094 (1977)
P. Salamon, A. Nitzan, B. Andresen and R.S. Berry Phys. Rev. A [**21**]{}, 2115 (1980)
B. Andresen, “Finite-Time Thermodynamics”, (Phys. Lab II. University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen 1983).
A. Bejan, “Entropy Generation Minimization”, (Chemical Rubber Corp., Boca Raton FL. 1996).
L. Szilard, Z. Physik [**53**]{}, 840 (1929).
, , .
S. Lloyd, Phys. Rev. A [**56**]{} 3374 (1997).
J. Geusic, E. S. du Bois, R. D. Grasse, and H. Scovil, J. App. Phys. [**30**]{}, 1113 (1959).
H. Scovil and E. S. du Bois, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**2**]{}, 262 (1959).
J. Geusic, E. S. du Bois, and H. Scovil, Phys. Rev. [**156**]{}, 343 (1967).
R. D. Levine and O. Kafri, Chem. Phys. Lett. [**27**]{}, 175 (1974).
A. Ben-Shaul and R.D. Levine, J. Non-Equilib. Thermodyn. [**4**]{}, 363 (1979).
, , J. Chem. Phys., [**80**]{},1625 (1984).
, , J. Chem. Phys., [**96**]{},3054 (1992).
, , J. Chem. Phys., [**97**]{},4398 (1992).
, , J. Chem. Phys., [**104**]{},7681 (1996).
, , Energy Conversion and Management, [**39**]{},1161 (1998).
T. Feldmann, E. Geva, R. Kosloff and P. Salamon, “Heat engines in finite time governed by master equations”, Am. J. Phys. [**64**]{}, 485 (1996)
S. Velasco J. M. M. Roco, A. Medina and A Calvo Hernandez, “New Performance Bounds for a Finite-Time Carnot Refrigerator” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**78**]{} 3241 (1997).
S. Velasco J. M. M. Roco, A. Medina and A Calvo Hernandez, “Irreversible refrigerator under per-unit-time coefficient of performance optimization” Appl. Phys. Lett. [**71**]{}, 1130 (1997).
A. Calvo Hernandez J. M. M. Roco, S. Velasco, A. Medina and , “Irreversible Carnot cycle under per-unit-time efficiency optimization.” Appl. Phys. Lett. [**73**]{}, 853 (1998).
Z. Yan and J. Chen, “Comment on ”New Performance Bounds for a Finite-Time Carnot Refrigerator", Phys. Rev. Lett. [**81**]{} 5469 (1998).
J. C. Chen and Z. J. Yan, “The effect of thermal resistances and regenerative losses on the performance characteristics of a magnetic Ericsson refrigerator cycle.”, J. Appl. Phys. [**84**]{} 1791 (1998).
J. M. Gordon and M. Huleihil, “On optimizing maximum-power heat engines” J. Appl. Phys. [**69**]{}, 1 (1991).
J. M. Gordon, K. C. Ng and H.T. Chua, “Optimizing chiller operation based on finite-time thermodynamics: universal modeling and experimental confirmation”, Int. J. Refrg. [**20**]{}, 191 (1997).
C. Cohen-Tanoudji, “Manipulating atoms with photons”, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**70**]{}, 707 (1998).
N. Balakrishnan, R. C. Forrey, and A. Dalgarno, “Quenching of H$_2$ Vibrations in Ultracold $^3$He and $^4$He Collisions”, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**80**]{}, 3224 (1998).
S. Blau and B. Halfpap, “Question no 34, ”What is the Third law of thermodynamics trying to tell us?" Am. J. Phys. [**64**]{}, 13 (1996).
P. T. Landsberg , “Answer to Question no 34, ”What is the Third law of thermodynamics trying to tell us?" Am. J. Phys. [**65**]{}, 269 (1997).
S. Mafe and J. De la Rubia, , “Answer to Question no 34, ”What is the Third law of thermodynamics trying to tell us?" Am. J. Phys. [**66**]{}, 277 (1998).
C. Rose-Innes, , “Answer to Question no 34, ”What is the Third law of thermodynamics trying to tell us?" Am. J. Phys. [**67**]{}, 273 (1999).
Z. J. Yan and J. C. Chen, “An equivalent theorem of the Nernsts Theorem” J. Phys. A [**21**]{} L707 (1988).
P. T. Landsberg, “A comment on Nernsts Theorem” J. Phys. A [**22**]{} 139 (1989).
I. Oppenheim “A comment on an equivalent theorem of the Nernsts Theorem” J. Phys. A [**22**]{} 143 (1989).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We expect an increase in the frequency and severity of cyber-attacks that comes along with the need for efficient security countermeasures. The process of attributing a cyber-attack helps to construct efficient and targeted mitigating and preventive security measures. In this work, we propose an argumentation-based reasoner (*ABR*) as a proof-of-concept tool that can help a forensics analyst during the analysis of forensic evidence and the attribution process. Given the evidence collected from a cyber-attack, our reasoner can assist the analyst during the investigation process, by helping him/her to analyze the evidence and identify who performed the attack. Furthermore, it suggests to the analyst where to focus further analyses by giving hints of the missing evidence or new investigation paths to follow. *ABR* is the first automatic reasoner that can combine both technical and social evidence in the analysis of a cyber-attack, and that can also cope with incomplete and conflicting information. To illustrate how *ABR* can assist in the analysis and attribution of cyber-attacks we have used examples of cyber-attacks and their analyses as reported in publicly available reports and online literature. We do not mean to either agree or disagree with the analyses presented therein or reach attribution conclusions.'
author:
- Erisa Karafili
- Linna Wang
- 'Emil C. Lupu'
bibliography:
- 'attribution.bib'
title: 'An Argumentation-Based Reasoner to Assist Digital Investigation and Attribution of Cyber-Attacks'
---
Introduction
============
The increase in cyber-attacks we are currently facing [@WebNewman2017] is expected to continue, especially given the exponential increase in the usage of IoT and smart devices, which drastically increases the attack surface of systems. The increasing dependency users have on these connected devices raises the users’ exposure to cyber-attacks. The growth in frequency and severity of cyber-attacks comes along with the increased economic costs associated to the damages caused by such cyber-attacks [@csoonline]. Existing protective and mitigating measures are not sufficient to cope with the sophistication of current attacks. This brings the need to enforce efficient preventive and mitigating measures that are attacker-oriented, i.e., countermeasures that are specific to the attacker or group of attackers performing the attack. Furthermore, discovering who performed an attack and bringing the perpetrators to justice, can act as a deterrent for future cyber-attacks.
Attacker-oriented countermeasures require to discover the perpetrator of the attack or the entity related to it. *Attribution* is the process of assigning an action of a cyber-attack to a particular entity/attacker/group of attackers. Currently, the attribution of cyber-attacks is mainly a manual process, performed by the forensic analyst, and is strictly related to the knowledge of the analyst, thus, is easily human biased and error-prone. Attributing cyber-attacks is not trivial, as attackers often use deceptive and anti-forensics techniques [@goutam15], and the analysts need to analyze an enormous amount of data, filter [@KarafiliCV18; @RasgaSKV19] and classify them. The increasing use of IoT devices aggravates the work of the analysts and makes the attribution process more expensive, as the analysts might need to physically access the devices to retrieve their data.
Digital forensics helps during the attribution process, as it collects and analyzes the evidence left by the attack, but it is not able to deal with conflicting or incomplete information. It only works with technical evidence, and fails to consider other aspects such as geopolitical situations and social-cultural contexts that provide useful leads during an investigation. Digital forensics tools mainly focus on collecting the evidence, which is then given to the analyst for analysis. This makes the process often extremely human-intensive, requiring many skilled analysts to work for weeks or even months [@nassif13; @openlv]. The problem is aggravated by the large proportion of unstructured data, which makes the automated analysis challenging.
In this work, we propose an automatic *reasoner* (*ABR*), based on argumentation and abductive reasoning that helps the forensic analyst during the evidence analysis and attribution process. Given the pieces of cyber forensic and social evidence of a cyber-attack, the proposed reasoner analyzes them and derives new information that is provided to the analyst. In particular, *ABR* can answer queries, such as, who is a possible perpetrator of an attack, who has the motives to perform it, what are the capabilities needed to perform an attack or what are the similarities with past attacks. Furthermore, *ABR* can suggest to the analyst other paths of investigation, by giving hints on what other pieces of evidence can be collected to arrive at a conclusion thus, enabling a prioritized evidence collection. Our reasoner is based on our preliminary work [@KarafiliWKL18; @SocialGood] where we briefly presented the main intuition behind *ABR*. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first automatic reasoner that helps with the analysis of cyber-attacks using both technical and social evidence, and that is able to reason with conflicting and incomplete knowledge.
The reasoner uses a set of *reasoning rules*, preferences between them, and *background knowledge*. The rules of the reasoner are constructed from the input provided by the expert user and from the analyses of past attacks. To illustrate *ABR*, we have used in this paper rules extrapolated from the analysis of well-known cyber-attacks as published in the public literature (e.g., APT1 [@Mandiant2013ExposingUnits], Wannacry [@Wannacry]). In particular, the rules were generalised so that they can be applied across different attack scenarios. The background knowledge incorporates typical common knowledge that analysts may use during the analysis process. In this work, we have used some of the knowledge extracted from the examples, as well as other public reports such as [@GCI2017; @WebBreene2016WhoSuperpowers; @WebBrilliantMaps2017WhoEnemies]. Our reasoner can assist in the attribution of an attack by using both technical evidence and social considerations that are represented thanks to the use of a social model [@rid15].
*ABR* is able to work with incomplete and conflicting evidence. We decided to base *ABR* on an *argumentation* framework, in particular, a preference-based argumentation framework [@KMD94], which permits to reason with *conflicting* pieces of evidence by introducing preferences between the applied rules. We use preference-based argumentation as it is similar to the decision-making process followed by digital forensics investigators. *ABR* is constructed using the Gorgias [@gorgias1] tool, which uses abductive reasoning [@abductive] combined with preference-based argumentation. The use of *abduction* allows us to reach conclusions even with *incomplete* information, as the missing information is abduced (hypothesized) and then suggested to the analyst as hints of possible further evidence to be collected.
*ABR* is a proof-of-concept tool that aims to assist the analyst during the analysis process. Therefore, together with the answer to a query it also provides the explanation of the reasoning process, applied rules and the information used to reach that conclusion. Furthermore, *ABR* gives hints to the analyst for missing evidence, that, if provided, allows to pursue other investigation paths. *ABR* is flexible and adaptable to user requests and changes. The use of *ABR* helps to promote best practices and to share lessons learned from past experience as rules and background knowledge can be constructed with expert input and then shared and re-used across investigations.
In Section \[relatedwork\] we present the relevant related work. We introduce our argumentation-based reasoner (*ABR*) in Section \[ABR\]. In Section \[sec:rules\] and \[sec:bg\] we present *ABR*’s main components, correspondingly its reasoning rules and its background knowledge. We give an overall evaluation and discussion in Section \[discuss\]. In Section \[concl\] we conclude and present some interesting future research directions.
Related Work {#relatedwork}
============
Attribution of a cyber-attack is the process of “determining the identity or location of an attacker or attackers intermediary” [@wheeler03]. Tracing the origin of a cyber-attack is difficult as attackers can easily forge or obscure information sources, and use anti-forensics tools, to avoid being detected and identified [@goutam15]. Digital forensics plays a significant role in attribution by collecting, examining, analyzing and reporting the evidence [@Kent2006GuideResponse]. Other techniques created for protecting the systems are also used to collect forensic data, e.g., traceback techniques [@wheeler03], honeypots [@anagnostakis2005], or other deception techniques [@Almeshekah2014; @Almeshekah2016; @Val2017].
Digital forensics comes with its own challenges [@Beebe], that can mainly be categorised into: *complexity problems* as the collected data are in the lowest raw format and require high resources to analyze them and *quantity problems* as the enormous amount of collected data is too large to be analyzed manually [@carrier03]. Forensics techniques identify and collect the evidence that is later managed and analyzed by the forensic analyst. Since often the data are collected from different sources and the attackers can plant false evidence to lead the investigator off his/her trail, the latter is likely to be in a situation with multiple pieces of conflicting evidence. Digital forensics techniques can deal with conflicting information during the evidence collection phase [@aziz; @fontani], but lack the ability to work with conflicting pieces of evidence during the analysis and attribution process. These techniques can collect pieces of evidence [@schatz], but have difficulties reasoning with incomplete information, and reaching conclusions without having all the needed pieces of evidence. Digital forensics only uses technical evidence [@openlv] and fails to consider other factors such as geopolitical situations and social-cultural contexts, which could provide useful leads during the investigations.
A theoretical social science model is proposed in [@rid15], called the *Q-Model* that describes how the analysts combine technical and social evidence during the attribution process. In this model, attribution is described as an *incremental process* passing from one level of attribution to the other. The *Q-Model* represents how the forensic investigators perform the attribution process and particular attention is placed on the social evidence, where contextual knowledge such as ongoing conflicts between countries or rivalry between corporations are very useful in detecting motives of potential culprits.
We decided to use argumentation for our reasoner, as argumentation helps during the analysis and attribution process because it is transparent and encourages the evaluation of the arguments, by assessing the relative importance of various factors when making decisions [@ouerdane10]. Argumentation captures the fact that the final decision might change if more information is available (i.e., *non-monotonic reasoning* [@nonmono]), where more information may reveal new arguments that are in conflict with the original ones and are stronger than them. Non-monotonic reasoning has previously been proposed to tackle the attribution challenge. For example, in [@nunes16; @shakarian15] the authors propose the DeLP3E framework to attribute operations of cyber-attacks. This theoretical framework is based on the extension of Defeasible Logic Programming with probabilistic uncertainty. The DeLP3E framework does not deal with incomplete evidence, and thus, cannot make assumptions to reach a conclusion and cannot suggest new paths of investigation or new evidence to be collected. It also lacks in general technical and social common knowledge, e.g., ongoing conflicts/rivalries between countries/corporations, information about past attacks, cyber-security capabilities of entities, which can be very useful in detecting motives, capabilities and potential culprits. DeLP3E uses as a measure for its conclusion the probabilities of an event being true. However, this requires the user to provide the probability of being true for each of the given pieces of evidence. It also does not distinguish the different levels of reasoning that can be applied to reach certain conclusions.
Despite the advances in using digital forensics or defeasible reasoning in attribution, some shortcomings still remain to be addressed. The most important one is that none of the current works considers the social aspects of attribution. The current state of the art does not deal with incomplete evidence, which is an important aspect of forensic investigations, as usually not all evidence can be collected due to time/resource constraints, and anti-forensics tools used by attackers can hide some of the evidence. We believe, our reasoner is the first attempt to use a social model to categorize evidence and rules in an argumentation-based framework, which leads to a more accurate and explainable attribution that helps the investigator during the analysis process also in case of conflicting and incomplete evidence.
Argumentation-Based Reasoner for Attribution {#ABR}
============================================
Let us now introduce our argumentation-based reasoner (*ABR*) that is based on a preference-based argumentation framework. *ABR* is composed of two main components the *reasoning rules*, and the *background knowledge*, see Figure \[fig:abr\]. Given the evidence presented in input, *ABR* analyzes it and attempts to answer queries about the possible perpetrators of the attack, or provides suggestions for further pieces of evidence needed to reach a conclusion or perform a more precise or a different analysis. The reasoning rules used by ABR were extracted[^1] from public reports about past cyber-attacks and formalized in the argumentation framework[^2]. In actual use, rules could be specified by expert users or extracted automatically from different analyses and then reviewed by expert analysts. Rules are divided into three layers: technical, operational and strategic layer, following the social model structure proposed in [@rid15]. In this paper, we have used background knowledge based on the information extracted from online analyses of past cyber-attacks and relevant information for these attacks. *ABR* takes as input from the user the pieces of evidence (technical and social evidence) relevant to the current investigation and then analyzes them by using the reasoning rules and the background knowledge. It gives as result to the user answers to the user’s queries, e.g., if a given entity is a possible culprit of the attack, together with an explanation on how the conclusion was reached, hints about what other pieces of evidence the user can provide to perform a more precise or a new analysis.
![*ABR* Overview\[fig:abr\]](ABRDiagram.pdf){width="65.00000%"}
Argumentation Framework for Attribution {#argum}
---------------------------------------
We base our reasoner on a preference-based argumentation framework [@KMD94; @gorgias1], as it permits the user to take decisions while working with conflicting evidence, and it naturally encodes the different reasoning layers with its preference relations between rules. The used framework best simulates the analysis and attribution process made by an investigator, who needs to use different reasoning rules that work with technical and social aspects of the attack, have exceptions, and can derive conflicting conclusions.
Our framework allows the investigator to work with conflicting evidence and reasoning rules that derive conflicting conclusions, by introducing preferences between them. The introduced preferences can be considered as exceptions to other rules, or preferences that are context dependent. The use of argumentation permits to provide an explanation of the given results. Let us briefly introduce the used framework.
An *argumentation theory* is a pair $(\mathcal{T}, \mathcal{P})$ of argument rules $\mathcal{T}$ and preference rules $\mathcal{P}$. The *argument rules* $\mathcal{T}$ are a set of labeled formulas of the form: $$rule_i: L \leftarrow L_1, \ldots, L_n$$ where $L, L_1, \ldots, L_n$ are positive or negative ground literals, and $rule_i$ is the label denoting the rule name. In the above argument rule, $L$ denotes the *conclusion* of the argument rule and $L_1, \ldots, L_n$ denote its *premises*. The premise of an argument rule is the set of conditions required for the conclusion to be true. In our framework, the argument rules are the *reasoning rules* used by *ABR*. Let us show below a reasoning rule that is part of *ABR*: $$str_1: isCulprit(C, Att) \leftarrow ClaimResp(C, Att)$$ where the *rule name* is the label of the rule, in this case $str_1$; the *head* is the second argument and represents the conclusion of the rule, in this case $isCulprit(C, Att)$; the *body* predicates are the literals following the head, and represent the premises of the rule, in this case $ClaimResp(C, Att)$.
The *preference rules* $\mathcal{P}$ are a set of labelled formulas of the form: $$p_i: rule_1 > rule_2$$ where $p_i$ is the label denoting the rule name, the head of the rule is $rule_1 > rule_2$, and $rule_1$, $rule_2$ are labels of rules defined in $\mathcal{T}$, and $>$ refers to an irreflexive, transitive and antisymmetric higher priority relation between rules. The above rule means that $rule_1$ has *higher priority* than $rule_2$, or better $rule_1$ is preferred over $rule_2$. The preference rules, also called *priority rules* are true always or in certain conditions or contexts. We show below a priority rule, $p_1$, denoting that rule $str_2$ is preferred over rule $str_1$. $$p_1: str_2 > str_1$$
We have priority rules between rules that are in conflict with each other or better that derive conflicting conclusions. *Preference-based argumentation* allows the investigator to handle non-monotonic reasoning [@nonmono] in attribution, where the introduction of new evidence might change the result of the attribution (due to conflicting arguments) and the investigator’s confidence in the results. Argumentation is particularly useful as it permits to represent the reasoning rules in an intuitive and simple way.
Let us introduce the following rule that is part of *ABR*: $$str_2: \neg isCulprit(X, Att) \leftarrow \neg hasCap(X, Att).$$ Rule $str_2$ describes that entity $X$ is not the possible culprit for the attack $Att$, because it does not have the capabilities for performing it. Rule $str_1$ and $str_2$ are in conflict with each other because when both preconditions are met, they derive conflicting conclusions. Given the above preference rule $p_1$, rule $str_2$ is preferred over rule $str_1$. Thus, in case both preconditions for $str_1$ and $str_2$ are given, we take into consideration only the conclusion from $str_2$ , $\neg isCulprit(C, Att)$.
The inputs of *ABR* are pieces of evidence that are used together with the background knowledge by the reasoning rules to derive new information. The reasoning rules and the preferences used in this paper were extracted from real cyber-attacks analyses and attribution taken from online public reports, such as [@Mandiant2013ExposingUnits; @Wannacry].
*ABR* is the first tool that is able to work with incomplete evidence. It provides hints of missing evidence or new investigation paths to the user, thanks to the use of abductive reasoning [@abductive]. The use of abducible predicates permits to fill the *knowledge gaps* in the reasoning, by allowing *ABR* to perform the analysis and to reach a conclusion even when there are insufficient pieces of evidence. This feature is extremely important to the investigator who is provided with new possible conclusions and new evidence to be collected. To construct *ABR* we use the Gorgias [@gorgias1] tool, which is a preference-based argumentation reasoning tool that uses abduction.
Let us now introduce the following rule from *ABR*: $$\begin{array}{ll}
op_1: hasMotive(X,Att) \leftarrow & \ target(T,Att),\ industry(T), \\
& hasEconMot(X,T), \\ & contextOfAtt(econ,Att), \\ &
specificTarget(Att).
\end{array}$$ which states that $X$ has the motives to perform attack $Att$, when it has economical motives against the target $T$ of $Att$, where $T$ is an industrial company, the context of $Att$ was economical ($econ$), and $Att$ had a specific target. *ABR* treats $specificTarget$ as an *abducible* predicate. For every abducible predicate we have the rules that derive the predicate or its negation. For the $specificTarget$ abducible we can prove that it is not true by using the following rule. $$\begin{array}{ll}
op_2: \neg specificTarget(Att) \leftarrow & target(T_1,Att), \\
& target(T_2,Att), T_1 \neq T_2.
\end{array}$$ In case, we are not able to derive $\neg specificTarget(Att)$, then we can abduce (hypothesize) that $specificTarget(Att)$ is true, and we can use this result to derive $hasMotive(X, Att)$, in case we have the rest of the preconditions.
Technical and Social Attribution
--------------------------------
The main goal of the *ABR* reasoner is to assist the forensic analyst during the evidence analysis. Given the pieces of evidence of an attack, the reasoner analyzes the evidence and derives new information, if possible attributes this attack to one or different possible entities, or provides suggestions on other pieces of evidence that the user can provide to better analyze and attribute the attack. To perform the attribution process, *ABR* also needs to work with non-technical evidence, usually called *social evidence*. To deal with these aspects, we have used a social model for attribution, called the *Q-Model* [@rid15]. This model represents how the investigators perform the attribution process of cyber-attacks. Following the Q-Model, we categorize the evidence and the reasoning rules into three layers: *technical*, *operational* and *strategic*. The combination of information in these layers permits the attribution of a cyber-attack, as it aims to emulate the investigator’s attribution process. Depending on the layer a rule/evidence is part of, we call it a technical, operational, or strategic rule/evidence and denote its name starting correspondingly with $t$, $op$, or $str$.
The *technical layer* is composed of rules that deal with pieces of evidence obtained from digital forensics processes, related to technical evidence of the attack, and how it was carried out, e.g., the IP address from which the attack was originated, time of the attack, logs, type of attack, code used. Let us give below an example of a technical layer reasoning rule that is part of *ABR*: $$t_1: reqHighRes(Att) \leftarrow usesZeroDay(Att).$$ Rule $t_1$ denotes that if the attack $Att$ uses zero-day vulnerabilities, $usesZeroDay(Att)$, then this attack requires a lot of resources, $reqHighRes(Att)$.
The *operational layer* is composed of rules that deal with non-technical pieces of evidence that relate to the social aspects where the attack took place, e.g., the motives of the attack, the needed capabilities to perform it, the political or economical context where it took place. Let us give below an operational layer reasoning rule that is part of *ABR*: $$\begin{array}{ll}
op_3: hasCap(X, Att) \leftarrow & reqHighRes(Att),\\ & hasResources(X).
\end{array}$$ Rule $op_3$ denotes that if $Att$ requires a large amount of resources, and an entity $X$ has (large amounts of) resources, $hasResources(X)$, then $X$ has the capability to carry out the attack, $hasCap(X, Att)$.
The *strategic layer* is composed of rules that deal with who performed the attack, or who is obtaining advantage from it. Let us give below a strategic layer reasoning rule that is part of *ABR*: $$\begin{array}{ll}
str_3: isCulprit(X, Att) \leftarrow & hasMotive(X, Att),\\
& hasCap(X, Att).
\end{array}$$ Rule $str_3$ denotes that if $X$ has both the capability, $hasCap(X, Att)$, and the motive, $hasMotive(X, Att)$, to carry out the attack $Att$, then $X$ is a possible culprit of the attack, $isCulprit(X, Att)$.
As shown in Figure \[fig:abr\], the operational rules use information derived from the technical layer, and the strategic rules use information derived from the technical and operational layers. All three layers use the evidence given by the user and the background knowledge. This categorization of the evidence and rules in three layers, following from the Q-Model, aims to emulate the forensic investigator’s analysis during the attribution process, where s/he moves from the technical layer, to the operational, and finally to the strategic one, by using the conclusions from the previous layers. Furthermore, this categorization improves *ABR*’s usability, given the investigator’s familiarity with these three layers.
*ABR*’s Reasoning Rules {#sec:rules}
=======================
To illustrate the use of ABR we have extracted around 200 reasoning rules from the analyses of different cyber-attacks reported in the public literature (e.g., APT1 [@Mandiant2013ExposingUnits] and Wannacry [@Wannacry]). These rules have then been translated into generic argumentation rules to be used within the framework. These reasoning rules are considered as one of the main components of *ABR* as they permit to perform the reasoning behind the analysis and attribution of cyber-attacks. We briefly present some of these rules in this section.
As described in the previous section, the reasoning rules, also called simply rules, are divided into three layers: technical, operational and strategic. Let us give an overview of some of the strategic rules of the reasoner and show how the rules of the different layers are related to each other. The following rules describe some of the circumstances in which we can derive that an entity $X$ is a possible culprit ($isCulprit(X, Att)$) or not ($\neg isCulprit(X, Att)$) of an attack $Att$.
$$\begin{array}{ll}
str_3: \ isCulprit(X, Att) \leftarrow & hasMotive(X, Att),\\ & hasCap(X, Att).\\
str_4: \ isCulprit(X, Att) \leftarrow & malwareUsed(M1, Att),\\ &
similar(M1, M2),\\
& notBlackMarket(M1), \\ &
notBlackMarket(M2),\\
& malwareLinked(M2, X). \\
str_5: \neg isCulprit(X, Att) \leftarrow &\neg attackOrig(X, Att).\\
str_6: \neg isCulprit(X, Att) \leftarrow &target(X, Att).
\end{array}$$
Let us use the strategic rule $str_3$, to show the relations of the reasoning rules between the different layers. Rule $str_3$ uses the predicates $hasMotive(X, Att)$ and $hasCap(X, Att)$; where the first is a derived predicate of the operational layer, indicating that $X$ has motives to perform the attack $Att$ and $hasCap(X, Att)$ is a derived predicate of the technical and operational layer, indicating that entity $X$ has the capabilities to perform $Att$.
The $hasMotive$ predicate can be derived using the rule introduced in Section \[argum\], represented as below: $$\begin{array}{ll}
op_1: hasMotive(X,Att) \leftarrow &target(T,Att),\ industry(T), \\ & hasEconMot(X,T), \\&contextOfAtt(econ,Att), \\ &
specificTarget(Att).
\end{array}$$ The above rule says that an entity $X$ has the motives to perform $Att$, when $X$ has economical motives to attack a particular entity $T$, which is an industry, and the attack was designed to target entity $T$, and the context of $Att$ was economical. The predicates used in $op_1$ are: $target(T, Att)$ is an evidence, stating that $T$ is the target of $Att$; $industry(T)$ is a background fact, stating that $T$ is an industry; $hasEconMot(X, T)$ is an evidence, stating that entity $X$ benefits economically from attacking industry $T$, (for example, if $countryC$ has identified $industryY$ as a strategic industry, we say that $hasEconMot(countryC, industryY)$ is true); $specificTarget(Att)$ is an evidence that is true when $Att$ was constructed to attack a particular target; $contextOfAtt(Y, Att)$ is an evidence stating that: if the target of an attack was a “normal”[^3] industry, then the context was economical ($econ$), if the target was a “political” industry, then the context was political ($pol$).
We introduce below one of the rules that derives the $hasCap$ predicate[^4]. $$\begin{array}{ll}
op_3: hasCap(X, Att) \leftarrow & reqHighRes(Att), \\ & hasResources(X).
\end{array}$$ Rule $op_3$ states that $X$ has the capability to perform $Att$, when $Att$ requires high resources and $X$ has the needed resources. Predicate $reqHighRes(Att)$ can be derived from the following technical rules: $$\begin{array}{ll}
t_2: reqHighRes(Att) \leftarrow &target(T, Att), \ highSecurity(T).\\
t_3: reqHighRes(Att) \leftarrow &highVolAtt(Att),\ longDurAtt(Att).\\
t_4: reqHighRes(Att) \leftarrow & highLevelSkill(Att).\\
\end{array}$$ where $highSecurity(T)$ means that entity $T$ has high security measures in place; $highVolAtt(Att)$ means that $Att$ has a high volume; $longDurAtt(Att)$ means that $Att$ was performed over a long duration (few months or even years), and $highLevelSkill$ means that $Att$ is a complex attack and requires high level skills to be performed. Rule $t_2$ states that $Att$ requires high resources if its target has put in place high security measures, rule $t_3$ states that $Att$ requires high resources if the attack has a high volume and a long duration, and rule $t_4$ states that $Att$ requires high resources if it requires advanced skills.
*ABR*’s rules are used to analyze the evidence and to derive new conclusions, in order to offer new insights to the analyst, as shown in the example below.
\[usbank\] Let us consider the example of the US bank hack [@Goldman2012], that occurred in 2012. During this attack, US banks faced denial of service (DoS) attacks, causing websites of many banks to suffer slowdowns and even be unreachable for many customers. The banks’ web hosting services were infected by a sophisticated malware called *Itsoknoproblembro*, (denoted as $itsOKnp$). Earlier that year, US government placed economic sanctions against Iran. Some of the pieces of evidence provided to *ABR* for this attack ($usBHack$) are as below: $$\begin{array}{l}
target(us\_banks, usBHack). \\
targetCountry(usa , usBHack). \\
attackPeriod(usBHack , [2012, 9]). \\
highLevelSkill(usBHack).\\
malwareUsed(itsOKnp, usBHack). \\
imposedSanc(usa, iran, [2012, 2]).
\end{array}$$ By using rule $t_4$ and the evidence that this attack required a high level of skill, *ABR* derives that this attack requires high resources, $reqHighRes(usBHack)$.
Another rule capturing that an entity might have a political motive if it has been the target of sanctions can be written as follows: $$\begin{array}{l}
op_4: hasPolMotive(C,T,Date) \leftarrow
imposedSanc(T,C,Date).
\end{array}$$ Rule $op_4$ would then derive[^5] that Iran might have political motives against US because of the sanctions imposed by US against Iran [@Goldman2012], $hasPolMotive(iran, us, [2012, 2])$. $\Box$
*ABR*’s Background Knowledge {#sec:bg}
============================
*ABR* uses background knowledge comprising non-case-specific information and divided into *general knowledge* and *domain-specific knowledge*. Some of the background knowledge predicates used in this paper are shown in Table \[table:bg\]. The use of the background knowledge alleviates the analysts’ work and helps avoid human errors and bias. It comprises of pieces of information that are used as preconditions by the reasoning rules to answer the users’ queries. *ABR*’s background knowledge can be updated and enriched by the user. Note that reaching meaningful conclusions through the application of the rules to the background knowledge relies on the correctness of the background knowledge given.
General Knowledge
-----------------
The general knowledge consists of information about countries characteristics, international relations between nations, and classification of the types of industry. This information is used together with the given pieces of evidence, to perform the analysis. Below we illustrate how these predicates are used by *ABR*’s rules.
*Language indicators* in malware can provide useful clues regarding the possible origin of attacks. We use two language artifacts: default system language settings, $sysLang$, and language used in code, $langInCode$. We present below two rules of *ABR*, $t_5$ and $t_6$, that use the language evidence to derive the possible origin of the attack $attackPOrig$, when the country’s first language $firstLang$ matches the one found in the system/code.
$$\begin{array}{ll}
t_5: attackPOrig(X,Att) \leftarrow & sysLang(L, Att),\\ &
firstLang(L,X).\\
t_6: attackPOrig(X,Att) \leftarrow & langInCode(L,Att),\\ & firstLang(L,X).
\end{array}$$
The *cyber capability of a nation* is another interesting information as it limits the type of attacks that an entity can carry out. We have used the Global Cybersecurity Index (GCI) Group [@GCI2017] and the cyber capabilities of countries in cyberwar [@WebBreene2016WhoSuperpowers] as sources for this information. There are three GCI groups: *leading*, *maturing* and *initiating*, from where we classify the countries according to their capabilities. Furthermore, based on the cyber capabilities in cyberwar [@WebBreene2016WhoSuperpowers] we identify some countries as cyber “*superpower*”. We show below three of *ABR*’s rules that use the countries’ cyber capability.
$$\begin{array}{l}
t_7: hasResources(X) \leftarrow gci\_tier(X,leading).\\
t_8: hasResources(X) \leftarrow cybersuperpower(X).\\
t_9: hasNoResources(X) \leftarrow gci\_tier(X,initiating).
\end{array}$$
A country $hasResources$ if it is in the ‘leading’ GCI group or is a cyber “*superpower*”. Countries in the ‘initiating’ GCI group are considered as $hasNoResources$.
\[usbank2\] Let us continue with the $usBHack$ introduced in Example \[usbank\]. In the background knowledge, we have that Iran is a cyber “*superpower*”[^6]. Thus, using rule $t_8$ ABR derives that Iran has the resources to carry out sophisticated attacks, $hasResources(iran)$. Similarly the application of the operational rule $op_3$ derives that Iran has the capabilities[^7] to perform the US bank hack, as shown below. $$\begin{array}{ll}
op_3: hasCap(iran, usBHack) \leftarrow &
\ reqHighRes(usBHack), \\
& \ hasResources(iran).
\end{array}$$ $\Box$
Good *international relations* between two countries can indicate that a state-sponsored attack is unlikely. We encoded this information in *ABR* by creating a list of countries that have good relations with each other ($goodRelation$) and a list of countries that may have poor relations with each other ($poorRelation$) according to [@WebYouGov2017AmericasEnemies; @WebBrilliantMaps2017WhoEnemies]. This information can then be used to narrow down the countries that might have or not a motive to carry out an attack, as shown by the following rule. $$\begin{array}{l}
op_5: \neg hasMotive(C,Att) \leftarrow targetC(T,Att), \ country(T),\\
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad \ \ \ country(C), goodRelation(C,T).
\end{array}$$ Rule $op_5$ derives that country $C$ does not have any motive to perform $Att$, as it has good relations with $T$ that is the country that $Att$ has as target, ($targetC(T, Att)$).
Domain-Specific Knowledge
-------------------------
Domain-specific knowledge consists of information about *prominent groups* of attackers and *past attacks*. These facts are primarily used in the *strategic* and *technical* layers. We encoded information on prominent APT groups taken from [@FireEye; @Martin2016], where for each group we have their: name or ID; country of origin; countries/organisations targeted by the group in the past; malware or pieces of malicious software (suspected or confirmed) linked to the group, as well as relations of this group with other entities (e.g., governments). We assume these groups have the capabilities of conducting long term and significant attacks. Thus, we derive that an entity $X$ has the capabilities to perform an attack, if $X$ is a prominent group of attackers, as shown by the rule below $op_6$. $$op_6: hasCap(X,Att) \leftarrow prominentGroup(X).$$
Another important part of the domain-specific knowledge is the *similarity* with past attacks. For example, similarity to an APT-linked malware may indicate that the same APT group may be responsible. This is presented in rule $str_4$. $$\begin{array}{ll}
str_4: \ isCulprit(X, A1) \leftarrow &malwareUsed(M1, A1),\\
& similar(M1, M2),\\ & malwareLinked(M2, X), \\
& notBlackMarket(M1), \\
¬BlackMarket(M2).\\
\end{array}$$ In rule $str_4$, we derive that the attacker of $Att$ is most likely entity $X$, because the malware used is similar to another malware linked to $X$, and both malware codes were not found on the black market ($notBlackMarket$)[^8]. We use the predicate $similar(M1, M2)$ to denote that two malwares are similar to each other. In the rules below we define that $M1$ and $M2$ are similar if they use a similar code obfuscation ($similarCodeObf$) mechanism, or they share code, or $M1$ is derived by modifying $M2$, or they have similar command and communication (C&C) servers[^9], where the similarity of C&C servers of two different malwares can be derived by using other *ABR*’s technical rules. $$\begin{array}{l}
t_{10}: similar(M1, M2) \leftarrow similarCodeObf(M1, M2).\\
t_{11}: similar(M1, M2) \leftarrow sharedCode(M1, M2).\\
t_{12}: similar(M1, M2) \leftarrow modifiedFrom(M1, M2).\\
t_{13}: similar(M1, M2) \leftarrow similarCCServer(M1, M2).
\end{array}$$
Evaluation and Discussion {#discuss}
=========================
*ABR* aims to be a flexible tool designed to be part of an iterative process, where the user can add other pieces of evidence, rules or preferences after evaluating the answers produced by the tool. *ABR*’s input is given manually by the analyst, or could be collected, in part, automatically through an automatic extraction process by using digital forensics tools.
Evaluation
----------
We have tested *ABR*’s performance and usability using examples of cyber-attacks published in the online literature. During the evaluation, *ABR* used the reasoning rules correctly to identify possible attackers. The explanations provided, in the textual and the graphical representations, helped to improve the usage of *ABR* as they provided information that was used by the user for the next iterations. *ABR* answered the queries requested (e.g., if a country had the motives or capabilities to perform the attack, or if a particular group of attackers could be related to the attack following the technical evidence of the used malware) as expected, given the pieces of evidence provided as input. Note that *ABR* assumes that the input evidence is correct, and providing inaccurate or incomplete information may lead to incorrect conclusions.
For every tested example, we ran *ABR* using a subset of the input evidence. Depending on the use-case and the provided evidence, *ABR* was able to reach some conclusions by abducing (hypothesizing) some of the missing predicates. *ABR* gave interesting results when asked to provide suggestions for missing evidence, as it proposed useful missing evidence and also new (not predicted) investigation paths. When a significant part of the evidence was provided to *ABR*, its results coincided with those in the publicly available analyses or the entity attributed in the publicly available analyses was contained in *ABR*’s list of possible culprits, which also contained other possibilities.
Let us now briefly introduce some of the cyber-attacks used to evaluate *ABR* and its conclusions. For the sake of space, we decided to show some well-known attacks where *ABR* was tested, as they do not need a detailed introduction.
*ABR* analyzed evidence of the *Stuxnet* attack [@Zetter2014CountdownWeapon; @mcafeeStuxnet] and derived two different entities as possible culprits: US and Israel. The *Stuxnet* attack was first discovered in 2010 at the uranium enrichment plant in Iran. The code used was complex, using four zero-day vulnerabilities and mainly targeted Iran. *ABR* explained the conclusion based on the high resources required to perform such a sophisticated attack, and the political conflicts that existed in that period between Iran and US, and between Iran and Israel. In this case, the social evidence provided to *ABR* mainly included the political conflicts between Iran and these two countries. However, ABR would have listed as possible source of the attacks any entity for which it could derive a motive and that had the resources to perform such sophisticated attacks.
*ABR* analyzed evidence of the *Sony Pictures* attack [@Roman2015FBIAttribution]. The Sony Pictures attack represents the 2014 attack when hackers infiltrated Sony’s computers and stole data from Sony’s servers. A group called “Guardians of Peace” claimed credit for the attack, but several US government organisations claimed that the attack was state-sponsored by North Korea [@DoJ; @GOP; @Roman2015FBIAttribution]. *ABR* attributed this attack to three possible culprits: the attackers group called “Guardians of Peace” and to two countries, Iran and North Korea. The attribution to Iran came as a consequence of low diplomatic relations between US and Iran. *ABR*’s results were unexpected, with respect to the attribution given in [@DoJ; @GOP; @Roman2015FBIAttribution]. In this case we see that *ABR* can suggest new possible paths of investigation.
*ABR* analyzed evidence from the *Conficker* [@Conficker] attack and, using the evidence provided, was not able to reach a result. Some of *ABR*’s suggestions were to find entities that operated/worked in Ukraine or that had interest in Ukraine, as the first version of the attack was constructed to avoid machines with Ukrainian keyboards [@confickerA], thus to avoid a specific country (Ukraine). *ABR* suggested also to find evidence about political or economical motivations for the attack, as the attack was sophisticated and it could either be a nation-state attack or performed by a cyber-criminal organization.
\[ex3\] Let us now show *ABR*’s final steps of the analysis and attribution of the $usBHack$. Following from Example \[usbank\] and \[usbank2\], *ABR* derived the following predicates: $hasCap$ $(iran, usBHack)$ and $hasPolMotive(iran, us, [2012, 2])$. *ABR* can now apply the following operational rule: $$\begin{array}{ll}
op_7: hasMotive(C, Att) \leftarrow & targetCountry(T, Att),\\ & attackPeriod(Att, Date1),\\
& hasPolMotive(C, T, Date2),\\ & specificTarget(Att)\\
& dateApplicable(Date1, Date2).
\end{array}$$ Rule $op_7$ permits *ABR* to derive that Iran has motives to perform the attack, as it has political motives. Furthermore, these motives are applicable for the attack, as they occurred less than 1 year before the attack took place. By applying rule $str_3$, *ABR* derives that Iran is a possible culprit for this attack ($isCulprit(iran, usBHack)$). This result is in line with the attribution reported in [@USBankByWhom], while it does not match another attribution reported in [@alQassam], which attributed the attack to a group of hackers. *ABR* provides its conclusion to the analyst together with its derivation tree with all the rules and evidence used.
*ABR* provides further results of possible culprits, when new information is provided. For example, when new evidence is provided that a leader of the *al-Qassam Cyber Fighters* hackers group has publicly claimed this attack [@alQassam], then *ABR* derives that this group is also one of the possible attackers.
$\Box$
Discussion
----------
Together with the answers to the queries, *ABR* also provides the different ways in which the result was derived. Furthermore, every result comes with its *explanation* that is composed of the rules and pieces of evidence used. The explanations are in the form of text and graphical representation. The given explanations make *ABR*’s result and analysis process transparent to the user and provides her/him further information that can be used for the analysis. ABR does not require the user to be familiar with the argumentation reasoning framework used as the user needs only to provide the evidence (in some cases the evidence is automatically extracted), and to launch the queries. The main goal of *ABR* is to help the investigator during the analysis process and provide useful information.
*ABR*’s results include hypothesized but missing evidence and suggestions about other investigations paths that could be followed by the analyst. The missing evidence suggested can be collected by the analyst in a second moment and given to *ABR* as part of an iterative process. We decided to provide only the first list of results of the “missing" pieces of evidence, together with the conclusions that could be derived from them, to keep *ABR*’s running time and complexity polynomial. Hence, *ABR* does not provide an exhaustive list of all the possible hypotheses/missing evidence. On the other hand, limiting the suggested evidence to be collected can be beneficial for the analyst, who can focus his/her attention on particular evidence, instead of spending time and resources on checking an exhaustive list.
*ABR* promotes best practice and helps to share lessons learned between analysts, as its reasoning rules can be constructed using the analysts’ reasoning process and be used by multiple investigators across different events. It also helps investigators cope with large numbers of rules and large knowledge bases. The attribution process is mainly human-based, and thus can be easily biased, e.g., by the resources invested [@Felmlee]. In some cases, it may be difficult for the analyst to abandon a path of investigation when substantial resources have been devoted to it. *ABR* permits to reduce the human bias through the rigorous application of rules and by suggesting new paths of investigation.
*ABR* relies on the reasoning rules with which it has been provided. Thus, *ABR* can fail to deal with new evidence that has not been encountered before and which is not included in the reasoning rules. Furthermore, ABR relies on the rules being correct and complete. To illustrate its operation we have extracted 200 rules from public reports and analyses of cyber-attacks. However, the rules need to be validated with expert analysts and the rule base would need to be enriched with further rules for broader use. To facilitate the extraction and update of the reasoning rules and the background knowledge, we plan to investigate the automated extraction of rules and knowledge through the use of NLP techniques in conjunction with ontologies for cyber-attack investigations.
As *ABR* uses in its reasoning information from past attacks and past attributions, it will derive the wrong conclusions if the information is incorrect. In particular, if a past attribution was incorrect, the error can be propagated to *ABR*’s new results. For example, the Sony attack attribution [@Roman2015FBIAttribution] was built on the (alleged) claim that North Korea was responsible for the assault on South Korean banks in 2013 [@WebAltman2014SonyInterview]. We can avoid this problem, by not using past attribution decisions as part of the knowledge, but it would make the attribution more difficult or cumbersome as it would require a larger amount of additional evidence. Furthermore, using results of past attributions is a common practice adopted by forensic analysts during their analysis and attribution process, as it permits to identify existing groups of attackers and to use their *modus operandi* as an important factor for the attribution.
Conclusion and Future Work {#concl}
==========================
In this work, we proposed a method and proof-of-concept argumentation-based reasoner (*ABR*) that aims to help forensic investigators during the analysis and attribution process of cyber-attacks. Our aim was to demonstrate how such a tool can be constructed using the proposed argumentation framework. *ABR* aims to help attribute cyber-attacks by leveraging both social and technical evidence. It provides explanations of the given results and hints of new investigation paths. The use of preference-based argumentation and abductive reasoning permits *ABR* to work with conflicting pieces of evidence and to fill the knowledge gaps that derive from incomplete ones. We introduced *ABR*’s main components that are its reasoning rules (that are based on past analyses and expert knowledge), and its background knowledge. We improve *ABR* usability by applying the Q-Model and categorizing the evidence and rules in three layers, thus following a model familiar to the forensic analysts. Our reasoner emphasises the incremental and iterative nature of attribution, by making the derivations of the solutions fully transparent to the user.
In our future work, we plan to increase *ABR*’s reasoning capabilities by adding new reasoning rules, and new background knowledge. In this work, we mainly focused on constructing the *ABR* reasoner, addressing its usability and showing its possible use. We leave a careful and possibly semi-automated population of the reasoning rules and background knowledge for future work. In particular, we plan to use NLP techniques to automatically extract the reasoning rules and social evidence used by forensic analysts. Furthermore, we intend to enhance the expressive power of *ABR*’s reasoner using ontologies. We also aim to address its integration with forensic tools and data mining techiniques. We plan to apply *ABR* to other cyber-attacks, across a broad range of threats and to improve its usability using feedback from forensic analysts. Another interesting future work is to include probabilities for our pieces of evidence and reasoning rules, in order to provide probabilistic measures for the analysis and attribution results.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
Erisa Karafili was supported by the European Union’s H2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 746667.
[^1]: Currently the extraction of the rules is done manually by analyzing various reports and articles about the analysis and attribution of past cyber-attacks.
[^2]: The rules extracted have not been evaluated for correctness and might not be complete i.e., they might not capture the complexity of the situations encountered.
[^3]: “Normal” industries are companies that are not closely related to a country’s national interests. A “political” industry is a company that is closely related to a country’s national interests, e.g., the defence or energy sector.
[^4]: Numerous factors can be used to determine the capability. However, for the sake of space, we introduce only one of the possible rules that can derive the capability ($hasCap$) predicate.
[^5]: *ABR*’s derived evidence is derived from the application of the rules to the input evidence and thus depends on both rules and evidence being correct.
[^6]: Iran is mentioned as a “notable player" in [@WebBreene2016WhoSuperpowers]. Thus, we identify it as a cyber “superpower”.
[^7]: Note that we have a list of countries that have the resources to perform the attack, given their cyber capabilities. Rule $op_3$ is applied to all these countries. For the sake of simplicity, we only show the entities that are of interest to the discussed example.
[^8]: Currently, *ABR* is not able to derive the evidence $notBlackMarket$. This evidence is either provided by the user or given in the background knowledge.
[^9]: For the sake of simplicity, in this paper we introduce only a subset of *ABR*’s rules that identify similarities between malwares or malicious software.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The output randomness from a random number generator can be certified by observing the violation of quantum contextuality inequalities based on the Kochen-Specker theorem. Contextuality can be tested in a single quantum system, which significantly simplifies the experimental requirements to observe the violation comparing to the ones based on nonlocality tests. However, it is not yet resolved how to ensure compatibilities for sequential measurements that is required in contextuality tests. Here, we employ a modified Klyachko-Can-Binicioğlu-Shumovsky contextuality inequality, which can ease the strict compatibility requirement on measurements. On a trapped single [$^{138}\mathrm{Ba}^+~$]{}ion system, we experimentally demonstrate violation of the contextuality inequality and realize self-testing quantum random number expansion by closing detection loopholes. We perform $1.29 \times 10^8$ trials of experiments and extract the randomness of $8.06 \times 10^5$ bits with a speed of 270 bits s$^{-1}$. Our demonstration paves the way for the practical high-speed spot-checking quantum random number expansion and other secure information processing applications.'
author:
- 'Mark Um$^{1*}$, Qi Zhao$^{1*}$, Junhua Zhang$^{2,1}$, Pengfei Wang$^{1}$, Ye Wang$^{1}$, Mu Qiao$^{1}$, Hongyi Zhou$^{1}$, Xiongfeng Ma$^{1}$, and Kihwan Kim$^{1}$'
title: Randomness expansion secured by quantum contextuality
---
Randomness is a critical resource for information processing with applications ranging from computer simulations [@Coddington94] to cryptography [@Gisin02]. For cryptographic purposes, in particular, streams of random numbers should have good statistical behavior and unpredictability against adversaries [@Fiorentino07; @Goldreich07]. In reality, random numbers produced by an algorithm or a classical chaotic process are intrinsically deterministic, thereby in principle allowing an adversary with the information of the device to find a pattern. On the other hand, the nature of quantum mechanics is fundamentally random, which, in this sense, provides a foundation for genuine randomness. Thanks to the unpredictable behavior of quantum mechanics, various quantum random number generators have been proposed and implemented [@Ma2016Quantum; @Herrero2017Quantum; @Liu2018High]. In practice, however, the security can be jeopardized if an adversary partially manipulates the devices or the devices are exposed to imperfection or malfunction. In order to address this realistic issue, the device-independent protocols have been proposed to guarantee the generated randomness without relying on detailed knowledge of uncharacterized devices [@Colbeck07; @Pironio10; @Colbeck2011private; @Vazirani12; @Pironio2013Security; @Coudron13; @Carl17; @Chung2014Physical; @Arnon2016; @Ac2016Certified].
The essence of device-independent randomness expansion lies in the fact that any violation of nonlocality inequalities [@bell1964einstein] shows unpredictability of measurement results. Recent security proofs show that randomness can be certified under the device-independent scenario by a class of Bell inequalities [@Colbeck07; @Pironio10; @Colbeck2011private; @Vazirani12; @Pironio2013Security; @Coudron13; @Carl17]. On the experimental side, the loophole-free violations of Bell’s inequality have been demonstrated [@hensen2015Loophole; @Shalm2015Strong; @Giustina2015Significant], which have been applied to generate random numbers [@bierhorst2018experimentally; @liu2018device]. However, the randomness certification by the loophole-free Bell test is suffered from the low generation rate and requires high-fidelity entanglement sources. Moreover, it requires a large space separation between two detection sites to rule out the locality loophole, which is almost impossible to make the whole system compact. Till now, a strict and practical randomness expansion, where the output randomness is larger than input randomness, based on loophole-free Bell tests still has not been demonstrated and remained as an experimental challenge.
Similar to the Bell theorem, the Kochen-Specker theorem [@Bell66; @KS67] states that quantum mechanics is contextual and cannot be fully explained by classical models, *i.e.*, noncontextual hidden variables models that have definite predetermined values for measurement outcomes. Contextuality can be tested with a single system without entanglement by using the Klyachko-Can-Binicioğlu-Shumovsky (KCBS) inequality [@klyachko2008simple], which can significantly reduce the experimental requirements comparing to the nonlocality test. Inequalities based on the Kochen-Specker theorem can provide alternatives for randomness certification, which has been studied in both theory and experiment [@Dongling12; @UMark13; @Carl17]. A contextuality test contains a set of contexts, which are composed of a certain number of compatible, $i.e.$, commuting in quantum mechanics, measurements. Note that the measurements in the nonlocality Bell test can also be regarded as compatible measurements. The randomness certification has been proven for the case with perfectly compatible measurements [@Carl17]. In reality, when the contextuality test is performed on a single party, it is difficult to establish the perfect compatibility between sequential measurements. Though a couple of experimental demonstration of randomness certification with the KCBS inequality have been reported [@Dongling12; @UMark13], the security of the scheme has not been fully resolved.
In this work, first, we experimentally demonstrate the violation of a modified KCBS inequality [@Gunhe10; @Szangolies13], which reveals quantum correlations without the requirement of the perfect compatibility on sequential measurements. Then we employ it for a spot-checking protocol of randomness expansion with exponential gain [@Carl17], which is the first experimental demonstration of the strict randomness expansion. Our scheme is not a fully device-independent protocol, since it requires a few assumptions on the device, in particular, the assumption of approximate compatibilities on the measurement settings [@Herrero2017Quantum; @lunghi2015self]. However, we do not need the perfect compatibility, since the imperfections in control and the disturbances from classical and quantum noisy-environment are characterized and compensated in the modified KCBS inequality. In this scenario, we can expand the randomness from the generated strings merely based on the experimental observed data that violate the modified KCBS inequality , which is in a self-testing manner [@Herrero2017Quantum; @lunghi2015self]. We implement the protocol with a single trapped [$^{138}\mathrm{Ba}^+~$]{}ion instead of a [$^{171}\mathrm{Yb}^+~$]{}ion which was used for the previous demonstration [@UMark13] in order to fully address the experimental requirements in a modified KCBS inequality [@Gunhe10; @Szangolies13]. The [$^{138}\mathrm{Ba}^+~$]{}ion has long-lived states that can be used for the coherent shelving of a quantum state during the sequential measurements. We develop a narrow-line laser system that is stabilized to a high-finesse cavity to precisely manipulate the long-lived states and observe sufficient amount of violation for the randomness expansion with large enough number of trials. We perform $1.29 \times 10^8$ trials of experiments and extract the randomness of $8.06 \times 10^5$ bits with the speed of 270 bits s$^{-1}$.
Results
=======
Modified KCBS inequality {#modified-kcbs-inequality .unnumbered}
------------------------
In order to test contextuality, various inequalities have been proposed [@Cabello08; @klyachko2008simple] and demonstrated in diverse physical systems, including trapped ion system [@Roos09; @Xiang13], photonic system [@Zeilinger11; @xiao2018experimental], and superconducting system [@Jerger16]. Among the contextuality inequalities, the KCBS inequality, which uses five observables $A_i$ taken $\pm 1$, shows that there is no hidden variables models in the smallest dimension $d=3$ [@klyachko2008simple], $$\label{eq:classicKCBS}
\begin{aligned}
{\ensuremath{\left\langle \chi_{KCBS}\right\rangle}} ={\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_1\right\rangle}} \geq -3.
\end{aligned}$$ If all the five observables are predetermined, the inequality of Eq. always holds. In quantum mechanics, on the other hand, the inequality can be violated for a specific state with properly arranged observables $A_i$. In the case of $d=3$, denote the basis states by $\ket{1}$, $\ket{2}$ and $\ket{3}$. Design the observable $A_{i} = 1-2 \ket{v_{i}}\bra{v_{i}}$ to be the projector along the axis of $\ket{v_{i}}$. The maximal violation of the inequality (\[eq:classicKCBS\]) is achieved when five state vectors, $\{\ket{v_{i}}\}$, form a regular pentagram, and the initial state vector passes through the center of the pentagram, as shown in Fig. \[fig1:Pentagram\]. In this case, the value of ${\ensuremath{\left\langle \chi_{KCBS}\right\rangle}}$ achieves $5- 4 \sqrt{5} \approx -3.944$. The assumption behind the above contextuality inequality is that the observables $A_i$ and $A_{i+1}$ (let $A_6 \equiv A_1$) are compatible. However, in an actual experiment using sequential measurements, the compatibility is difficult to verify, which leads to open the compatibility loophole. The issues of the compatibility in sequential measurements have been addressed by modifying the KCBS inequality [@Gunhe10; @Szangolies13] (see also Supplementary Materials (SM) I).
We combine the two modifications of the KCBS inequality to relax the condition of the perfect compatibility, which introduce additional terms of $\epsilon$’s [@Gunhe10] and ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}}$ [@Szangolies13], $$\label{eq:finalKCBS}
\begin{aligned}
{\ensuremath{\left\langle \chi_{KCBS}\right\rangle}} &= {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_1\right\rangle}} - {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}} \\
&\geq -4-(\epsilon_{12}+\epsilon_{32}+\epsilon_{34}+\epsilon_{54}+\epsilon_{51}+\epsilon_{11}).
\end{aligned}$$ Here, $\langle A_i A_j \rangle$ denotes the expectation value of the measurement results in the time order of $A_i A_j$ for the sequential measurements. The terms of $\epsilon_{ij}$ describe the difference between a same pair of observables $A_i$ and $A_j$ in different time orders, $A_i A_j$ and $A_j A_i$, which can be regarded as the bound of incompatibility between these sequential measurements [@Gunhe10], $$\label{eq:epsilon}
\begin{aligned}
\epsilon_{ij}=\left|{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_j|A_j A_i\right\rangle}}-{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_j|A_i A_j\right\rangle}}\right|.
\end{aligned}$$ The term of ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}}$ is later introduced to address different types of incompatibility, which cannot be excluded with the terms of $\epsilon_{ij}$ [@Szangolies13]. In our work, we include both of the modifications that address all types of incompatibility discussed in the Refs [@Gunhe10; @Szangolies13].
![KCBS pentagram and experimental procedure. (a) Initial state and five axes which form a pentagram in $d$=3 space. The five observables $A_1, A_2, \dots, A_5$ are the projectors on the axes respectively. The connected axes $\ket{v_i}$ and $\ket{v_{i+1}}$ are orthogonal, representing compatibility of the corresponding observables $A_i$ and $A_{i+1}$. (b) Initially, we prepare $\ket{3}$ state, then perform two sequential measurements of $A_i$ and $A_j$. Each sequential measurement contains a unitary rotation $U_i$, projective measurement, and an inverse unitary rotation $U_{i}^{\dagger}$. Each unitary rotation $U_i$ is comprised of first $R_2 \left(\theta_{2i}, \phi_{2i} \right)$ then $R_1 \left(\theta_{1i}, \phi_{1i} \right)$. In projective measurement, we assign $a_i=1(-1)$ if flourescence is (not) detected. []{data-label="fig1:Pentagram"}](fig1.pdf){width="0.9\columnwidth"}
Randomness expansion protocol {#randomness-expansion-protocol .unnumbered}
-----------------------------
The violation of the KCBS inequality implies the existence of quantum randomness which cannot be imitated by classical variables, which is not only fundamentally interesting but also posses the values for practical applications. The noncontextuality inequalities provide an alternative way of generating secure randomness. Similar to Bell inequality, in each trial, certain bits of randomness are consumed. Thus in order to efficiently expand the randomness from small input randomness, the idea of spot checking is necessary in our scheme. Recently, a robust (error-tolerant) randomness expansion scheme has been proposed [@Carl17], which is a spot-checking protocol that achieves exponential expansion. The protocol is shown in Box \[box:scheme\], with our experimental settings.
According to the definition of Ref. [@Carl17], the score of the KCBS game is given by $g \in \left\{0,1\right\}$. Thus, Eq. can be rewritten in the form KCBS game $G$, $$\begin{aligned}
g_{KCBS} = -\frac{1}{6} ({\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_1\right\rangle}} - {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}} \\+\epsilon_{12}+\epsilon_{32}+\epsilon_{34}+\epsilon_{54}+\epsilon_{51}+\epsilon_{11}).
\label{eq:KCBSgame}
\end{aligned}$$ The classical winning probability is $\chi_g=2/3$ (see SM.II. for details) and the achievable maximal quantum winning probability is $\chi'_g=(4 \sqrt{5}-4)/6 \approx 0.824$. The gap between $\chi_g$ and $\chi'_g$ enables randomness expansion.
In our scheme, the amount of randomness quantified by the min-entropy is related to the violation of the KCBS inequality (see Methods, Randomness generation rate). For a given game, if the device obtains a superclassical average score, then it must exhibit certain quantumness, which implies random behavior. This quantum randomness produced by the devices could be extracted. The violation is only based on the observation of experimental data, and can be independent of the sources of prepared states and other device specifications. Therefore, our protocol is self-testing provided that the following assumptions. In our scheme, there are three underlying main assumptions: (1) the input is chosen from an independent random distribution uncorrelated with the system; (2) the measurement outcomes cannot be leaked directly to adversaries; (3) The first and the second measurements in a context are approximately compatible and can be characterized by $\epsilon_{ij}$ and ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}}$ in Eq. (\[eq:finalKCBS\]). The assumptions (1) and (2) are widely used in other self-testing tasks, such as device-independent quantum random number generators [@Vazirani12; @Carl17; @Arnon2016]. The assumption (3) is related to the validity of the quantum contextuality test, which would be similar to all the other experimental tests with sequential measurements. We note that we do not require the perfect compatibility. Instead, we assume approximate compatibility, which can be quantified by the terms of $\epsilon_{ij}$ and ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}}$ in Eq. (\[eq:finalKCBS\]). Due to those terms, the violation of the inequality of Eq. (\[eq:finalKCBS\]) is getting difficult if two sequential measurements are deviated from the perfect compatibility. However, in our scheme, two measurements in a context are performed on a single system, which makes it impossible to exclude the possibility that a malicious manufacturer sabotage the compatibility assumption by registering the setting and results of the first measurements and using them for the second measurements. Therefore, our protocol can not be viewed as a fully-device independent scenario. We need the trust of the device that the measurement settings are close enough to be compatible, but it is fine to have imperfections in the realization and disturbance from classical or quantum noisy environments since the amount of introduced incompatibilities are quantified. Our protocol is well fitted to a scenario of trusted but error-susceptible devices. Given these assumptions, the generated randomness is certified by only experimental statistics.
$^{138}\mathrm{\textbf{Ba}}^+$ qutrit and experimental procedure {#mathrmtextbfba-qutrit-and-experimental-procedure .unnumbered}
----------------------------------------------------------------
There have been demonstrated the randomness expansion based on the experimental violations of the KCBS inequality using a single trapped [$^{171}\mathrm{Yb}^+~$]{}ion [@UMark13]. In the demonstration, however, it is not possible to test the modified KCBS inequality, Eq. , due to lack of capability in obtaining all correlations. For example, when we observe fluorescence in the first measurement, the second measurement does not provide any useful information [@UMark13]. Instead, we develop a single [$^{138}\mathrm{Ba}^+~$]{}ion system [@Dietrich2010; @Slodicka2012] with which we can obtain full-correlation results from the sequential measurements by using long-lived shelving states in $^{5}D_{5/2}$ manifold similar to [$^{40}\mathrm{Ca}^+~$]{}ion [@Leupold2018]. We choose two Zeeman sub-levels ($\ket{m_j =+1/2}\equiv \ket{1}$, $\ket{m_j =+3/2}\equiv \ket{2}$) in the $^{5}D_{5/2}$ manifold, and one Zeeman sub-level ($\ket{m_j =+1/2}\equiv \ket{3}$) in the $^{6}S_{1/2}$ manifold to represent the qutrit system as shown Fig. \[fig3:ExperimentalSetup\](a). In the projective measurement, we observe fluorescence when the state is projected to $\ket{3}$ and no fluorescence for all the other projections on the subspace that consists of $\ket{1}$ and $\ket{2}$ basis while conserving coherence. Different from the [$^{171}\mathrm{Yb}^+~$]{}ion realization, since the coherence is not destroyed even when we observe fluorescence in the first measurement, we can get meaningful outcomes in the second measurement. The transitions between $^{6}S_{1/2}$ and $^{5}D_{5/2}$ are coherently manipulated by a narrow-line laser with the wavelength of 1762 nm, which is stabilized to a high-finesse optical cavity. The coherent rotations $R_1 \left(\theta_1, \phi_1 \right)$ between $\ket{1}$ to $\ket{3}$ and $R_2 \left(\theta_2, \phi_2 \right)$ between $\ket{2}$ to $\ket{3}$ (See Methods for the details) are realized by applying the 1762 nm laser beam, where $\theta$ and $\phi$ are controlled by the duration and the phase of the laser beam, respectively, using an AOM.
The procedure of the experimental test of the KCBS inequality consists of Doppler and electromagnetically induced transparency (EIT) cooling [@Morigi00; @Lin13Sympathetic; @Lechner16], initialization, the first projective measurement of observable $A_i$ and the second projective measurement of $A_j$. The initialization to the state $\ket{3}$ is performed by applying the optical pumping beam of 493 nm with $\sigma^{+}$ polarization shown in Fig. \[fig3:ExperimentalSetup\](b). The first measurement of the observable $A_i$ is realized by the rotation $U_i$, the projective measurement, and the reverse of the rotation $U_i^{\dagger}$ (see Methods). The $U_i$ maps the axis $\ket{v_i}$ to the axis $\ket{3}$ and the projective measurement can be described as the projector $M_{\ket{3}}=2\ket{3}\bra{3}-1$ (see Methods). Thus $A_i$ is assigned to value $a_i =1$ when fluorescence is observed and $a_i =-1$ when no fluorescence is observed. The projective measurement consists of the state-dependent fluorescence detection and the optical pumping sequence (see Methods). The second measurement of the observable $A_j$ is realized by the same scheme to that of the first measurement. Unitary rotations of $A_i$(Alice) and $A_j$(Bob) are realized by different signal generators and amplifiers, their results are also collected independently.
![Experimental setup of the [$^{138}\mathrm{Ba}^+~$]{}ion system. (a) The energy level diagram of a [$^{138}\mathrm{Ba}^+~$]{}ion for a qutrit system, which is represented by two Zeeman sublevels $\ket{m_D =+1/2}\equiv\mathrm{\ket{1}}$, $\ket{m_D =+3/2}\equiv\mathrm{\ket{2}}$ in the $^{5}D_{5/2}$ manifold, and $\ket{m_S =+1/2}\equiv\mathrm{\ket{3}}$ sublevel in the $^{6}S_{1/2}$ manifold. The quadrupole transitions between $^{6}S_{1/2}$ and $^{5}D_{5/2}$ are coherently manipulated using narrow-line 1762 nm laser which is stabilized to a high-finesse cavity. The 493 nm and 650 nm lasers are used for Doppler cooling, EIT cooling, optical pumping and detection. The 614 nm laser is used for depopulation of $^{5}D_{5/2}$ level to $^{6}S_{1/2}$ level. (b) The experimental setup of a trapped [$^{138}\mathrm{Ba}^+~$]{}ion for testing KCBS inequality and for the spot checking random number expansion. One of 11 measurement configurations $\left\{A_i,A_j\right\}$ is randomly selected. When Alice and Bob receive $i$ and $j$, they could not know the setting of the other since each observable is included in at least two different contexts. For example, when Alice receives $i=3$, Bob could be either $j=2$ or $j=4$. Their pulse sequences are independently generated by their own Direct Digital Synthesizer (DDS) and amplifiers, sent to the acousto-optic modulator (AOM) through independent paths, and finally applied to the ion on different time order. Fluorescence is observed by PMT on different time order and the values of the observables are assigned accordingly. []{data-label="fig3:ExperimentalSetup"}](fig3.pdf "fig:"){width="0.9\columnwidth"}\
Violation of KCBS inequality and randomness expansion {#violation-of-kcbs-inequality-and-randomness-expansion .unnumbered}
-----------------------------------------------------
To test the modified KCBS inequality , we need to measure the eleven combinations of sequential measurements, which include five terms explicitly shown in the inequality as ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_2\right\rangle}}$, ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_2\right\rangle}}$, ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_4\right\rangle}}$, ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_4\right\rangle}}$, and ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_1\right\rangle}}$, the other five terms with reverse order (${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_2 A_1\right\rangle}}$, ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_2 A_3\right\rangle}}$, ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_4 A_3\right\rangle}}$, ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_4 A_5\right\rangle}}$, ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_5\right\rangle}}$), and ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}}$. The reversed-order terms are necessary to observe $\epsilon_{12}$, $\epsilon_{32}$, $\epsilon_{34}$, $\epsilon_{54}$, and $\epsilon_{51}$ and evaluate incompatibility from experimental imperfections. The detailed experimental results of the measurements are summarized in Table \[TAB2:KCBSData\].
[c|c|c|c|c]{} $\left\{i,j\right\}$ & ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_i A_j\right\rangle}}$ & ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_i\right\rangle}}$ & ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_j\right\rangle}}$ & $\epsilon_{ij}$\
$\left\{\textbf{1,2}\right\}$ & **-0.768(23)** & 0.082(15) & 0.091(15) & **0.005(2)**\
$\left\{2,1\right\}$ & -0.783(23) & 0.096(15) & 0.065(15) & 0.017(4)\
$\left\{2,3\right\}$ & -0.767(22) & 0.098(14) & 0.088(14) & 0.033(5)\
$\left\{\textbf{3,2}\right\}$ & **-0.750(23)** & 0.107(15) & 0.098(15) & **0.009(3)**\
$\left\{\textbf{3,4}\right\}$ & **-0.773(23)** & 0.084(15) & 0.082(15) & **0.019(4)**\
$\left\{4,3\right\}$ & -0.762(22) & 0.122(14) & 0.068(14) & 0.000(0)\
$\left\{4,5\right\}$ & -0.782(23) & 0.095(15) & 0.075(15) & 0.014(3)\
$\left\{\textbf{5,4}\right\}$ & **-0.789(22)** & 0.056(15) & 0.094(15) & **0.025(4)**\
$\left\{\textbf{5,1}\right\}$ & **-0.773(22)** & 0.100(14) & 0.069(14) & **0.000(0)**\
$\left\{1,5\right\}$ & -0.767(23) & 0.109(15) & 0.066(15) & 0.007(2)\
$\left\{\textbf{1,1}\right\}$ & **0.977(21)** & 0.106(15) & 0.108(15) & **0.001(1)**\
\
\[TAB2:KCBSData\]
For the spot-checking protocol, we choose $\{A_1, A_2\}$ as the setting for generation rounds, i.e., $\left\{1,2\right\}$ as the distinguished input of our KCBS game $G$. At each round, a string of trusted random bits $t$ decides each round is generation round or game round. If it is generation round, we perform the sequential measurement $\{A_1, A_2\}$ and record the output $\{a_1, a_2\}$. If it is game round, we randomly choose one of the 11 configurations of Eq. and save the result $\{a_i, a_j\}$ after performing the sequential measurement $\{A_i, A_j\}$.
From the Eq. , we can see that when the violation is small, the total rounds $N$ is a critical parameter. A positive generation rate requires a sufficiently large $N$. Thus we give the minimum required rounds for different violations, which is instructive for experiments. Figure \[fig4:ViolationvsEntropy\](a) shows the minimum total rounds $N_{min}$ to obtain net randomness depending on the KCBS game score $g_{KCBS}$, where $N_{min}$ can be obtained with an optimal $q$. In order to gain net randomness at our experimentally observed $g_{KCBS}=0.795$, we perform $N_{exp}=1.29\times 10^8$ rounds, which is sufficiently larger than $N_{min}=4.6\times 10^7$. At our experimental condition of $N_{exp}$, Fig. \[fig4:ViolationvsEntropy\](b) shows the generation rate of net randomness depending on $g_{KCBS}$. If $g_{KCBS}\le0.77$, we can not observe net randomness regardless of $q$. When $g_{KCBS}>0.77$, there exist optimal $q$ values. If $q$ is bigger than proper range, input randomness increases thus no net randomness is produced. If $q$ is smaller than proper range, due to the increase of $\Delta$ in Eq. , we also cannot gain net randomness. In our experiment, we choose $q_{exp}=10^{-4}$ as shown in red circle of Fig. \[fig4:ViolationvsEntropy\](b).
![(a-b) For MS-bound the relation of the score of KCBS game $g_{KCBS}$, number of total rounds $N$, test probability $q$, and randomness expansion rate with smoothing parameter $\delta=10^{-2}$ in Eq. . (a) The minimum number of rounds to have net randomness depending on the score $g_{KCBS}$. The minimum $N$ decreases as $g_{KCBS}$ increases. We can get net randomness only within the shadow area. Our experimental $g_{KCBS}=0.795$ and $N_{exp}=1.29 \times 10^8$ are shown as the green circle. (b) Randomness expansion rate at different $g_{KCBS}$ and $q$ for our $N_{exp}$. Only with the combination of large enough $g_{KCBS}$ and proper $q$ can we obtain net randomness. Our experimental $g_{KCBS}=0.795$ and $q_{exp}=0.0001$ are shown as the red circle, resulting expansion rate $3.4 \times 10^{-3}$ per bit. (c-d) For HS-bound the relation of the score of KCBS game $g_{KCBS}$, number of total rounds $N$, test probability $q$, and randomness expansion rate with smoothing parameter $\delta=10^{-4}$ in Eq. . (c) The minimum number of rounds to have net randomness depending on the score $g_{KCBS}$. Our experimental condition is shown as the green circle. (d) Randomness expansion rate at different $g_{KCBS}$ and $q$ for our $N_{exp}$. Our experimental $g_{KCBS}=0.795$ and $q_{exp}=0.0001$ are shown as the red circle, resulting expansion rate $4.4 \times 10^{-3}$ per bit, although our $q_{exp}$ is not optimal for this case. []{data-label="fig4:ViolationvsEntropy"}](fig4.pdf){width="0.9\columnwidth"}
Meanwhile, we also apply HS bound to our experimental data as shown in Fig. \[fig4:ViolationvsEntropy\]. The HS bound produces a bigger generation rate than the MS bound, thus we are able to reduce smoothing parameter $\delta$ to $10^{-4}$, which is the security failure probability. We find that the optimal $q$ for the HS bound is different from that of the MS bound, but our $q_{exp}$ is still good enough to generate net randomness as shown in Fig. \[fig4:ViolationvsEntropy\](d).
We play $N_{exp}=1.29 \times 10^8$ (129421072) rounds and observe the left hand side of the inequality Eq. , ${\ensuremath{\left\langle\chi_{KCBS}\right\rangle}} = -4.831$, and the right hand side $-4-(\epsilon_{12}+\epsilon_{32}+\epsilon_{34}+\epsilon_{54}+\epsilon_{51}+\epsilon_{11})=-4.058$. The detailed experimental results of are summarized in Tab. \[TAB2:KCBSData\]. The obtained final score of KCBS game is $g_{KCBS} = 4.772(68)/6 = 0.795(11)$, which violates the inequality by 11 standard deviations. Our test probability is $q_{exp}=10^{-4} \sim O((\mathrm{log}^3 N_{exp})/N_{exp})$, and the required amount of initial random seed is $O(\mathrm{log}^4 N_{exp})$ bits (see SM.III. and IV. for details). The min-entropy of final randomness is $5.3\times 10^{-3}$ per bit, thus the output random bits is $\Theta(N_{exp})$, achieving exponential randomness expansion. In real number, we get $6.88 \times 10^5$ bits of min-entropy which exceeds $2.35 \times 10^5$ bits of input randomness, resulting $4.52 \times 10^5$ net random bits, expansion rate per round is $3.5 \times 10^{-3}$.
When we apply the HS bound to the experimental data, we get larger min-entropy and expansion rate. Note that $\delta$ is two order smaller than that of the MS bound. The min-entropy of final randomness is $6.2 \times 10^{-3}$ per bit, and the expansion rate per round is $4.4 \times 10^{-3}$. We get $8.06 \times 10^5$ bits of min-entropy which exceeds $2.35 \times 10^5$ bits of input randomness, resulting $5.71 \times 10^5$ net random bits. If we use an optimized $q$ based on the calculation using the MS bound, we can get even larger min-entropy and expansion rate.
Discussion and Outlook {#discussion-and-outlook .unnumbered}
======================
In this work, we achieve an exponential randomness expansion secured by quantum contextuality. Regardless of imperfections and experimental noises, the observed violation of the modified KCBS inequality, Eq. , verifies the generated randomness. In our protocol, we can guarantee the randomness without the i.i.d. assumption even when imperfections or noises may originate from quantum mechanics, which would be our quantum adversary. Note that there are other types of quantum contextuality inequalities that do not require sequential measurements, which could also ensure the no-disturbance condition. Our work can be easily extended to these proposals as well.
Due to the advantage of using contextuality for randomness certification, our current generation speed is 270 bits s$^{-1}$ and 1.7 bits s$^{-1}$ after applying Toeplitz matrix hashing, which is faster than that of using Bell’s inequality [@Pironio10; @bierhorst2018experimentally]. We believe we can achieve orders of magnitude higher generation speed by several improvements in duration of cooling, optical pumping, and detection, coherence time of qutrit, and coherent operation time (see SM.V. for details). From the theoretical aspect, though the generation rate used in our scheme is robust and noise-tolerable, a large number of trials are still required which costs a lot of efforts. An improved generation rate based on general contextuality inequality is still an open problem. Recently, entropy accumulation theory has been applied in device-independent protocols [@dupuis2016entropy; @arnon2018practical] and may be a potential tool for achieving a near optimal generation rate using contextuality inequality.
Fully device-independent random number generation puts a very high requirement on implementation devices. In practice, it is meaningful to pursue alternative randomness generation schemes with additional reasonable assumptions, such as Bell test with certain loopholes [@Liu2018High], uncertainty principles, or contextuality [@kulikov2017realization]. Our scheme is not fully device-independent due to the approximate compatibility assumption on measurements. On the other hand, our scheme does enjoy the self-testing properties on both source and measurement. Note that the self-testing protocols with proper assumptions on the device have also been proposed to deal with other quantum information processing tasks [@lunghi2015self; @fiorentino2007secure].
The security proof in [@Carl17] only considers the perfect case without imperfections of compatible or no-disturbance. Here we characterize this imperfections and modify the score of KCBS game. We assume the imperfections in experiments does not affect the adversary and security proof in [@Carl17] and only leads to a modified classical bound. The rigorous proof of a self-testing random number generator with limited compatibility is an interesting open problem and we will leave it as a future theoretical work.
Moreover, quantum contextuality can also provide an alternative means for randomness amplification. In principle, we can individually manipulate multiple ions and use them to generate random numbers simultaneously, which could lead to orders of magnitude faster generation speed. Such kind of multiple ion system can be applied to realize randomness amplification protocol [@Chung2014Physical], which generates true randomness out of weak randomness input. The protocol can be implemented by the multiple of our developed randomness expansion systems and the exclusive-OR of their outputs.
Data availability {#data-availability .unnumbered}
-----------------
The authors declare that the main data supporting the finding of this study are available within the article and its Supplementary Material files. Additional data can be provided by the corresponding author upon request.
Methods {#methods .unnumbered}
=======
Randomness generation rate {#randomness-generation-rate .unnumbered}
--------------------------
Here, we consider the case that the average probability of measurement setting choice is unbiased, $p(a) = 1/11$, $a\in \{(i,i+1),(i+1,i),(1,1)\} (i=1,2,\dots,5)$. The violation of the inequality in Eq. , indicates the presence of genuine quantum randomness in the measurement outcomes. The amount of secure randomness can be quantified by the smooth min-entropy $H_{min}^\delta(X|AE)$, which is bounded by $$\label{eq:smoothEntropy}
\begin{aligned}
H_{min}^\delta(X|AE)\ge N R_{gen} (g_{KCBS}, q,\epsilon,N, \delta),
\end{aligned}$$ where $X$ and $A$ denote the output and input sequences, respectively; $E$ denotes the system of an quantum adversary; $\delta$ is the smoothing parameter representing the security failure probability; $g_{KCBS}$ is the KCBS game score; $N$ is the total number of experiment trials; $q$ is the probability of choosing game round; $\epsilon$ is the parameter of Schatten norm, in the security analysis, $(1+\epsilon)$-Schatten norm is applied; $R_{gen}$ is the lower bound of randomness generation on average for each trial. In order to achieve the maximal randomness expansion, we also need to consider the input randomness for each trial, $$\label{eq:inputrandomness}
\begin{aligned}
R_{In}=q\log11+H(q),
\end{aligned}$$ and the randomness expansion rate can be expressed as $R_{exp}=R_{gen}-R_{In}$. The output randomness rate $R_{gen}$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
R_{gen}=\pi(\chi)-\Delta,
\label{eq:Rgen}
\end{aligned}$$ where $$\label{eq:piandO}
\begin{aligned}
&\chi=g_{KCBS}-\chi_g, \\
&\pi(\chi)=2\frac{\log(e)\chi^2}{r-1}, \\
&\Delta=\frac{\epsilon}{q} \frac{8\log(e)\chi^2}{(r-1)^2} +
\frac{\log(2/\delta^2)}{N\epsilon} + 2rq + O\left(\left(\frac{\epsilon}{q}\right)^2\right).
\end{aligned}$$ Here, all the log is base 2 throughout the paper, $r$ is the output alphabet size, which is $r=4$ in our KCBS game. The explicit form of $O\left(\left(\frac{\epsilon}{q}\right)^2\right)$ and derivation of Eq. are shown in Sections III and IV of Supplementary Materials. Denote the above bound as Miller-Shi (MS) bound [@Carl17] and afterwards a tighter bound is obtained, referred as Huang-Shi (HS) bound without the dependence of $r$ [@Huang17]. For the experiment, we perform the parameter optimization of $q$ and $\epsilon$ to achieve the maximal randomness expansion rate $R_{exp}$ with MS bound and also show the final randomness rate for two different bounds.
Unitary Rotations {#unitary-rotations .unnumbered}
-----------------
Here, $R_1 \left(\theta_1, \phi_1 \right)$ and $R_2 \left(\theta_2, \phi_2 \right)$ are defined as $$R_1 \left(\theta_1, \phi_1 \right) = \left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\text{$\cos$}\frac{\theta_1}{2} & 0 & -ie^{i\left(\phi_1+\frac{\text{$\pi$}}{2}\right)}\text{$\sin$}\frac{\theta_1}{2} \\
0 & 1 & 0 \\
-ie^{-i\left(\phi_1+\frac{\text{$\pi$}}{2}\right)}\text{$\sin$}\frac{\theta_1}{2} & 0 & \text{$\cos$}\frac{\theta_1}{2}\end{array}\right),$$
$$R_2 \left(\theta_2, \phi_2 \right) = \left(\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & \text{$\cos$}\frac{\theta_2}{2} & -ie^{-i\left(\phi_2+\frac{\text{$\pi$}}{2}\right)}\text{$\sin$}\frac{\theta_2}{2} \\
0 & -ie^{i\left(\phi_2+\frac{\text{$\pi$}}{2}\right)}\text{$\sin$}\frac{\theta_2}{2} & \text{$\cos$}\frac{\theta_2}{2}\end{array}\right).$$
The Unitary rotations $U_i$ in the measurement configurations shown in Fig. \[fig1:Pentagram\](b) are realized by corresponding $R_2 \left(\theta_{2i}, \phi_{2i} \right)$ then $R_1 \left(\theta_{1i}, \phi_{1i} \right)$, while $U_{i}^{\dagger}$ are composed of $R_1 \left(\theta_{1i}, \pi-\phi_{1i} \right)$ then $R_2 \left(\theta_{2i}, \pi-\phi_{2i} \right)$, where the specific $U_i$ are listed in Tab. \[TAB1:Rotation\].
U Rotation
------- --------------------------------------------
$U_1$ $R_1(0.531\pi,\pi)\cdot R_2(0.066\pi,0)$
$U_2$ $R_1(0.442\pi,0)\cdot R_2(0.328\pi,0)$
$U_3$ $R_1(0.191\pi,\pi)\cdot R_2(0.506\pi,\pi)$
$U_4$ $R_1(0.104\pi,\pi)\cdot R_2(0.526\pi,0)$
$U_5$ $R_1(0.377\pi,0)\cdot R_2(0.404\pi,\pi)$
: Unitary rotations $U_i$.
\[TAB1:Rotation\]
Experimental sequence {#experimental-sequence .unnumbered}
---------------------
Each round comprises Doppler cooling, EIT cooling, optical pumping, rotation ($U_i$), the first projective measurement, inverse rotation ($U_{i}^{\dagger}$), rotation ($U_j$), the second projective measurement, inverse rotation ($U_{j}^{\dagger}$). The [$^{138}\mathrm{Ba}^+~$]{}ion is first cooled down with 500 $\mu$s Doppler cooling and 1000 $\mu$s EIT cooling. Optical pumping procedure initializes the internal state of the ion to $\ket{m_S=+1/2}$ by carefully adjusting the polarization of 493 nm laser beam. We manipulate the states between $\ket{1}$ and $\ket{3}$, and between $\ket{2}$ and $\ket{3}$ by applying 1762 nm laser with different frequencies and amplitudes controlled by AOM. The 1762 nm fiber laser is stabilized with a high-finesse cavity to achieve a linewidth below 1 Hz using Pound-Drever-Hall technique. The cavity is made of ultra-low-expansion material and is mounted in a vacuum cavity with active temperature stabilization to maximize the stability of its length. Frequency and amplitude of RF signal for AOM inputs are generated by two independent pairs of DDS (AD9910) for $A_i$ and $A_j$ measurements, which represent Alice and Bob, ensuring they are compatible without communication. The 2$\pi$ time for both Rabi oscillations are adjusted to 37 $\mu$s, that is $\Omega=\left(2\pi\right)27$ kHz. Every rotation $U_i$ is performed with same duration of no longer than 16 $\mu$s.
EIT cooling implements the asymmetry profile of the absorption spectrum to cancel the heating effect caused by carrier transition meanwhile strength the red-sideband transition to hold the cooling function [@Morigi00; @Lin13Sympathetic; @Lechner16]. EIT cooling only need three level, however there are four Zeeman states of [$^{138}\mathrm{Ba}^+~$]{}ion. Though with only doppler cooling and EIT cooling the ion is not perfectly cooled to the ground state without sideband cooling (average phonon number ${\ensuremath{\left\langle\bar{n}=0.1\right\rangle}}$), the carrier transition operated by stabilized 1762 nm laser has enough fidelity due to the small Lamb-Dicke parameter $\eta=0.07$.
Our projective measurement includes state discrimination and state re-preparation. We differentiate one state versus the other two states of a qutrit using the standard fluorescent-detection method. For the $\ket{3}$ state, average of 32 photons at 493 nm can be detected during 600 $\mu$s and no photons for the $\ket{1}$ or the $\ket{2}$ state. In experiment, perfect state detection fidelity is achieved for $\ket{3}$, while the error of $\ket{1}$ and $\ket{2}$ is 1.3%. Duration of the first projective measurement is set to 600 $\mu$s with discrimination $n_{\mathrm{ph}}=3$ while the second projective measurement is 300 $\mu$s and $n_{\mathrm{ph}}=1$. Fluorescence detection duration is longer than the coherence time between $\ket{1}$ and $\ket{2}$, which is around 200 $\mu$s. Therefore we add spin echo pulses during the fluorescence detection to keep the coherence until the second measurement is done. Re-preparation to $\ket{3}$ state, which is realized by optical pumping without 614 nm laser, keeps the coherence between $\ket{1}$ and $\ket{2}$ in $^{5}D_{5/2}$ manifold. Since the second projective measurement is the end of the experiment without further operations, we do not apply spin echo pulses and state re-preparation, which results in shorter duration.
Extractor and random test {#extractor-and-random-test .unnumbered}
-------------------------
A random number extractor is a hashing function transforming a non-perfect random number string $\{0,1\}^N$ to a nearly perfect one $\{0,1\}^m$. In our experiment, the length of the input string is $N_{exp}=1.29\times 10^8$ and $H_{min}(X|IE)=6.2\times 10^{-3}$ per bit. According to leftover hash lemma [@impagliazzo1989pseudo] $$m \leq NH_{min}(X|IE)-2\log{\frac{1}{\epsilon_h}},$$ we set the security parameter $\epsilon_h$ to be a typical value $\epsilon_h=2^{-100}$, and the length of the output string is $m=8.06 \times 10^5$. Here we apply a random $m \times N_{exp}$ Toeplitz matrix [@wegman1981new] as the hashing function. The input random seed $\{0,1\}^s$ ($s=m+N_{exp}-1$) is from [@nie2015generation].
We apply the random test [@Rukhin10] to the extracted data. The tests include ’Frequency’, ’Block Frequency (BFreq)’, two ’Cumulative Sums (CuSm)’ tests, ’Runs’, ’Longest-Run-of-Ones in a Block (LROB)’, ’Rank’, ’Fast Fourier Transform (FFT)’, ’Serial’. The $p$-values are distributed in the interval (0, 1), which show the probabilities that an ideal random number generator would produce less random sequence than the tested one. If $p$-value is taken 0, it means the tested data is fully non-random, while 1 means completely random. The threshold we set for accepting the data as random is 0.01. As shown in Fig. \[fig5:RandomTest\], the outputs strings ${a_i}^N$ and ${a_j}^N$ pass all tests. However, as expected, the combined outputs ${(a_i a_j)}^N$ do not pass all tests because since the measurement outputs of two observables are correlated thus are not independent random variables.
![The results for random tests [@Rukhin10] of the outputs of the first measurement $a_i$ and the second measurement $a_j$, and both measurement $a_i a_j$. Outputs of ${a_i}^N$ and ${a_j}^N$ pass the listed tests since all $p$-values exceed the threshold 0.01, while the outputs of ${(a_i a_j)}^N$ failed to pass the first test of ’Cumulative Sums (CuSm)’. []{data-label="fig5:RandomTest"}](fig5.pdf){width="0.9\columnwidth"}
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We thank Yaoyun Shi, Carl Miller, Kai-Min Chung, Cupjin Huang, and Xiao Yuan for helpful discussions. This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China under Grants No. 2016YFA0301900, No. 2016YFA0301901, No. 2017YFA0303900, and No. 2017YFA0304004, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China Grants No. 11374178, No. 11574002, No. 11674193, and No. 11875173.
Corresponding authors {#corresponding-authors .unnumbered}
---------------------
Correspondence to Xiongfeng Ma ([email protected]) and Kihwan Kim ([email protected]).
[10]{}
P. D. Coddington. Analysis of random number generators using monte carlo simulation. , page Paper 14, 1994.
N. Gisin, G. Ribordy, W. Tittel, and H. Zbinden. Quantum cryptography. , 74:145, 2002.
M. Fiorentino, C. Santori, S. M. Spillane, and R. G. Beausoleil. Secure self-calibrating quantum random-bit generator. , 75:032334, 2007.
Oded Goldreich. . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2007.
Xiongfeng Ma, Xiao Yuan, Zhu Cao, Bing Qi, and Zhen Zhang. Quantum random number generation. , 2:16021, 2016.
Miguel Herrero-Collantes and Juan Carlos Garcia-Escartin. Quantum random number generators. , 89:015004, Feb 2017.
Yang Liu, Xiao Yuan, Ming-Han Li, Weijun Zhang, Qi Zhao, Jiaqiang Zhong, Yuan Cao, Yu-Huai Li, Luo-Kan Chen, Hao Li, Tianyi Peng, Yu-Ao Chen, Cheng-Zhi Peng, Sheng-Cai Shi, Zhen Wang, Lixing You, Xiongfeng Ma, Jingyun Fan, Qiang Zhang, and Jian-Wei Pan. High-speed device-independent quantum random number generation without a detection loophole. , 120:010503, Jan 2018.
Roger Colbeck. Quantum and relativistic protocols for secure multi-party computation. , 2007.
S. Pironio, A. Acin, S. Massar, A. Boyer de la Giroday, D. N. Matsukevich, P. Maunz, S. Olmschenk, D. Hayes, L. Luo, T. A. Manning, and C. Monroe. Random numbers certified by bell’s theorem. , 464:1021, Apr. 2010.
Roger Colbeck and Adrian Kent. Private randomness expansion with untrusted devices. , 44(9):095305, 2011.
Umesh Vazirani and Thomas Vidick. Certifiable quantum dice. , 370:3432–3448, 2012.
Stefano Pironio and Serge Massar. Security of practical private randomness generation. , 87(1):012336, 2013.
Matthew Coudron, Thomas Vidick, and Henry Yuen. Robust randomness amplifiers: Upper and lower bounds. In [*Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques*]{}, pages 468–483. Springer, 2013.
Carl A. Miller and Yaoyun Shi. Universal security for randomness expansion from the spot-checking protocol. , 46(4):1304–1335, 2017.
Kai Min Chung, Yaoyun Shi, and Xiaodi Wu. Physical randomness extractors: Generating random numbers with minimal assumptions. , 2014.
Arnon-Friedman Rotem, Renner Renato, and Vidick Thomas. Simple and tight device-independent security proofs. , 2016.
Antonio Acin and Lluis Masanes. Certified randomness in quantum physics. , 540(7632):213–219, 2016.
John S Bell. On the einstein-podolsky-rosen paradox. , 1(3):195, 1964.
Bas Hensen, Hannes Bernien, Ana[ï]{}s E Dr[é]{}au, Andreas Reiserer, Norbert Kalb, Machiel S Blok, Just Ruitenberg, Raymond FL Vermeulen, Raymond N Schouten, Carlos Abell[á]{}n, et al. Loophole-free bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres. , 526(7575):682–686, 2015.
L. K. Shalm, E Meyer-Scott, B. G. Christensen, P Bierhorst, M. A. Wayne, M. J. Stevens, T Gerrits, S Glancy, D. R. Hamel, and M. S. Allman. Strong loophole-free test of local realism. , 115(25):250402, 2015.
Marissa Giustina, Marijn AM Versteegh, S[ö]{}ren Wengerowsky, Johannes Handsteiner, Armin Hochrainer, Kevin Phelan, Fabian Steinlechner, Johannes Kofler, Jan-[Å]{}ke Larsson, Carlos Abell[á]{}n, et al. Significant-loophole-free test of bell’s theorem with entangled photons. , 115(25):250401, 2015.
Peter Bierhorst, Emanuel Knill, Scott Glancy, Yanbao Zhang, Alan Mink, Stephen Jordan, Andrea Rommal, Yi-Kai Liu, Bradley Christensen, Sae Woo Nam, et al. Experimentally generated randomness certified by the impossibility of superluminal signals. , 556(7700):223, 2018.
Yang Liu, Qi Zhao, Ming-Han Li, Jian-Yu Guan, Yanbao Zhang, Bing Bai, Weijun Zhang, Wen-Zhao Liu, Cheng Wu, Xiao Yuan, et al. Device-independent quantum random-number generation. , 562(7728):548, 2018.
J. S. Bell. On the problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. , 38:447–452, 1966.
S. Kochen and E. P. Specker. The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. , 17:59–87, 1967.
Alexander A. Klyachko, M. Ali Can, Sinem Binicio ğlu, and Alexander S. Shumovsky. Simple test for hidden variables in spin-1 systems. , 101:020403, Jul 2008.
D. L. Deng, C. Zu, X. Y. Chang, P. Y. Hou, H. X. Yang, Y. X. Wang, and L. M. Duan. Random numbers certified vis kochen-specker theorem. , 2013.
Mark Um, Xiang Zhang, Junhua Zhang, Ye Wang, Shen Yangchao, D.-L. Deng, Lu-Ming Duan, and Kihwan Kim. Experimental certification of random numbers via quantum contextuality. , 3:1627, 2013.
Otfried Gühne, Matthias Kleinmann, Adan Cabello, Jan ke Larsson, Gerhard Kirchmair, Florian Zähringer, Rene Gerritsma, and Christian F. Roos. Compatibility and noncontextuality for sequential measurements. , 81:022121, 2010.
Jochen Szangolies, Matthias Kleinmann, and Otfried Gühne. Tests against noncontextual models with measurement disturbances. , 87:050101, 2013.
Tommaso Lunghi, Jonatan Bohr Brask, Charles Ci Wen Lim, Quentin Lavigne, Joseph Bowles, Anthony Martin, Hugo Zbinden, and Nicolas Brunner. Self-testing quantum random number generator. , 114(15):150501, 2015.
A. Cabello. Experimentally testable state-independent quantum contextuality. , 101:210401, 2008.
G. Kirchmair, F. Zähringer, R. Gerritsma, M. Kleinmann, O. Gühne, A. Cabello, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos. State-independent experimental test of quantum contextuality. , 460:494–497, 2009.
Xiang Zhang, Mark Um, Junhua Zhang, Shuoming An, Ye Wang, Dong ling Deng, Chao Shen, Lu-Ming Duan, and Kihwan Kim. State-independent experimental tests of quantum contextuality in a three dimensional system. , 110:070401, 2013.
Radek Lapkiewicz, Peizhe Li, Christoph Schaeff, Nathan K. Langford, Sven Ramelow, Marcin Wieśniak, and Anton Zeilinger. Experimental non-classicality of an indivisible quantum system. , 474:490–493, June 2011.
Ya Xiao, Zhen-Peng Xu, Qiang Li, Jin-Shi Xu, Kai Sun, Jin-Ming Cui, Zong-Quan Zhou, Hong-Yi Su, Ad[á]{}n Cabello, Jing-Ling Chen, et al. Experimental observation of quantum state-independent contextuality under no-signaling conditions. , 26(1):32–50, 2018.
Markus Jerger, Yarema Reshitnyk, Markus Oppliger, Anton Potočnik, Mintu Mondal, Andreas Wallraff, Kenneth Goodenough, Stephanie Wehner, Kristinn Juliusson, Nathan K. Langford, and Arkady Fedorov. Contextuality without nonlocality in a superconducting quantum system. , 7:12930, 2016.
M. R. Dietrich, N. Kurz, T. Noel, G. Shu, and B. B. Blinov. Hyperfine and optical barium ion qubits. , 81:052328, May 2010.
L. Slodi čka, G. Hétet, N. Röck, S. Gerber, P. Schindler, M. Kumph, M. Hennrich, and R. Blatt. Interferometric thermometry of a single sub-doppler-cooled atom. , 85:043401, Apr 2012.
F. M. Leupold, M. Malinowski, C. Zhang, V. Negnevitsky, A. Cabello, J. Alonso, and J. P. Home. Sustained state-independent quantum contextual correlations from a single ion. , 120:180401, May 2018.
Giovanna Morigi, Jürgen Eschner, and Christoph H. Keitel. Ground state laser cooling using electromagnetically induced transparency. , 85:4458, 2000.
Y. Lin, J. P. Gaebler, T. R. Tan, R. Bowler, J. D. Jost, D. Leibfried, and D. J. Wineland. Sympathetic electromagnetically-induced-transparency laser cooling of motional modes in an ion chain. , 110:153002, Apr 2013.
Regina Lechner, Christine Maier, Cornelius Hempel, Petar Jurcevic, Ben P. Lanyon, Thomas Monz, Michael Brownnutt, Rainer Blatt, and Christian F. Roos. Electromagnetically-induced-transparency ground-state cooling of long ion strings. , 93:053401, May 2016.
Frederic Dupuis, Omar Fawzi, and Renato Renner. Entropy accumulation. , 2016.
Rotem Arnon-Friedman, Fr[é]{}d[é]{}ric Dupuis, Omar Fawzi, Renato Renner, and Thomas Vidick. Practical device-independent quantum cryptography via entropy accumulation. , 9(1):459, 2018.
Anatoly Kulikov, Markus Jerger, Anton Poto[č]{}nik, Andreas Wallraff, and Arkady Fedorov. Realization of a quantum random generator certified with the kochen-specker theorem. , 119(24):240501, 2017.
M Fiorentino, C Santori, SM Spillane, RG Beausoleil, and WJ Munro. Secure self-calibrating quantum random-bit generator. , 75(3):032334, 2007.
Cupjin Huang and Yaoyun Shi. Private communications. 2017.
Impagliazzo Russell, Levin Leonid A, and Luby Michael. Pseudo-random generation from one-way functions. In [*Proceedings of the twenty-first annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing*]{}, pages 12–24. ACM, 1989.
Wegman Mark N and Carter J Lawrence. New hash functions and their use in authentication and set equality. , 22(3):265–279, 1981.
Nie You-Qi, Huang Leilei, Liu Yang, Payne Frank, Zhang Jun, and Pan Jian-Wei. The generation of 68 gbps quantum random number by measuring laser phase fluctuations. , 86(6):063105, 2015.
A. Rukhin, J. Soto, J. Nechvatal, M. Smid, E. Barker, S. Leigh, M. Levenson, M. Vangel, D. Banks, A. Heckert, J. Dray, and S. Vo. A statistical test suite for random and pseudorandom number generators for cryptographic applications. , 800-22:Rev. 1–a, 2010.
Modified noncontextual inequality
=================================
Among the KS inequalities, KCBS inequality, which uses five observables $A_i$ taking $\pm 1$, shows that with noncontexual hidden variables, the l.h.s of the inequality is no less than -3 [@klyachko2008simple], $$\begin{aligned}
{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_1\right\rangle}} \geq -3.
\end{aligned}$$ In practice, the observables ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_i A_j\right\rangle}}$ have to be implemented in a sequential measurement. We denote the observalble $A_i$ with superscript $m$, $A_i^m$ as the measurement of $A_i$ at the position $m$ in the sequence. For example, $A_i^1A_j^2$ denotes the sequence of measuring $A_i$ first, then $A_j$.
Noncontexual HV model requires that the outcomes of any observable $A_i$ does not depend on other compatible jointly measured observables with $A_i$. To be more specific, we take $A_1$ as an example. It is compatible with $A_2$ and $A_5$. We denote the obtained value as $v$, then have $v(A_1^1)=v(A_1^2|A_2^1 A_1^2)$ and $v(A_1^1)=v(A_1^2|A_5^1 A_1^2)$.
The assumption behind the above contextuality inequality is that the observables $A_i$ and $A_{i+1}$ (let $A_6 \equiv A_1$) are compatible. However, in an actual experiment using sequential measurements, the compatibility is not perfect which leads to the compatibility loophole.
In [@Gunhe10], this imperfection can be quantified by $$\begin{aligned}
p^{flip}[A_1A_2]=p[(A_2^1(+)|A_2^1)~and~(A_2^2(-)|A_1^1 A_2^2)]+p[(A_2^1(-)|A_2^1)~and~(A_2^2(+)|A_1^1 A_2^2)].
\end{aligned}$$ Here $+,-$ denote the obtained value and this probability can be understood as the $A_1$ flips the predetermined value of $A_2$. Then using the fact ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_2\right\rangle}}\le {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1^1 A_2^2\right\rangle}}+2p^{flip}[A_1A_2]$, the inequality can be modified as $$\begin{aligned}
&{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1^1 A_2^2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3^1 A_2^2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3^1 A_4^2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5^1 A_4^2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5^1 A_1^2\right\rangle}} \geq \\ &-3-2(p^{flip}[A_1A_2]+p^{flip}[A_3A_2]+p^{flip}[A_3A_4]+p^{flip}[A_5A_4]+p^{flip}[A_5A_1]).
\end{aligned}$$ Note that this inequality holds for any HV models. In the experiment, $p^{flip}$ is not achieveable and different approaches are proposed to estimated with different assumptions. Here we use $\epsilon_{ij}$ to quantify the difference between a same pair of obervables $A_i$ and $A_j$ in different time order, $A_i A_j$ and $A_j A_i$, which can be regarded as the bound of incompatibility of these sequential measurements, $$\begin{aligned}
\left|{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_j|A_j A_i\right\rangle}}-{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_j|A_i A_j\right\rangle}}\right| \le \epsilon_{ij}.
\label{eq:epsilon}
\end{aligned}$$ For experimentally accessible distributions, $$\begin{aligned}
\left|p(A_i=a| A_iA_{i+1})- p(A_i=a| A_{i+1}A_i)\right|\le \epsilon_{ij}/2,
\end{aligned}$$ where $a\in \{+,-\}$. We assume that the underlaying probability distributions have the same properties as all accessible distributions. Then $p^{flip}[A_1A_2]$ can be bounded by $\epsilon_{12}/2$ which is obtained in the experiments, $p^{flip}[A_1A_2]\le \epsilon_{12}/2$. However, the probability distributions of a general HV model may not belong to the set of experimentally accessible probability distributions. We assume that this difference is negligible and that the properties verified in accessible experiments hold also for some of HV models. Combining another modification in [@Szangolies13], we apply an extended version of KCBS inequality $$\begin{aligned}
{\ensuremath{\left\langle \chi_{KCBS}\right\rangle}} = {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_1\right\rangle}} - {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}} \geq \\-4-(\epsilon_{12}+\epsilon_{32}+\epsilon_{34}+\epsilon_{54}+\epsilon_{51}+\epsilon_{11}),\label{eq:finalKCBS}
\end{aligned}$$ here for simplicity, we omit the time order superscript and $\langle A_i A_j \rangle$ denotes the expectation value of the measurement results in the time order of $A_i A_j$ for the sequential measurements;
The above modifications of the inequality can be understood from the point of view of the game, which is played by two players $Alice$ and $Bob$ who receive random inputs for measurement settings without knowing the other’s, similar to the Bell-inequality nonlocal game [@Colbeck07; @Vazirani12; @Colbeck2011private]. The score of each trial is calculated according to the inputs and outputs. Each nonlocal game can be transformed into a contextuality game because no-communication local measurements is a stronger assumption and satisfy the compatible assumption. But on the contrary, not every contextuality game can be transformed into a nonlocal game. The inequality with only terms of $\epsilon_{ij}$ is not a Bell inequality because it can also be violated by a simple classical strategy, two players output always opposite results. Thus it is critical to have the term of $-{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}}$. In the following, it can be proved that the modified KCBS inequality even without $\epsilon_{ij}$ terms is a Bell inequality which cannot be violated by all classical local hidden means. Inspired by a modified KCBS inequality, we propose a new Bell inequality, we assume that the measurements in different time order can not communicate with each other. With local hidden variable, the l.h.s of the inequality is no less than -4. $$\begin{aligned}
{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_1\right\rangle}}- {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}}\geq -4.
\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
&{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_1\right\rangle}}- {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}}\\
=&{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_2\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3 A_4\right\rangle}} -{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_4\right\rangle}} +{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_1\right\rangle}}- {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}}\\
\ge & {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1(A_2-A_4)\right\rangle}}+ {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3(A_2+A_4)\right\rangle}}-2
\end{aligned}$$
The inequality holds because with local hidden variable, ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_4\right\rangle}} + {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_4\right\rangle}}+{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5 A_1\right\rangle}}-{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}}\ge -2$, which is a CHSH inequality. $A_i\in \{\pm 1\}$, either $A_2+A_4=0$ or $A_2-A_4=0$ will hold, thus ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1(A_2-A_4)\right\rangle}}+ {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3(A_2+A_4)\right\rangle}}\ge -2$. The l.h.s is no less than -4 with local hidden variable.
From the view of nonlocal game, it is critical to have the term $-{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1 A_1\right\rangle}}$ in Eq. .
Miller and Shi’s security proof and its feasibility in practical case
=====================================================================
Here in this section, we mainly focus on the work [@Carl17] and overview their security proof.
The min entropy is used for evaluating the randomness. Given the output $X$ , conditioned on input $A$ and adversary’ system $E$, the smooth min entropy $H_{min}^\delta(X|AE)$ is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
H_{min}^\delta(X|AE)= \max \limits_{\lVert \Gamma^{'}-\Gamma_{AEX}\rVert\le \delta} H_{min}(X|AE)_{\Gamma^{'}}
\end{aligned}$$
The direct estimation of min entropy is generally hard, thus their security proof applied Renyi entropy to give the lower bound of min entropy. For a quantum state $\rho$, its smooth min-entropies satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
H_{min}^\delta(\rho)= H_{1+\varepsilon} (\rho)-\frac{\log(1/\delta)}{\varepsilon}
\end{aligned}$$ where $H_{1+\varepsilon} (\rho)=-\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\log \mathrm{Tr}[\rho^{1+\varepsilon}]$. The randomness in its output is quantified by this $(1+\varepsilon)$-randomness. The main tool proposed in this proof is a $(1+\varepsilon)$-uncertain relation. After a projective measurement, the amount of randomness ($(1+\varepsilon)$-randomness) obtained from a measurement is related to the degree of disturbance caused by the measurement, shown in Proposition 4.4. For a given fixed input, the device has a classically predicable output and can achievable maximal score is $w$. Then if device obtains a score higher than this threshold $w$, then there must be unpredictable randomness in the output of this device. The rate curve is achieved in Corollary 6.11. This security proof is general for not only nonlocal game but also for contextuality. The uncertain relation is only relevant to the size of output alphabet and the measurement in contextuality can fit this proposition. For different schemes, the major differences is the classically predicable bound $w$. Note that this bound $w$ is the maximal score for devices which has classically predictable outputs on an input. It is different with the classical strategy bound by hidden variable $C_G$ in general. Though different in the definition, the value can be the same for some specific cases, for example, nonlocal game with binary input in each party and contextuality shown in Appendix D of [@Carl17]. However, in the practical case, the measurements in contextuality is not compatible. Though the uncertain relation in Proposition 4.4 still holds, the remained problem is to calculate $w$ and check whether it equals to the classical bound achieved by approximately contextuail hidden variable. We express this KCBS game as $$\begin{aligned}
G(A_1,A_2,A_3,A_4,A_5)=-\frac{1}{6}(A_1^1A_2^2+A_3^1A_2^2+A_3^1A_4^2+A_5^1A_4^2+A_5^1A_1^2-A_1^1A_1^2+\epsilon_{12}+\epsilon_{32}+\epsilon_{34}+\epsilon_{54}+\epsilon_{51}+\epsilon_{11}).
\end{aligned}$$
Let G be the game given above , $w=2/3$
With the approximately noncontextual hidden variable, the maximal score is $C_G=2/3$. This strategy is classically predictable, thus the maximal score $w$ with an input classically predictable should not be less than $C_G$, i.e. $w\ge C_G$. We suppose that there is a device $D$ (can be quantum) applied in KCBS game which outputs a score above 2/3, and which gives a deterministic output on input 1, $$\begin{aligned}
-4\ge {\ensuremath{\left\langle\chi_{KCBS}\right\rangle}},
\end{aligned}$$ where ${\ensuremath{\left\langle\chi_{KCBS}\right\rangle}}= {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1^1A_2^2\right\rangle}}+{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3^1A_2^2\right\rangle}}+{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3^1A_4^2\right\rangle}}+{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5^1A_4^2\right\rangle}}+{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5^1A_1^2\right\rangle}}-{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1^1A_1^2\right\rangle}}+\epsilon_{12}+\epsilon_{32}+\epsilon_{34}+\epsilon_{54}+\epsilon_{51}+\epsilon_{11}$ is the practical mean value with sequential measurements. Due to $ {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_i A_j\right\rangle}}\ge -1+| {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_i\right\rangle}}+ {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_j\right\rangle}}|$, ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_i A_j\right\rangle}}\le {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_i^1 A_j^2\right\rangle}}+2p^{flip}[A_iA_j]$ and $p^{flip}[A_iA_j]\le \epsilon_{ij}$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\ensuremath{\left\langle\chi_{KCBS}\right\rangle}}&\ge -6+ | {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1\right\rangle}}+ {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_2\right\rangle}}|+| {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3\right\rangle}}+ {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_2\right\rangle}}|+| {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3\right\rangle}}+ {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_4\right\rangle}}|+| {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5\right\rangle}}+ {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_4\right\rangle}}|+| {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5\right\rangle}}+ {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1\right\rangle}}|\\
&\ge -6+ | {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1\right\rangle}}+ {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_2\right\rangle}}|+| {\ensuremath{\left\langle-A_2\right\rangle}}-{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3\right\rangle}}|+| {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_3\right\rangle}}- {\ensuremath{\left\langle-A_4\right\rangle}}|+| {\ensuremath{\left\langle-A_4\right\rangle}}- {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5\right\rangle}}|+| {\ensuremath{\left\langleA_5\right\rangle}}- {\ensuremath{\left\langle-A_1\right\rangle}}|.
\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, with the triangle inequality, $$\begin{aligned}
-4\ge -6+|{\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1\right\rangle}}-{\ensuremath{\left\langle-A_1\right\rangle}}|.
\end{aligned}$$ The fixed input 1 is deterministic, thus ${\ensuremath{\left\langleA_1\right\rangle}}=\pm 1$, this is a contradiction. Thus $w\le C_G=2/3$ and $w=2/3$.
With this proposition, any score above $w$ can be used to generate randomness though the observables are approximately compatible.
Randomness generation rate
==========================
Here in this section, based on the work [@Carl17] we give an exact result for the randomness expansion rate. The min entropy is used for evaluating the randomness. Combining Theorem 4.1 and Proposition 6.8 in [@Carl17] yields $$\begin{aligned}\label{rate1}
&H_{min}^\delta(X|AE)\ge N [\pi(\chi)-O(q+\epsilon/q+\frac{\log(2/\delta^2)}{N\epsilon})]\\
\end{aligned}$$ where $O(\frac{\log(2/\delta^2)}{N\epsilon})$ and $O(q+\epsilon/q)$ come from Theorem 3.2 and Proposition 6.8, respectively. From Theorem 3.2, we can let $O(\frac{\log(2/\delta^2)}{N\epsilon})=\frac{\log(2/\delta^2)}{N\epsilon}$. $O(q+\epsilon/q)$ comes from Proposition 6.5, the combination of Proposition 6.3 and 6.4. In the proof of Proposition 6.4, from Eq.(6.25) to Eq.(6.26) is equivalent to $$\begin{aligned}\label{rate2}
\frac{\sum_x \langle\rho^x_{\bar{a}} \rangle_{1+\epsilon}}{\langle\rho \rangle_{1+\epsilon}}\ge 1-O(\epsilon)
\end{aligned}$$ where $x$ is the output with output alphabet size $r$, and $\bar{a}$ is the input. According to the Proposition B.2 and Proposition B.3 in Carl’s paper, we apply the induction, $\sum_x \langle\rho^x_{\bar{a}} \rangle_{1+\epsilon}\ge (1-\epsilon)^r \langle\sum_x \rho^x_{\bar{a}} \rangle_{1+\epsilon}$ and $\langle\sum_x \rho^x_{\bar{a}} \rangle_{1+\epsilon}\ge (1-\epsilon)^r \langle\rho \rangle_{1+\epsilon}$. Thus $\frac{\sum_x \langle\rho^x_{\bar{a}} \rangle_{1+\epsilon}}{\langle\rho \rangle_{1+\epsilon}}\ge (1-\epsilon)^{2r}
\ge 1-2r\epsilon$ and $O(\epsilon)=2r\epsilon$. Consequently, the term in Proposition 6.4 $O(q)=2rq$.
The estimation in Proposition 6.3 comes from the second order terms in Taylor expansion in Eq.(6.20) and Eq.(6.21). For a function $F(x)$, its Taylor expansion at $a$ is as follows, $$\begin{aligned}\label{rate3}
F(b)=F(a)+F^{'}(a)(b-a)+\frac{F^{''}(a)}{2}(b-a)^2+\frac{F^{'''}[a +\theta(b-a)]}{6}(b-a)^3,\theta\in (0,1)
\end{aligned}$$ where the fourth term is third order Taylor Lagrange remainder. Here $F(b)=2^{\epsilon s H(a,x)/q}$ and $a=0$. $$\begin{aligned}\label{rate4}
&2^{\epsilon s H(a,x)/q}-1=\epsilon s \left(\ln2\right) H(a,x)/q+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\epsilon s \left(\ln2\right) H(a,x)}{q}\right)^2+R_3 \\
&R_3=\frac{1}{6}\left(\frac{\epsilon s \left(\ln2\right) H(a,x)}{q}\right)^3 2^{\theta \epsilon s H(a,x)/q}, \theta\in (0,1)
\end{aligned}$$ where the term $R_3$ is the third order Taylor Lagrange remainder. Substitute this expression in Eq.(6.20), we have $$\begin{aligned}\label{rate5}
&\sum_{a,x} p(a)\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\epsilon s\left(\ln2\right) H(a,x)}{q}\right)^2+R_3\right] \langle\rho^x_{a} \rangle_{1+\epsilon} \\
&\le \left[\frac{1}{2} \left(\frac{\epsilon s\left(\ln2\right)}{q}\right)^2 +\frac{1}{6}\left(\frac{\epsilon s\left(\ln2\right)}{q}\right)^3 2^{\epsilon s/q}\right]\sum_{a,x} p(a)H(a,x) \langle\rho^x_{a} \rangle_{1+\epsilon} \\
&\le \frac{1}{2} \left(\frac{\epsilon s\left(\ln2\right)}{q}\right)^2 +\frac{1}{6}\left(\frac{\epsilon s\left(\ln2\right)}{q}\right)^3 2^{\epsilon s/q}
\end{aligned}$$ After applying the function $-\frac{1}{\epsilon}\log()$, we have a more precise result similar to Proposition 6.3. The difference is we replace the $O(\epsilon/q)$ by $ \frac{\epsilon}{q} \frac{\left(\ln2\right)s^2}{2} + (\frac{\epsilon}{q})^2 \frac{\left(\ln2\right)^2s^3}{6}2^{\epsilon s/q}$. In the Theorem 6.7, we let the parameter $s$ be $\pi^{'}(\chi)$ . In the Theorem 5.8, we know that $$\begin{aligned}\label{rate6}
&\pi(\chi)=2\frac{\log(e)(\chi-w)^2}{r-1}\\
&\pi^{'}(\chi)=4\frac{\log(e)(\chi-w)}{r-1}
\end{aligned}$$ Thus $$\begin{aligned}\label{rate7}
O(\epsilon/q)=\frac{\epsilon}{q} \frac{8\log(e)(\chi-w)^2}{(r-1)^2} + \left(\frac{\epsilon}{q}\right)^2 \frac{32 \log(e)(\chi-w)^3}{3(r-1)^3} 2^{\epsilon 4\frac{\log(e)(\chi-w)}{(r-1)q}}
\end{aligned}$$ **Result 1** $$\begin{aligned}\label{rate8}
&H_{min}^\delta(X|AE)\ge N [\pi(\chi)-\Delta]\\
&\pi(\chi)=2\frac{\log(e)(\chi-w)^2}{r-1}\\
&\Delta=\frac{\epsilon}{q} \frac{8\log(e)(\chi-w)^2}{(r-1)^2} + \left(\frac{\epsilon}{q}\right)^2 \frac{32 \log(e)(\chi-w)^3}{3(r-1)^3} 2^{\frac{\epsilon}{q} \frac{4\log(e)(\chi-w)}{r-1}}+\frac{\log(2/\delta^2)}{N\epsilon}+2rq
\end{aligned}$$ where $\chi\in[0,1]$ is the score obtained in experiments, $w$ is the classical bound for a certain game, $r$ is the number of total outputs, $q$ is the probability for test round, N is the total round number, $\delta$ is the failure probability, $\epsilon\in (0,1]$ is the . The randomness expansion, generation, and input rate per round are $$\begin{aligned}
R_{exp}&=R_{gen}-R_{In},\\
R_{gen}&=\pi(\chi)-\Delta,\\
R_{In}&=q\log11 +H(q).
\end{aligned}$$
If we focus on the randomness expansion instead of the generation randomness, we should consider the random seed $H(q)+q\log 11$ used for random inputs. Different target function have different optimal result, the figures in main text shows the effect of optimization parameter. Note that from the Result 1, the generated randomness is $O\left(N\right)$, and we take the probability $q\sim (\log^3 N)/N$, then the initial random seed required is $q\log11+H\left(q\right)$. And due to $\log N< N$, $q\log11+H\left(q\right)\sim O\left(q\right)+q \log \left(\left(\log^3N\right) /N\right)< O\left(\log^4 N\right)$. Thus compared with the generated randomness $O\left(N\right)$, exponential randomness expansion is achieved.
Improved rate curve
===================
The important uncertain relation is related to the output alphabet size $r$. A larger $r$ will lead to a bad performance. This disadvantage is removed by an improved uncertain relation. A tighter bound of Proposition 4.4 proposed by Ref. [@Huang17] is as follows.
For any finite dimensional Hilbert space $V$ , any positive semidefinite operator $\tau: V \rightarrow V$, and any projective measurement $\{P_0, P_1,\cdots, P_n\}$ on $V$ , the following holds. Let $\tau^{'}=\sum_i P_i\tau P_i$. Then
$$\|\tau^{'}\|^2_{1+\epsilon}\le \|\tau\|^2_{1+\epsilon}-\epsilon \|\tau-\tau^{'}\|^2_{1+\epsilon}$$
for all $\epsilon\in (0,1)$. Consequently, $$\|\tau^{'}\|_{1+\epsilon}\le \|\tau\|^2_{1+\epsilon}-\epsilon/2 \|\tau-\tau^{'}\|^2_{1+\epsilon}.$$
This result can be applied in Theorem 5.8 and obtain a new rate curve, $$\begin{aligned}\label{rate9}
\pi(\chi)=2\log(e)(\chi-w)^2~if~\chi \ge w.
\end{aligned}$$ Consequently, we have $\pi^{'}(\chi)=4log(e)(\chi-w) $, and let the parameter $s$ be $\pi^{'}(\chi)$ in $O(\epsilon/q)$ by $ \frac{\epsilon}{q} \frac{\left(\ln2\right)s^2}{2} + (\frac{\epsilon}{q})^2 \frac{\left(\ln2\right)^2s^3}{6}2^{\epsilon s/q}$. Then $$O(\epsilon/q)=\frac{\epsilon}{q} 8\log(e)(\chi-w)^2 + \left(\frac{\epsilon}{q}\right)^2 \frac{32 \log(e)(\chi-w)^3}{3}2^{\frac{\epsilon}{q} 4\log(e)(\chi-w)}.$$
**Result 2** $$\begin{aligned}\label{rate10}
&H_{min}^\delta(X|AE)\ge N [\pi(\chi)-\Delta]\\
&\pi(\chi)=2log(e)(\chi-w)^2\\
&\Delta=\frac{\epsilon}{q} 8log(e)(\chi-w)^2 + \left(\frac{\epsilon}{q}\right)^2 \frac{32 log(e)(\chi-w)^3}{3}2^{\epsilon 4\frac{log(e)(\chi-w)}{q}}+\frac{log(2/\delta^2)}{N\epsilon}+2rq
\end{aligned}$$
Improvement of random number generation speed
=============================================
Currently, each round costs 3700 $\mu$s, which is consisted of 1500 $\mu$s cooling process, two detections procedures 900 $\mu$s in total, 140 $\mu$s spin echo pulses for the first detection, two optical pumping pulses 60 $\mu$s in total, rotations 60 $\mu$s in total, some short gaps between sequences to make sure they do not affect each other, and around 1000 $\mu$s communication time. However, there is room for technical improvement as follows. By extending coherence time between qutrit, spin echo will not be required. Detection time could be reduce to around 100 $\mu$s by replacing a high numerical aperture (NA) lens from 0.2 to 0.6. By amplifying 1762 $\mu$m laser power 10 times, Rabi oscillations between $\ket{1}$ and $\ket{3}$, and between $\ket{2}$ and $\ket{3}$ can be at least 3 times faster, so as the rotation. Each optical pumping could be reduced to 1 $\mu$s by further optimization. Currently we apply 1500 $\mu$s cooling process each round, but it will be possible to apply only one cooling process per ten rounds after some improvements. With all the development above, we can achieve at least one order faster generation speed.
[1]{} Alexander A. Klyachko, M. Ali Can, Sinem Binicio ğlu, and Alexander S. Shumovsky. Simple test for hidden variables in spin-1 systems. , 101:020403, Jul 2008.
Otfried Gühne, Matthias Kleinmann, Adan Cabello, Jan ke Larsson, Gerhard Kirchmair, Florian Zähringer, Rene Gerritsma, and Christian F. Roos. Compatibility and noncontextuality for sequential measurements. , 81:022121, 2010.
Jochen Szangolies, Matthias Kleinmann, and Otfried Gühne. Tests against noncontextual models with measurement disturbances. , 87:050101, 2013.
Roger Colbeck. Quantum and relativistic protocols for secure multi-party computation. , 2007.
Umesh Vazirani and Thomas Vidick. Certifiable quantum dice. , 370:3432–3448, 2012.
Roger Colbeck and Adrian Kent. Private randomness expansion with untrusted devices. , 44(9):095305, 2011.
Carl A. Miller and Yaoyun Shi. Universal security for randomness expansion from the spot-checking protocol. , 46(4):1304–1335, 2017.
Cupjin Huang and Yaoyun Shi. Private communications. 2017.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- |
Michael Pan$^1$, Peter J. Gawthrop$^1$, Kenneth Tran$^2$, Joseph Cursons$^{3,4}$,\
Edmund J. Crampin$^{1,5,6,*}$
bibliography:
- 'bibliography.bib'
- 'bibliography2.bib'
date: |
$^1$Systems Biology Laboratory, School of Mathematics and Statistics, and Department of Biomedical Engineering, Melbourne School of Engineering, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia\
$^2$Auckland Bioengineering Institute, University of Auckland\
$^3$Bioinformatics Division, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia\
$^4$Department of Medical Biology, School of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia\
$^5$ARC Centre of Excellence in Convergent Bio-Nano Science and Technology, Melbourne School of Engineering, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia\
$^6$School of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia\
\*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
title: '**Bond graph modelling of the cardiac action potential: Implications for drift and non-unique steady states**'
---
**Abstract**\
Mathematical models of cardiac action potentials have become increasingly important in the study of heart disease and pharmacology, but concerns linger over their robustness during long periods of simulation, in particular due to issues such as model drift and non-unique steady states. Previous studies have linked these to violation of conservation laws, but only explored those issues with respect to charge conservation in specific models. Here, we propose a general and systematic method of identifying conservation laws hidden in models of cardiac electrophysiology by using bond graphs, and develop a bond graph model of the cardiac action potential to study long-term behaviour. Bond graphs provide an explicit energy-based framework for modelling physical systems, which makes them well-suited for examining conservation within electrophysiological models. We find that the charge conservation laws derived in previous studies are examples of the more general concept of a “conserved moiety”. Conserved moieties explain model drift and non-unique steady states, generalising the results from previous studies. The bond graph approach provides a rigorous method to check for drift and non-unique steady states in a wide range of cardiac action potential models, and can be extended to examine behaviours of other excitable systems.
Introduction
============
Models of the cardiac action potential have been developed to study cardiac diseases such as arrhythmia [@luo_dynamic_1994; @luo_dynamic_1994-1; @faber_action_2000], ischaemia [@terkildsen_balance_2007] and acidosis [@crampin_dynamic_2006]. Increasing model complexity has led to concerns over the occurrence of drift and non-unique steady states [@guan_discussion_1997; @fraser_quantitative_2007; @kneller_time-dependent_2002], particularly for extensions of the DiFrancesco and Noble [@difrancesco_model_1985] and Luo-Rudy [@luo_dynamic_1994; @faber_action_2000] models. While solutions to these issues have been proposed using conservation principles [@hund_ionic_2001; @livshitz_uniqueness_2009], they have not been universally applied for more recent models, many of which still use nonconservative stimulus currents that predispose them to drift [@aslanidi_mechanisms_2009; @carro_human_2011; @grandi_novel_2010]. More recently, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has initiated plans to use cardiac action potential models to assess potential drug side-effects on cardiac instability through the human *ether-à-go-go*-related gene (hERG) K^+^ channel. Thus, with an increasing emphasis on model robustness and accuracy, there is a renewed incentive to resolve the issues of drift and non-unique steady states [@sager_rechanneling_2014; @colatsky_comprehensive_2016].
Drift is the failure of a model to reach a consistent limit cycle when simulated over long periods, and is often caused by a nonconservative stimulus containing current with no charge carrier [@guan_discussion_1997; @hund_ionic_2001]. Hund *et al.* [@hund_ionic_2001] derived a charge conservation law, and found that nonconservative stimulus currents violate this conservation law, hence they proposed K^+^ ions as the current charge carrier to resolve this. A related issue in many models where drift has been resolved is that steady state limit cycles under constant pacing depend upon the initial conditions and are therefore non-unique [@fraser_quantitative_2007; @hund_ionic_2001; @kneller_time-dependent_2002]. Thus, depending on the initial conditions, the same model may lead to different conclusions. Like drift, authors have suggested that charge conservation can constrain initial conditions such that they lead to the same steady state [@hund_ionic_2001; @kneller_time-dependent_2002; @livshitz_uniqueness_2009].
While the studies by Hund *et al.* [@hund_ionic_2001] and Livshitz and Rudy [@livshitz_uniqueness_2009] suggest measures to eliminate drift and attain a unique steady state by using conservation laws, their analyses are limited in their scope and not a comprehensive solution for all models. Because existing studies [@hund_ionic_2001; @livshitz_uniqueness_2009] explore charge conservation only in specific models, and the conservation laws were derived from physical intuition rather than a principled mathematical approach, it is difficult to generalise their findings to other models. Furthermore, because these studies focus only on conservation of charge, they may miss other conservation laws relevant for long-term behaviour, such as those corresponding to ions, ion channels and buffers. A general approach is, therefore, desirable to deal with the issues of drift and steady states in a more systematic manner and for a broader range of models.
To facilitate a general approach, we propose the use of bond graphs which explicitly model energy transfer across physical systems to ensure compliance with conservation principles. Bond graphs were initially invented to model hydroelectric systems [@paynter_analysis_1961] and they have subsequently been extended to model chemical [@borutzky_advances_1995], biochemical [@oster_network_1973; @gawthrop_energy-based_2014] and electrochemical systems [@gawthrop_bond_2017-1]. As with all physical systems, biological processes must obey the fundamental principles of physics and thermodynamics [@omholt_human_2016], therefore bond graphs are well-suited for constraining models of biological systems to physically plausible solutions [@gawthrop_hierarchical_2015], and also for inferring the energetic cost of biological processes [@gawthrop_bond_2017-1; @gawthrop_bond_2017; @gawthrop_hierarchical_2015; @gawthrop_energy-based_2017]. Because the bond graph representation emphasises analogies between different physical domains, electrophysiological systems can be analysed as an analogous biochemical system with a stoichiometric matrix that describes the stoichiometry of each reaction within its columns [@beard_energy_2002; @beard_thermodynamic_2004; @gawthrop_energy-based_2014; @van_der_schaft_mathematical_2013]. In this context, the “conservation principle” described in earlier studies is an example of the more general principle of a conserved moiety in metabolic and bond graph analysis [@haraldsdottir_identification_2016; @gawthrop_hierarchical_2015].
In this study, we develop a bond graph model of the cardiac action potential and outline a general approach to study the effects of conserved moieties on drift and steady-state behaviour. Our bond graph model simulates physiological action potentials, and because bond graphs are energy-based this easily provides an estimate of the energetic cost (in Joules) of the cardiac action potential. Our analysis reveals conservation of charge as one of the conserved moieties of our model, along with other conserved moieties corresponding to ions, channels, transporters and buffers. We observed that our model solution was subject to drift when the stimulus current violated any conservation laws corresponding to the conserved moieties, and that changes to the initial conditions led to different steady states if the value of any conserved moiety was changed. To demonstrate that our approach is general, we analyse variants of our bond graph model where different ions have been fixed at a constant concentration (corresponding to “chemostats”). It should be noted that fixing an ion concentration can change the conserved moieties of a system, therefore influencing a model’s susceptibility to drift and non-unique steady states. The bond graph approach is a useful and general method to identify and interpret conservation principles, and it can link conserved moieties to individual steady states. We build upon existing reports [@hund_ionic_2001; @livshitz_uniqueness_2009] to propose solutions for drift and non-unique steady states which work for all cardiac action potential models that can be represented using bond graphs.
Methods {#sec:methods}
=======
Model components
----------------
To study the issues of drift and non-unique steady-states, we built a bond graph model of the cardiac action potential, with the minimal number of channels and pumps required to simulate a physiological action potential, and maintain ionic concentrations over long periods of simulation. Accordingly, our model was based on the Luo-Rudy 1994 dynamic model [@luo_dynamic_1994], although it is possible to use other models and/or model more sub-cellular processes. Model components are shown in A, together with the overall bond graph structure (B). Ion channels and Ca^2+^ buffering components were based upon their representations in Luo and Rudy [@luo_dynamic_1994]. The L-type Ca^+^ channel in the Luo-Rudy model is permeable to calcium, sodium and potassium, but we neglected its sodium conductance as this has a relatively small contribution to the action potential. The Na$^+$/K$^+$ ATPase model was based on the model by Terkildsen *et al.* [@terkildsen_balance_2007], with modifications suggested by Pan *et al.* [@pan_cardiac_2017] to allow conversion into a bond graph model. The equation for the Na^+^-Ca^2+^ exchanger (NCX) current in Luo and Rudy did not have an obvious correspondence to a bond graph structure, thus we modelled this component using a simple bond graph module that was fitted to experimental data [@kimura_identification_1987; @beuckelmann_sodium-calcium_1989]. Further detail on the modelling of each component is given in the Supporting Material.
![Action potential model. **(A)** Cell schematic; **(B)** Overall bond graph structure. The bond graph modules Na[\_]{}channel, NaK, K[\_]{}channels, LCC, NCX and Ca[\_]{}buffer contain more detailed aspects of the bond graph structure which are described further in the Supporting Material. Coloured bonds link bond graph modules to the appropriate chemical species. Definitions: $I_\mathrm{Na}$, sodium current; $I_\mathrm{K1}$, time-independent K^+^ current; $I_\mathrm{K}$, time-dependent K^+^ current; $I_\mathrm{Kp}$, plateau K^+^ current; $I_\mathrm{LCC}$, L-type Ca^2+^ current; NCX, Na^+^-Ca^2+^ exchanger; Na/K, Na$^+$/K$^+$ ATPase; TRPN, troponin; CMDN, calmodulin.[]{data-label="fig:cardiac_AP_model"}](Cardiac_AP_fig){width="0.9\linewidth"}
Bond graph modelling
--------------------
Here we briefly outline bond graph components as used in electrophysiological modelling. For a more comprehensive introduction, the texts by Gawthrop and Smith [@gawthrop_metamodelling:_1996] and Borutzky [@borutzky_bond_2010] provide detailed descriptions of bond graph theory, and Gawthrop and Bevan [@gawthrop_bond-graph_2007] provide a short tutorial for engineers. Theory for bond graph modelling of biochemical systems can be found in [@oster_network_1973; @gawthrop_energy-based_2014; @gawthrop_hierarchical_2015; @gawthrop_bond-graph_2017].
Bond graphs consist of components (representing physical objects and processes), bonds (representing the transfer of energy), and junctions (representing network structure). Each bond carries two variables: an effort $e$ and a flow $f$, such that their product determines the power of the bond (i.e. $p=ef$). Thus bond graphs explicitly account for energy transfer, and are thermodynamically consistent. Because effort and flow are generalised variables, they can represent quantities from a variety of physical systems, including mechanical ($e=\text{force}$ \[N\], $f=\text{velocity}$ \[m/s\]), electrical ($e=\text{voltage}$ \[V\], $f=\text{current}$ \[A\]) and hydraulic systems ($e=\text{pressure}$ \[Pa\], $f=\text{volumetric flow rate}$ \[$\si{m^3/s}$\]) [@borutzky_bond_2010].
The network structure of a bond graph is specified by 0 and 1 junctions. The 0 (or effort) junctions specify that efforts of all connected bonds are equal, and thus to ensure conservation of energy through this junction, the flows of the bonds must sum to zero. In the electrical and hydraulic domains, 0 junctions represent parallel connections, whereas they represent series connections in the mechanical domain. By a similar principle, 1 (or flow) junctions specify that the flows of all connected bonds are equal, ensuring that their efforts sum to zero. Thus, 1 junctions correspond to series connections in the electrical and hydraulic domains, and parallel connections in the mechanical domain.
[90]{}
![Conceptual representations of physical systems. **(A)** A bond graph for the illustrated simple electric circuit with two capacitors and a resistor in series. **(B)** A bond graph analogous to the electric circuit in (A) can also represent the chemical reaction $A \operatorname*{\rightleftharpoons}B$. **(C)** Bond graphs can also model interaction of components in both the chemical and physical domains, such as the transport of an ion across a membrane. **(D)** Transport of an ion across a membrane through an ion channel involves gating which modulates the rate of reaction. Thus the ion channel is analogous to a potentiometer.[]{data-label="fig:representations"}](analogies){width="\linewidth"}
To illustrate the use of a bond graph for electric circuit analysis, we consider the electric circuit where two capacitors are connected to a resistor in series (A). All components are linear, described by the equations: $$\begin{aligned}
V_A &= \frac{q_A}{C_A} \qquad \text{(capacitor)} \\
V_B &= \frac{q_B}{C_B} \qquad \text{(capacitor)} \\
I &= \frac{V_R}{R} \qquad \text{(resistor)}\end{aligned}$$ The 1 junction enforces Kirchhoff’s voltage law, such that: $$\begin{aligned}
V_R = V_A - V_B\end{aligned}$$ Combining these equations gives rise to a system of first-order differential equations: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dq_A}{dt} &= -I = \frac{V_B - V_A}{R} = \frac{q_B}{RC_B} - \frac{q_A}{RC_A} \\
\frac{dq_B}{dt} &= I = \frac{V_A - V_B}{R} = \frac{q_A}{RC_A} - \frac{q_B}{RC_B}\end{aligned}$$
More recently, bond graphs have been extended to model biochemical systems [@oster_network_1973; @gawthrop_energy-based_2014] where the chemical potential $\mu$ \[$\si{J/mol}$\] is the effort variable, and molar flow rate $v$ \[$\si{mol/s}$\] is the flow variable. Each chemical species is represented as a capacitor. However, in contrast to the electrical domain, the constitutive equation for the capacitor representing each species is nonlinear: $$\begin{aligned}
\mu = RT\ln(Kx)
\label{eq:cp}\end{aligned}$$ where $x$ \[mol\] is the molar amount of the species, $K$ \[$\si{mol^{-1}}$\] is a species thermodynamic constant, $R=8.314\ \si{J\cdot mol^{-1} \cdot K^{-1}}$ is the gas constant and $T$ is the absolute temperature of the system. Reactions are modelled as two-port resistors using the Marcelin-de Donder equation as the constitutive equation: $$\begin{aligned}
v = \kappa (e^{A^f/RT} - e^{A^r/RT})
\label{eq:MdD}\end{aligned}$$ where $\kappa$ \[$\si{mol/s}$\] is a reaction rate constant and $A^f$ \[$\si{J/mol}$\] and $A^r$ \[$\si{J/mol}$\] are the forward and reverse affinities, respectively. The two affinities represent the potential energies present in the reactants and products, and the reaction proceeds in the direction of decreasing potential. As illustrated by the example in B, the reaction $A \operatorname*{\rightleftharpoons}B$ has a physical analogy to A, with the same equivalent electric circuit. By using the constitutive equations in Eqs. \[eq:cp\] and \[eq:MdD\], the reaction velocity for the bond graph model follows mass-action kinetics: $$\begin{aligned}
v = \kappa_1 (e^{A^f/RT} - e^{A^r/RT})
= \kappa_1 (e^{\mu_a/RT} - e^{\mu_b/RT})
= \kappa_1 (K_a x_a - K_b x_b)
= k^+ x_a - k^- x_b\end{aligned}$$ where the forward and reverse rate constants are $k^+ = \kappa_1 K_a$ and $k^- = \kappa_1 K_b$. For more general chemical reaction networks, 1 junctions describe the presence of multiple reactants or products in a single reaction, whereas 0 junctions describe the involvement of a single species in multiple reactions [@gawthrop_energy-based_2014]. For some models, we may wish to keep the amount $x$ of a species constant and this is achieved by defining the species as a “chemostat” [@polettini_irreversible_2014]. Because chemostats can be interpreted as an external flow that balances internal flows, they require energy to be pumped into (or out of) the system [@gawthrop_hierarchical_2015].
The bond graph framework for biochemistry can be extended to electrochemical systems [@gawthrop_bond_2017-1] as demonstrated in C, which models the transport of a positively charged species $X$ across a membrane. It should be noted that chemical species are described with C components that have a logarithmic association, whereas the C component corresponding to the (electric) membrane potential has a linear constitutive relationship. A transformer (TF) is used to convert the membrane voltage into an equivalent chemical potential through Faraday’s constant ${F = 96485\ \si{C/mol}}$, such that: $$\begin{aligned}
\mu_P &= FV \\
I &= Fv\end{aligned}$$ Thus, the reaction velocity is: $$\begin{aligned}
v = \kappa_1 (e^{A^f/RT} - e^{A^r/RT})
= \kappa_1 (e^{(\mu_i + \mu_P)/RT} - e^{\mu_e/RT})
= \kappa_1 (K_i x_i e^{zFV/RT} - K_e x_e)\end{aligned}$$ By setting $v=0$ the familiar Nernst equation can be derived [@gawthrop_bond_2017-1]. However, where electrical circuit representations of the membrane Nernst potential use voltage sources, the bond graph approach necessarily accounts for possible changes in ionic concentrations, and thus this “voltage source” is split into two capacitors that provide an equivalent voltage difference.
We chose to represent ion channels such that conductance was modulated by membrane voltage, both directly and indirectly through gating processes. A bond graph representation for this relationship is given in D. As shown, this model has the same electrical representation as C however it uses a variable resistor. The bond graph representation contains the same states, with C:xi, C:xe, and C:mem (with a transformer) connected through 0 junctions. In this case however, the Re components that describe the constitutive relation have been changed, such that Re[\_]{}GHK:r1 is connected to an additional effort that modulates its velocity, and the gating affinity $A^g$ is added to both the forward and reverse affinities to describe changes in permeability due to gating. Further detail on modelling ion channels using bond graphs is given in the Supporting Material.
Modelling approach {#sec:modelling_approach}
------------------
Because bond graphs constrain the equations of a model to ensure thermodynamic consistency, many existing models do not have a direct bond graph representation [@gawthrop_hierarchical_2015]. For the example here, equations representing ion channels in the Luo-Rudy model could not be directly translated into a bond graph model due to difficulties with simultaneously modelling open-channel currents and channel gating, and due to thermodynamic inconsistencies in the time-dependent K^+^ and L-type Ca^2+^ channels (see Supporting Material). Therefore rather than attempting to reproduce the Luo-Rudy equations exactly, we built a bond graph structure as implied by the equations in Luo and Rudy model, and chose parameters of our bond graph model to fit aspects of the Luo-Rudy model as closely as possible, specifically the current-voltage (I-V) curves and gating parameters. For all other components conversion into a bond graph model was more straightforward, and we used the methods of Gawthrop *et al.* [@gawthrop_hierarchical_2015]. Further information on the bond graph model, and parameter identification is given in the Supporting Material.
Finding conserved moieties
--------------------------
Within a biochemical model, conserved moieties are chemical structures that are neither created, removed nor broken down. A common example in energy-dependent metabolic networks is the adenosine moiety found in AMP, ADP and ATP [@haraldsdottir_identification_2016; @gawthrop_hierarchical_2015]. Mass balance specifies that the total amount of each conserved moiety remains constant, and if information on the molecular structure of each species of a reaction network is available, these conservation laws can be derived by counting the number of moieties across all species [@haraldsdottir_identification_2016]. In practice, many models do not contain this structural information and this approach cannot be used, however the conservation laws still hold. Here we outline a method to find conserved moieties using stoichiometric information rather than chemical structures.
Models of cardiac electrophysiology can be represented by the differential equation $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{X} = NV\end{aligned}$$ where $X(t)$ is a vector of each state (such as species, or charge difference across a membrane), $N$ is the stoichiometric matrix [@beard_energy_2002; @beard_thermodynamic_2004; @gawthrop_energy-based_2014; @van_der_schaft_mathematical_2013], and $V$ is a vector of fluxes (such as reaction velocities, or ion channel currents) [@gawthrop_energy-based_2014; @liebermeister_modular_2010; @beard_energy_2002]. If the model contains chemostats, the entries of $X$, and rows of $N$ corresponding to the chemostats are deleted prior to performing the above analysis [@polettini_irreversible_2014]. Using results from biochemical systems [@gawthrop_energy-based_2014], if $g$ is a row vector in the left nullspace of $N$, i.e. $gN=0$, then $$\begin{aligned}
g\dot{X} = gNV = 0\end{aligned}$$ Therefore the linear combination $gX$ is constant for the duration of the simulation. We call the linear combination of species represented by $g$ a conserved moiety. The space of all conserved moieties can be described by a left nullspace matrix $G$, whereby linear combinations of the rows of $G$ give all possible conserved moieties $g$ [@palsson_systems_2006; @klipp_systems_2009]. Advantages of using the left nullspace are that it does not require information on chemical structures and it accounts for all conservation laws. The left nullspace matrix for any given system is generally not unique, however there are many well-established techniques for calculating nullspace matrices [@anton_elementary_2014], specialised approaches for finding meaningful conserved moieties in biochemical networks [@schuster_what_1995; @schuster_determining_1991; @haraldsdottir_identification_2016] as well as methods for finding conserved moieties from the junction structure of a bond graph [@gawthrop_bond-graph_2017]. In this study, we chose conserved moieties with clear physical interpretations [@schuster_determining_1991], but our conclusions hold regardless of our choice of the left nullspace matrix.
Stimulus currents
-----------------
The cardiac action potential model was stimulated using a constant current stimulus that contained enough charge to raise the membrane potential by 30 mV over 0.1 ms. As recommended by Kneller *et al.* [@kneller_time-dependent_2002], conservative stimulus currents contained K^+^ ions as the charge carrier.
![A simulation of the cardiac action potential using a bond graph model. **(A)** Membrane voltage, following stimulation with a conservative stimulus current (arrow); **(B)** Ion channel currents; **(C)** Transporter and gating currents; **(D)** Membrane voltage over three cycles, for comparison with (E) and (F); **(E)** Power consumption; **(F)** Energy dissipated, with the variable $E$ representing the energy consumption over the duration of the action potential. The model was run initially for 300 ms to allow the membrane potential and channel gates to stabilise. The intracellular ion concentrations were dynamic variables with initial concentrations $\mathrm{[Na_i^+]} = 10\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[K_i^+]} = 145\ \si{mM}$ and $\mathrm{[Ca_i^+]} = 0.12\ \si{\micro M}$. Constant concentrations were $\mathrm{[Na_e^+]} = 140\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[K_e^+]} = 5.4\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca_e^+]} = 1.8\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[MgATP] = 6.95\ \si{mM} }$, $\mathrm{[MgADP] = 0.035\ \si{mM} }$, $\mathrm{[P_i] = 0.3971\ \si{mM} }$ and $\mathrm{pH = 7.095 }$. $T = 310\ \si{K}$.[]{data-label="fig:single_AP"}](single_AP){width="0.9\linewidth"}
Results {#sec:results}
=======
Simulation of a single action potential
---------------------------------------
To verify that our bond graph model reproduced a typical action potential we simulated the model over a single beat (A-C). The membrane potential (A, with stimulation indicated by the arrow) resembled a typical cardiac action potential, with a distinct peak and plateau phase. The contributions of ion channel currents reproduce some common features of cardiac action potentials (B). Once the action potential is initiated by a stimulus current, the sodium current $I_\mathrm{Na}$ briefly activates to give rise to a voltage spike. Following this, the plateau phase occurs where depolarising L-type Ca^2+^ currents oppose the repolarising K^+^ currents $I_\mathrm{K}$ and $I_\mathrm{Kp}$. Towards the end of the action potential, $I_\mathrm{K1}$ activates to restore the resting potential [@noble_models_2001]. Our model also simulates the reversal of NCX current across the action potential, and the consistent outward current of the Na$^+$/K$^+$ ATPase to maintain ionic gradients (C). A consequence of modelling ion channels using bond graphs is that transitions between channel states are associated with a gating current resulting from charged residues moving in an electric field [@hodgkin_quantitative_1952]. Our model reveals that the total gating current across all channels $I_\mathrm{gate}$ has minimal contribution to total current (C).
E shows the power consumption of the membrane model over three cardiac cycles which was integrated to estimate the energetic cost of the cardiac action potential (F). Note that energy continues to be consumed even during the resting state due the presence of currents associated with ion transporters. Thus while energy is predominantly consumed during the action potential, there is a rising gradient between action potentials (F). By setting the energy consumption at the start of the second action potential to zero (F, dotted blue line), we calculated the energetic cost over the duration of the action potential to be $46.8\ \si{pJ}$. Since the capacitive area of membrane for this model is $1.534 \times 10^{-4}\ \si{cm^2}$, the energy consumed per unit membrane area is $305\ \si{nJ/cm^{2}}$. When compared to Gawthrop et al.’s [@gawthrop_bond_2017-1] estimate of $173\ \si{nJ/cm^{2}}$ for the energetic cost of an action potential in the giant axon of a squid, the cardiac action potential uses 76% more energy. The main reason for this difference is that in contrast to a neuron, the cardiac action potential contains a plateau phase with opposing currents. Despite the relatively slow rate of change in voltage, the Ca^2+^ and K^+^ currents remain relatively high, therefore a large amount of energy is dissipated during the plateau phase.
\[tab:cm\]
Chemostats influence the conserved moieties of cardiac action potential models
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the earliest models of the cardiac action potential did not include active transporters, they used constant intracellular concentrations to maintain ionic gradients across multiple cardiac cycles [@difrancesco_model_1985; @luo_model_1991]. Later models incorporated ion transporters, allowing them to represent physiological conditions with dynamic intracellular ion concentrations, and constant extracellular ion concentrations to model washout from the circulatory system [@luo_dynamic_1994; @faber_action_2000]. Under ischaemic conditions, washout is greatly inhibited, thus models of ischaemia use dynamic extracellular ion concentrations [@terkildsen_balance_2007]. We investigated the issue of drift in three classes of model: those with (A) dynamic ion concentrations on both sides of the membrane, representing models of myocytes under ischaemic conditions; (B) dynamic intracellular ion concentrations but constant extracellular ion concentrations, representing models of myocytes under physiological conditions; and (C) constant ion concentrations, representing models without transporters.
We used our bond graph model to represent these classes of models, selecting ions to fix at constant concentrations that resulted in three variants representative of the classes listed above. Conserved moieties of each variant were found using the left nullspace matrix of the stoichiometric matrix (), and these include for example, the total amount of K1 channel (moiety 1). Because the channel is neither synthesised nor degraded in our model, the total amount of channel, i.e. the sum of its closed ($\mathrm{C_{K1}}$) and open ($\mathrm{O_{K1}}$) states, remains constant over the course of a simulation.
Similarly, moiety 10 for variant (A) represents the total amount of K^+^ ions, which includes intracellular K^+^, extracellular K^+^ and the K^+^ ions bound to Na^+^/K^+^ ATPase. The total amount of K^+^ is constant when ion concentrations are dynamic. However, because fixing the concentration of K^+^ requires an additional external flux, the conservation law is broken in variants (B) and (C). Because the membrane capacitance is included in the stoichiometry of the system, our method automatically identifies a charge conservation law (moiety 13 for variant (A), and moiety 10 for variant (B)).
Finally, the overall amount of intracellular charge can be described as a sum of contributions from intracellular K^+^, Na^+^, Ca^2+^ (and its buffers) and Markov states from ion channels and transporters ($\Sigma$), similar to forms found in previous studies [@hund_ionic_2001; @varghese_conservation_1997]. It should be noted, however, that when all ion concentrations were held constant charge conservation was broken, as indicated by the absence of a conserved charge moiety in the bottom partition of . In general, holding the concentration of a species constant breaks conservation laws [@polettini_irreversible_2014] and the number of conserved moieties progressively decreases as more ions concentrations are modelled as chemostats. We discuss the consequences of this in later sections.
![Effect of stimulus type and variable ion concentrations on model drift. **(A)** Dynamic ion concentrations; **(B)** Dynamic intracellular ion concentrations; **(C)** Constant ion concentrations. Results are shown for stimuli that conserve overall charge (blue) and those that do not conserve charge (red). Charge values are given as differences from the initial value of $-$5882.2 fmol. $T = \text{310 K}$. Definitions: $V_\text{dia}$, diastolic membrane potential; APD, action potential duration at 90% repolarisation.[]{data-label="fig:stim_currents"}](stim_current_comparison){width="0.9\linewidth"}
Nonconservative stimulus currents cause drift in models with a charge conservation law
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An important feature of cardiac electrophysiology models is that they must be simulated for extended periods to examine physiologically relevant changes in behaviour, thus we tested how the type of stimulus current affected each variant of the cardiac action potential model by pacing at 1 Hz for 30 minutes. As illustrated (A,B), a nonconservative stimulus resulted in drift when the model had dynamic ion concentrations either for all compartments, or only within the intracellular compartment. The drift was particularly pronounced when all ion concentrations were dynamic (A), as extracellular concentrations changed faster than intracellular concentrations. In contrast, the model was resistant to drift from a nonconservative stimulus when all ion concentrations were held constant (C).
These results suggested that drift arose due to violations of the conserved charge moiety. Charge is a conserved moiety () in model variants where drift occured with a nonconservative stimulus. In this situation nonconservative stimulus currents cause drift because every stimulus causes a stepwise increase in the value of the conserved charge moiety (A,B bottom panels). However, because conservation laws are broken as more species are represented as chemostats [@polettini_irreversible_2014], charge is no longer a conserved moiety when all ion concentrations are constant (). Thus an observation which may not be obvious to intuition is that under these conditions charge is no longer constant between stimuli, and therefore free to return to its original value after each stimulus (C, bottom panel), allowing such models to achieve a steady-state limit cycle.
![Effect of initial conditions on steady-state behaviour. **(A)** Dynamic ion concentrations; **(B)** Dynamic intracellular ion concentrations; **(C)** Constant ion concentrations. The models were paced at 1Hz for 30 minutes using a conservative stimulus current. $\mathrm{[MgATP] = 6.95\ \si{mM} }$, $\mathrm{[MgADP] = 0.035\ \si{mM} }$, $\mathrm{[P_i] = 0.3971\ \si{mM} }$, $\mathrm{pH = 7.095 }$, $T = 310\ \si{K}$. Definitions: $V_\text{dia}$, diastolic membrane potential; APD, action potential duration at 90% repolarisation.[]{data-label="fig:ic_ss"}](ss_comparison){width="\linewidth"}
Initial conditions influence steady states through conserved moieties and chemostats
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, for different sets of conserved moieties (as determined by constrained/dynamic ionic concentrations) we tested how the steady-state behaviour of the cardiac action potential was altered under three different initial conditions (). The first set of initial conditions (IC1) are common values for comparison (Fig. 5; *at bottom*). IC2 is the same as IC1 but with 1mM intracellular K^+^ exchanged for 1mM of intracellular Na^+^, such that charge is conserved but K^+^ and Na^+^ are not conserved. Similarly, IC3 is IC1, but with some K^+^ extruded and an equal amount of Na^+^ moved into the cell such that charge, Na^+^, and K^+^ are all conserved. When all ion concentrations are dynamic IC1 and IC3 lead to the same steady state, but IC2 results in a different steady state (A). If only intracellular ion concentrations are dynamic, however, IC1 and IC2 result in identical steady states, but IC3 leads to a different steady state (B). Finally, keeping all ion concentrations constant leads to different steady states for all initial conditions (C).
These results demonstrate that the summed amount for each conserved moiety and/or chemostat value determines the steady-state behaviour of cardiac action potential models. To investigate this further, we calculated the values for conserved moieties and chemostats that resulted from each initial condition (; *differences from IC1 indicated in bold*). For two sets of initial conditions to achieve identical steady states, all conserved moieties and chemostats must have the same value. Thus under dynamic ion concentrations (A), IC3 results in the same steady state as IC1 because all conserved moieties have been preserved (), whereas, IC2 causes a different steady state because the $\mathrm{K^+}$ and $\mathrm{Na^+}$ conserved moieties take on different values. Similarly, when only intracellular ion concentrations are dynamic, IC2 preserves the value of all conserved moieties and chemostats, but IC3 changes the values of the chemostats corresponding to extracellular Na^+^ and K^+^ concentrations (), hence the different steady state. When all ion concentrations were held constant, changes in the chemostat values () were associated with different steady states for all three initial conditions (C).
[c c c c]{} &\
Moiety/Chemostat & IC1 & IC2 & IC3\
\
$\mathrm{K^+}$ & 5538.1 & **5500.1** & 5538.1\
$\mathrm{Na^+}$ & 1105.6 & **1143.6** & 1105.6\
Charge & $-$5882.2 & $-$5882.2 & $-$5882.2\
\
$\mathrm{K_e^+}$ (cs) & 27.98 & 27.98 & **38.35**\
$\mathrm{Na_e^+}$ (cs) & 5510 & 5510 & **715.12**\
Charge & $-$5882.2 & $-$5882.2 & $-$5882.2\
\
$\mathrm{K_e^+}$ (cs) & 27.98 & 27.98 & **38.35**\
$\mathrm{Na_e^+}$ (cs) & 725.48 & 725.48 & **715.12**\
$\mathrm{K_i^+}$ (cs) & 5510 & **5472** & **5500**\
$\mathrm{Na_i^+}$ (cs) & 380 & **418** & **390.36**\
\[tab:ic\_cm\]
Discussion
==========
In this study, we developed a bond graph model of the cardiac action potential with the aim of resolving the issues of drift and non-unique steady states. Analysis using conserved moieties enabled the discovery of all conservation laws within the model. In addition to the conservation of charge law from previous studies [@varghese_conservation_1997; @hund_ionic_2001; @endresen_theory_2000], we found conservation laws corresponding to ions, states of Markov models of channels and transporters, and buffers. Two key advantages of our approach over existing analyses are that it reveals all conservation laws in a comprehensive and systematic manner, and that it is general for all models of the cardiac action potential that can be represented as bond graphs. When simulated over long periods with a nonconservative stimulus our bond graph model displayed solution drift, but it became resistant to drift when ion concentrations were held constant, demonstrating that changes in the value of a conserved charge moiety drive model drift. We also found that two sets of initial conditions can lead to different steady states if the values of their corresponding conserved moieties and chemostats are different, suggesting a strong link between conserved moieties and the steady-state limit cycles of cardiac action potential models. To demonstrate that our approach is general, we tested how the selection of chemostats (i.e. fixed concentrations) influenced drift and steady-states by using variants of our model that were representative of existing models in the literature. Our approach shows that holding ion concentrations constant changes the conserved moieties of the model, which in turn has an effect on the susceptibility of a model to drift and non-unique steady states.
Drift
-----
When paced with a nonconservative stimulus, variants of the model with a charge conservation law underwent drift (A,B) consistent with previous studies [@hund_ionic_2001; @livshitz_uniqueness_2009]. By observing changes in the charge conserved moiety, the bond graph approach attributes drift to regular perturbations in charge that cannot be restored due to the presence of a conservation law. Whereas previous analyses relied solely on intuition to derive a conservation law corresponding to charge [@hund_ionic_2001; @livshitz_uniqueness_2009], we note that our approach automatically derives conservation laws and can detect other conservation laws that may be relevant for drift.
As demonstrated, the bond graph method requires construction of a stoichiometric matrix, providing a simple approach to check whether a stimulus current will cause drift. Let $v_s$ be a row matrix representing the stoichiometry of the stimulus current (with chemostats removed), $N^{cd}$ be the stoichiometric matrix after removing rows corresponding to chemostats, and $G$ be the left nullspace matrix of $N^{cd}$. To avoid altering any of the conserved moieties, the stimulus current must have zero contribution to them, i.e. $Gv_s = 0$ (or equivalently, $v_s$ needs to lie in the image of $N^{cd}$). Thus the model drifts if $Gv_s \neq 0$. While it is common practice to use K^+^ as the charge carrier for stimulus currents, it is likely that multiple species contribute to the current [@hund_ionic_2001; @kneller_time-dependent_2002]. Thus the automated approach suggested here is well-suited for checking whether more complex stimulus currents satisfy conservation of charge, as well as other conservation laws within the model. It should be noted however, that while a model satisfying $Gv_s = 0$ will not drift due to violating conservation laws, drift may still occur due to an imbalance of currents throughout the action potential, for instance, in the absence of Na$^+$/K$^+$ ATPase, the ionic gradients would gradually disappear in a model with dynamic ion concentrations.
Finally, we believe that this analysis provides a link between the issues of drift and steady states. Our models show that drift due to a nonconservative stimulus current can be attributed to changes in the value of the charge conserved moiety with every stimulus, and accordingly the steady state of the model changes. Model drift then occurs as the solution continually chases a moving steady state.
Effects of initial conditions on steady states
----------------------------------------------
We also found that initial conditions of cardiac action potential models change their steady states through the values of chemostats and conserved moieties (, ). Accordingly, the same perturbation to initial conditions can have different effects on the steady state depending on which species are held constant. Therefore in addition to ensuring that the concentration of ions are physiological, care should be taken to correctly initialise each state of buffers and Markov models of ion channels and ion transporters, as they may contain a significant fraction of total ion abundance. For example, Ca^2+^ buffers and SERCA can sequester a significant amount of Ca^2+^ and they should be initialised with the correct amount of bound Ca^2+^ when multi-state models are used [@higgins_buffering_2006]. We note that the difficulty of manually deriving conservation laws increases exponentially as models of cardiac electrophysiology become more complex, and we believe that our approach extends on existing analyses [@hund_ionic_2001; @livshitz_uniqueness_2009] to provide a general method for assessing steady-state behaviour by comparing the values of conserved moieties and chemostats that result from each initial condition.
In the field of biochemical network analysis, there is a well-established dependence of quiescent steady states on conserved moieties, and numerous mathematical techniques for assessing the uniqueness and stability of these steady states have been developed [@gross_algebraic_2016; @feliu_variable_2012]. However, the influence of conserved moieties on limit cycles in an oscillating system that is regularly stimulated has yet to be investigated. Our results hint at similarities between these two fields, and while we only tested the uniqueness of steady states using relatively small perturbations to the initial conditions, it is possible that a set of conserved moieties may have multiple steady states, and greater perturbations may lead to other limit cycles.
The “differential” and “algebraic” methods
------------------------------------------
The discovery of conservation principles in cardiac electrophysiology has lead to a debate over whether to use the differential or algebraic methods of simulation [@hund_ionic_2001; @fraser_quantitative_2007; @livshitz_uniqueness_2009; @varghese_conservation_1997; @endresen_theory_2000]. The differential method is the calculation of membrane voltage by integrating total current, and the algebraic method is the calculation of membrane voltage using an algebraic relationship derived from charge conservation. We chose the differential method over the algebraic method since it better supports model reuse and modularity - in particular it is easier to modify the equations to select different species as chemostats, and to combine equations when two models are coupled. We note, however, that the algebraic method may reduce computational complexity [@gawthrop_energy-based_2014; @hund_ionic_2001]. In bond graph modelling, the algebraic method can be implemented by using conserved moieties to turn the system of ordinary differential equations (ODEs) into an index-0 differential algebraic equation (DAE) (Eq. 3.48 of [@gawthrop_energy-based_2014]). This method generalises existing algebraic methods to reduce the system of differential equations by using all conserved moieties and not just the conserved charge moiety. While we did not use the algebraic approach, we emphasise that the choice of method relates to numerical approaches for model simulation rather than the underlying physics of the system [@hund_ionic_2001]. Therefore, the differential and algebraic methods are equivalent in conservative systems provided that the initial conditions and values of conserved moieties are consistent.
Integration into whole-cell models
----------------------------------
Our bond graph model of the cardiac action potential is the first step towards a fully-integrated whole-cell bond graph model of a cardiomyocyte that couples electrophysiology, signalling, metabolism and mechanics. Modelling studies for the energetic regulation of a cardiac cell exist across the literature [@tran_regulation_2015], but while some components used in these models are thermodynamically consistent [@tran_thermodynamic_2009; @smith_development_2004], existing whole-cell models are neither energy-based nor thermodynamically consistent throughout the entire model. Furthermore, because existing experimental and modelling studies use ATP consumption as a proxy for energy consumption, they can only estimate the energy consumption of major energy sinks: the Na$^+$/K$^+$ ATPase, SERCA, and crossbridge cycling [@schramm_energy_1994; @tran_regulation_2015]. A bond graph approach may thus provide more detailed insights into how a cardiac cell uses energy downstream of ATP hydrolysis processes, and help to identify energy-consuming processes. Because the bond graph approach is energy-based it allows us to directly assess energy consumption of the model (in Joules). We found that when normalised against membrane area the cardiac action potential consumes approximately 76% more energy than an action potential in the axon of a giant squid. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first account of energy consumed by electrochemical processes during the cardiac action potential.
Limitations
-----------
Because of physical restrictions imposed by the framework not all model components can be directly converted into a bond graph form. Accordingly, we were forced to model ion channels and transporters using Markov states to faithfully represent their underlying physics, however, this produced a model that had numerous states compared to the number of biological processes. While it is reassuring to find that our method of identifying conserved moieties remained robust despite this complexity, simulation of the model was computationally expensive. For the purpose of integrating this action potential model into a larger whole-cell model, it would be useful to have simple model components that reduce computational cost. While current methods for reducing biochemical models in the bond graph framework are not advanced enough to apply to the biological components in this study, we note that bond graphs provide a useful foundation for applying model simplification while ensuring that thermodynamic consistency is maintained [@gawthrop_energy-based_2014].
We also decided to limit the transport processes included in our model to those considered essential for producing a cardiac action potential, while maintaining a limit cycle using dynamic ion concentrations. Our bond graph model omitted many ionic currents due to their small amplitudes, however these channels may have greater contributions under conditions which vary from those tested here. Thus an obvious extension of this work would be the integration of other electrogenic processes within the cardiac membrane. It would be interesting to investigate whether coupling other models requires further tuning of parameters [@babtie_how_2017], and whether the presence of physical bond graph parameters changes this process.
When formulating the structure and parameters for a bond graph model of the cardiac action potential (or most other processes), it is possible to either fit against existing mathematical models or the underlying experimental measurements. For all processes in this study excluding the NCX, we developed our bond graph model to reproduce the behaviour of an existing model, in an attempt to re-use existing knowledge about these processes. This approach poses constraints on the bond graph structure used, especially for gating structure. Therefore it would be interesting to develop an approach that assesses bond graph structures as well as bond graph parameters, based on their fits to data [@babtie_how_2017]. Such an approach may provide a better fit to the data, and uncover insights into the physical mechanisms of ion channels.
Conclusion
==========
In this study we have developed a bond graph model of the cardiac action potential and used this to explore the issues of drift and non-unique steady states. We demonstrate that the analysis of conserved moieties generalises the concept of charge conservation used in earlier studies, and found that changes in conserved moieties can explain drift as well as changes in steady state behaviour. Importantly, holding ion concentrations constant can have significant consequences on both drift and steady states as they change the conserved moieties in the model. Our approach is sufficiently general that it can be applied to any cardiac action potential model which can be represented as a bond graph. We hope that the bond graph approach outlined here will prove useful for the development of future cardiac electrophysiology models, and eventually whole-cell models of the cardiomyocyte.
**Data access:** The code associated with this study is available from GitHub (<https://github.com/uomsystemsbiology/bond_graph_cardiac_AP>), and archived on Zenodo (<https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1172205>) [@pan_supporting_2018]. The code contains MATLAB (The MathWorks, Natick, MA) that generate the figures, CellML code containing parameters, initial conditions and equations of the model, and full details of the bond graph structure.
**Author contributions:** M.P., P.J.G., J.C. and E.J.C. developed the theory. M.P. performed the research. K.T. provided conceptual advice and helped interpret the results. All authors contributed to the text of the manuscript and gave final approval for publication.
**Competing interests:** We have no competing interests.
**Funding:** M.P. would like to acknowledge financial support provided by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship. P.J.G. would like to thank the Melbourne School of Engineering for its support via a Professorial Fellowship. K.T. is supported by the Heart Foundation of New Zealand (Research Fellowship 1692) and the Marsden Fund Council from Government funding, managed by Royal Society Te Apārangi (Marsden Fast-Start 17-UOA-300).
Ion channel modelling
=====================
Bond graph structure
--------------------
In this section, we discuss decisions made in developing models of ion channels. The bond graph structure for the Kp channel is shown in . The other channels have similar structures that follow from the discussion in this section.
------ ------
**** ****
------ ------
\
------ ------
**** ****
------ ------
Current-voltage relations {#sec:GHK}
-------------------------
While thermodynamic properties can be used to determine how membrane voltage and ionic concentrations relate at equilibrium, they do not specify behaviour away from equilibrium. For this purpose, the current-voltage (I-V) relationship defines how the membrane voltage relates to the current through a specific channel. Using bond graphs, it is difficult to incorporate the effects of gating using a linear I-V equation. Therefore we use the Goldman-Hodgkin-Katz (GHK) equation to model ion channels, as it enables relatively simple incorporation of ion channel gating as a physics-based biochemical module [@gawthrop_bond_2017-1]. The GHK equation defines a non-linear relationship between current $I$ and membrane voltage $V$: $$\begin{aligned}
I = P\frac{z^2F^2}{RT} V \left(
\frac{c_i - c_e e^{-zFV/RT}}{1 - e^{-zFV/RT}}
\right)
\label{eq:GHK}\end{aligned}$$ where $c_i$ and $c_e$ are the ion’s intracellular and extracellular concentrations respectively [@keener_mathematical_2009]. In a bond graph, the GHK equation for current can be described by a modulated Re component with a single modulator (see A, left panel), using the constitutive equation from Gawthrop *et al.* [@gawthrop_bond_2017-1]: $$\begin{aligned}
v = \begin{cases}
\kappa \frac{ \frac{A^{m}}{RT} }
{\exp\left(\frac{A^{m}}{RT} \right) - 1} \left[
\exp\left(
\frac{A^f}{RT}
\right)
-
\exp\left(
\frac{A^r}{RT}
\right)
\right], & A^m \neq 0 \\
\kappa \left[
\exp\left(
\frac{A^f}{RT}
\right)
-
\exp\left(
\frac{A^r}{RT}
\right)
\right], & A^m = 0
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ As discussed in Gawthrop *et al.* [@gawthrop_bond_2017-1], setting $$\begin{aligned}
A^f &= \mu_i + zFV \\
A^r &= \mu_e \\
A^m &= zFV\end{aligned}$$ gives rise to the GHK equation. Since many ion channels in the Luo-Rudy model are described using a linear I-V relationship, the use of GHK equations requires some approximations.
Modulation {#sec:modulation}
----------
While the I-V curves describe currents through open ion channels, a formulation for gating is required to describe the number of open ion channels at any given time. In the Hodgkin-Huxley framework, gating is modelled as differential equations that give the proportion of open gates at any given time. We incorporated the effects of gating through a gating affinity $A^g$, which is added to both the forward and reverse affinities of a reaction (A) to modulate its rate without changing the equilibrium [@gawthrop_bond_2017-1].
State models {#sec:channel_states}
------------
Ion channel models must account for gating and bond graphs require the use of physical components to achieve this. We model gating as transitions between channel states, known in the literature as Markov models [@rudy_computational_2006; @fink_markov_2009]. To illustrate, we use the example of a typical Na^+^ channel in which the current $I$ is described by the equation $$\begin{aligned}
I = m^3 h \bar{I}\end{aligned}$$ where $\bar{I}$ is the current when all channels are open. This can be described using the reaction scheme in , where $S_{31}$ represents the open channel. Because individual channel states are modelled, the current depends only on the amount of $S_{31}$ and not any of the other closed states. Thus, incorporation into the gating framework described above is intuitive; each state represents a structural conformation of the ion channel and the number of channels in each state are explicitly tracked, facilitating a simple approach to account for the energetics of gating under varying ion channel densities.
(S00) [$S_{00}$]{}; (S10) [$S_{10}$]{}; (S20) [$S_{20}$]{}; (S30) [$S_{30}$]{}; (S01) [$S_{01}$]{}; (S11) [$S_{11}$]{}; (S21) [$S_{21}$]{}; (S31) [$S_{31}$]{};
(S00) – node\[above\][$3\alpha_m$]{} (S10); (S00) – node\[below\] [$\beta_m$]{} (S10);
(S10) – node\[above\][$2\alpha_m$]{} (S20); (S10) – node\[below\] [$2\beta_m$]{} (S20);
(S20) – node\[above\][$\alpha_m$]{} (S30); (S20) – node\[below\] [$3\beta_m$]{} (S30);
(S01) – node\[above\][$3\alpha_m$]{} (S11); (S01) – node\[below\] [$\beta_m$]{} (S11);
(S11) – node\[above\][$2\alpha_m$]{} (S21); (S11) – node\[below\] [$2\beta_m$]{} (S21);
(S21) – node\[above\][$\alpha_m$]{} (S31); (S21) – node\[below\] [$3\beta_m$]{} (S31);
(S00) – node\[right\][$\alpha_h$]{} (S01); (S00) – node\[left\] [$\beta_h$]{} (S01);
(S10) – node\[right\][$\alpha_h$]{} (S11); (S10) – node\[left\] [$\beta_h$]{} (S11);
(S20) – node\[right\][$\alpha_h$]{} (S21); (S20) – node\[left\] [$\beta_h$]{} (S21);
(S30) – node\[right\] [$\alpha_h$]{} (S31); (S30) – node\[left\] [$\beta_h$]{} (S31);
Voltage dependence of state transitions {#sec:V_dependence}
---------------------------------------
The transition rates between open and closed states are voltage-dependent for ion channels. Hodgkin-Huxley models describe state transitions using ODEs of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dg}{dt} = \alpha(V) (1-g) - \beta(V) g\end{aligned}$$ where $g$ is a gating variable such as $m$, $h$ or $n$. In typical Hodgkin-Huxley models, these rates $\alpha(V)$ and $\beta(V)$ are modelled using mathematical expressions on the basis of empirical fits to data. However, due to the physics-based nature of bond graphs, the open and closed states of channels must be explicitly modelled as physical components with a restricted set of constitutive equations. Because common expressions for $\alpha(V)$ and $\beta(V)$ do not obey the laws of thermodynamics, bond graphs are unable to perfectly replicate existing mathematical expressions used for ion channel transition rates. We chose to model state transitions by using the module described in B, which results in an exponential voltage-dependence for both the forward and reverse reactions. In the case of the plateau K^+^ channel, the rate of transition from the closed state (C) to the open state (O) is: $$\begin{aligned}
v &= \alpha_0 \exp\left(\frac{z_f FV}{RT} \right) x_A - \beta_0 \exp\left(\frac{z_r FV}{RT} \right)x_B
\label{eq:gate_trans_rate}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha_0 = \kappa K_C \\
\beta_0 = \kappa K_O\end{aligned}$$ The parameters $\alpha_0$, $z_f$, $\beta_0$ and $z_r$ are fitted against mathematical equations in the original model, and then used to determine the bond graph parameters. It is acceptable to fit the kinetic parameters $\alpha_0$ and $\beta_0$ to reduce computation time since the equilibrium points of state transitions are not specified.
Channel-specific modelling issues {#sec:channel_specific_issues}
---------------------------------
### K^+^ regulation of K^+^ currents
For the K and K1 channels, Luo and Rudy [@luo_dynamic_1994] describe a dependence of the permeability on the square root of extracellular K^+^ concentration. This was incorporated by assigning an additional extracellular K^+^ stoichiometry of 0.5 to both sides of the ion transport reaction.
### Ca^2+^ inactivation of L-type Ca^2+^ current
Luo and Rudy [@luo_dynamic_1994] describe a mechanism whereby the L-type Ca^2+^ channel is inactivated by intracellular Ca^2+^, using the function: $$\begin{aligned}
f_\mathrm{Ca} = \frac{1}{1 + ([\mathrm{Ca_i^{2+}}]/K_{m,\text{Ca}})^2}\end{aligned}$$ This mechanism was incorporated into the bond graph framework through the reaction: $$\begin{aligned}
A + 2\mathrm{Ca_i} \rightleftharpoons I
\label{eq:Ca_inactivation}\end{aligned}$$ with a dissociation constant equal to $K_{m,\text{Ca}}^2$. It can be shown that at equilibrium: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{x_A}{x_A + x_I} = \frac{1}{1 + ([\mathrm{Ca_i^{2+}}]/K_{m,\text{Ca}})^2} = f_\mathrm{Ca}\end{aligned}$$ Therefore Ca^2+^ inactivation was incorporated by applying the reaction in Eq. \[eq:Ca\_inactivation\] to each of the states that result from independent $d$ and $f$ gating, using kinetic constants that were sufficiently high to approximate rapid equilibrium.
### f-gate of the L-type Ca^2+^ channel {#sec:f_gate_methods}
Luo and Rudy use the equations from Rasmusson *et al.* [@rasmusson_mathematical_1990] for their L-type Ca^2+^ channel $f$-gate, resulting in U-shaped functions for both the steady-state open probability $f_\text{ss}$ and time constant $\tau_f$. Using the exponential dependence in Eq. \[eq:gate\_trans\_rate\], $f_\text{ss}$ must have a monotonic and sigmoidal shape, and $\tau_f$ must either be bell-shaped or monotonic. As neither the $f_\text{ss}$ nor $\tau_f$ could be made U-shaped with the current formulation, we used an alternative mechanism to describe the $f$-gate. We observed that the $f$-gate activated at both negative and positive voltages, and that the minima of $f_\mathrm{ss}$, and $\tau_f$ of the Rasmusson equations appeared to coincide. We modelled the gate using the reaction network $O_1 \xrightleftharpoons[\alpha_1]{\beta_1} C \xrightleftharpoons[\beta_2]{\alpha_2} O_2 \xrightleftharpoons[k_3^+]{k_3^-} O_1$ with the final reaction assumed to be at quasi-equilibrium. The rationale behind using this three-state model was that: (a) there were two open states, one that activated at negative voltages and one that activated at positive voltages, and; (b) the inactivation parameters could be chosen such that the gate inactivated faster than it activated. The initial spike in membrane potential during an action potential implies that the open probability is unable to change, thus we used a reaction in rapid equilibrium to convert between the two open states; without this, the gate would need to pass the closed states to move between the open states.
Similar to the transition parameters in other gates an exponential dependence on voltage was assumed. Since the mechanism involves a biochemical cycle, a detailed balance constraint was used to determine parameters for the third reaction between the two open states: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{k_3^+(V) } {k_3^- (V)} = \frac{\beta_1 (V) \alpha_2 (V)}{\alpha_1 (V) \beta_2 (V)}\end{aligned}$$
The following information was used to parameterise the $f$-gate:
1. The difference between the steady-state open probabilities in the Luo-Rudy model ($f_\text{ss}$) and bond graph model ($f_\text{ss,BG}$) over the range $-90\ \si{mV} \le V \le 50\ \si{mV}$. The open probability of the bond graph formulation was calculated by rapid equilibrium arguments [@smith_development_2004]: $$\begin{aligned}
f_\text{ss,BG} = \frac{\alpha_1/\beta_1 + \alpha_2/\beta_2}{1 + \alpha_1/\beta_1 + \alpha_2/\beta_2}
\end{aligned}$$ Differences were taken between the natural logarithms of each of the open probabilities prior to calculating differences to better match lower values.
2. Simulations of the $f$-gate were run with the voltage held constant. The open probabilities over time were compared to solutions obtained from the Luo-Rudy formulation of the $f$-gate. The conditions for the simulations are summarised in . For computational efficiency, the third reaction was neglected for the bond graph simulations. All simulations involve either activation/inactiation processes involving one of the open states. It was assumed that very little of the of the other open state would become open.
\# Voltage (mV) Initial conditions Description
---- -------------- --------------------------- -----------------------------------------
1 $-80$ $o_1 = 0$, $c=1$, $o_2=0$ Activation at $-80\ \si{mV}$
2 $-40$ $o_1 = 1$, $c=0$, $o_2=0$ Inactivation at $-40\ \si{mV}$
3 $-40$ $o_1 = 0$, $c=1$, $o_2=0$ Activation at $-40\ \si{mV}$
4 0 $o_1 = 1$, $c=0$, $o_2=0$ Inactivation at $0\ \si{mV}$ from $O_1$
5 0 $o_1 = 0$, $c=0$, $o_2=1$ Inactivation at $0\ \si{mV}$ from $O_2$
6 40 $o_1 = 0$, $c=0$, $o_2=1$ Inactivation at $40\ \si{mV}$
: **Summary of conditions used to simulate f-gate for fitting parameters.** $o_1$, $c$ and $o_2$ represent the proportion of the three states representing the inactivation process.
\[tab:f\_gate\_sim\_fit\]
The transition rates for the $f$-gate are $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha_1 (V) &= \alpha_{0,1} \exp \left( \frac{z_{f,1}FV}{RT} \right) \\
\beta_1 (V) &= \beta_{0,1} \exp \left( \frac{z_{r,1}FV}{RT} \right) \\
\alpha_2 (V) &= \alpha_{0,2} \exp \left( \frac{z_{f,2}FV}{RT} \right) \\
\beta_2 (V) &= \beta_{0,2} \exp \left( \frac{z_{r,2}FV}{RT} \right) \\
k_3^+ (V) &= r_3 K_{3,0} \exp \left( \frac{z_{f,3}FV}{RT} \right) \\
k_3^- &= r_3\end{aligned}$$ with the constants $$\begin{aligned}
&\alpha_{0,1} = 0.8140\ \si{s^{-1}}, \qquad
z_{f,1} = -1.1669\\
&\beta_{0,1} = 36.1898\ \si{s^{-1}} , \qquad
z_{r,1} = 1.6709 \\
&\alpha_{0,2} = 1.6369\ \si{s^{-1}}, \qquad
z_{f,2} = 0.7312 \\
&\beta_{0,2} = 35.5248\ \si{s^{-1}} , \qquad
z_{r,2} = -0.5150 \\
&r_3 = 10000\ \si{s^{-1}} ,\qquad
K_{3,0} = 2.0485 \\
&z_{f,3} = z_{r,1}+z_{f,2}-z_{f,1}-z_{r,2} = 4.0839\end{aligned}$$
The three-state scheme in the bond graph framework produced a similar curve for $f_\mathrm{ss}$ to the $f$-gate of the Luo-Rudy model (A). Since there is no direct time constant for our three-state model we compared the dynamic behaviour of the $f$-gates by simulating to an action potential-like voltage waveform (B). During the depolarised phase of the action potential where the $f$-gate steadily inactivates, the bond graph model provides a very good fit to the Luo and Rudy model (C). In the resting phase the bond graph model reactivates faster, but still provides a reasonable fit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[****]{} [****]{} [****]{}
![**Fitting the $f$-gate of the L-type Ca^2+^ channel.** **(A)** The steady-state open probability of the $f$-gate, calculated by adding the proportion of the two open states. **(B)** The action potential waveform used to compare the behaviour of the Luo and Rudy (LRd) and bond graph (BG) formulations of the $f$-gate. This was obtained by simulating the Luo-Rudy model with the ion channels used in this study, and holding the ion concentrations constant. **(C)** The response of the $f$-gates to the voltage signal in B.[]{data-label="fig:f_gate"}](g_ss_f "fig:"){width="0.3\linewidth"} ![**Fitting the $f$-gate of the L-type Ca^2+^ channel.** **(A)** The steady-state open probability of the $f$-gate, calculated by adding the proportion of the two open states. **(B)** The action potential waveform used to compare the behaviour of the Luo and Rudy (LRd) and bond graph (BG) formulations of the $f$-gate. This was obtained by simulating the Luo-Rudy model with the ion channels used in this study, and holding the ion concentrations constant. **(C)** The response of the $f$-gates to the voltage signal in B.[]{data-label="fig:f_gate"}](AP_input "fig:"){width="0.3\linewidth"} ![**Fitting the $f$-gate of the L-type Ca^2+^ channel.** **(A)** The steady-state open probability of the $f$-gate, calculated by adding the proportion of the two open states. **(B)** The action potential waveform used to compare the behaviour of the Luo and Rudy (LRd) and bond graph (BG) formulations of the $f$-gate. This was obtained by simulating the Luo-Rudy model with the ion channels used in this study, and holding the ion concentrations constant. **(C)** The response of the $f$-gates to the voltage signal in B.[]{data-label="fig:f_gate"}](f_AP_input "fig:"){width="0.3\linewidth"}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitting ion channel parameters
==============================
I-V equations {#sec:IV_fit}
-------------
A variety of methods were used to fit permeability constants $P$ for the GHK equations used for the bond graph model. For some channels, $P$ could be determined algebraically (such as the Na^+^ and L-type Ca^2+^ channels). For others, optimisation was required to reduce error between the fitted I-V curve $I_\mathrm{GHK}(V)$ (see Eq. \[eq:GHK\]) and Luo-Rudy I-V curve $I_\mathrm{LR}(V)$. In these cases, fitting was weighted towards $-90\ \si{mV} \le V \le -30\ \si{mV}$ for $I_\mathrm{K1}$, $-20\ \si{mV} \le V < 30\ \si{mV}$ for $I_\mathrm{K}$, and $0\ \si{mV} \le V \le 60\ \si{mV}$ for $I_\mathrm{Kp}$. These regions were chosen based on when those channels activated. Where applicable, the optimisation problem was carried out by using particle swarm optimisation followed by a local nonlinear optimiser. The standard concentrations in Luo and Rudy [@luo_dynamic_1994] ($\mathrm{[Na_i^+]} = 10\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Na_e^+]} = 140\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[K_i^+]} = 145\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[K_e^+]} = 5.4\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca_i^+]} = 0.12\ \si{\micro M}$, $\mathrm{[Ca_e^+]} = 1.8\ \si{mM}$) were used to match I-V curves. The permeabilities from fitting I-V curves are summarised in .
Permeability Value (pL/s)
------------------ --------------
$P_\mathrm{Na}$ 9.0602
$P_\mathrm{K1}$ 1.1200
$P_\mathrm{K}$ 0.2299
$P_\mathrm{Kp}$ 0.0136
$P_\mathrm{CaL}$ 28.2471
$P_\mathrm{KL}$ 0.0222
: **Permeabilities of the GHK equations used for the bond graph model.**
\[tab:GHK\_permeabilities\]
### Sodium current
The permeability was chosen so match the linear equation at the negative of the Nernst potential [@gawthrop_bond_2017-1]: $$\begin{aligned}
P_\mathrm{Na} = \frac{2 \bar{G}_\mathrm{Na} (1-\exp \left[ FE_\mathrm{Na}/(RT) \right] )}{\mathrm{[Na_i^+]} -\mathrm{[Na_e^+]}\exp \left[ FE_\mathrm{Na}/(RT) \right] } \frac{RT}{F^2}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
E_\mathrm{Na} &= \frac{RT}{F} \ln \left(\frac{\mathrm{[Na_e^+]}}{\mathrm{[Na_i^+]}} \right) \\
\bar{G}_\mathrm{Na} &= 2.45\ \si{\micro A / mV}\end{aligned}$$
### Time-independent K^+^ current
$$\begin{aligned}
P_\mathrm{K1} &= \operatorname*{arg\,min}_P \left\{
\sum_{V=-90}^{-30} \left[
I_\mathrm{K1,LR}(V) - I_\mathrm{K1,GHK}(V,P)
\right]^2
\right\} \\
I_\mathrm{K1,LR}(V) &= \bar{G}_\mathrm{K1} (V - E_\mathrm{K}) \\
\bar{G}_\mathrm{K1} &= 1.1505 \times 10^{-4}\ \si{\micro A / mV} \\
E_\mathrm{K} &= \frac{RT}{F} \ln \left(
\frac{\mathrm{[K_e^+]}}
{\mathrm{[K_i^+]}}
\right) \\\end{aligned}$$
### Time-dependent K^+^ current
$$\begin{aligned}
P_\mathrm{K} &= \operatorname*{arg\,min}_P \left\{
\sum_{V=-20}^{29} \left[
I_\mathrm{K,LR}(V) - I_\mathrm{K,GHK}(V,P)
\right]^2
\right\} \\
I_\mathrm{K,LR}(V) &= \bar{G}_\mathrm{K} (V - E_\mathrm{K,LR}) \\
\bar{G}_\mathrm{K} &= 4.3259 \times 10^{-5}\ \si{\micro A / mV} \\
E_\mathrm{K,LR} &= \frac{RT}{F} \ln \left(
\frac{\mathrm{[K_e^+]} + P_\mathrm{Na,K} \mathrm{[Na_e^+]}}
{\mathrm{[K_i^+]} + P_\mathrm{Na,K} \mathrm{[Na_i^+]}}
\right) \\
P_\mathrm{Na,K} &= 0.01833\end{aligned}$$
### Plateau K^+^ current
$$\begin{aligned}
P_\mathrm{Kp} &= \operatorname*{arg\,min}_P \left\{
\sum_{V=0}^{60} \left[
I_\mathrm{Kp,LR}(V) - I_\mathrm{Kp,GHK}(V,P)
\right]^2
\right\} \\
I_\mathrm{Kp,LR}(V) &= \bar{G}_\mathrm{Kp} (V - E_\mathrm{K}) \\
\bar{G}_\mathrm{Kp} &= 2.8072 \times 10^{-6}\ \si{\micro A / mV} \\\end{aligned}$$
$E_\mathrm{K}$ same as for the time-independent K^+^ current.
### L-type Ca^2+^ channel
For the L-type Ca^2+^ channel, Luo and Rudy [@luo_dynamic_1994] use the I-V equation $$\begin{aligned}
I_\mathrm{Ca} = P_\mathrm{Ca} \frac{z^2 F^2 V}{RT} \frac{\gamma_{\text{Cai}}[\mathrm{Ca_i^{2+}}] \exp (zFV/RT) - \gamma_{\text{Cae}}[\mathrm{Ca_e^{2+}}] }{\exp (zFV/RT) - 1}\end{aligned}$$ which resembles the GHK equation, but allows thermodynamic laws to be broken through the use of different partitioning factors $\gamma_{si}$ and $\gamma_{so}$. In the case of the Ca^2+^ component of the current, this was resolved by setting both factors to the value of $\gamma_\mathrm{Cao}$, with little effect on the I-V curve. Thus the permeabilities of the GHK equations are calculated as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
P_\mathrm{CaL} &= P_\mathrm{CaL,LR} \gamma_\mathrm{Cae} \\
P_\mathrm{KL} &= P_\mathrm{KL,LR} \gamma_\mathrm{Ke} = P_\mathrm{KL,LR} \gamma_\mathrm{Ki} \end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
P_\mathrm{CaL,LR} &= 8.2836 \times 10^{-8}\ \si{cm^3 /s}\\
P_\mathrm{KL,LR} &= 2.9606 \times 10^{-11}\ \si{cm^3 /s}\\
\gamma_\mathrm{Cae} &= 0.341\\
\gamma_\mathrm{Ke} &= \gamma_\mathrm{Ki} = 0.75\end{aligned}$$
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
**** ****
![**Comparison of I-V curves between the Luo-Rudy (LRd) and bond graph (BG) models.** **(A)** $I_\mathrm{Na}$; **(B)** $I_\mathrm{K1}$; **(C)** $I_\mathrm{K}$; **(D)** $I_\mathrm{Kp}$; **(E)** $I_\mathrm{Ca,L}$; **(F)** $I_\mathrm{K,L}$.[]{data-label="fig:IV_fitting"}](Na_IV_curve "fig:"){width="0.4\linewidth"} ![**Comparison of I-V curves between the Luo-Rudy (LRd) and bond graph (BG) models.** **(A)** $I_\mathrm{Na}$; **(B)** $I_\mathrm{K1}$; **(C)** $I_\mathrm{K}$; **(D)** $I_\mathrm{Kp}$; **(E)** $I_\mathrm{Ca,L}$; **(F)** $I_\mathrm{K,L}$.[]{data-label="fig:IV_fitting"}](K1_IV_curve "fig:"){width="0.4\linewidth"}
**** ****
![**Comparison of I-V curves between the Luo-Rudy (LRd) and bond graph (BG) models.** **(A)** $I_\mathrm{Na}$; **(B)** $I_\mathrm{K1}$; **(C)** $I_\mathrm{K}$; **(D)** $I_\mathrm{Kp}$; **(E)** $I_\mathrm{Ca,L}$; **(F)** $I_\mathrm{K,L}$.[]{data-label="fig:IV_fitting"}](K_IV_curve "fig:"){width="0.4\linewidth"} ![**Comparison of I-V curves between the Luo-Rudy (LRd) and bond graph (BG) models.** **(A)** $I_\mathrm{Na}$; **(B)** $I_\mathrm{K1}$; **(C)** $I_\mathrm{K}$; **(D)** $I_\mathrm{Kp}$; **(E)** $I_\mathrm{Ca,L}$; **(F)** $I_\mathrm{K,L}$.[]{data-label="fig:IV_fitting"}](Kp_IV_curve "fig:"){width="0.4\linewidth"}
**** ****
![**Comparison of I-V curves between the Luo-Rudy (LRd) and bond graph (BG) models.** **(A)** $I_\mathrm{Na}$; **(B)** $I_\mathrm{K1}$; **(C)** $I_\mathrm{K}$; **(D)** $I_\mathrm{Kp}$; **(E)** $I_\mathrm{Ca,L}$; **(F)** $I_\mathrm{K,L}$.[]{data-label="fig:IV_fitting"}](LCC_Ca_IV_curve "fig:"){width="0.4\linewidth"} ![**Comparison of I-V curves between the Luo-Rudy (LRd) and bond graph (BG) models.** **(A)** $I_\mathrm{Na}$; **(B)** $I_\mathrm{K1}$; **(C)** $I_\mathrm{K}$; **(D)** $I_\mathrm{Kp}$; **(E)** $I_\mathrm{Ca,L}$; **(F)** $I_\mathrm{K,L}$.[]{data-label="fig:IV_fitting"}](LCC_K_IV_curve "fig:"){width="0.4\linewidth"}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
### Model comparison
A comparison of the resulting I-V curves is given in . The Na^+^ channel I-V curves appeared to match reasonably well (A), with some discrepancies at positive membrane potentials. For K^+^ channels (B–D), we attempted to optimise the fit across voltages that correspond to their physiological function. Accordingly, for $I_\mathrm{K1}$ ($-90\ \si{mV}\le V < -30\ \si{mV}$), $I_\mathrm{K}$ ($-20\ \si{mV}\le V \le 30\ \si{mV}$) and $I_\mathrm{Kp}$ ($V>0\ \si{mV}$) the I-V curves matched reasonably well in these regions. Discrepancies occurred outside these ranges of voltages, but appeared to only cause minor differences to the currents. In their implementation of $I_\mathrm{K}$, Luo and Rudy [@luo_dynamic_1994] use a thermodynamically inconsistent I-V equation where the current is nonzero at the Nernst potential for K^+^. Despite this, bond graph parameters could still be chosen to give a reasonable fit to this I-V equation (C). Because the Luo-Rudy model based their L-type Ca^2+^ I-V curves on the GHK equation, there was a far closer match between the bond graph and Luo-Rudy models for these currents, (E,F) and the K^+^ curve was matched exactly (F).
Gating transition parameters {#sec:gating_fit}
----------------------------
The parameters derived for gate transition are summarised in , with further detail described below.
Gate $\alpha_0$ ($\si{s^{-1}}$) $z_f$ $\beta_0$ ($\si{s^{-1}}$) $z_r$
------ ---------------------------- ----------- --------------------------- -----------
$m$ 12516.4361 0.4954 79.9996 $-$2.4284
$h$ 0.00033539 $-$4.1892 799.9028 1.2995
$j$ 0.00013079 $-$4.0381 422.7582 1.4281
K1 1127.3395 0.0336 13544806.3586 3.1153
X 2.2317 0.5192 0.5750 $-$0.7317
Xi 995.8931 0 172.6026 0.8322
Kp 999.8464 0 3497.4018 $-$4.4669
$d$ 486.7619 2.1404 98.0239 $-$2.1404
$f$
: **Gate transition parameters.**
\[tab:gate\_trans\_params\]
### m, h, j, K1 and X-gates
A vector quantity $\mathbf{p} = (\alpha_0,z_f,\beta_0,z_r) $ was optimised based on the quality of fits to the transition parameters, steady-state open probability and time constant in the range $-120\ \si{mV} \le V \le 60\ \si{mV}$: $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{p}_g = \operatorname*{arg\,min}\left\{
\sum_{V=-120}^{60} a(V) \left(
a_\alpha\left[
\alpha_{g,\text{LR}}(V) - \alpha_g (V,\mathbf{p})
\right]^2 +
a_\beta\left[
\beta_{g,\text{LR}}(V) - \beta_g (V,\mathbf{p})
\right]^2
\right.
\right. \nonumber \\
\left. \vphantom{\sum_{V=-120}^{60} } \left.
+ a_\text{gss} \left[
g_{ss,\text{LR}}(V) - g_\text{ss} (V,\mathbf{p})
\right]^2 +
a_\tau\left[
\tau_{g,\text{LR}}(V) - \tau_g (V,\mathbf{p})
\right]^2
\right) \right\}\end{aligned}$$ where $g$ is replaced with $m$, $h$, $j$, K1 or $X$ depending on the gate. $a(V) = 1$ and $a_\alpha=a_\beta=a_\text{gss}=a_\tau = 1$ for the $m$, $h$ and $j$ gates. For the K1 gate, $a(V) = 1$, $a_\alpha=a_\beta=0$, $a_\tau=1$ and $a_\text{gss} = 1000$. For the X gate, $$\begin{aligned}
a_\text{gss} = 100, \qquad a(V) = \begin{cases}
1, & V < 0\ \si{mV} \\
25, & V \ge 0\ \si{mV} \\
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ The parameters $\alpha_g$ and $\beta_g$ have unit $\si{ms^{-1}}$ and $\tau_g$ has unit ms. Optimisation was carried out using particle swarm optimisation followed by a local optimiser.
### Xi-gate
To give a perfect fit for $\mathrm{Xi_{ss}}$, $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha_0 &= K_\mathrm{Xi} \\
\beta_0 &= K_\mathrm{Xi} e^{56.26/32.1} \\
z_f &= 0 \\
z_r &= \frac{RT}{F} \frac{1000\si{mV/V}}{32.1\si{mV}} = 0.8322\end{aligned}$$ To achieve a time constant of less than 1ms in the range $-120\ \si{mV}\le V \le 60\ \si{mV}$, we chose $$\begin{aligned}
K_\mathrm{Xi} = 0.9959\end{aligned}$$
### Kp-gate
To give a perfect fit for $\mathrm{Kp_{ss}}$, $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha_0 &= K_\mathrm{Kp} \\
\beta_0 &= K_\mathrm{Kp}e^{7.488/5.98} \\
z_f &= 0 \\
z_r &= \frac{RT}{F} \frac{1000\si{mV/V}}{5.98\si{mV}} = -4.4669\end{aligned}$$ To achieve a time constant of less than 1ms in the range $-120\ \si{mV}\le V \le 60\ \si{mV}$, we chose $$\begin{aligned}
K_\mathrm{Kp} = 0.9998\end{aligned}$$
### d-gate
To give a perfect fit for $d_\mathrm{{ss}}$, $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha_0 &= K_d e^{10/12.48} \\
\beta_0 &= K_d e^{-10/12.48} \\
z_f &= \frac{RT}{F} \frac{1000\si{mV/V}}{12.48\si{mV}} = 2.1404 \\
z_r &= -\frac{RT}{F} \frac{1000\si{mV/V}}{12.48\si{mV}} = -2.1404\end{aligned}$$ $K_d$ was chosen to match the peak time constant because that is where changes would be most likely to make a difference given that the time constant is small: $$\begin{aligned}
K_d = 0.2184\end{aligned}$$
-- --
-- --
### Model comparison
To assess the quality of fit we compare steady-state open probabilities $g_\mathrm{ss} = \alpha(V)/(\alpha(V)+\beta(V))$ and time constants $\tau =1/(\alpha(V)+\beta(V))$ (). The curves for $g_{ss}$ and $\tau$ were generally in agreement however there were some exceptions. In particular, time constants for the Na^+^ channel gates have lower peaks in the bond graph model when compared to the Luo-Rudy model (A–C), but this did not appear to significantly affect Na^+^ channel function as the peaks were all decreased by a similar proportion, facilitating coordination between opening and closing. Similarly, the time constant $\tau_d$ (H) was lower in the bond graph model for some voltages, but given that discrepancies occur at time constants much smaller than the time course of a cardiac action potential we expect that the effects would be negligible. Finally, for the time-dependent K^+^ current $X_\text{ss}$ is substantially higher at negative voltages so that the bond graph model can provide a better match at positive voltages (E). The effects of this difference are partially offset by the lower GHK current at negative voltages which are still above the Nernst potential of K^+^ (C).
Ion transporters
================
Na$^+$/K$^+$ ATPase
-------------------
We used the 15-state bond graph model described in Pan *et al.* [@pan_cardiac_2017], with a pump density of 4625 $\si{{\micro}m^{-2}}$ (0.1178 fmol per cell).
Na^+^-Ca^2+^ exchanger
----------------------
The NCX was modelled using the bond graph shown in . The reaction scheme was based on the ping-pong mechanism proposed in Giladi *et al.* [@giladi_structure-functional_2016], with reactions r1, r2, r4 and r5 modelled by fast rate constants to approximate rapid equilibrium. We assigned voltage dependence to translocation of Na^+^, based on experimental findings from Hilgemann *et al.* [@hilgemann_steady-state_1992-1].
![**The bond graph model of NCX.**[]{data-label="fig:NCX_bg"}](NCX_abg){width="0.8\linewidth"}
Using similar methods to Luo and Rudy [@luo_dynamic_1994], the NCX model was fitted to the following data, assuming steady-state operation:
1. Dependence of cycling rate on extracellular Na^+^ and voltage, from Kimura *et al.* [@kimura_identification_1987].
2. Dependence of cycling rate on extracellular Ca^2+^, from Kimura *et al.* [@kimura_identification_1987]. Data obtained at $V < -50\ \si{mV}$ and $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_e} = 1\ \si{mM}$ were excluded from the fitting process.
3. To incorporate behaviour for another intracellular Ca^2+^ concentration, data from Beuckelmann and Wier [@beuckelmann_sodium-calcium_1989] were used. Data obtained at $V < -120\ \si{mV}$ were excluded from the fitting process.
Parameters of the model were identified using particle swarm optimisation followed by a local optimiser, and a comparison between the model and data is shown in . The model closely matched the data describing extracellular Na^+^ dependence (A). Reasonable fits were obtained for the other data, although there was some discrepancy at negative voltages in B. There was some difference between the model and data from Beuckelmann and Wier [@beuckelmann_sodium-calcium_1989] (C), although this appears to have resulted from differences in the equilibrium point.
The cycling velocity was normalised to 700 $\si{s^{-1}}$ at the normalisation point of A to approximately match experimental currents at a membrane capacitance of 200 pF and 300 sites per $\si{{\micro}m^{-2}}$. To ensure that the exchanger current had a similar magnitude to that of Luo and Rudy [@luo_dynamic_1994], we used a site density of 170 $\si{{\micro}m^{-2}}$ (0.0043 fmol per cell) in our cardiac action potential model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[****]{} [****]{} [****]{}
![**Fit of NCX model to data.** **(A)** Comparison of model to Fig. 8B of Kimura *et al.* [@kimura_identification_1987]. Fluxes were normalised to the value at $\mathrm{[Na^+]_e} = 140\ \si{mM}$ and $V = -110\ \si{mV}$. $\mathrm{[Na^+]_i} = 0\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_e} = 1\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_i} = 430\ \si{nM}$. **(B)** Comparison of model to Fig. 9A of Kimura *et al.* [@kimura_identification_1987]. Fluxes were normalised to the value at $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_e} = 4\ \si{mM}$ and $V = 40\ \si{mV}$. $\mathrm{[Na^+]_e} = 140\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Na^+]_i} = 10\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_i} = 172\ \si{nM}$. **(C)** Comparison of model to Fig. 6B of Beuckelmann and Wier [@beuckelmann_sodium-calcium_1989]. Fluxes were normalised to the value at $V = 60\ \si{mV}$. $\mathrm{[Na^+]_e} = 135\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Na^+]_i} = 15\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_e} = 2\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_i} = 450\ \si{nM}$.[]{data-label="fig:NCX"}](NCX_Nae_fit "fig:"){width="0.3\linewidth"} ![**Fit of NCX model to data.** **(A)** Comparison of model to Fig. 8B of Kimura *et al.* [@kimura_identification_1987]. Fluxes were normalised to the value at $\mathrm{[Na^+]_e} = 140\ \si{mM}$ and $V = -110\ \si{mV}$. $\mathrm{[Na^+]_i} = 0\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_e} = 1\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_i} = 430\ \si{nM}$. **(B)** Comparison of model to Fig. 9A of Kimura *et al.* [@kimura_identification_1987]. Fluxes were normalised to the value at $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_e} = 4\ \si{mM}$ and $V = 40\ \si{mV}$. $\mathrm{[Na^+]_e} = 140\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Na^+]_i} = 10\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_i} = 172\ \si{nM}$. **(C)** Comparison of model to Fig. 6B of Beuckelmann and Wier [@beuckelmann_sodium-calcium_1989]. Fluxes were normalised to the value at $V = 60\ \si{mV}$. $\mathrm{[Na^+]_e} = 135\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Na^+]_i} = 15\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_e} = 2\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_i} = 450\ \si{nM}$.[]{data-label="fig:NCX"}](NCX_Cae_fit "fig:"){width="0.3\linewidth"} ![**Fit of NCX model to data.** **(A)** Comparison of model to Fig. 8B of Kimura *et al.* [@kimura_identification_1987]. Fluxes were normalised to the value at $\mathrm{[Na^+]_e} = 140\ \si{mM}$ and $V = -110\ \si{mV}$. $\mathrm{[Na^+]_i} = 0\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_e} = 1\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_i} = 430\ \si{nM}$. **(B)** Comparison of model to Fig. 9A of Kimura *et al.* [@kimura_identification_1987]. Fluxes were normalised to the value at $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_e} = 4\ \si{mM}$ and $V = 40\ \si{mV}$. $\mathrm{[Na^+]_e} = 140\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Na^+]_i} = 10\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_i} = 172\ \si{nM}$. **(C)** Comparison of model to Fig. 6B of Beuckelmann and Wier [@beuckelmann_sodium-calcium_1989]. Fluxes were normalised to the value at $V = 60\ \si{mV}$. $\mathrm{[Na^+]_e} = 135\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Na^+]_i} = 15\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_e} = 2\ \si{mM}$, $\mathrm{[Ca^{2+}]_i} = 450\ \si{nM}$.[]{data-label="fig:NCX"}](NCX_Cai_fit "fig:"){width="0.3\linewidth"}
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ca^2+^ buffering
================
The model of Ca^2+^ buffering was based on the equations described in Luo and Rudy [@luo_dynamic_1994]. These equations represent the reactions $$\begin{aligned}
\mathrm{TRPN + Ca_i^{2+} \operatorname*{\rightleftharpoons}TRPNCa} \\
\mathrm{CMDN + Ca_i^{2+} \operatorname*{\rightleftharpoons}CMDNCa}\end{aligned}$$ with the dissociation constants $K_\text{d,TRPN} = 0.5\ \si{{\micro}M}$ and $K_\text{d,CMDN} = 2.38\ \si{{\micro}M}$. The total concentrations of each buffer were 70 $\si{{\micro}M}$ for troponin and 50 $\si{{\micro}M}$ for calmodulin. The reactions were modelled using sufficiently fast kinetic constants to approximate rapid equilibrium, and the amount of Ca^2+^ bound to each buffer was initialised to the value at equilibrium for the initial intracellular Ca^2+^ concentration of 0.12 $\si{{\micro}M}$.
Bond graph parameters
=====================
Calculating bond graph parameters {#sec:bg_params}
---------------------------------
Bond graph parameters were found by using an extension of the method presented in Gawthrop *et al.* [@gawthrop_hierarchical_2015]. The kinetic parameters and bond graph parameters can be related through the matrix equation $$\begin{aligned}
\textbf{Ln}(\mathbf{k}) = \mathbf{M} \textbf{Ln}(\mathbf{W} \boldsymbol{\lambda}) \label{eq:bg_general}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\textbf{k} = \begin{bmatrix}
k^+ \\ k^-
\end{bmatrix}, \quad
\textbf{M} = \left[ \begin{array}{c | c}
I_{n_r \times n_r} & {N^f}^T \\ \hline
I_{n_r \times n_r} & {N^r}^T
\end{array} \right], \quad
\boldsymbol{\lambda} = \begin{bmatrix}
\kappa \\ K
\end{bmatrix}
\label{eq:standard}\end{aligned}$$ $k^+$ is a column vector consisting of the forward kinetic constants, $k^-$ is a column vector consisting of the reverse kinetic constants, $N^f$ and $N^r$ are the forward and reverse stoichiometric matrices respectively, $\kappa$ is a column vector of bond graph reaction rate constants, and $K$ is column vector of thermodynamic constants. To account for the volumes of each compartment, $\mathbf{W}$ is a diagonal matrix where the $i$-th diagonal element is the volume corresponding to $i$-th bond graph component (either a reaction or species). Depending on compartment, the elements corresponding to each ion were set to either the intracellular volume of $W_i = 38\ \si{pL}$ or the extracellular volume of $W_e = 5.182\ \si{pL}$. All other diagonal entries were set to 1. Assuming that detailed balance constraints are satisfied, a solution to Eq. \[eq:bg\_general\] is $$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{\lambda_0 } = \mathbf{W}^{-1} \textbf{Exp} (\mathbf{M}^\dagger \textbf{Ln} (\mathbf{k}))\end{aligned}$$ where $\mathbf{M}^\dagger$ is the pseudo-inverse of $\mathbf{M}$. All parameters were identified using $T = 310\ \si{K}$.
For reactions involved in ion transport that use the GHK equation, both the forward and reverse rate constants were set to $P/x_\text{ch}$, where $P$ is the permeability constant found by fitting to Eq. \[eq:GHK\], and $x_\text{ch}$ is the total number of channels. The values of $x_\text{ch}$ used for each channel are given in . Since the bond graph paramters of the NCX model were fitted to kinetic data, the bond graph paramters were converted back to kinetic paramters [@gawthrop_hierarchical_2015] to parameterise the action potential model.
Ion channel Channel density ($\si{\micro m^{-2}}$) Channels per cell Reference
------------- ---------------------------------------- ------------------- -------------------------------
Na $16^\text{*}$ 122720 [@reuter_ion_1984]
K1 $1.8^\text{*}$ 4261 [@sakmann_conductance_1984]
K $0.7^\text{*}$ 5369 [@shibasaki_conductance_1987]
Kp $0.095$ $725^\text{*}$ [@yue_characterization_1996]
LCC $6.5$ $50000^\text{*}$ [@hinch_simplified_2004]
: **Amounts of each ion channel per cell.** A geometric area of $0.767 \times 10^{-4}\ \si{cm^2}$ was used to convert between channel density and channels per cell ($x_\text{ch}$).\
\*Quantity cited from reference.
\
\[tab:x\_ch\]
Charge conserved moiety
=======================
In of the main text, $\Sigma$ is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
\Sigma = &+ 3.0818\mathrm{C_{K1}} - 1.6697\mathrm{S_{00,K}} -0.4188\mathrm{S_{10,K}} + 0.8322\mathrm{S_{20,K}} -2.5019\mathrm{S_{01,K}} \notag \\
&-1.2509\mathrm{S_{11,K}} -4.4669\mathrm{C_{Kp}} + 2.1835\mathrm{S_{000,Na}} + 5.1073\mathrm{S_{100,Na}} + 8.0311\mathrm{S_{200,Na}} \notag \\
& + 10.9549\mathrm{S_{300,Na}} -3.3052\mathrm{S_{010,Na}} -0.3814\mathrm{S_{110,Na}} + 2.5424\mathrm{S_{210,Na}} + 5.4662\mathrm{S_{310,Na}} \notag \\
&-3.2827\mathrm{S_{001,Na}} -0.3589\mathrm{S_{101,Na}} + 2.5649\mathrm{S_{201,Na}} + 5.4887\mathrm{S_{301,Na}} -8.7714\mathrm{S_{011,Na}} \notag \\
& -5.8476\mathrm{S_{111,Na}} -2.9238\mathrm{S_{211,Na}} -1.5253\mathrm{S_{000,LCC}} -4.5742\mathrm{S_{010,LCC}} -0.2808\mathrm{S_{020,LCC}} \notag \\
&+ 2.7555\mathrm{S_{100,LCC}} -0.2933\mathrm{S_{110,LCC}} +4\mathrm{S_{120,LCC}} -5.5253\mathrm{S_{001,LCC}} -8.5742\mathrm{S_{011,LCC}} \notag \\
&-4.2808\mathrm{S_{021,LCC}} -1.2445\mathrm{S_{101,LCC}} -4.2933\mathrm{S_{111,LCC}} + \mathrm{P2_{NaK} + P3_{NaK} + P4_{NaK}} \notag \\
& \mathrm{-0.9450P6_{NaK} -0.9450P7_{NaK} -0.9450P8_{NaK} - P1_{NCX} + 2P2_{NCX}}\end{aligned}$$
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The aim of this article is to study the forest composed by point-to-line geodesics in the last-passage percolation model with exponential weights. We will show that the location of the root can be described in terms of the maxima of a random walk, whose distribution will depend on the geometry of the substrate (line). For flat substrates, we will get power law behaviour of the height function, study its scaling limit, and describe it in terms of variational problems involving the Airy process.'
address:
- |
Departamento de Matemáticas\
Facultad de Ciencias, UNAM\
C.P. 04510, Distrito Federal, México
- |
Instituto de Matemática\
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro\
Caixa Postal 68530, CEP 21941-909 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
author:
- 'Sergio I. López\*'
- 'Leandro P. R. Pimentel$\dag$'
title: 'Geodesic Forests in the Last-Passage Percolation'
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
Introduction
------------
The motivation of this article comes from the work of T. Antunović and E. B. Procaccia [@AP] on *geodesic forests* in first-passage percolation models (we restrict ourselves to the square lattice context). Give a bi-infinite nearest-neighbour path $\phi$ (also called line or substrate), the geodesic forest is the collection of paths composed by point-to-$\phi$ geodesics. It was proven by them that, if the initial substrate is flat, then a.s. every geodesic tree in the forest is finite. On the other hand, it is expected that if the initial substrate $\phi$ has a macroscopic convex wedge, then the tree rooted at the origin is infinite (percolation phenomena)[^2], with positive probability. We address the reader to [@DH] for further discussions on the first-passage percolation model with exponential passage times (Richardson model).
The results proved by Antunović and Procaccia [@AP] in the first-passage percolation context can be extended mutatis mutandis to last-passage percolation models, under fairly general assumptions on the weight distribution. On the other hand, the percolation phenomena is expected to occur for substrates with a macroscopic concave wedge (we call it the concave wedge conjecture). General last-passage or first-passage percolation models are known to be very hard to analise, and still fundamental questions concerning the shape function have not yet been solved. These difficulties impose serious obstacles to understand the geometry of geodesics.
However, there are a few exceptions where the shape function is explicitly known and fluctuations results also are available. In this article we will consider one of them, namely, the exponential last-passage percolation model, where the weights are sampled from the exponential distribution. It is well known that the exponential model enjoys some crucial symmetries (like Burke’s property) that allows one to find nice formulas for related invariant measures, and to use them to compute important objects, such as the shape function [@Ro] and the probability distribution of the asymptotic slope of the competition interface [@CaPi2; @FePi]. Based on these special properties, we will give a positive answer to the concave wedge conjecture, and show that the probability of percolation, in a fixed direction, of the tree rooted at the origin equals the probability that a two-sided random walk with a negative drift stays below $0$. This will follow from a distributional description of the the location of the root in terms of the location of the maxima of such random walk, and it will also allow us to study the number of disjoint trees that percolates.
For flat substrates, we will prove a power law behaviour of the height of a tree, with exponent $2/3$, and get some results that partially describes the limit, in the $m^{3/2}$ scale, of the maxima of the height function on a interval of size $m$. These results will connect this scenario with variational problems involving the Airy process and, consequently, with the Kardar-Parisi-Zhang (KPZ) universality class. We will also relate the height of a tree with coalescence times of semi-infinite geodesics.
The proofs of the aforementioned results are not technically demanding, and they rely on the relation between geodesics and the associated Busemann field [@CaPi]. They parallel the method developed in [@CaPi2] to obtain the asymptotic slope of completion interfaces. For flat substrates, the proofs of the power law and scaling results make use of scaling properties of a point process composed by locations of maxima. A similar approach can be found in [@Pi], to deal with coalescence times of semi-infinite geodesics.
Definitions and Results
=======================
Exponential Last-Passage Percolation
------------------------------------
Consider a collection of i.i.d. random variables $\{W_{{\mathbf x}}\,:\,{{\mathbf x}}\in{{\mathbb Z}}^2\}$ (also called weights), distributed according to an exponential distribution function of parameter one. In last-passage site percolation (LPP) models, each number $W_{{\mathbf x}}$ is interpreted as the passage (or percolation) time through vertex ${{\mathbf x}}=(x(1),x(2))$. For ${{\mathbb Z}}^2$ lattice vertices ${{\mathbf x}}\leq {{\mathbf y}}$ (i.e. $x(i)\leq y(i)\,,i=1,2$), denote $\Gamma({{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}})$ the set of all up-right oriented paths $\gamma=({{\mathbf x}}_0,{{\mathbf x}}_1\dots,{{\mathbf x}}_k)$ from ${{\mathbf x}}$ to ${{\mathbf y}}$, i.e. ${{\mathbf x}}_0={{\mathbf x}}$, ${{\mathbf x}}_k={{\mathbf y}}$ and ${{\mathbf x}}_{j+1}-{{\mathbf x}}_j\in\{{{\mathbf e}}_1,{{\mathbf e}}_2\}$, for $j=0,\dots,k-1$, where ${{\mathbf e}}_1:=(1,0)$ and ${{\mathbf e}}_2=(0,1)$. The weight (or passage time) along $\gamma$ is defined as $$W(\gamma):=\sum_{j=0}^{k} W_{{{\mathbf x}}_i}\,.$$ The *last-passage time* between ${{\mathbf x}}$ and ${{\mathbf y}}$ (point to point) is defined as $$ L({{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}}):=\max_{\gamma\in\Gamma({{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}})}W(\gamma)\,.$$ The *geodesic* from ${{\mathbf x}}$ to ${{\mathbf y}}$ is the a.s. unique maximising path $\gamma({{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}})\in\Gamma({{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}})$ such that $$L({{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}})=W(\gamma({{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}}))\,.$$
Let $\phi=(\phi_z)_{z\in{{\mathbb Z}}}$ denote a down-right bi-infinite path in ${{\mathbb Z}}^2$ passing through the origin: $\phi_0={{\mathbf 0}}$ and $\phi_{z+1}-\phi_z\in\{-{{\mathbf e}}_2,{{\mathbf e}}_1\}$. The substrate can be deterministic or random, and in the last case we are always considering it being independent from the weights $\{W_{{\mathbf x}}\,:\,{{\mathbf x}}\in{{\mathbb Z}}^2\}$. Let us denote by ${{\mathbb P}}_\phi$ the law of the geodesic forest for a given substrate $\phi$ and by ${{\mathbb P}}$ the law of the geodesic forest where $\phi$ is also random. The path $\phi$ splits ${{\mathbb Z}}^2$ into two disjoint regions, and we take $$\Upsilon:=\left\{{{\mathbf x}}\in{{\mathbb Z}}^2\,:\,\exists\,z\in{{\mathbb Z}}\mbox{ s.t. }\phi_z<{{\mathbf x}}\right\}\,.$$ We call $\phi$ the initial substrate and $\Upsilon$ the growth region. We assume that $\phi$ has a macroscopic concave wedge, i.e. there exist $\lambda_-,\lambda_+\in(0,\infty)$, with $\lambda_->\lambda_+$, such that $$\label{slope}
\lim_{z\to-\infty}\frac{\phi_z(2)}{\phi_z(1)}= -\lambda_-\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,\lim_{z\to+\infty}\frac{\phi_z(2)}{\phi_z(1)}= -\lambda_+\,,$$ (where $\phi_z(i)$ is the $i$-coordinate of $\phi_z$). We say that ${{\mathbf z}}=\phi_z$ is a (microscopic) concave corner of $\phi$ if $\phi_z-\phi_{z-1}=-{{\mathbf e}}_2$ and $\phi_{z+1}-\phi_z={{\mathbf e}}_1$, and we denote ${\mathcal}{C}(\phi)$ the set of all concave corners of $\phi$. We also define $${\mathcal}{C}_{{\mathbf x}}(\phi):=\left\{{{\mathbf z}}\in{\mathcal}{C}(\phi)\,:\, {{\mathbf z}}< {{\mathbf x}}\right\}\,.$$ Hence $\#{\mathcal}{C}_{{\mathbf x}}(\phi)<\infty$ for all ${{\mathbf x}}\in\Upsilon$.
{height="6cm"}
Denote ${{\mathbf d}}=(1,1)$ and define the (backward) *point to line last-passage time* from ${{\mathbf x}}\in\Upsilon$ to $\phi$ as $$L_\phi({{\mathbf x}}):=\max_{{{\mathbf z}}\in{\mathcal}{C}_{{\mathbf x}}(\phi)} L({{\mathbf z}}+{{\mathbf d}},{{\mathbf x}})\,.$$ We note that we could have take the maximisation over all possible ${{\mathbf z}}$ in the substrate (there a finite number of them), however the maximum path would always start at a concave corner. The geodesic between $\phi$ and ${{\mathbf x}}\in\Upsilon$ is defined as $\gamma_{\phi}({{\mathbf x}}):=\gamma(\Phi({{\mathbf x}})+{{\mathbf d}},{{\mathbf x}})$, where $$\label{rootmax}
\Phi({{\mathbf x}}):={\mathop{\rm arg\,max}}_{{{\mathbf z}}\in{\mathcal}{C}_{{\mathbf x}}(\phi)} L({{\mathbf z}}+{{\mathbf d}},{{\mathbf x}})\,,$$ so that, $$L_\phi({{\mathbf x}})=W(\gamma_{\phi}({{\mathbf x}}))\,.$$ We call $\Phi({{\mathbf x}})$ the root of $\gamma_{\phi}({{\mathbf x}})$. If $\Phi({{\mathbf x}})={{\mathbf z}}$ we also say that ${{\mathbf x}}$ has root ${{\mathbf z}}$.
We define the *geodesic forest* ${{{\mathcal}F}}_{\phi}$ (with substrate $\phi$) as $${{{\mathcal}F}}_{\phi}:=\left\{\gamma_\phi({{\mathbf x}})\,:\,{{\mathbf x}}\in \Upsilon\right\}\,.$$ Then ${{{\mathcal}F}}_\phi$ is the union of *geodesic trees* rooted at the concave corners of $\phi$, $${{{\mathcal}F}}_\phi=\cup_{{{\mathbf z}}\in{\mathcal}{C}(\phi)}{\mathcal}{T}_{{\mathbf z}}\,,$$ where $${\mathcal}{T}_{{\mathbf z}}:=\left\{\gamma_\phi({{\mathbf x}})\,:\,\Phi({{\mathbf x}})={{\mathbf z}}\right\}\,.$$
{height="6cm"}
For a fixed $a>0$, we say ${{\mathbf z}}\in{\mathcal}{C}(\phi)$ is the *asymptotic root* in the direction $(1,a)$, if for every sequence of lattice points ${{\mathbf x}}_n=(x_n(1),x_n(2))$, $n\geq 1$, in $\Upsilon$ such that $$\lim_{n\to\infty}(x_n(1),x_n(2))=\infty\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{x_n(2)}{x_n(1)}= a\,,$$ there exists $n_0$ such that $\Phi({{\mathbf x}}_n)={{\mathbf z}}$ for all $n\geq n_0$. In this case, we denote $\Phi(a):={{\mathbf z}}$. The first goal of this paper is to characterise the set of directions for which there is a.s. an asymptotic root and, furthermore, to describe the distribution of the location of the root along the substrate.
To state the results we need to introduce a two-sided random walk whose distribution will depend on the initial substrate $\phi$ and on the slope $a>0$ of interest. This random walk is constructed by summing independent exponential increments along the initial substrate $\phi$. The parameter associated to the exponentials depends on the orientation of the edge $(\phi_{z-1},\phi_{z})$ as follows. Let $\{{{\rm Exp}}_z(\rho):z\in{{\mathbb Z}}\}$ and $\{{{\rm Exp}}'_z(1-\rho):z\in{{\mathbb Z}}\}$ be independent collections of i.i.d. exponential random variables of intensity $\rho$ and $1-\rho$, respectively. These collections are also assumed to be independent of $\phi$, whenever $\phi$ is random. Denote $$\rho_a:=\frac{\sqrt{a}}{1+\sqrt{a}}\,.$$ For $z\in\{1,2,\dots\}$ let $$X_{z}^{a,\phi}=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}- {{\rm Exp}}'_z(1-\rho_a) & \mbox{ if }\,\,\, \phi_z-\phi_{z-1}={{\mathbf e}}_1\,\\
{{\rm Exp}}_z(\rho_a) & \mbox{ if }\,\,\, \phi_z-\phi_{z-1}=-{{\mathbf e}}_2\,\end{array}\right.$$ (the increment along the edge $(\phi_{z-1},\phi_z)$), and for $z\in\{0,-1,-2,\dots\}$ let $$X_{z}^{a,\phi}=\left\{\begin{array}{ll} {{\rm Exp}}'_z(1-\rho_a) & \mbox{ if }\,\,\, \phi_{z-1}-\phi_{z}=-{{\mathbf e}}_1\,\\
-{{\rm Exp}}_z(\rho_a) & \mbox{ if }\,\,\, \phi_{z-1}-\phi_z={{\mathbf e}}_2\,\end{array}\right.$$ (increment along the edge $(\phi_z,\phi_{z-1})$). Set $S^{\rho,\phi}(0)=0$, $$\label{rw}
S^{a,\phi}(z)=\sum_{k=1}^{z}X_{k}^{a,\phi}\,,\,\mbox{ for }z>0\,,\mbox{ and }\,\,S^{a,\phi}(z)=\sum_{k=z}^{-1}X_{k+1}^{a,\phi}\,,\,\mbox{ for }z<0\,.$$ We note that, for $a\in(\lambda^2_{+},\lambda^2_{-})$ (*the rarefaction interval*), both sides of this random walk have a negative drift.
\[rootlaw\] Consider the geodesic forest with a concave substrate $\phi$ satisfying and fix $a\in(\lambda^2_{+},\lambda^2_{-})$. Then ${{\mathbb P}}_\phi$-a.s. it has an asymptotic root $\Phi(a)\in{\mathcal}C(\phi)$. Furthermore, if we set $Z_\phi(a)=z\in{{\mathbb Z}}$ such that $\Phi(a)=\phi_z$, then $$\label{substrate}
Z_\phi(a) \stackrel{d}{=} \arg\max_{z\in{{\mathbb Z}}} S^{a,\phi}(z)\,.$$
From now on we assume that the origin is a concave corner of $\phi$ and we parametrize the two sided random walk in terms of the microscopic concave corners of $\phi$. Let $$\dots<z_{-2}<z_{-1}<0=z_0<z_1<z_2<\dots$$ denote the ordering of the concave corners of $\phi$. For $n\geq 1$ let $$\label{step}
X^{a,+}_n:=S^{a,\phi}(z_n)-S^{a,\phi}(z_{n-1})\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,X^{a,-}_n:=S^{a,\phi}(z_{-n})-S^{a,\phi}(z_{-n+1}) \,.$$ We set $S^{a,\pm}_0:=0$, $S^{a,\pm}_n:=\sum_{k=1}^nX^{a,\pm}_n$ for $n\geq 1$, and finally $M_a^{\pm}:=\max_{n\geq 0} S_n^{a,\pm}$. Notice that, by the definition of $X_{z}^{a,\phi}$, concave corners are local maxima of $S^{a,\phi}$. In this way, $S^{a,\pm}$ is the sum of the increments between local maxima (it can be seen as a upper poligonal envelope of the original random walk). Thus, $$\label{globalmax}
M_a:=\max_{z\in{{\mathbb Z}}} S^{a,\phi}(z)=\max\left\{M_a^{+}\,,\,M_a^{-}\right\}\,,$$ and, if we set $Z_a:=k\in{{\mathbb Z}}$ so that $Z_\phi(a)=z_k$, then $$\label{globalargmax}
Z_a= \arg\max_{k\in{{\mathbb Z}}} S_k^{a,\pm}\,.$$ By independence between the sides of the random walk, for such a fixed substrate $\phi$, $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber{{\mathbb P}}_\phi \left(\Phi(a)={{\mathbf 0}}\right)&=&{{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(Z_\phi(a)=0\right)\\
\nonumber&=&{{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(Z_a=0\right)\\
\label{percolates}&=&{{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(M^+_a=0\right){{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(M^-_a=0\right)\,.
\end{aligned}$$
The following corollary provides a positive answer to the concave wedge conjecture.
\[Ben\] Fix a substrate $\phi$ satisfying , and such that ${{\mathbf 0}}$ is a microscopic concave corner. Then $${{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(\#{\mathcal}{T}_{{\mathbf 0}}=\infty \right)>0\,.$$
Since $X_1^{a,\pm}$ is the difference between two independent exponential random variables, $${{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(X_1^{a,\pm}<-y \right)>0\,\mbox{ for all }\,y>0\,.$$ If we denote by $\bar{M}^{\pm}_a$ the maxima of the random walk with increments $\bar{X}_n^{a,\pm}:=X_{n+1}^{a,\pm}$, then $${{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(\bar{M}^{\pm}_a<\infty\right)=1\,$$ for for $a\in(\lambda_+^2,\lambda_-^2)$, and hence $${{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(M^{\pm}_a=0\right)\geq {{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(X^{a,\pm}_1+\bar{M}^{\pm}_a<0\right)=\int_0^\infty{{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(X_1^{a,\pm}<-y \right){{\mathbb F}}_{\bar{M}^{\pm}_a}(dy)>0\,.$$ By , $${{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(\#{\mathcal}{T}_{{\mathbf 0}}=\infty \right)\geq {{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(\Phi(a)={{\mathbf 0}}\right)={{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(M^+_a=0\right){{\mathbb P}}\left(M^-_a=0\right)>0\,,$$ which finishes the proof.
### Examples of computable models
Now we proceed with some explicit calculations for some types of substrates where the distribution of the maxima can be computed. Recall now the random variables $M_a$ and $Z_a$ given by , , , and define the variables $ Z^+_a = {\mathop{\rm arg\,max}}_{ k\geq 0 } S_k^{a,+}$ , $Z^-_a = -{\mathop{\rm arg\,max}}_{k \leq 0} S_k^{a,-}$. Assume for the moment that there exists $c>0$ such that ${{\mathbb E}}(e^{ u \, X_1^{a,\pm}} )<\infty$ for all $u \in [0,c]$, and that there exists a (minimal) $\gamma^\pm >0$ such that ${{\mathbb E}}(e^{\gamma \, X_1^{a,\pm}} ) =1$. Also, assume that $X_1^{a, \pm}$ has an exponential right tail: there exist constants $b^\pm, \delta^\pm >0$ such that its density at the right of the origin has the form $$\label{exptail}
f_{X_1^{a, \pm}}(x) = b^\pm \, \delta^\pm \, e^{- \delta^\pm \, x} \quad \forall x > 0,$$ where $b^\pm= {{\mathbb P}}(X_1^{a,\pm}>0)$. By relating the random walk with waiting times in queueing theory, it is known that [@Res]: $$\label{maxdist}
{{\mathbb P}}(M^\pm_a =0)=\frac{\gamma^\pm}{\delta^\pm}\,\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,\,\,{{\mathbb P}}(M^\pm_a > x)= \Big(1- \frac{\gamma^\pm}{\delta^\pm} \Big) e^{- \gamma^\pm \, x} \,, \,\,\forall x \geq 0\,.$$
#### **Bernoulli Substrate**
Fix $p_-\in(0,1]$ and $p_+\in[0,1)$, with $p_->p_+$. Consider a random substrate where $\phi_{-1}={{\mathbf e}}_2$, $\phi_0={{\mathbf 0}}$ and $\phi_1={{\mathbf e}}_1$. For $z>1$ $${{\mathbb P}}\left(\phi_{z+1} - \phi_{z}=-{{\mathbf e}}_2\right)=p_+=1-{{\mathbb P}}\left(\phi_{z+1} - \phi_{z}={{\mathbf e}}_1\right)\,,$$ while for $z<1$, $${{\mathbb P}}\left(\phi_{z-1} - \phi_{z}={{\mathbf e}}_2\right)=p_-=1-{{\mathbb P}}\left(\phi_{z-1} - \phi_{z}=-{{\mathbf e}}_1\right)\,.$$ Thus, a.s. $$\lambda_+=\frac{p_+}{1-p_+}\,\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,\,\lambda_-=\frac{p_-}{1-p_-}\,.$$ Also, for $n\geq1$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{stepber}
X^{+,a}_n &\stackrel{dist.}{=}&{{\rm Exp}}_n((1-p_+)\rho_a)-{{\rm Exp}}_n(p_+(1-\rho_a))\,, \\
\textrm{ and } \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad & & \nonumber \\
X^{-,a}_n &\stackrel{dist.}{=} &{{\rm Exp}}_n(p_-(1-\rho_a))-{{\rm Exp}}_n((1-p_-)\rho_a)\,. \nonumber
\end{aligned}$$ where the last distribution equalities are with respect to the joint law ${{\mathbb P}}$. To see this, notice that the number of down steps between two right steps is distributed as the number of trials until the first success (right step) of a Bernoulli random variable of parameter $(1-p_+)$. Thus, along down steps we have a geometrical sum of exponentials of parameter $\rho_a$, which gives an exponential of parameter $(1-p_+)\rho_a$. For the other cases the argument is analog. Here condition is met, and the parameters are known for the associated one-sided storage system (it is an M/M/1 queue [@Res]): $\delta_a^+=(1-p_+) \rho_a $, $\delta_a^-= p_-(1-\rho_a)$, $\gamma_a^+=(1-p_+) \rho_a - p_+ (1-\rho_a)$ and $\gamma_a^-=p_-(1-\rho_a)-(1-p_-) \rho_a$. As a consequence of , $${{\mathbb P}}\left(M^+_a=0\right)=1-\frac{p_+(1-\rho_a)}{(1-p_+)\rho_a}=1-\frac{\lambda_+}{\sqrt{a}}\,,$$ and $${{\mathbb P}}\left(M^-_a=0\right)=1-\frac{(1-p_-)\rho_a}{p_-(1-\rho_a)}=1-\frac{\sqrt{a}}{\lambda_-}\,.$$ Therefore, $${{\mathbb P}}\left(\Phi(a)={{\mathbf 0}}\right)=\left(1-\frac{\lambda_+}{\sqrt{a}}\right)\left(1-\frac{\sqrt{a}}{\lambda_-}\right)\,,\,\,\mbox{ for }\,\,a\in(\lambda^2_+,\lambda^2_-)\,.$$ By maximising the last expression we find $a=\lambda_+\lambda_-$, and thus $${{\mathbb P}}\left(\#{\mathcal}{T}_{{\mathbf 0}}=\infty \right)\geq\left(1-\frac{\sqrt{\lambda_+}}{\sqrt{\lambda_-}}\right)^2\,.$$ For this type of substrate (and the following one) it is possible to obtain more explicit expression for the joint law of the maxima and its location (see below), since the density of a difference of two independent random gamma variables is known [@Kl], however it turns out to be a complex formula.
#### **Periodic Substrate**
Let $k_+,k_-\geq 1$ such that $\max\{k_+,k_1\}\geq 2$. Define $\phi$ by starting at $\phi_0={{\mathbf 0}}$ and then, for $z>0$, jumping $k_+$ steps to the right and $1$ down, repeatedly, while for $z<0$, jumping $k_-$ steps up and $1$ to the left, repeatedly. For this substrate we have $\lambda_+=k_+^{-1}$ and $\lambda_-=k_-$. The increments are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{stepper}
X^{+,a}_n &\stackrel{dist.}{=}& {{\rm Exp}}(\rho_a)-\sum_{j=1}^{k^+}{{\rm Exp}}_j(1-\rho_a)\,,\,\,\mbox{ for }\,\,n\geq 1\,, \\
\textrm{ and } \qquad \qquad & & \nonumber \\
X^{-,a}_n &\stackrel{dist.}{=}& {{\rm Exp}}(1-\rho_a)-\sum_{j=1}^{k^-}{{\rm Exp}}_j(\rho_a)\,,\,\,\mbox{ for }\,\,n\leq 1\,. \nonumber
\end{aligned}$$ In this case, the exponential right tail assumption is fulfilled, and we can use formula to compute the probability of the maxima be zero. This is related to a G/M/1 queueing system [@Res] and it boils down to calculate, for each $a\in(k_+^{-2},k_-^2)$, the smallest positive solution of $$\alpha(1-\rho_a\alpha)^{k_+}=(1-\rho_a)^{k_+}\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,\alpha(1-(1-\rho_a)\alpha)^{k_-}=\rho_a^{k_-}\,,$$ which we denote by $\alpha^+_a,\alpha^-_a\in(0,1)$, respectively. Thus, $${{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(M^+_a=0\right)=1-\alpha^+_a\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,{{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(M^-_a=0\right)=1-\alpha^-_a\,,$$ and $${{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(\Phi(a)={{\mathbf 0}}\right)=\left(1-\alpha^+_a\right)\left(1-\alpha^-_a\right)\,,\,\,\mbox{ for }\,\,a\in(k_+^{-2},k^2_-)\,.$$
We were not able to find a closed formula for other periodic substrates because there were no results on the distribution of the maxima when the step distribution of the underlying random walk is different from exponential minus gamma.
#### **Finite Rooted Substrate**
To compute the value of the probability that the tree at the origin percolates using one needs to have more information on the joint probability of $S^{a,\phi}$, as a process in $a\in(\lambda_+^2,\lambda_-^2)$. This problem is related to the computation of the joint distribution of the Busemann field for different values of directions (see Section \[Bus\]), which is still not accomplished. However, there is a particular example of substrate where the probability of percolation can be computed by means of another method, developed by Coupier [@Co1], that is based on the relation between completion interfaces and second-class particles [@FePi], and on the distributional description of the totally asymmetric simple exclusion speed process introduced by Amir, Omer and Válko [@AOV]. Consider a substrate $\phi$ as follows: set $\phi_0={{\mathbf 0}}$, $\phi_{-1}={{\mathbf e}}_2$, and for $z<-1$ set $\phi_{z}=|z+1|{{\mathbf e}}_2-{{\mathbf e}}_1$. Fix $m\in{{\mathbb N}}$ and for $z\in\{1,\cdots,m\}$ we set $\phi_z=z{{\mathbf e}}_1$ while for $z>m$ we set $\phi_z=z{{\mathbf e}}_1-{{\mathbf e}}_2$. In this way, we get three concave corners and it might happen that the tree at the origin is finite. The probability that this happens is $$\label{finiteroots}
{{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(\#{\mathcal}{T}_{{\mathbf 0}}<\infty\right)=\frac{2}{m+2}\,.$$ Formula is a consequence of equation (22) in [@Co1], as soon as one realizes that $\#{\mathcal}{T}_{{\mathbf 0}}=\infty$ means coexistence of the trees. On the other hand, the probability of coexistence was obtained in [@Co1] using the results in [@AOV; @FePi]. To compute the probability of percolation in the direction $(1,a)$, by our method, we only need to compare independent gamma random variables, $$\begin{aligned}
{{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(\Phi(a)=0\right)&=&{{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(M^+_a=0\right){{\mathbb P}}_\phi\left(M^-_a=0\right)\\
&=&{{\mathbb P}}\left(\Gamma(\rho_a,1)<\Gamma(1-\rho_a,m)\right){{\mathbb P}}\left(\Gamma(1-\rho_a,1)<\Gamma(\rho_a,1)\right)\\
&=&\frac{\sqrt{a}}{1+\sqrt{a}}\sum_{j=0}^{m-1}\frac{(j+m-1)!}{j!}\left(\frac{1}{1+\sqrt{a}}\right)^{j+1}\,.
\end{aligned}$$
### The joint transform of the maximum and its location
Not easy to apply formulas are available for the joint distribution of the global maximum of a random walk and its location, however next proposition suggest some Monte Carlo method to approximate it, and thus to approximate the law of $(Z,M)$ for the Bernoulli and periodic substrates.
\[ZrelN\] Let $S_n = \sum_{i=1}^n X_i$, $S_0=0$ denote a random walk defined on the non-negative integers, such that $\mathbb{E} (X_i) <0$, where $X_i$ has a continuous distribution. Define $M:= \max_{n \geq 0} S_n$, $Z={\mathop{\rm arg\,max}}_{n \geq 0} S_n$, and the hitting time of $\{S_n\}_{n \geq 0}$ to the negative numbers as $$N:= \min\{ n \geq 1 | \sum_{i=1}^{n} X_i \leq 0 \}.$$ Then ${{\mathbb P}}( Z=0, M=0) ={{\mathbb P}}(M=0)$ and we have the equality of densities $$f_{Z,M}(n,x)= \sum_{j>n}f_{N,S_n} (j,x) {{\mathbb P}}(M=0) \qquad \forall n \geq 1, x \geq 0.$$
Let us briefly describe the method. Assume the probability of $M^\pm_a$ be equal to zero is known. Then, to approximate the right hand side of the result in Proposition \[ZrelN\] one could simulate random walks where the hitting time to the negative real has yet not happened (using acceptance-rejection method) and this would be enough to approximate the joint distribution of $(Z^\pm_a,M^\pm_a)$. Then, by using this approximation, it is possible to simulate $(Z^+_a,M^+_a) $ and $(Z^-_a,M^-_a)$ independently. Finally, $(Z_a,M_a)$ is a deterministic function of those variables, thus one could use crude Monte Carlo to approximate its distribution.
Using the previous proposition, and the same connection between $(M^\pm_a, Z^\pm_a)$ and queueing systems, we obtained an expression for the joint transform of the maximum and its location.
\[jointexpl\] Under the assumptions on the step distribution stated above, the joint transform of $(Z_a,M_a)$ can be expressed as $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber{{\mathbb E}}(s^{Z_a} \, e^{uM_a}) &=& \Big( \frac{\gamma^+}{\delta^+} \Big) \Big( \frac{\gamma^-}{\delta^-} \Big) +\phi^+_a(s,u)
- \Big( 1 - \frac{\gamma^+}{\delta^+} \Big) \phi^+_a(s,u - \gamma^+) \\
\label{jointexpl1}&+& \phi^-_a(s,u) - \Big( 1 - \frac{\gamma^-}{\delta^-} \Big) \phi^-_a(s,u- \gamma^-), \quad \forall s \in (0,1), \, u \in [0,c] \,,
\end{aligned}$$ where $\gamma^\pm, \delta^\pm$ are the corresponding constants for each one-sided random walk and the function $ \phi^\pm_a$ is given by $$\phi^\pm_a(s,u) = \frac{\gamma^\pm}{\delta^\pm} \exp \Big\{ \sum_{n=1}^{ \infty} \frac{s^n}{n} \Big( {{\mathbb E}}( e^{-u (S_n^{a,\pm})^*}) - {{\mathbb P}}( S_n^{a,\pm} \leq 0 ) \Big) \Big\} ,$$ and we are using the (non-standard) notation $x^*= \max \{0,x\}$, for $x$ real.
To simplify the expression , it would be necessary to compute $\delta^\pm, \gamma^\pm$, ${{\mathbb E}}(e^{-u(S_n^{a,\pm})^*}) $ and ${{\mathbb P}}(S_n^{a,\pm} \leq 0)$ in each particular case.\
### On the number of tress that percolates
We note that, since geodesics cannot cross (though they may coalesce) the location of the root is monotonic with respect to the slope $a$. Thus, if $c\in[a,b]\subseteq(\lambda^2_{+},\lambda^2_{-})$ then $Z_\phi(b)\leq Z_\phi(c)\leq Z_\phi(a)$. In particular, there are only finitely many roots such that the respective tree percolates within $[a,b]$. However, as soon as one get closer to the critical slopes $\lambda_{\pm}^2$, the number of infinite trees may explode. To see an example where this occurs, take a Bernoulli type random substrate $\phi$ as before with parameters $p_-$ and $p_+$: $${{\mathbb E}}X_{n}^{a,+} = \frac{1}{(1-p_+)\rho_a} - \frac{1}{p_+(1-\rho_a)}\,\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,\,{{\mathbb E}}X_{n}^{a,-} = \frac{1}{p_-(1-\rho_a)} - \frac{1}{(1-p_-)\rho_a}\,.$$ At the critical slopes, ${{\mathbb E}}X_{n}^{ \lambda_{\pm}^2,\pm} = 0$ and $M_{ \lambda_{\pm}^2}^\pm=\infty$. Since $Z_\phi(a)$ is a monotonic function of $a$, we must have that $Z_\phi(a) \to \pm\infty$, as $a \to \lambda^2_\pm$. Thus, we have the following corollary [^3].
\[infinite\] Consider the geodesic forest composed by a Bernoulli type random substrate $\phi$ with parameters $p_-$ and $p_+$, with $p_->p_+$. Then $$\lim_{a\to \lambda^2_\pm}Z_\phi(a)\stackrel{a.s.}{=}\pm\infty\,.$$ In particular, a.s., there will be infinitely many roots that percolates.
In view of Corollary \[infinite\] one might expect that $Z_\phi(a)$ converges to infinity according to some speed that depends on $a$. We expect that Proposition \[jointexpl\] may be helpful to attack this problem for computable models (Bernoulli or Periodic initial substrates). Another approach would be to fix $a=1$, set $p_-=1/2+\epsilon$, $p_+=1/2-\epsilon$ and then send $\epsilon\to 0^+$.
### Last-passage percolation with weighted substrate
An alternative description of the model can be done by fixing the initial substrate as the horizontal axis and then putting extra weights along it. Now, the geometry of the substrate is represented by a collection of non-negative real numbers $\{\nu_k:k\in{{\mathbb Z}}\setminus\{0\}\}$. Define $$\nu(k)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll} 0 & \mbox{ if }\,\,\,k=0 \,\\
\sum_{i=1}^k\nu_i & \mbox{ if }\,\,\,k>0 \,\\
-\sum_{i=k}^{-1}\nu_i & \mbox{ if }\,\,\,k<0\,\end{array}\right.$$ We will assume that this collection has an asymptotic drift: there exists $\mu_->\mu_+> 1$ such that $$\lim_{k\to-\infty}\frac{\nu(k)}{k}=-\mu_-\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,\lim_{k\to\infty}\frac{\nu(k)}{k}=\mu_+\,.$$ The last-passage percolation time with weighted substrate $\nu$ is defined for $x\in{{\mathbb Z}}$ and $n\geq 1$ as $$\label{lppsystem}
L_\nu(x,n):=\max_{k\leq x}\left\{\nu(k)+L_k(x,n)\right\}\,$$ where $L_k(x,n):=L\left((k,1),(x,n)\right)$. The point to line geodesic is now defined as $\gamma_\nu(x,n):=\gamma\left(K_\nu+{{\mathbf e}}_2,(x,n)\right)$ where $$K_\nu(x,n):=\arg\max_{k\leq x}\left\{\nu(k)+L_k(x,n)\right\}\,.$$
Let $${{{\mathcal}F}}_{\nu}:=\left\{\gamma_\nu(x,n)\,:\,x\in{{\mathbb Z}}\,,\,n\geq 1\right\}\,.$$ Then ${{{\mathcal}F}}_\nu$ is a union of trees rooted at maximisers: $$\label{wforest}
{{{\mathcal}F}}_\nu=\cup_{k\in{{\mathbb Z}}}{\mathcal}{T}_k\,,$$ where $${\mathcal}{T}_k:=\left\{\gamma_\nu(x,n)\,:\,K_\nu(x,n)=k\right\}\,.$$ We call ${{{\mathcal}F}}_\nu$ the geodesic forest with weighted substrate $\nu$. As before, we also say that a slope $a>0$ has root $k$ if for every sequence of lattice points $({{\mathbf x}}_n)_{n\geq 1}$ in ${{\mathbb Z}}\times{{\mathbb N}}$ with direction $(1,a)$, there exists $n_0$ such that $K_\nu({{\mathbf x}}_n)=k$ for all $n\geq n_0$. In that case, we denote $K_\nu(a):=k$ (the root of the direction $(1,a)$).
The weighted substrate may be deterministic or random. We always assume that it is independent of the lattice weights $W_{{\mathbf x}}$. As an example, take collections $\{{{\rm Exp}}^\nu_k(1-p_+):k>0\}$ and $\{{{\rm Exp}}^\nu_k(1-p_-):k<0\}$ of i.i.d. exponential random variables of intensity $1-p_+$ and $1-p_-$, respectively, where $p_+,p_-\in(0,1)$. In this case $$\mu_-=\frac{1}{1-p_-}\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,\mu_+=\frac{1}{1-p_+}\,.$$ The assumption $\mu_->\mu_+$ (or $p_->p_+$) corresponds to the rarefaction regime where the characteristic slopes satisfy $$(\mu_+-1)^2=\left(\frac{p_+}{1-p_+}\right)^2<\left(\frac{p_-}{1-p_-}\right)^2=(\mu_--1)^2\,.$$
Similar to the preceding case, let $\{{{\rm Exp}}_z(1-\rho):z\in{{\mathbb Z}}\}$ be a collection of i.i.d. exponential random variables of intensity $1-\rho$. This collection is also assumed to be independent of $\nu$, whenever $\nu$ is random. Define $$\mu_a(k)= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 0 & \mbox{ if }\,\,\,k=0 \,\\
\sum_{i=1}^k{{\rm Exp}}_i(1-\rho_a) & \mbox{ if }\,\,\,k>0 \,\\
-\sum_{i=k}^{-1}{{\rm Exp}}_i(1-\rho_a) & \mbox{ if }\,\,\,k<0\, \textrm{,} \end{array} \right.$$ where we kept $\rho_a = \frac{\sqrt{a}}{1+\sqrt{a}}$. Fix $a\in((\mu_+-1)^2,(\mu_--1)^2)$. Then a.s. it has an asymptotic root $K_\nu(a)$. Furthermore, $$\label{weighted}
K_\nu(a)\stackrel{dist.}{=}\arg\max_{k\in{{\mathbb Z}}}\left\{ \nu(k)-\mu_{a}(k)\right\}\,.$$ The proof of follows the same method developed to prove . For the sake of brevity, we will not include it in this article.
#### **Exponential Weighted Substrate**
For the weighted substrate with exponential distribution with parameters $(1-p_-)$ and $(1-p_+)$ the calculation using maxima of random walks is analog, and we get that $${{\mathbb P}}\left(\Phi(a)={{\mathbf 0}}\right)=\left(1-\frac{\mu_+}{1+\sqrt{a}}\right)\left(1-\frac{1+\sqrt{a}}{\mu_-}\right)\,,\,\,\mbox{ for }\,\,a\in((\mu_+-1)^2,(\mu_--1)^2)\,.$$ By maximising over $a\in((\mu_+-1)^2,(\mu_--1)^2)$, we find $(1+\sqrt{a})^{-1}=\sqrt{\mu_+\mu_-}$, and hence $${{\mathbb P}}\left(\#{\mathcal}{T}_{{\mathbf 0}}=\infty \right)\geq\left(1-\frac{\sqrt{\mu_+}}{\sqrt{\mu_-}}\right)^2\,.$$ For this model we also have that a.s. $K_\nu(a)\to\pm\infty$, as $a \to (\mu_\pm-1)^2$.
Convergence of the geodesic forest with flat substrate
------------------------------------------------------
Finite geodesics do converge when we fix one end point and send the other to infinity along a prescribed direction. For simplicity we will choose the direction $(-1,-1)$. The following is a well known result in last-passage percolation with exponential weights [@Co; @FePi]: a.s for each ${{\mathbf x}}\in{{\mathbb Z}}^2$ there is a unique semi-infinite geodesic $\gamma({{\mathbf x}})$ (down-left oriented) such that if a sequence of lattice points ${{\mathbf x}}_n=(x_n(1),x_n(2))\leq {{\mathbf x}}$, $n\geq 1$, satisfies $$\lim_{n\to\infty}(x_n(1),x_n(2))=-\infty\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{x_n(2)}{x_n(1)}= 1\,,$$ then $$\label{semigeo}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\gamma({{\mathbf x}}_n,{{\mathbf x}})=\gamma({{\mathbf x}})\,.$$ Furthermore, for every ${{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}}\in{{\mathbb Z}}^2$ there is ${{\mathbf c}}$ such that (coalescence occurs) $$\label{coal}
\gamma({{\mathbf x}})=\gamma({{\mathbf c}}) {\ensuremath{+\!\!\!\!+\,}}\gamma({{\mathbf c}},{{\mathbf x}})\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,\gamma({{\mathbf y}})=\gamma({{\mathbf c}}){\ensuremath{+\!\!\!\!+\,}}\gamma({{\mathbf c}},{{\mathbf y}})\,,$$ where ${\ensuremath{+\!\!\!\!+\,}}$ denotes the concatenation of paths. As a consequence, the collection of such semi-infinite geodesics $${\mathcal}{F}:=\left\{\gamma({{\mathbf x}})\,:\,{{\mathbf x}}\in{{\mathbb Z}}^2\right\}\,,$$ is a.s. a tree. Let $\nu$ be the exponential weighted substrate of parameter $1/2$. It follows from Theorem 5.3 of [@CaPi] that $${\mathcal}{F}^+\stackrel{dist.}{=}{\mathcal}{T}_\nu\,,$$ where ${\mathcal}{F}^+:={\mathcal}{F}\cap {{\mathbb N}}\times{{\mathbb Z}}$ and ${\mathcal}{T}_\nu$ is given by ($\ref{wforest}$).
Furthermore, the geodesic tree ${\mathcal}{F}$ is the limiting tree of a geodesic forest with respect to a flat substrate. Indeed, assume that $\phi^n=(\phi_z^n)_{z\in{{\mathbb Z}}}$ has inclination $$\lim_{z\to-\infty}\frac{\phi^n_z(2)}{\phi^n_z(1)}=\lim_{z\to+\infty}\frac{\phi^n_z(2)}{\phi^n_z(1)}= -1\,.$$ The index $n$ means that now the origin of the substrate is $\phi^n_0=-n{{\mathbf d}}$, we will let $n\to\infty$. Denote ${\mathcal}{F}_{\phi^n}$ the respective geodesic forest. Then for a fixed ${{\mathbf x}}\in{{\mathbb Z}}^2$ the point to substrate geodesic $\gamma_{\phi^n}({{\mathbf x}})$ will have a root $\Phi_n({{\mathbf x}})$ whose distance from $-n{{\mathbf d}}$ is of sub-linear order. The proof follows the same method used to prove Lemma 5.2 [@CaPi] in the Poissonian last-passage percolation model, and can be extended to the lattice context with exponential weights as well. The key is the knowledge of the curvature of the limiting shape, which is explicitly known in both cases. This implies that the sequence of finite geodesics paths $(\gamma_{\phi^n}({{\mathbf x}}))_{n\geq 1}$ has asymptotic direction $(-1,-1)$ and hence, by , will converge to the semi-infinite geodesic path $\gamma({{\mathbf x}})$. Moreover, this convergence holds simultaneously for any finite collection of sites. Therefore this geodesic forest will weakly converge to ${\mathcal}{F}$, as $n\to\infty$. If one takes a flat substrate with slope $-\lambda$, the same result holds but now the limiting object is the geodesic tree composed by semi-infinite geodesics with direction $-(1, \frac{1}{\lambda})$.
Scaling the height of a tree
----------------------------
The proof of the scaling behaviour of point to point exponential last-passage percolation times, and its connection with the Tracy-Widom distribution, was performed by Johansson [@Jo]. This result was later extended to convergence to the Airy process [@CoFePe]. Precisely: $$\label{scalelpp}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{L\left({{\mathbf 0}},( n+\lfloor 2^{2/3}xn^{2/3}\rfloor, n-\lfloor 2^{2/3}xn^{2/3}\rfloor)\right)-4n}{2^{4/3}n^{1/3}}\stackrel{dist.}{=}{\mathcal}A(x)-x^2\,,$$ where $\{{\mathcal}A(x)\,:\,x\in{{\mathbb R}}\}$ is the so called Airy process ($\lfloor x\rfloor$ denotes the integer part of $x\in{{\mathbb R}}$). The characteristic exponents $\chi=1/3$ and $\xi=2/3$ are believed to describe the fluctuations of a broad class of interface growth models, named the Kardar-Parisi-Zhang (KPZ) universality class. In this section we will explain how to use to shed light on the scaling scenario of geodesic forests.
{height="5cm"}
From now on we fix the substrate $\phi$ whose set of corners is given by the diagonal $\{(z,-z)\,:\,z\in{{\mathbb Z}}\}$. Recall that the geodesic tree with substrate $\phi$ and rooted at $(z,-z)$ was defined as the set of all point to substrate geodesics with common root at $(z,-z)$: $${\mathcal}{T}_z:=\left\{\gamma_\phi({{\mathbf x}})\,:\,\Phi({{\mathbf x}})=(z,-z)\right\}\,.$$ Let $L(n):=\left\{(x(1),x(2)\in{{\mathbb Z}}^2\,:\,x(1)+x(2)=n\right\}$. The height of ${\mathcal}{T}_z$ is defined as $$H_z:=\max\left\{n\geq 1\,:\, (x(1),x(2))\in{\mathcal}{T}_z\,\mbox{ for some }\,(x(1),x(2))\in L(n+1) \right\}\,.$$ Then a.s. $H_z<\infty$ for all $z\in{{\mathbb Z}}$ (this follows from Antunović and Procaccia [@AP]). It is not hard to see that $${{\mathbb P}}\left(H_0\geq n\right)\geq cn^{-1}\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,{{\mathbb E}}H_0=\infty\,.$$ A harder task is to determine the precise tail decay of $H_0$ and the respective power law exponent. We expect $${{\mathbb P}}\left(H_0\geq n\right)\sim n^{-2/3}\,,\mbox{ as }n\to\infty\,,$$ and the reason is related to . To perform a scaling limit of the height function one can take the maximum of the height among a finite collection of trees, $$H(m):=\max_{z\in(0,m]}H_z\,.$$ Again by , we expect that the right scaling is $m^{3/2}$. Here we will prove the following theorems.
\[thm:tail\] There exists $c_0>0$ such that $${{\mathbb P}}\left(H_0\geq n\right)\geq \frac{c_0}{n^{2/3}}\,.$$
\[thm:maxscal\] Let $${{\mathbb G}}(r):=\liminf_{m\to\infty}{{\mathbb P}}\left(\frac{H(m)}{2^{-1}m^{3/2}}> r\right)\,.$$ Then $$\label{maxscal}
{{\mathbb G}}(r)\geq{{\mathbb P}}\left(X \in \left(-(2r^{2/3})^{-1},(2r^{2/3})^{-1}\right] \right)\,,$$ where $X:=\arg\max_{x\in{{\mathbb R}}}\left\{{\mathcal}A(x)-x^2\right\}$.
It is known that $X$ has a density and an explicit formula can be found in [@MoQuRe]. Combining this with one get as corollary a lower bound for the limiting tail function ${{\mathbb G}}$.
\[lowertail\] Let $f$ denote the density of $X$. Then $$\liminf_{r\to\infty}r^{2/3}{{\mathbb G}}(r)\geq f(0)>0\,.$$ Furthermore, $$\lim_{r\to 0^+}{{\mathbb G}}(r)=1\,.$$
### The weighted substrate model and coalescence times
Consider the exponential weighted substrate model with parameter $p_-=p_+=1/2$. The height of a tree is now defined as $$H_k:=\max\left\{n\geq 0\,:\,(x,n)\in{\mathcal}{T}_k \cup\{(k,0)\}\,,\mbox{ for some }\,x\in{{\mathbb Z}}\right\}\,,$$ and the maximum $H(m)$ over $(0,m]$ has an analog definition. The analogs to Theorem 3 and Theorem 4 can be obtained for this model as well, but now the rescaling factor for $H(m)$ is $2^{-5/2}m^{3/2}$ and the lower bound is giving as function of the distribution of $\bar X :=\arg\max_{x\in{{\mathbb R}}}\left\{\sqrt{2}{\mathcal}B(x)+{\mathcal}A(x)-x^2\right\}$, where ${\mathcal}B$ is a standard Brownian motion process independent of ${\mathcal}A$.
The distribution of $H(m)$ is also related to coalescence times of semi-infinite geodesics. Indeed, let ${{\mathbf c}}(m)$ denote the coalescence point between the semi-infinite geodesics starting at ${{\mathbf 0}}$ and $(m,0)$, and with direction $(1,1)$, and let $T(m)$ denote the second coordinate of ${{\mathbf c}}(m)$. By self-duality of the geodesic tree [@Pi], $$\label{dual}
T(m)\stackrel{dist.}{=}H(m)\,.$$ Thus, the heavy tail lower bound for $H_0$ implies that $${{\mathbb P}}\left(T(1)\geq n\right)\geq \frac{c_0}{n^{2/3}}\,.$$
### Conjectural picture and KPZ universality
It is believed that the space and time fluctuations of models in the KPZ universality class can be described by variational problems involving a four parameter field ${\mathcal}A(u,x;t,y)$, where $0\leq u<t$ are time coordinates and $x,y\in{{\mathbb R}}$ are space coordinates. This field is called the *space-time Airy sheet*. We address to [@CoQua] for a more complete description of this field and its conjectural relation with the KPZ universality class.
In last-passage percolation models, the space-time Airy sheet would appear as the limit fluctuations of last-passage percolation times. Denote $$(u,x)_n:=(\lfloor un+2^{2/3}xn^{2/3}\rfloor,\lfloor un-2^{2/3}xn^{2/3}\rfloor)\,\,\mbox{ and }\,\,(t,y)_n:=(\lfloor nt+2^{2/3}yn^{2/3}\rfloor,\lfloor nt-2^{2/3}yn^{2/3}\rfloor)\,.$$ Then it is expected that $$\label{scalelpp1}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{L\left((u,x)_n,(t,y)_n\right)-4n(t-u)}{2^{4/3}n^{1/3}}\stackrel{dist.}{=}{\mathcal}A(u,x;t,y)-\frac{(y-x)^2}{t-u}\,.$$ For fixed times $u,t$, tightness in the space of two-dimensional continuous fields is already known [@CaPi1], however no uniqueness result is available so far.
By taking $u=0$ and $t=1$, one gets a two-dimensional field ${\mathcal}A(x,y)$, called the Airy sheet. This field gives rise to a point process on the real line as follows. For each $y\in{{\mathbb R}}$ let $$X(y):=\sup\arg\max_{x\in{{\mathbb R}}}\left\{{\mathcal}A(x,y)-(y-x)^2\right\}\,.$$ The process $(X(y)\,,\,y\in{{\mathbb R}})$ is expected to be a right-continuous pure jump process which runs through the locations of maximisers of the Airy sheet minus a drifting parabola. Notice that $X(0)$ corresponds to $X$ as defined in Theorem \[thm:maxscal\]. The reason for taking the supremum is that there will be points $y\in{{\mathbb R}}$ such that the $\arg\max$ is not uniquely defined. However, it is not hard to see that for fixed $y$ a.s. there will be a unique maximiser [@Pi1] (it follows from space stationarity of the Airy sheet). This process should be similar, *grosso modo*, to the Groeneboom process, which arises by taking a Brownian motion minus a drifting parabola [@Gro].
Related to $X({{\mathbb R}})=\{X(y)\,,\,y\in{{\mathbb R}}\}$ there is a stationary point process ${\mathcal}U$ defined as $${\mathcal}U(x):=\#\left(X({{\mathbb R}})\cap(0,x]\right)\,,$$ which counts the number of maximisers $X(y)$ lying within the interval $(0,x]$. We conjecture that $$\label{tailconj}
\exists\,\lim_{n\to\infty}n^{2/3}{{\mathbb P}}\left(H_0\geq n\right)=\frac{{{\mathbb E}}{\mathcal}U(1)}{2^{2/3}}\,.$$ The motivation for is explained at the end of the proofs. In Figure \[simulationtree\] we illustrate the result of crude Monte Carlo simulation[^4]. It is compared with powerlaw decay taking $2.364$ as an estimate of ${{\mathbb E}}{\mathcal}U(1)$, a value suggested by those simulations.
![Estimates of ${{\mathbb P}}(H_0 \geq n)$ done by simulations.[]{data-label="simulationtree"}](simulationtree){height="10cm"}
The same reasoning will also yield to a conjectural description of the limiting distribution of $H(m)$ (after rescaling) in terms of ${\mathcal}U$: $$\label{scalheight1}
\exists\,\lim_{m\to\infty}{{\mathbb P}}\left(\frac{H(m)}{2^{-1}m^{3/2}}\leq r\right)=1-{{\mathbb G}}(r)={{\mathbb P}}\left({\mathcal}{U}(r^{-2/3})= 0\right)\,,$$ and $$\label{scalheight2}
\exists\,\lim_{r\to\infty}r^{2/3}{{\mathbb G}}(r)={{\mathbb E}}{\mathcal}U(1)\,.$$
For the geodesic forest with an exponential weighted substrate (of parameter $1/2$) we expect to have a process $\bar{{\mathcal}U}(x):=\#\left(\bar X({{\mathbb R}})\cap(0,x]\right)$ where $$\bar X(y):=\sup\arg\max_{x\in{{\mathbb R}}}\left\{\sqrt{2}{\mathcal}B(x)+{\mathcal}A(x,y)-(y-x)^2\right\}\,,$$ and ${\mathcal}B(x)$ is independent a standard two-sided Brownian motion process. Thus, the conjecture will be that $$\label{tailconj1}
\exists\,\lim_{n\to\infty}n^{2/3}{{\mathbb P}}\left(H_0> n\right)=\frac{{{\mathbb E}}\bar{{\mathcal}U}(1)}{2^{5/3}}\,,$$ $$\label{scalheight3}
\exists\,\lim_{m\to\infty}{{\mathbb P}}\left(\frac{H(m)}{2^{-5/2}m^{3/2}}\leq r\right)=1-\bar{{\mathbb G}}(r)={{\mathbb P}}\left(\bar{{\mathcal}{U}}(r^{-2/3})= 0\right)\,,$$ and $$\label{scalheight4}
\exists\,\lim_{r\to\infty}r^{2/3}\bar{{\mathbb G}}(r)={{\mathbb E}}\bar{{\mathcal}U}(1)\,.$$
We note that the limiting distribution coincides with the one conjectured for coalescence times [@Pi].
Proofs
======
The Busemman field and the location of the root {#Bus}
-----------------------------------------------
The coalescence of (backward) semi-infinite geodesics in the direction $(1,-a)$, where $a>0$, gives rise to Busemann field defined as $$B_a({{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}}):=L({{\mathbf c}},{{\mathbf y}})-L({{\mathbf c}},{{\mathbf x}})\,,$$ where ${{\mathbf c}}$ is the coalescence point between $\gamma_a({{\mathbf y}})$ and $\gamma_a({{\mathbf x}})$. The Busemann function is an alternative construction of the equilibrium measure of last-passage percolation system $(M_t^{\nu})$ defined as $M^\nu_0=\nu$ and (recall ) $$M^\nu_t(x,y]:=L_\nu(y,t)-L_\nu(x,t)\,.$$ If one takes $\nu_a(k):=B_a({{\mathbf 0}},(0,k))$ for $k> 0$ and $\nu_a(k):= B_a((0,k),{{\mathbf 0}})$ for $k\leq 0$, then $M^{\nu_a}_t\stackrel{dist.}{=}\nu_a$ for all $t\geq 0$. The i.i.d. exponential profile of parameter $1-p$ is also an equilibrium measure and this allows us get that $B_\lambda((t,k-1),(t,k))$ for $k\in{{\mathbb Z}}$, are i.i.d. exponential random variables of parameter $1-\rho_a$ [@CaPi]. By symmetry, one can get the same result for Busemann functions in the (forward) direction $(1,a)$. By also using Burkes’ property, one can describe the distribution of the Busemann function along the substrate $\phi$ as follows (see Lemma 3.3 in [@CaPi2]):
\[Busemann\] Fix $a>0$, denote $B_a$ the Busemman field in the direction $(1,a)$ and recall the definition of the random walk $S^{a,\phi}$ . Then, $$\left\{B_a({{\mathbf d}},\phi_z+{{\mathbf d}})\,:\,z\in{{\mathbb Z}}\right\}\stackrel{dist.}{=}\left\{S^{a,\phi}(z)\,:\,z\in{{\mathbb Z}}\right\}\,.$$
The next ingredient in the proof is to ensure that the sequence of roots with respect to a sequence of lattice points in a direction $(1,a)$, within the rarefaction interval $(\lambda^2_-,\lambda_+^2)$, stay bounded. This is given by following lemma, which follows from Proposition 3.1 [@FeMaPi] (see also Lemma 3.4 [@CaPi2]).
\[rootcontrol\] Let $a\in(\lambda^2_-,\lambda_+^2)$. Then a.s. for any sequence of lattice points $({{\mathbf x}}_n)_{n \geq 1}$ with asymptotic inclination $(1,a)$, there is $M>0$ such that $\Phi({{\mathbf x}}_n)\in\{\phi_{-M},\cdots,\phi_M\}$ for all $n\geq 1$.
#### **Proof of Theorem \[rootlaw\]**
By , $$\Phi({{\mathbf x}}_n)={\mathop{\rm arg\,max}}_{{{\mathbf z}}\in{\mathcal}{C}_{{{\mathbf x}}_n}(\phi)} L({{\mathbf z}}+{{\mathbf d}},{{\mathbf x}}_n)={\mathop{\rm arg\,max}}_{{{\mathbf z}}\in{\mathcal}{C}_{{{\mathbf x}}_n}(\phi)}\left( L({{\mathbf z}}+{{\mathbf d}},{{\mathbf x}}_n)-L({{\mathbf d}},{{\mathbf x}}_n)\right)\,.$$ By Lemma \[rootcontrol\], $$\lim_{n\to\infty}{\mathop{\rm arg\,max}}_{{{\mathbf z}}\in{\mathcal}{C}_{{{\mathbf x}}_n}(\phi)}\left( L({{\mathbf z}}+{{\mathbf d}},{{\mathbf x}}_n)-L({{\mathbf d}},{{\mathbf x}}_n)\right)\stackrel{dist.}{=}{\mathop{\rm arg\,max}}_{{{\mathbf z}}\in{\mathcal}C(\phi)}B_a({{\mathbf z}}+{{\mathbf d}},{{\mathbf d}})\,.$$ Together with Lemma \[Busemann\], this implies Theorem \[rootlaw\].
Computable models
-----------------
#### **Proof of Proposition \[ZrelN\]**
Define the process $\{W_n\}_{n \leq 0}$ by $$W_{-n}:= \max_{-k \leq -n} ( S_k - S_n) = -S_n - \min_{-k \leq -n} (-S_k) \qquad \forall n \geq 0,$$ and the random variable $\tau:= \min \{ n \geq 0 : W_{-n} = 0 \}$. We prove now that $(Z,M)=(\tau, W_0)$.\
For $n=0, x \geq 0$ we have r $$\{ \tau=0, W_0= x \} = \{ S_0=0, S_0= \max_{ n \geq 0 } S_n, x = 0 \} = \{ Z= 0 , M= x \} .$$ In the case of $n \geq 1, x \geq 0$, it holds $$\begin{aligned}
\{ \tau=n, W_0 >x \} &=& \{ X_n > 0, ..., X_n + \cdots +X_1 > 0, X_n + \cdots +X_1 > x, S_n = \max_{ k \geq n } S_k \} \\
&=& \{ S_n - X_n < S_n, ..., S_n - (X_n+\cdots+X_2) < S_n, S_n >x, S_n = \max_{ k \geq n } S_k \} \\
&=& \{ S_{n-1} < S_n, ..., S_{1} < S_n, S_n >x, S_n = \max_{ k \geq n } S_k \} \\
&=&\{ S_n > x, S_n = \max_{ k \geq 0 } S_k \} =\{ Z =n , M >x \}.\end{aligned}$$ By construction the process $\{W_n\}_{n \leq 0}$ is stationary. Besides, it satisfies *Lindley property*: $$\label{Lindley}
W_{-n}= (W_{-n-1} + X_{n+1})^* \qquad \forall n \geq 0,$$ where $X_{n+1}$ and $W_{-n-1}$ are independent random variables and $x^*= \max \{0,x\}$, for $x \in \mathbb{R}$. A set of random variables which satisfy recursion has an interpretation as sequential waiting times in queueing theory [@Phi]. By definition of $\tau$, for all $x \geq 0$ we have that $${{\mathbb P}}(Z=0,M=x)={{\mathbb P}}(\tau =0, W_0 \in [x, x+dx) ) = 1_{ \{ x=0 \} } {{\mathbb P}}(W_0=0),$$ while for $n \geq 1$, $x > 0$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
{{\mathbb P}}(Z=n, M \in [x, x+dx)) &=& {{\mathbb P}}(\tau = n, W_0 \in [x, x+dx) ) \\
&=& {{\mathbb P}}(W_{-n}=0, W_{-n+1}>0,..., W_{0} >0, W_0 \in [x, x+dx)) \\
& = & {{\mathbb P}}(W_{-n+1}>0, \dots,W_{0} >0, W_0 \in [x, x+dx) \Big| W_{-n} = 0 ) {{\mathbb P}}( W_{-n} = 0 ) \\
&=& {{\mathbb P}}( X_{n} >0,\dots, X_{n} +\cdots + X_{1} >0, X_{n} +\cdots + X_{1} \in [x, x+dx) ) \\
& & \cdot \, {{\mathbb P}}( W_{-n} = 0 ), \\
& =& {{\mathbb P}}(N>n, S_n \in [x, x+dx) ) {{\mathbb P}}( W_{-n} = 0 ), \end{aligned}$$ where we used . Since $\{W_{n}\}_{n \leq 0}$ is stationary, $W_{-n}$ is equal in law to $M$ and we are done.
#### **Proof of Proposition \[jointexpl\]**
Define the function $$\phi_{Z^\pm_a, M^\pm_a }(s,u) := \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \int_{0}^{\infty} s^n \, e^{ux} f_{Z^\pm_a, M^\pm_a}(n,x) dx.$$ By Proposition \[ZrelN\], we can express $\phi_{Z^\pm_a, M^\pm_a }(s,u)$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{sumtrans}
\phi_{Z^\pm_a, M^\pm_a }(s,u) &= & \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \int_{0}^{\infty} s^n e^{ux} \sum_{j>n}f_{N^\pm_a, S^{a,\pm}_n}(j,x) {{\mathbb P}}(M^\pm_a=0) dx \nonumber\\
&= & {{\mathbb P}}(M^\pm_a=0) \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} s^n {{\mathbb P}}(N^\pm_a >n) \int_{0}^{\infty} e^{ux} f_{ (S^{a,\pm}_n =x | N^\pm>n) } dx \nonumber \\
&= & {{\mathbb P}}(M^\pm_a=0) \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} s^n {{\mathbb P}}(N^\pm_a >n) {{\mathbb E}}( e^{u S^{a,\pm}_n } | N^\pm_a>n ) .\end{aligned}$$ where all the variables with signs $^\pm$ are the corresponding ones to each one-sided random walk. By [@Ig] (p. 744), for all $u \in [0,c]$, and $0< s < 1$ we have that $$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} s^n {{\mathbb P}}(N_a^\pm >n) {{\mathbb E}}( e^{u S^{a,\pm}_n } | N_a^\pm>n ) = (1-s) \exp \Big\{ \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{s^n}{n} [ {{\mathbb P}}(S^{a,\pm}_n>0) + {{\mathbb E}}(e^{-u(S^{a,\pm}_n)^*}) ] \Big\} ,$$ then by plug it in (\[sumtrans\]) and expressing $1-s = \exp \{ - \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{s^n}{n} \}$, we obtain $$\label{phiZM}
\phi_{Z^\pm_a, M^\pm_a }(s,u) = {{\mathbb P}}(M^\pm_a=0) \exp \Big\{ \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{s^n}{n} [ {{\mathbb E}}(e^{-u(S^{a,\pm}_n)^*}) - {{\mathbb P}}(S^{a,\pm}_n \leq 0) ] \Big\}=\phi^\pm_a(s,u)\,.$$ Recall the definition of the variables $ Z^+_a = {\mathop{\rm arg\,max}}_{ k\geq 0 } S_k^{a,+}$ , $Z^-_a = -{\mathop{\rm arg\,max}}_{k \leq 0} S_k^{a,-}$. Then, the joint transform of $(Z_a,M_a)$ can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{joint2side}
{{\mathbb E}}(s^{Z_a} e^{uM_a} ) &=& {{\mathbb P}}( M_a^+=0) {{\mathbb P}}(M_a^-=0) + \sum_{n=1}^\infty \int_{0}^{\infty} s^n e^{ux} f_{Z^+_a,M^+_a}(n,x) {{\mathbb P}}( M^-_a<x) dx \\
&+& \sum_{n=-\infty}^{-1} \int_{0}^{\infty} s^n e^{ux} f_{Z^-_a,M^-_a}(-n,x) {{\mathbb P}}(M^+_a<x) dx. \nonumber \end{aligned}$$ As a consequence of the exponential right tail assumption we have $${{\mathbb P}}(M^\pm_a \leq x)= 1 - \Big(1- \frac{\gamma^\pm}{\delta^\pm} \Big) e^{- \gamma^\pm \, x} \qquad \forall x > 0,$$ thus by substituing it in and factorising the exponents, $$\begin{aligned}
{{\mathbb E}}(s^{Z_a} \, e^{uM_a}) &=& \Big( \frac{\gamma^+}{\delta^+} \Big) \Big( \frac{\gamma^-}{\delta^-} \Big) +\phi_{Z^+_a, M^+_a}(s,u)
- \Big( 1 - \frac{\gamma^+}{\delta^+} \Big) \phi_{Z^+_a, M^+_a}(s,u - \gamma^+) \\
&+& \phi_{Z^-_a, M^-_a}(s,u) - \Big( 1 - \frac{\gamma^-}{\delta^-} \Big) \phi_{Z^-_a, M^-_a}(s,u- \gamma^-), \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ and the result follows since we already calculated $\phi_{Z^\pm_a, M^\pm_a}=\phi^\pm_a$ in .
Scaling the height function and the root counting process
---------------------------------------------------------
The key in the proof of the theorems for the scaling scenario is the introduction of a point process that counts the number of roots whose geodesic tree has height bigger or equal to $n$. Define the *root counting process* at “time” $n\geq 1$ as $${\mathcal}{Z}_n(m):=\sum_{z\in (0,m]} \zeta_n(z)\,,\,\mbox{ for }m\geq 1\,,$$ where $$\zeta_n(z):=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}1 & \mbox{ if $(z,-z)=\Phi(x_1,x_2)$ and $x_1+x_2=n+1$},\\
0 & \mbox{otherwise}\,.\end{array}\right.$$ In words, $\zeta_n(z)=1$ if $(z,-z)$ is a root of a tree that intersects the line $x_1+x_2=n+1$. The process ${\mathcal}Z_n$ counts the number of such roots in the interval $(0,m]$. Notice that, by translation invariance of the last-passage percolation model, the counting process ${\mathcal}Z_n$ is also stationary. It is also not hard to see that $H(m)$, the maximum height on $(0,m]$, and this counting process are related by $$\{H(m)< n\}=\{{\mathcal}Z_n(m)=0\}\,,$$ and so $$\label{counting2}
{{\mathbb P}}\left(H(m)< n\right)={{\mathbb P}}\left({\mathcal}Z_n(m)=0\right)\,.$$ In particular, $$\label{counting3}
p_n:={{\mathbb P}}\left(\zeta_n(0)=1\right)={{\mathbb P}}\left(H_0\geq n\right)\,.$$
We also note that, by definition, $z$ is a root if and only if it is a point to line maximiser : $\zeta_n(z)=1$ if and only if there exists ${{\mathbf x}}=(x(1),x(2))$ such that $x(1)+x(2)=n+1$ and $$\label{maximiser}
z=\arg\max_{y:(y,-y)\leq {{\mathbf x}}} L\left((y+1,-y+1),{{\mathbf x}}\right)\,.$$ Thus, ${\mathcal}Z_n$ can also be seen as point process that counts the number of maximisers at “time” $n$.
#### **Proof of Theorem \[thm:tail\]**
Let $Z(n)$ denote location in ${{\mathbb Z}}$ of the root of $(n,n)$: $\Phi(n,n)=(Z(n),-Z(n))$. By , we have that $$\label{scalarg}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{Z(n)}{2^{2/3}n^{2/3}}\stackrel{dist.}{=}X:=\arg\max_{x\in{{\mathbb R}}}\left\{{\mathcal}A(x)-x^2\right\}\,.$$ (This is analog to Theorem 1.6 in [@Jo].) In particular, there exist $\epsilon,c>0$ such that $${{\mathbb P}}\left(|Z(n)|< cn^{2/3}\right)>\epsilon\,,$$ for all $n\geq 1$. If $|Z(n)|< m$ then there will at least one root in $(-m,m)$. By stationarity of ${\mathcal}Z_n$, we then have that $${{\mathbb P}}\left(|Z(n)|< m\right)\leq {{\mathbb P}}\left({\mathcal}Z_n(2m-1)\geq 1\right)\leq 2m p_n\,,$$ (in the right-hand side inequality we use the union bound) and hence, $$0<\epsilon<{{\mathbb P}}\left(|Z(n)|\leq cn^{2/3}\right)\leq 2cn^{2/3}p_n\,,$$ which implies that $${{\mathbb P}}\left(H_0\geq n\right)=p_n\geq \frac{\epsilon}{2cn^{2/3}}\,,$$ and finishes the proof of Theorem \[thm:tail\].
#### **Proof of Theorem \[thm:maxscal\]**
We use again : $${{\mathbb P}}\left(|Z(n)|< m\right)\leq {{\mathbb P}}\left({\mathcal}Z_n(2m-1)\geq 1\right)\leq {{\mathbb P}}\left(H(2m)\geq n\right)\,,$$ and thus, $${{\mathbb P}}\left(\frac{H(m)}{2^{-1}m^{3/2}}\geq r\right)\geq {{\mathbb P}}\left( \frac{Z(n)}{2^{2/3}n^{2/3}}\in\left(\frac{-1}{2r^{2/3}},\frac{1}{2r^{2/3}}\right)\right)\,,$$ where $n=\lfloor r2^{-1}(2m)^{3/2}\rfloor$, which shows that $${{\mathbb G}}(r)\geq {{\mathbb P}}\left( X \in\left(\frac{-1}{2r^{2/3}},\frac{1}{2r^{2/3}}\right]\right)\,.$$
The reason for conjectures , and , lyes in the expected limiting behaviour of the point process ${\mathcal}Z_n$. Indeed, by seeing roots as maximisers , if is true then we must have that $$\lim_{n\to\infty}X_n(y)\stackrel{dist.}{=}X(y)\,\,\mbox{ (as process in $y\in{{\mathbb R}}$) }\,,$$ where $$X_n(y):={\mathop{\rm arg\,max}}_{x}\left\{\frac{L\left((0,x)_n,(1,y)_n\right)-4n}{2^{4/3}n^{1/3}}\right\}\,.$$ Thus, under assumption , we have $$\lim_{n\to\infty}{\mathcal}Z_n(2^{2/3}xn^{2/3})\stackrel{dist.}{=}{\mathcal}U(x)\,.$$ To get one also needs to use . For the scaling behaviour of the weighted substrate model we address the reader to [@Pi].
[10]{}
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Amir, G., Omer, A., Valkó, B.</span> (2011). The TASEP speed process *Ann. Probab. **39***:1205–1242.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Antunović, T., Procaccia, E.</span> (2014). Stationary Eden model on amenable groups. arXiv:1410.4944.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Cator, E. A., Pimentel, L. P. R.</span> (2012). Busemman functions and equilibrium measures in LPP models. *Prob. Theory Rel. Fields. **154***:89–125.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Cator, E. A., Pimentel, L. P. R.</span> (2013). Busemman functions and the speed of a second class particle in the rarefaction fan. *Ann. Probab. **14***:2401–2425.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Cator, E. A., Pimentel, L. P. R.</span> (2015). On the local fluctuations of last-passage percolation models. *Stoch. Proc. Appl. **125***:538–551.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Corwin, I., Ferrari, P L., Péché, S.</span> (2010). Limit Processes for TASEP with Shocks and Rarefaction Fans. *J. Stat. Phys. **140***: 232–267.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Corwin, I., Quatel, J., Remenik, D.</span> (2011). Renormalization fixed point of the KPZ universality class. arXiv:1103.3422.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Coupier, D.</span> (2011). Multiple geodesics with the same direction. *Elect. Comm. in Prob. **16***:517–527.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Coupier, D.</span> (2012). Coexistence probability in the last passage percolation model is $6-8\log2$. *Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Probab. Statist. **48***:973–988.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Deijfen, M., Häggström, O.</span> (2007). The two-type Richardson model with unbounded initial configurations. *Ann. App. Probab. **17***:1639–1656.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Ferrari, P. A., Martin, J. B., Pimentel, L. P. R.</span> (2009). A phase transition for competition interfaces. *Ann. Appl. Prob. **19***:281–317.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Ferrari, P. A., Pimentel, L. P. R.</span> (2005). Competition interfaces and second class particles. *Ann. Prob. **33***:1235–1254.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Groeneboom, P.</span> (1989). Brownian motion with a parabolic drift and Airy functions. *Prob. Theory Rel. Fields **81***:79–109.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Iglehart, D.</span> (1974). Random Walks with Negative Drift Conditioned to Stay Positive. *Journal of Applied Probability **11***:742–751.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Johansson, K.</span> (2003). Discrete polynuclear growth and determinantal processes.*Comm. Math. Phys. **242***:277–329.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Klar, B.</span> (2015). A note on gamma difference distributions. *J. Statist. Comput. Simul.*: To appear.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Moreno, G., Quastel, J., Remenik, D.</span> (2013). Endpoint Distribution of Directed Polymers in 1 + 1 Dimensions. *Commun. Math. Phys. **317***: 363–380.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Philippe, R.</span> (2003). Stochastic Networks and Queues. *Springer-Verlag*: 1st Edition.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Pimentel, L. P. R.</span> (2014). On the location of the maximum of a continuous stochastic process. *J. Appl. Prob. **51***: 152–161.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Pimentel, L. P. R.</span> (2013). Duality between coalescence times and exit points in last-passage percolation models. arXiv:1307.7769.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Resnick, S.</span> (1992). Adventures in Stochastic Processes. *Birkhäuser*.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Rost, H.</span> (1981). Nonequilibrium behaviour of a many particle process: Density profile and local equilibria. *Z. Wahrsch. Verw. Gebiete **58***:41–53.
[^1]: Leandro P. R. Pimentel was partially supported by the CNPQ grant 474233/2012-0. Sergio I. López was partially funded by the CAPES grant *Jovens Talentos* 063/2013
[^2]: This problem was communicated to us by D. Ahlberg, as a conjecture proposed by I. Benjamini.
[^3]: A similar reasoning can be done for a deterministic concave substrate that exhibits a periodic structure on each side, like the one with parameters $k_-,k_+$, and the analog result will hold as well.
[^4]: We used a random sample of size $50,000$ where the height of the tree was truncated at $n=1000$, using JULIA (through JUNO) programming language.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- Lorenzo Casarin
title: '**On higher derivative gauge theories**'
---
{height="5cm"}
**Università degli Studi di Padova**
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia “Galileo Galilei”
Corso di Laurea Magistrale in Fisica
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">On Higher-Derivative Gauge Theories</span>
[Supervisor:Candidate:]{}\
**Prof. Arkady TseytlinLorenzo Casarin**\
[Imperial College London]{}
[Internal Supervisor:]{}\
**Prof. Stefano Giusto**\
[Università degli Studi di Padova]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
**Academic Year 2016/2017**
**Abstract**
In this work we study the main properties and the one-loop renormalization of a Yang-Mills theory in which the kinetic term contains also a fourth-order differential operator; in particular, we consider the Euclidean Lagrangian density $${ { \mathcal{L} } }=
- \frac{1}{2 g^2} \operatorname{tr}F_{\mu\nu} F_{\mu\nu} - \frac{1}{ m^2 g^2 }\operatorname{tr}\left[
\left( { { \mathcal{\nabla} } }_\mu F_{\mu\nu} \right)^2
+ \gamma \: F_{\mu\nu}
\left[ F_{\mu\lambda},
F_{\nu\lambda} \right]
\right],$$ where we add to the Yang-Mills term the most general contribution of mass dimension six, weighted with a dimensionful parameter $m$. This model is renormalizable; in the literature two values for the $\beta$ function for the gauge coupling $g$ have been reported: one in [@Fradkin:1981iu], using the heat kernel approach, and the other in [@Grinstein:2008qq; @Schuster], obtained via Feynman diagrams. In this work we repeat the computation using heat kernel techniques confirming the latter result. We also considered coupling with matter.
We then study the supersymmetric extension of the model; this is a nontrivial task because of the complicate structure of the higher-derivative term. Some partial results were known, but a computation of the $\beta$ functions for the full supersymmetric non-Abelian higher-derivative gauge theory was missing. We make use of the (unextended) supersymmetric higher-derivative Lagrangian density for the [Yang-Mills]{} field in six spacetime dimensions derived in [@Ivanov:2005qf]; by dimensional reduction we obtain the $N=1$ and $N=2$ supersymmetric higher-derivative super-Yang-Mills Lagrangian in four spacetime dimensions, whose $\beta$ function we evaluate using heat kernels. We also deduce the $\beta$ function for $N=4$ supersymmetry.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
Given $1\le q \le 2$ and $\alpha\in{\mathbb{R}}$, we study the properties of the solutions of the minimum problem $$\lambda(\alpha,q)=\min\left\{\dfrac{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1}|u'|^{2}dx+\alpha\left|\int_{-1}^{1}|u|^{q-1}u\, dx\right|^{\frac2q}}{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1}|u|^{2}dx}, u\in H_{0}^{1}(-1,1),\,u\not\equiv 0\right\}.$$ In particular, depending on $\alpha$ and $q$, we show that the minimizers have constant sign up to a critical value of $\alpha=\alpha_{q}$, and when $\alpha>\alpha_{q}$ the minimizers are odd.\
MSC: 49R50, 26D10
author:
- |
Francesco Della Pietra[^1] [, ]{}\
Gianpaolo Piscitelli[^2]
title: |
A saturation phenomenon\
for a nonlinear nonlocal eigenvalue problem
---
Introduction
============
In this paper we consider the following problem: $$\label{operat}
\lambda(\alpha,q)=\inf \left\{ \mathcal Q[u,\alpha],\; u\in H_0^1(-1,1),\,u\not\equiv 0 \right\},$$ where $\alpha\in{\mathbb{R}}$, $1\le q \le 2$ and $$\mathcal{Q}[u,\alpha]:=\dfrac{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1}|u'|^{2}dx+\alpha\left|\int_{-1}^{1}|u|^{q-1}u\, dx\right|^{\frac2q}}{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1}|u|^{2}dx}.$$ Let us observe that $\lambda(\alpha,q)$ is the optimal value in the inequality $$\lambda(\alpha,q)\int_{-1}^{1}|u|^{2}dx\le{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1}|u'|^{2}dx+\alpha\left|\int_{-1}^{1}|u|^{q-1}u\, dx\right|^{\frac2q}}{{\displaystyle}}.$$ which holds for any $u\in H_0^1(-1,1)$. Moreover, in the local case ($\alpha=0$), this inequality reduces to the classical one-dimensional Poincaré inequality; in particular, $$\lambda(0,q)=\frac{\pi^2}{4}$$ for any $q$.
The minimization problem leads, in general, to a nonlinear nonlocal eigenvalue problem. Indeed, supposing $\int_{-1}^1 y|y|^{q-1}\ dx\ge 0$, the associated Euler-Lagrange equation is $$\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
-y'' + \alpha\left({\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^1 y|y|^{q-1}\ dx\right)^{\frac{2}{q}-1} |y|^{q-1}=\lambda(\alpha,q)\, y& \text{in}\ ]-1,1[\\[.4cm]
y(-1)=y(1)=0
\end{array}
\right.$$ (see Section 2 for its precise statement).
This kind of nonlocal problems, in the one dimensional case, as in the multidimensional one, have been studied by several authors in many contexts, as, for example, reaction-diffusion equations describing chemical processes (see [@F], [@S]) or Brownian motion with random jumps (see [@P]). Other results can be found, for example, in [@AB], [@BCGM], [@BFNT], [@D], [@F0], [@Pi].
The purpose of this paper is to study some properties of $\lambda(\alpha,q)$. In particular, depending on $\alpha$ and $q$, we aim to prove symmetry results for the minimizers of .
Under this point of view, in the multidimensional case ($N\ge 2$) the problem has been settled out in [@BFNT] (when $q=1$) and in [@D] (when $q=2$).
Our main result is stated in Theorem \[mainthm1\] below. In particular, the nonlocal term affects the minimizer of problem in the sense that it has constant sign up to a critical value of $\alpha$ and, for $\alpha$ larger than the critical value, it has to change sign, and a saturation effect occurs.
\[mainthm1\] Let $1\le q \le 2$. There exists a positive number $\alpha_{q}$ such that:
1. if $\alpha<\alpha_{q}$, then $$\lambda(\alpha,q)<\pi^{2},$$ and any minimizer $y$ of $\lambda(\alpha,q)$ has constant sign in $]-1,1[$.
2. If $\alpha\ge\alpha_{q}$, then $$\lambda(\alpha,q)= \pi^{2}.$$ Moreover, if $\alpha>\alpha_{q}$, the function [$y(x)=\sin\pi x$, $x\in[-1,1]$, is the only minimizer, up to a multiplicative constant, of $\lambda(\alpha,q)$. Hence it is odd, $\int_{-1}^{1} |y(x)|^{q-1}y(x)\,dx=0$, and $\overline x=0$ is the only point in $]-1,1[$ such that $y(\overline x)=0$. ]{}
Some additional informations are given in the next result.
\[mainthm2\] The following facts hold.
1. For $q=1$, then $\alpha_{1}=\frac{\pi^{2}}{2}$. Moreover, if $\alpha=\alpha_{1}$, there exists a positive minimizer of $\lambda(\alpha_1,1)$, and for any $\overline x\in]-1,1[$ there exists a minimizer $y$ of $\lambda(\alpha_1,1)$ which changes sign in $\overline x$, non-symmetric and with $\int_{-1}^{1}y(x)\,dx\ne 0$ when $\overline x\ne 0$.
2. If $1<q\le 2$ and $\alpha=\alpha_{q}$, [then $\lambda(\alpha_q,q)$ in $[-1,1]$ admits both a positive minimizer and the minimizer $y(x)=\sin\pi x$, up to a multiplicative constant. Hence, any minimizer has constant sign or it is odd.]{}
3. If $q=2$, then $\alpha_{2}=\frac{3}{4}\pi^{2}$.
[ Let us observe that, for any $\alpha\in{\mathbb{R}}$, it holds that $$\label{nonloc-twist}
\lambda(\alpha,q) \le \Lambda_q=\pi^2,$$ where $$\label{twist}
\Lambda_q:=\min \left\{ \dfrac{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1}|u'|^{2}dx}{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1}|u|^{2}dx},\; u\in H_0^1(-1,1),\,\int_{-1}^{1}|u|^{q-1}u\,dx=0,\,u\not\equiv 0 \right\}.$$ It is known that, when $q\in[1,2]$, then $\Lambda_q=\Lambda_1=\pi^{2}$, and the minimizer of is, up to a multiplicative constant, $y(x)=\sin \pi x$, $x\in[-1,1]$ (see for example [@CD]).]{}
Problems with prescribed averages of $u$ and boundary value conditions have been studied in several papers. We refer the reader, for example, to [@BK; @BKN; @CD; @E; @EK; @GN; @N]. In recent literature, also the multidimensional case has been adressed (see, for example [@BDNT], [@FH], [@CHP; @CHPerratum], [@Narxiv]).
If the interval of integration is $]a,b[$ instead of $]-1,1[$, then $$\lambda(\alpha,q;]a,b[)= \left(\frac{2}{b-a}\right)^{2} \cdot
\lambda\left(\left(\frac{b-a}{2}\right)^{1+\frac 2q}\alpha,\,q\right).$$
The outline of the paper follows. In Section 2 we show some properties of $\lambda(\alpha,q)$, while in Section 3 we study the behavior of changing-sign minimizers. Finally, in Section 4 we give the proof of the main results.
Some properties of the first eigenvalue
=======================================
Let us observe that if $y$ is a minimizer in , then is not restrictive to suppose that $\int_{-1}^{1}|y|^{q-1}y\,dx\ge 0$. From now on, we assume that this condition is satisfied by the minimizers.
\[propr\] Let $1\le q \le 2$ and $\alpha\in {\mathbb{R}}$. The following properties of $\lambda(\alpha,q)$ hold.
1. Problem admits a minimizer.
2. [Any minimizer $y$ of satisfies the following boundary value problem $$\label{el}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
-y'' + \alpha \gamma |y|^{q-1}=\lambda(\alpha,q)\, y& \text{in}\ ]-1,1[\\[.4cm]
y(-1)=y(1)=0,
\end{array}
\right.$$ where $$\gamma=
\begin{cases}
0 &\text{if both } q=2 \text{ and }\displaystyle \int_{-1}^1 y|y|\ dx=0, \\
\displaystyle\left(\int_{-1}^1 y|y|^{q-1}\ dx\right)^{\frac{2}{q}-1} &\text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}$$ Moreover, $y\in C^{2}(-1,1)$. ]{}
3. For any $q\in[1,2]$, the function $\lambda(\cdot,q)$ is Lipschitz continuous and non-decreasing with respect to $\alpha\in{\mathbb{R}}$.
4. If $\alpha\le 0$, the minimizers of do not change sign in $]-1,1[$. In addition, $${\displaystyle}\lim_{\alpha\to -\infty}\lambda(\alpha,q)=-\infty.$$
5. As $\alpha\to+\infty$, we have that [$$\lambda(\alpha,q)\to \Lambda_q=\pi^{2}.$$]{}
The existence of a minimizer follows immediately by the standard methods of Calculus of Variations. Furthermore, any minimizer satisfies . In particular, let us explicitly observe that if $1\le q\le 2$ and there exists a minimizer $y$ of $\lambda(\alpha,q)$ such that $\int_{-1}^{1}|y|^{q-1}y\,dx=0$, then it holds that $\gamma=0$ in . Indeed, in such a case $y$ is a minimizer also of the problem , whose Euler-Lagrange equation is (see [@CD]) $$\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
-y'' =\lambda(\alpha,q)\, y\quad &\text{in}\ ]-1,1[,\\[.4cm]
y(-1)=y(1)=0.
\end{array}
\right.$$ From immediately follows that any minimizer $y$ is $C^{2}(-1,1)$. Hence [*(a)-(b)*]{} have been proved.
In order to get property [*(c)*]{}, we stress that for all ${\varepsilon}>0$, by Hölder inequality, it holds $$\mathcal{Q} [u,\alpha+{\varepsilon}]\le\mathcal{Q}[u,\alpha]+{\varepsilon}\frac{\left({\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} |u|^q\ dx\right)^{2/q}}{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} u^2\ dx}\leq\mathcal{Q}[u,\alpha]+ 2^\frac{2-q}{q}{\varepsilon},\quad\forall\, {\varepsilon}>0.$$ Therefore the following chain of inequalities $$\mathcal{Q}[u,\alpha]\leq\mathcal{Q}[u,\alpha+{\varepsilon}]\le\mathcal{Q}[u,\alpha]+ 2^\frac{2-q}{q}{\varepsilon},\quad\forall \ \varepsilon>0,$$ implies, taking the minimum as $u\in H_0^1(-1,1)$, that $$\lambda (\alpha ,q)\leq\lambda (\alpha+\varepsilon,q)\leq\lambda (\alpha,q)+2^\frac{2-q}{q}\varepsilon,\quad\forall \ \varepsilon>0,$$ that proves [*(c)*]{}.
If $\alpha< 0$, then $$\mathcal{Q}[u, \alpha] \ge \mathcal Q[|u|,\alpha],$$ with equality if and only if $u\ge 0$ or $u\le 0$. Hence any minimizer has constant sign in $]-1,1[$. Finally, it is clear from the definition that ${\displaystyle}\lim_{\alpha\to-\infty}\lambda(\alpha,q)=-\infty$. Indeed, by fixing a positive test function $\varphi$ we get $$\lambda(\alpha,q) \le \mathcal Q[\varphi,\alpha].$$ Being $\varphi>0$ in $]-1,1[$, then $\mathcal Q[\varphi,\alpha] \to -\infty \quad\text{as }\alpha\to -\infty$, and the proof of [*(d)*]{} is completed.
In order to show [*(e)*]{}, we recall that [$\lambda(\alpha,q)\le \Lambda_q=\pi^{2}$. ]{}
Let $\alpha_k\ge 0$, $k_n\in{\mathbb{N}}$, be a positively divergent sequence. For any $k$, consider a minimizer $y_k\in W_0^{1,2}$ of (\[operat\]) such that $\|y_k\|_{L^2}=1$. We have that[ $$\lambda(\alpha_k,q)=\int_{-1}^{1} |y'_k|^2\ dx + \alpha_k\left({\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} y_k|y_k|^{q-1} \ dx\right)^\frac{2}{q}\leq \Lambda_q.$$]{} Then $y_k$ converges (up to a subsequence) to a function $y\in H_0^1$, strongly in $L^2$ and weakly in $H_0^1$. Moreover $\|y\|_{L^2}=1$ and [ $$\left( \int_{-1}^{1} y_k|y_k|^{q-1} \ dx\right)^\frac{2}{q}\leq\frac{ \Lambda_q}{\alpha_k}\rightarrow 0 \quad\text{as}\ k\rightarrow + \infty$$]{} which gives that $\int_\Omega y|y|^{q-1} \ dx=0$. On the other hand the weak convergence in $H_0^{1}$ implies that $$\label{lsclap}
\int_{-1}^{1} |y'|^2\ dx \leq \liminf_{k \rightarrow \infty}\int_{-1}^{1} |y'_k|^2\ dx.$$ By definitions of [$\Lambda_q$ and $\lambda(\alpha,q)$, and by (\[lsclap\]) we have $$\begin{split}
\Lambda_q\le
\int_{-1}^{1} |y'|^2\ dx &\leq \liminf_{k \rightarrow \infty}\left[\int_{-1}^{1} |y'_k|^2\ dx
+ \alpha_k\left( \int_{-1}^{1} y_k|y_k|^{q-1} \ dx\right)^\frac{2}{q}\right]\\
&\leq\lim_{k \rightarrow \infty}\lambda(\alpha_k,q)\leq \Lambda_q.
\end{split}$$]{} and the result follows.
If $\lambda(\alpha,q)=0$, then $$\label{lapuq2}
-\alpha=\min_{w\in H_0^1(-1,1)}\frac{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} |w'|^2 dx}{\left({\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} |w|^{q} \ {d}x\right)^{2/q}}.$$ Indeed, if $\lambda(\alpha,q)=0$ then necessarily $\alpha<0$ and the minimizers of have constant sign. Let $y\ge 0$ be a minimizer of , by definition we have $$0=\lambda(\alpha,q)=\frac{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} | y'|^2\ dx+\alpha \left(\int_{-1}^{1} y^{q}\ dx\right)^{\frac{2}{q}}}{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} \bar u^2\ dx}$$ and hence $$\label{alpugu}
-\alpha=\dfrac{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} | y'|^2dx}{{\displaystyle}\left(\int_{-1}^{1} y^{q} \ dx\right)^{2/q}}.$$ If we denote by $v$ a minimizer of problem , we have $$0\leq \int_{-1}^{1} | v'|^2\ dx+\alpha \left(\int_{-1}^{1} |v|^{q}\ {d}x\right)^{{2}/{q}}$$ and therefore $$-\alpha\leq\dfrac{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} | v'|^2dx}{{\displaystyle}\left(\int_{-1}^{1} |v|^{q} \ {d}x\right)^{2/q}}=\min_{w\in H_0^1(-1,1)}\frac{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} |w'|^2 dx}{\left({\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} |w|^{q} \ {d}x\right)^{2/q}}.$$ From (\[alpugu\]) the result follows.
Changing-sign minimizers
========================
We first analyze the behavior of the minimizers of , by assuming that they have to change sign in $]-1,1[$. In this case, by Proposition \[propr\] [*(d)*]{}, we may suppose that $\alpha>0$. Moreover, due the homogeneity of the problem, in all the section we will assume also that $$\max_{[-1,1]} y(x)=1,\quad \min_{[-1,1]} y(x)=-\bar m,\quad \bar m\in]0,1].$$ It is always possible to reduce to this condition, by multiplying the solution by a constant if necessary.\
We split the list of the main properties in two propositions.
\[cambiosegno0\] Let $1\le q \le 2$ and suppose that, for some $\alpha>0$, $\lambda(\alpha,q)$ admits a minimizer $y$ that changes sign in $[-1,1]$. Then the following properties hold.
1. The minimizer $y$ has in $]-1,1[$ exactly one maximum point, $\eta_{M}$, with $y(\eta_{M})=1$, and exactly one minimum point, $\eta_{\bar m}$, with $y(\eta_{\bar m})= - \bar m$.
2. If $y_{+}\ge0$ and $y_{-}\le 0$ are, respectively, the positive and negative part of $y$, then $y_{+}$ and $y_{-}$ are, respectively, symmetric about $x=\eta_{M}$ and $x=\eta_{\bar m}$.
3. There exists a unique zero of $y$ in $]-1,1[$.
4. In the minimum value $\bar m$ of $y$, it holds that $$\lambda(\alpha,q)=H(\bar m,q)^2,$$ where $H(m,q)$, $(m,q)\in[0,1]\times[1,2]$, is the function defined as $$\begin{gathered}
H(m,q):= \int_{-m}^1\frac{dy}{ \sqrt{1-z(m,q)(1- |y|^{q-1}y) - y^2}}=\\[.3cm]
=\int_{0}^1\frac{dy}{ \sqrt{1-z(m,q)(1-y^{q}) - y^2}} + \int_{0}^1\frac{mdy}{ \sqrt{1-z(m,q)(1+m^q y^{q}) -m^2 y^2}}\end{gathered}$$ and $z(m,q)=\frac{1-m^2}{1+m^q}$.
\[cambiosegno\] Let us suppose that, for some $\alpha>0$, $\lambda(\alpha,q)$ admits a minimizer $y$ that changes sign in $[-1,1]$. Then the following properties holds.
If $1\le q \le 2$, then $$\lambda(\alpha,q)=\lambda^{T}=\pi^{2}.$$
If $1<q\le 2$, then $$\label{q-average}
\int_{-1}^{1}|y|^{q-1}y\,dx=0.$$
If $1\le q \le 2$ and holds, then [$y(x)=C\sin \pi x$, with $C\in {\mathbb{R}}\setminus\{0\}$]{}. Hence the only point in $]-1,1[$ where $y$ vanishes is $\overline x=0$.
First of all, if $y$ is a minimizer of which changes sign, let us consider $\eta_{M},\eta_{\bar m}$ in $]-1,1[$ such that $y(\eta_{M})=1=\max_{[-1,1]}y$, and $y(\eta_{\bar m})=-\bar m=\min_{[-1,1]}y$, with $\bar m\in]0,1]$. For the sake of simplicity, we will write $\lambda=\lambda(\alpha,q)$. Multiplying the equation in by $y'$ and integrating we get $$\label{inel1d}
\frac{y'^2}{2}+\lambda \frac{y^2}{2} = \frac{\alpha\gamma}{q} |y|^{q-1}y + c\qquad\ \text{in } ] -1,1[,$$ for a suitable constant $c$. Being $y'(\eta_{M})=0$ and $y(\eta_{M})=1$, we have $$\label{cosmax}
c=\frac{\lambda}{2}-\frac{\alpha}{q} \gamma.$$ Moreover, $y'(\eta_{\bar m})=0$ and $y(\eta_{\bar m})$ give also that $$\label{cosmin}
c=\lambda\frac{\bar m^2}{2}+\frac{\alpha}{q} \bar m^q\gamma.$$ Joining and , we obtain $$\label{costnl}
\begin{sistema}
\gamma =\frac{{\displaystyle}q\lambda}{{\displaystyle}2 \alpha}z(\bar m,q)\\[.3cm]
c=\frac{{\displaystyle}\lambda}{{\displaystyle}2}t(\bar m,q)
\end{sistema}$$ where $$z(m,q)=\frac{1-m^2}{1+m^q} \quad\text{and}\quad t(m,q)=\frac{m^2+m^q}{1+m^q}=1-z(m,q).$$ Then can be written as $$\label{integratedel0}
\frac{y'^2}{2}+\lambda \frac{y^2}{2} = \frac{\lambda}{2} z(\bar m,q) |y|^{q-1}y + \frac{\lambda}{2} t(\bar m,q)\qquad\ \text{in } ]-1,1[.$$ Therefore we have $$\label{integratedel}
(y')^2=\lambda [1-z(\bar m,q)(1- |y|^{q-1}y) - y^2] \qquad\ \text{in } ]-1,1[.$$
First of all, it is easy to see that the number of zeros of $y$ has to be finite. Let $$-1=\zeta_{1}<\ldots<\zeta_{j}<\zeta_{j+1}<\ldots<\zeta_{n}=1$$ be the zeros of $y$.
As observed in [@CD], it is easy to show that $$\label{dac}
y'(x)=0 \iff y(x)=-\bar m\text{ or }y(x)=1.$$ This implies that $y$ has no other local minima or maxima in $]-1,1[$, and in any interval $]\zeta_{j},\zeta_{j+1}[$ where $y>0$ there is a unique maximum point, and in any interval $]\zeta_{j},\zeta_{j+1}[$ where $y<0$ there is a unique minimum point.
To prove , let $$g(Y)=1-z(\bar m,q)(1-|Y|^{q-1}Y)-Y^{2},\quad Y\in [-\bar m,1].$$ So we have $$\label{CDproof}
(y')^{2}=\lambda\, g(y).$$ Observe that $g(-\bar m)=g(1)=0$. Being $q\le 2$, it holds that $g'(\bar Y)=0$ implies $g(\bar Y)>0$. Hence, $g$ does not vanish in $]-\bar m,1[$. By , it holds that $y'(x)\ne 0$ if $y(x)\ne 1 $ and $y(x)\ne -\bar m$.
Now, adapting an argument contained in [@DGS Lemma 2.6], the following three claims below allow to complete the proof of [*(a1)*]{}, [*(b1)*]{} and [*(c1)*]{}.
Claim 1:
: in any interval $]\zeta_{j},\zeta_{j+1}[$ given by two subsequent zeros of $y$ and in which $y=y^{+}>0$, has the same length; in any of such intervals, $y^{+}$ is symmetric about $x=\frac{\zeta_{j}+\zeta_{j+1}}{2}$;
Claim 2:
: in any interval $]\zeta_{j},\zeta_{j+1}[$ given by two subsequent zeros of $y$ and in which $y=y^{-}<0$ has the same length; in any of such intervals, $y^{-}$ is symmetric about $x=\frac{\zeta_{j}+\zeta_{j+1}}{2}$;
Claim 3:
: there is a unique zero of $y$ in $]-1,1[$.
Then, $y$ admits a unique maximum point and a unique minimum point in $]-1,1[$, and the positive and negative parts are symmetric with respect to $x=\eta_{M}$ and $x=\eta_{\bar m}$, respectively.
In order to get claims 1 and 2, To fix the ideas, let us assume that $y>0$ in $]\zeta_{2k-1},\zeta_{2k}[$, and $y<0$ in $]\zeta_{2k},\zeta_{2k+1}[$. If this is not the case, the procedure is analogous.
Let us consider $y=y_{+}>0$ in $]\zeta_{2k-1},\zeta_{2k}[$, and denote by $\eta_{2k-1}$ the unique maximum point in such interval. Then by , integrating between $\zeta_{2k-1}$ and $\eta_{2k-1}$ we have $$\int_{0}^{1}\frac{dy}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1-y^q) - y^2}}
=(\eta_{2k-1}-\zeta_{2k-1})\sqrt{\lambda}.$$ Similarly, integrating between $\eta_{2k-1}$ and $\zeta_{2k}$, it holds $$\int_{0}^{1}\frac{dy}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1-y^q) - y^2}}
=(\zeta_{2k}-\eta_{2k-1})\sqrt{\lambda}.$$ Hence $$\zeta_{2k}-\zeta_{2k-1}=
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda}}\int_{0}^{1}\frac{dy}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1-y^q) - y^2}},\quad\text{and}\quad\eta_{2k-1}=\frac{\zeta_{2k-1}+\zeta_{2k}}{2}.$$ Similarly, consider that in $]\zeta_{2k},\zeta_{2k+1}[$ it holds $y=y_{-}<0$, and $y(\eta_{2k})=-\bar m$. By , integrating between $\zeta_{2k}$ and $\eta_{2k}$ we have $$\int_{0}^{\bar m}\frac{dy}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1+y^q) - y^2}}
=(\eta_{2k}-\zeta_{2k})\sqrt{\lambda},$$ and then between $\eta_{2k}$ and $\zeta_{2k+1}$, it holds $$\int_{0}^{\bar m}\frac{dy}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1+y^q) - y^2}}
=(\zeta_{2k+1}-\eta_{2k})\sqrt{\lambda}.$$ Hence $$\zeta_{2k+1}-\zeta_{2k}=
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda}}\int_{0}^{\bar m}\frac{dy}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1+y^q) - y^2}},\quad\text{and}\quad\eta_{2k}=\frac{\zeta_{2k}+\zeta_{2k+1}}{2}.$$ Resuming, we have that any interval given by two subsequent zeros of $y$ and in which $y=y_{+}>0$, has the same length. Similarly, any interval given by two subsequent zeros of $y$ and in which $y=y_{-}<0$, has the same length.\
Now, again from , if $x\in]\zeta_{2k-1},\eta_{2k-1}[$ it holds $$\label{sim1}
\int_{0}^{y(x)}\frac{dy}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1-y^q) - y^2}}
=(x-\zeta_{2k-1})\sqrt{\lambda},$$ and, if $t\in]\eta_{2k-1},\zeta_{2k}[$, then $$-\int_{0}^{y(t)}\frac{dy}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1-y^q) - y^2}}
=(t-\zeta_{2k})\sqrt{\lambda}.$$ On the other hand, by choosing $t=\zeta_{2k-1}+\zeta_{2k}-x\in]\eta_{2k-1},\zeta_{2k}[$ it holds $$-(x-\zeta_{2k-1})\sqrt{\lambda}=(t-\zeta_{2k})\sqrt{\lambda}=-\int_{0}^{y(t)}\frac{dy}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1-y^q) - y^2}}.$$ From we deduce that $y(x)=y(t)$, hence $y$ is symmetric about $x=\eta_{2k-1}$ in the interval $]\zeta_{2k-1},\zeta_{2k}[$.\
In the same way, $y$ is symmetric about $x=\eta_{2k}$ in the interval $]\zeta_{2k},\zeta_{2k+1}[$.\
Now we show that the number of the zeros of $y$ is odd. Let us observe that $$A_{+}:=\int_{\zeta_{2k-1}}^{\zeta_{2k}}y^{q}dx\ge
\int_{\zeta_{2k}}^{\zeta_{2k+1}}(-y)^{q}dx =:A_{-}\;.$$ Indeed, multiplying by $|y(x)|^{2q}$ and using the symmetry properties of $y$ we have $$\begin{gathered}
A_{+}= \frac{2}{\sqrt\lambda} \int_{\zeta_{2k-1}}^{\eta_{2k-1}}\frac{y^{q}}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1-y^q) - y^2}}y'dx
=\\=\frac{2}{\sqrt\lambda}\int_{0}^{1}\frac{y^{q}}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1-y^q) - y^2}}dy\end{gathered}$$ and $$\begin{gathered}
A_{-}= \frac{2}{\sqrt\lambda} \int_{\eta_{2k}}^{\zeta_{2k+1}}\frac{(-y)^{q}}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1+|y|^q) - y^2}}y'dx
=\\=\frac{2}{\sqrt\lambda}\int_{0}^{1}\frac{\bar m^{q+1}y^{q}}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1+\bar m^{q}y^q) - \bar m^{2}y^2}}dy.\end{gathered}$$ If $y$ has an even number $n$ of zeros, two cases may occur.\
[**Case 1: $\bar m=1$**]{}. Then $z(1,q)=0$, and by $\gamma=0$. On the other hand, $A_{+}=A_{-}$, and being $n$ even, then $\gamma=A_{+}^{\frac2q-1}$ and this is absurd.\
[**Case 2: $\bar m<1$.**]{} Let us consider the function $\tilde y\in H^{1}_{0}(-1,1)$ defined as $$\tilde y(x)=
\begin{cases}
\phantom{-}y(x) &\text{if }x \in[\zeta_{0},\zeta_{n-1}]\\
-y(x) &\text{if }x \in [\zeta_{n-1},1].
\end{cases}$$ We have that $$\label{contra}
\begin{array}{l}
{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1}(\tilde y')^{2}dx =
\int_{-1}^{1}(y')^{2}dx,\; \int_{-1}^{1}\tilde y^{2}dx =
\int_{-1}^{1}y^{2}dx, \\[.4cm] {\displaystyle}\left|\int_{-1}^{1}|\tilde y|^{q-1}\tilde y\,dx\right| < \int_{-1}^{1}|y|^{q-1}y\,dx.
\end{array}$$ The first two equalities in are obvious. To show last inequality, we recall that $y(x)$ is positive in $]-1,\zeta_{2}[$, hence if it has an even number of zeros, it is positive in $]\zeta_{n-1},1[$. Hence it is sufficient to observe that $A_{+} > A_{-}$ and $$\int_{-1}^{1}|y|^{q-1}y\,dx=\frac{n}{2} A_{+}-\frac{n-2}{2} A_{-},\qquad \int_{-1}^{1}|\tilde y|^{q-1}\tilde y\,dx=\frac{n-2}{2} A_{+}-\frac{n}{2}A_{-}.$$ Then, implies that $\mathcal Q[\tilde y,\alpha]<\mathcal Q[ y,\alpha]$ and this contradicts the minimality of $y$. So, the number $n$ of the zeros of $y$ is odd.\
Finally, we conclude that $n=3$ (Claim 3). If not, by considering the function $w(x)=y\left(\frac{2(x+1)}{n-1}-1\right)$, $x\in [-1,1]$, we obtain that $$\mathcal{Q}[w,\alpha]=\dfrac{\left(\dfrac{2}{n-1}\right)^2 {\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1}|y'|^{2}dx+\alpha\left|\int_{-1}^{1}|y|^{q-1}y\, dx\right|^{\frac2q}}{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1}|y|^{2}dx}<\mathcal{Q}[y,\alpha],$$ that is absurd.
Hence, the solution $y$ has only one zero in $]-1,1[$, and also $(c1)$ is proved.
Now denote by $\eta_{M}$ and $\eta_{\bar m}$, respectively, the unique maximum and minimum point of $y$. It is not restrictive to suppose $\eta_{M}<\eta_{\bar m}$. They are such that $\eta_{M}-\eta_{\bar m}=1$, with $y'<0$ in $]\eta_{M},\eta_{\bar m}[$. Then $$\sqrt{\lambda(\alpha,q)}=\frac{-y'}{\sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1-|y|^{q-1}y)- y^2}} \qquad\ \text{in} \ ]\eta_{M},\eta_{\bar m}[.$$ Integrating between $\eta_{M}$ and $\eta_{\bar m}$, we have $$\lambda(\alpha,q)=\left[\int_{-\bar m}^1\frac{dy}{ \sqrt{1-z(\bar m,q)(1-|y|^{q-1}y) - y^2}}\right]^{2}= H(\bar m,q),$$ and the proof of the Proposition is completed.
We stress that properties $(a1)-(a3)$ can be also proved by using a symmetrization argument, by rearranging the functions $y^{+}$ and $y^{-}$ and using the Pólya-Sze̋go inequality and the properties of rearrangements (see also, for example, [@BFNT] and [@D]). For the convenience of the reader, we prefer to give an elementary proof without using the symmetrization technique.
Our aim now is to study the function $H$ defined in Proposition \[cambiosegno0\].
\[propminimo\] For any $m\in[0,1]$ and $q\in [1,2]$ it holds that $$H(m,q) \ge H(m,1)=\pi.$$ Moreover, if $m<1$ and $q>1$, then $$H(m,q)>\pi,$$ while $$H(m,1)=\pi,\quad \forall m\in[0,1].$$ Hence if $H(m,q)=\pi$ and $1<q\le 2$, then necessarily $m=1$.
[Let us explicitly observe that in the case $\alpha\le 0$, it holds that $\lambda(\alpha,q)\le \frac{\pi^{2}}{4}<H(m,q)^{2}$ for any $m\in[0,1]$ and $q\in[1,2]$. ]{}
\[rem3.5\] The proof of Proposition \[propminimo\] is based on the study of the integrand function that defines $H(m,q)$, that is $$h(m,q,y):=\frac{1}{ \sqrt{1-z(m,q)(1-y^{q}) - y^2 }}
+\frac{m}{ \sqrt{1-z(m,q)(1+ m^{q}y^{q})- m^{2}y^2 }}.$$ Let us explicitly observe that if $m=1$, then $z(1,q)=0$ and $$h(1,q,y)=\frac{2}{ \sqrt{1- y^2 }},$$ that is constant in $q$. Moreover, if $y=0$, then $$h(m,q,0)=\frac{1+m}{\sqrt{1-z(m,q) }}$$ that is strictly increasing in $q\in[1,2]$. Furthermore, simple computations yield $$\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
H(1,q)=\pi, & H(0,q)=\dfrac{\pi}{2-q}\ge \pi\quad(H(0,2)=+\infty), \\[.5cm]
H(m,1)=\pi, & H(m,2)={\displaystyle}\frac\pi2 \sqrt{\frac{1+m^{2}}{2}}\left(\frac 1m +1\right)\ge \pi.
\end{array}
\right.$$
To prove Proposition \[propminimo\], it is sufficient to show that $h$ is monotone in $q$.
\[lemma-monotonia\] For any fixed $y\in[0,1[$ and $m\in]0,1[$, the function $h(m,\cdot,y)$ is strictly increasing as $q\in[1,2]$.
From the preceding observations, we may assume $m\in]0,1[$ and $y\in]0,1[$. Differentiating in $q$, we have that $$\begin{split}
{\partial}_{q}h = &- \frac {1}{2F_{I}^{3}} \big[-(1-y^{q}){\partial}_{q} z + z\, y^{q}\log y \big]+\\[.2cm]
&- \frac {m}{2F_{II}^{3}} \big[
-(1+m^{q}y^{q}){\partial}_{q}z- z\,m^{q}y^{q}(\log m +\log y)
\big],
\end{split}$$ where $$\label{firint}
F_{I}(m,q,y):= \sqrt{1-z(m,q)(1- y^{q}) - y^2} \le \sqrt{1-y^2},$$ and $$\label{secint}
F_{II}(m,q,y):=\sqrt{1-z(m,q)(1+m^{q}y^{q})-m^{2}y^{2}}\ge m{\sqrt{1-y^{2}}}.$$ Being $$z=\frac{1-m^{2}}{1+m^{q}},\quad
{\partial}_{q}z= -\frac{1-m^{2}}{(1+m^{q})^{2}}m^{q}\log m,$$ we have that $$\begin{split}
{\partial}_{q}h = \frac12\frac{1-m^{2}}{(1+m^{q})^{2}}\bigg\{ &\overbrace{\bigg[ -(1-y^{q})m^{q}\log m -y^{q}(1+m^{q})\log y\bigg]}^{h_{1}(m,q,y)}\frac{1}{F_{I}^{3}}+ \\[.2cm]
+& \underbrace{\bigg[-(1+m^{q}y^{q})\log m+(1+m^{q})y^{q}(\log m +\log y)\bigg]}_{h_{2}(m,q,y)}\frac {m^{q+1}}{F_{II}^{3}}\bigg\}.
\end{split}$$
Let us observe that $h_{1}(m,q,y)\ge 0$. Hence, in the set $A$ of $(q,m,y)$ such that $h_{2}(m,q,y)$ is nonnegative, we have that ${\partial}_{q} h(q,m,y) \ge 0$. Moreover, $h_{1}(q,m,y)$ cannot vanish ($y<1$), then ${\partial}_{q}h>0$ in $A$.
Hence, let us consider the set $B$ where $$h_{2}=(y^{q}-1)\log m+(1+m^{q})y^{q}\log y\le 0$$ (observe that in general $A$ and $B$ are nonempty). By and we have that $$\begin{split}
{\partial}_{q}h \ge \frac12\frac{1-m^{2}}{(1+m^{q})^{2}}\bigg\{ &\bigg[ -(1-y^{q})m^{q}\log m -y^{q}(1+m^{q})\log y\bigg]\frac{1}{(1-y^{2})^{\frac32}}+ \\[.2cm]
+& \bigg[(y^{q}-1)\log m+(1+m^{q})y^{q}\log y\bigg]\frac {m^{q-2}}{(1-y^{2})^{\frac32}}\bigg\}.
\end{split}$$ Hence, to show that ${\partial}_{q}h> 0$ also in the set $B$ it is sufficient to prove that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{g>0}
g(m,q,y):=\bigg[ -(1-y^{q})m^{q}\log m -y^{q}(1+m^{q})\log y\bigg]+\\
+ \bigg[(y^{q}-1)\log m+(1+m^{q})y^{q}\log y\bigg]m^{q-2}> 0\end{gathered}$$ when $m\in]0,1[$, $q\in[1,2]$ and $y\in]0,1[$.\
[**Claim 1.**]{} [*For any $q\in [1,2]$ and $m\in]0,1[$, the function $g(m,q,\cdot)$ is strictly decreasing for $y\in]0,1[$.*]{}\
To prove the Claim 1, we differentiate $g$ with respect to $y$, obtaining $$\begin{gathered}
{\partial}_{y}g= \bigg[qy^{q-1}m^{q}\log m-qy^{q-1}(1+m^{q})\log y-y^{q-1}(1+m^{q})\bigg]+\\
+\bigg[qy^{q-1}\log m+(1+m^{q})(qy^{q-1}\log y+y^{q-1})
\bigg]m^{q-2}=\\
=y^{q-1}\bigg[q (m^{q} +m^{q-2})\log m+q(1+m^{q})(m^{q-2}-1)\log y + (1+m^{q})(m^{q-2}-1)\bigg].\end{gathered}$$ Then ${\partial}_{y} g < 0$ if and only if $$(1+m^{q})(m^{q-2}-1)(q\log y+1) < -q(m^{q}+m^{q-2})\log m.$$ The above inequality is true, as we will show that (recall that $0<m<1$ and $1\le q\le 2$) $$\label{ineqlog}
\log y < -\frac1q +\frac{(m^{q}+m^{q-2})\log m}{(1+m^{q})(1-m^{q-2})}=:-\frac1q+\ell(m,q).$$ If the the right-hand side of is nonnegative, then for any $y\in ]0,1[$ the inequality holds.\
[**Claim 2.**]{} [*For any $q\in [1,2]$ and $m\in]0,1[$, $\ell(m,q)> \frac1q$.*]{}\
We will show that $$\ell(m,q) > 1 \ge \frac 1q.$$ We have $$\ell(m,q)= \frac{(m^{q}+m^{q-2})}{(1+m^{q})(m^{q-2}-1)}\log\frac{1}{m} > 1$$ if and only if $$\begin{gathered}
\mu(m,q)=(m^{q}+m^{q-2})\log\frac{1}{m} - (1+m^{q})(m^{q-2}-1)=\\
=(m^{q}+m^{q-2})\log\frac{1}{m} + 1+m^{q}-m^{q-2}-m^{2q-2}=\\
= m^{q}\left(\log\frac 1m+1\right)+ m^{q-2}\left(\log\frac1m-1\right)+1-m^{2q-2}
> 0.\end{gathered}$$ Then for $m \in]0,1[$ we have $$\begin{gathered}
\mu(m,q)=m^{q}\left(\log\frac 1m+1\right)+ m^{q-2}\left(\log\frac1m-1\right)+1-m^{2q-2}\\
\ge m^{q}\left(\log\frac 1m+1\right)+ m^{q-2}\left(\log\frac1m-1\right)=\\=
m^{q-2}\left(m^{2}\left(\log\frac 1m+1\right)+\log\frac 1m-1\right)> 0,\end{gathered}$$ and the Claim 2, and then the Claim 1, are proved. To conclude the proof of , it is sufficient to observe that $$g(m,q,y)> g(m,q,1)=0$$ when $m\in]0,1[$, $q\in[1,2]$ and $y\in]0,1[$.
The Claim 1 gives that ${\partial}_{q}h(m,q,y)> 0$ when $m\in]0,1[$, $q\in[1,2]$ and $y\in]0,1[$, and this conclude the proof.
Using Lemma \[lemma-monotonia\] and Remark \[rem3.5\], it holds that $$H(m,q) \ge H(m,1)=\pi$$ for $1\le q \le 2$. In particular, if $q\in]1,2]$, $m\in[0,1[$ and $y\in ]0,1[$ then $$h(m,q,y)>h(m,1,y),$$ hence for any $m\in[0,1[$ and $q\in]1,2]$ it holds $$H(m,q)>H(m,1)=\pi.$$
Now we are in position to prove Proposition \[cambiosegno\].
Let $y$ be a minimizer of $\lambda(\alpha,q)$ that changes sign in $[-1,1]$, with $\max_{x\in[-1,1]} y(x)=1$. By [*(d1)*]{} of Proposition \[cambiosegno0\] and Proposition \[propminimo\], the eigenvalue $\lambda(\alpha,q)$ has to satisfy the inequality $$\lambda(\alpha,q)\ge \pi^{2}.$$ Hence, by it follows that $$\lambda(\alpha,q) = \pi^{2},$$ that is property [*(a2)*]{}. Assuming also $1<q\le 2$, if $-\bar m$ is the minimum value of $y$, again by Proposition \[propminimo\] and [*(d1)*]{} of Proposition \[cambiosegno0\], $\lambda(\alpha,q)=\pi^{2}$ if and only if $\bar m=1$. Hence, $z(1,q)=0$ and the first identity of gives that $$\int_{-1}^{1} y|y|^{q-1}dx=0.$$ and hence [*(b2)*]{} follows.
To prove [*(c2)*]{}, let us explicitly observe that, when holds, $y$ solves $$\begin{cases}
y''+\pi^{2}y=0&\text{in }]-1,1[\\
y(-1)=y(1)=0.&\\
\end{cases}$$ Hence [$y(x)=C\sin \pi x$, with $C\in {\mathbb{R}}\setminus\{0\}$]{}.
Proof of the main results
=========================
Now we are in position to prove the first main result.
We begin the proof with the following claim.\
[**Claim.**]{} [*There exists a positive value of $\alpha$ such that the minimum problem $$\lambda(\alpha,q)=\min_{u \in H_0^1([-1,1])}\frac{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} | u'|^2\ dx+\alpha \left|\int_{-1}^{1} u|u|^{q-1}\ dx\right|^{\frac{2}{q}}}{{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} u^2\ dx}$$ admits an eigenfunction $y$ that satisfies $\int_{-1}^1y|y|^{q-1}\ dx=0$ In such a case, $\lambda(\alpha,q)=\pi^{2}$ and, up to a multiplicative constant, $y=\sin \pi x$.* ]{}
To prove the claim, let us consider the case $1<q\le 2$. By contradiction, we suppose that for any $k\in{\mathbb{N}}$, there exists a divergent sequence $\alpha_{k}$, and a corresponding sequence of eigenfunctions $\{y_{k}\}_{k\in{\mathbb{N}}}$ relative to $\lambda(\alpha_{k},q)$ such that $\int_{-1}^1y_{k}|y_{k}|^{q-1}dx>0$ and $\|y_k\|_{L^2(-1,1)}=1$. By Proposition \[cambiosegno\], these eigenfunctions do not change sign and, as we have already observed, $\lambda(\alpha_{k},q)\le\pi^{2}$. It holds that $$\label{contrad}
{\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1} | y_k'|^2\ dx+\alpha_k \left(\int_{-1}^{1} |y_k|^{q}\ dx\right)^{\frac{2}{q}}\le\pi^{2}.$$ Hence, $y_k$ converges (up to a subsequence) to a function $y\in W_0^{1,2}(-1,1)$, strongly in $L^2(-1,1)$ and weakly in $H_{0}^{1}(-1,1)$. Moreover $\|y\|_{L^2(-1,1)}=1$ and $y$ is not identically zero. Hence $\|y\|_{L^q(-1,1)}>0$. Therefore, letting $\alpha_k\rightarrow +\infty$ in we have a contradiction and the claim is proved.
Now, we recall that for any $1\le q \le2$, $\lambda(\alpha,q)$ is a nondecreasing Lipschitz function in $\alpha$, and for $\alpha$ sufficiently large, $\lambda(\alpha,q)=\pi^{2}$. Hence, using the Claim 1, we can define $$\alpha_{q}=\min\{\alpha\in{\mathbb{R}}\colon \lambda(\alpha,q)=\pi^{2}\}=\sup\{\alpha\in{\mathbb{R}}\colon \lambda(\alpha,q)<\pi^{2}\}.$$
Obviously, $\alpha_{q}>0$. If $\alpha<\alpha_{q}$, then the minimizers corresponding to $\lambda(\alpha,q)$ has constant sign, otherwise $\lambda(\alpha,q)=\pi^{2}$. If $\alpha>\alpha_{q}$, then any minimizer $y$ corresponding to $\alpha$ is such that $\int_{-1}^{1}|y|^{q-1}y\,dx=0$. Indeed, if we assume, by contradiction, that there exist $\bar \alpha>\alpha_{q}$ and $\bar y$ such that $\int_{-1}^{1}|\bar y|^{q-1}\bar y\,dx>0$, $\|y\|_{L^2}=1$ and $\mathcal Q[\bar\alpha,\bar y]=\lambda(\bar\alpha,q)$, then $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal Q[\bar\alpha-{\varepsilon},\bar y] &=
\mathcal Q[\bar\alpha,\bar y]-{\varepsilon}\left(\int_{-1}^{1}|\bar y|^{q-1}\bar y\,dx\right)^{\frac q 2}\\ &=\lambda(\bar\alpha,q)-{\varepsilon}\left(\int_{-1}^{1}|\bar y|^{q-1}\bar y\,dx\right)^{\frac q 2}<\lambda(\bar\alpha,q).\end{aligned}$$ Hence, for ${\varepsilon}$ sufficiently small, $\pi^{2}=\lambda(\alpha_{q},q)\le\lambda(\bar\alpha-{\varepsilon},q)<\lambda(\bar\alpha,q)$ and this is absurd. [Finally, by (c2) of Proposition \[cambiosegno\], the proof of Theorem \[mainthm1\] is completed. It is not difficult to see, by means of approximating sequences, that $\lambda(\alpha_{q},q)$ admits both a nonnegative minimizer and a minimizer with vanishing $q$-average, that gives the thesis of Theorem \[mainthm2\], in the case $1<q\le 2$. To conclude the proof of Theorem \[mainthm2\], we have to study the behavior of the solutions when $q=1$ and $q=2$. Despite its simplicity, the case $q=1$ has a peculiar behavior. Let us recall that $\lambda(0,1)=\frac{\pi^{2}}{4}$, and, being $\lambda(\alpha,1)$ is Lipschitz, it assumes all the values in the interval $\left]\frac{\pi^{2}}{4},\pi^{2}\right]$ as $\alpha$ varies in $]0,+\infty[$. ]{}
Suppose that $\frac{\pi^{2}}{4}<\lambda(\alpha,1)<\pi^{2}$. Then $0<\alpha<\alpha_{1}$, the corresponding minimizer $y$ has constant sign in $]-1,1[$, and it is a solution of $$\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
y''+\lambda y=\alpha \gamma &\text{in }]-1,1[\\
y(-1)=y(1)=0,
\end{array}
\right.$$ where $\lambda=\lambda(\alpha,1)$ and $\gamma={\displaystyle}\int_{-1}^{1}y(x)dx>0$. Hence $$y(x)=\frac{\gamma \alpha}{\lambda}\left(1-\frac{\cos(\sqrt \lambda x)}{\cos\sqrt\lambda}\right),\quad x\in[-1,1].$$ Integrating both sides in $[-1,1]$, we get $$\alpha=\frac{\lambda\sqrt\lambda}{2\sqrt\lambda-2{\tan{\sqrt\lambda}}},$$ and, letting $\lambda\to {\pi^{2}}$, $$\alpha_{1}= \frac{\pi^{2}}{2}.$$
Finally, in the critical case $\alpha=\alpha_{1}=\frac{\pi^{2}}{2}$, an immediate computation shows that the functions $$y_{A}(x)= \frac{A}{2}\left( 1+\cos \left( \pi x \right)\right) -\sqrt{1-A}\sin \left( \pi x \right),$$ with $A\in[0,1]$ have average $\gamma=A$ and $y_{A}$ are minimizers of $\lambda(\alpha_{1},1)=\pi^{2}$. Moreover, when $A$ varies in $[0,1[$, the root of $y_{A}$ in $]-1,1[$ varies continuously in $[0,1[$.
It remains to consider the case $q=2$. If $\alpha=\alpha_2$, the corresponding positive minimizer $y$ is a solution of $$\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
y''+\pi^2 y=\alpha_2 y &\text{in }]-1,1[\\
y(-1)=y(1)=0.
\end{array}
\right.$$ The positivity of the eigenfunction guarantees that $$\alpha_2-\pi^2=\lambda(0,2)=\frac{\pi^2}{4},$$ hence $\alpha_{2}=\frac{3}{4}\pi^2$.
When $1<q<2$, it is possible to obtain the following lower bound on $\alpha_q$: $$\label{stimaq}
\alpha_{q}\ge \frac{3}{2^{1+\frac 2q}}\pi^{2}.$$ To get the estimate , by choosing $u(x)=\cos\frac\pi2x$ as test function we get $$\pi^{2}=\lambda(\alpha_{q},q)\le\mathcal{Q}[u,\alpha_{q}]=\frac{\pi^{2}}{4}+\alpha_{q}\left(\int_{-1}^{1}u^{q}dx\right)^{2/q}\le \frac{\pi^{2}}{4} +\alpha_{q}2^{\frac2q-1}.$$
[99]{} W. Allegretto, A. Barabanova, [*Positivity of solutions of elliptic equations with nonlocal terms*]{}, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 126 (1996), 643-663.
M. Belloni, B. Kawohl, [*A symmetry problem related to Wirtinger’s and Poincaré’s inequality*]{}, Journal of Differential Equations, 156.1 (1999), 211-218.
B. Brandolini, F. Della Pietra, C. Nitsch, C. Trombetti, [*Symmetry breaking in a constrained Cheeger type isoperimetric inequality*]{}, ESAIM Control Optim. Calc. Var., Vol. 21, Iss. 2 (2015), 359-371.
B. Brandolini, P. Freitas, C. Nitsch, C. Trombetti, [*Sharp estimates and saturation phenomena for a nonlocal eigenvalue problem*]{}, Advances in Mathematics, Vol. 228, Iss. 4 (2011), 2352-2365.
F. Brock, G. Croce, O. Guibé, A. Mercaldo, [*Symmetry and asymmetry of minimizers of a class of noncoercive functionals*]{}. arXiv preprint arXiv:1601.07327 (2016).
A. P. Buslaev, V. A. Kondrat’ev, A. I. Nazarov, [*On a family of extremal problems and related properties of an integral*]{}, Mat. Zametki, [**64**]{} (1998), N6, 830-838 (Russian); English transl.: Math. Notes, 64 (1998), N5-6, 719-725.
G. Croce, B. Dacorogna, [*On a generalized Wirtinger inequality*]{}, Discr. Contin. Dyn. Syst. [**9**]{} (2003), N5, 1329-1341.
G. Croce, A. Henrot, G. Pisante, [*An isoperimetric inequality for a nonlinear eigenvalue problem*]{}, Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré (C), Non Linear Analysis, 29 (2012), 21-34.
G. Croce, A. Henrot, G. Pisante, [*Corrigendum to An isoperimetric inequality for a nonlinear eigenvalue problem’*]{}, Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré (C), Non Linear Analysis 32 (2015), 485-487
B. Dacorogna, W. Gangbo, N. Subía, [*Sur une généralisation de l’inégalité de Wirtinger*]{}, Annales de l‘IHP Analyse non linéaire, Vol. 9, No. 1 (1992), 29-50.
F. Della Pietra, [*Some remarks on a shape optimization problem*]{}, Kodai Mathematical Journal, Vol. 37 (2014), 608-619.
Y. V. Egorov, [*On a Kondratiev problem*]{}, C.R.A.S., Paris, Ser. I, 324 (1997), 503-507.
Y. V. Egorov, V. A. Kondratjev, [*On a Lagrange problem*]{}, C.R.A.S., Paris, Ser. I, 317 (1993), 903-918.
P. Freitas, [*A nonlocal Sturm-Liouville eigenvalue problem*]{}, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 124 (1994), 169-188.
P. Freitas, [*Nonlocal reaction-diffusion equations*]{}, in: Differential Equations with Application to Biology, Halifax, NS (1997), in: Fields Inst. Commun., vol. 21, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI (1999), 187-204.
P. Freitas, A. Henrot, [*On the First Twisted Dirichlet Eigenvalue*]{}, Communications in Analysis and Geometry, Vol. 12, no. 5 (2004), 1083-1103.
I. V. Gerasimov, A. I. Nazarov, [*Best constant in a three-parameter Poincaré inequality*]{}, Probl. Mat. Anal. 61 (2011), 69-86 (Russian); English transl.: J. Math. Sci. [**179**]{} (2011), N1, 80-99.
A. I. Nazarov, [*On exact constant in the generalized Poincaré inequality*]{}, Probl. Mat. Anal., 24 (2002), 155-180 (Russian); English transl.: J. Math. Sci. [**112**]{} (2002), N1, 4029-4047.
A. I. Nazarov, [*On symmetry and asymmetry in a problem of shape optimization*]{}, arXiv:1208:3640 (2012).
R. Pinsky, [*Spectral analysis of a class of non-local elliptic operators related to Brownian motion with random jumps*]{}, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 361 (2009), 5041-5060.
G. Piscitelli, [*A nonlocal anisotropic eigenvalue problem*]{}, Preprint.
R. P. Sperb, [*On an eigenvalue problem arising in chemistry*]{}, Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 32 (4) (1981), 450-463.
[^1]: Università degli studi di Napoli Federico II, Dipartimento di Matematica e Applicazioni “R. Caccioppoli”, Via Cintia, Monte S. Angelo - 80126 Napoli, Italia. Email: [email protected]
[^2]: Università degli studi di Napoli Federico II, Dipartimento di Matematica e Applicazioni “R. Caccioppoli”, Via Cintia, Monte S. Angelo - 80126 Napoli, Italia. Email: [email protected]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: '[Two strategies are taken into account to determine the $f_1(1420)$-$f_1(1285)$ mixing angle $\theta$. (i) First, using the Gell-Mann-Okubo mass formula together with the $K_1(1270)$-$K_1(1400)$ mixing angle $\theta_{K_1}=(-34\pm 13)^\circ$ extracted from the data for ${\cal B}(B\to K_1(1270) \gamma), {\cal B}(B\to K_1(1400) \gamma), {\cal B}(\tau\to K_1(1270) \nu_\tau)$, and ${\cal B}(\tau\to K_1(1420) \nu_\tau)$, gave $\theta = (23^{+17}_{-23})^\circ$. (ii) Second, from the study of the ratio for $f_1(1285) \to \phi\gamma$ and $f_1(1285) \to \rho^0\gamma$ branching fractions, we have a two-fold solution $\theta=(19.4^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$ or $(51.1^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$. Combining these two analyses, we thus obtain $\theta=(19.4^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$. We further compute the strange quark mass and strange quark condensate from the analysis of the $f_1(1420)$-$f_1(1285)$ mass difference QCD sum rule, where the operator-product-expansion series is up to dimension six and to ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3, m_s^2 \alpha_s^2)$ accuracy. Using the average of the recent lattice results and the $\theta$ value that we have obtained as inputs, we get $\langle \bar{s} s \rangle/ \langle \bar{u} u\rangle =0.41 \pm 0.09$.]{}'
author:
- 'Kwei-Chou Yang'
title: '**$1^{++}$ Nonet Singlet-Octet Mixing Angle, Strange Quark Mass, and Strange Quark Condensate**'
---
[CYCU-HEP-10-21 ]{}
Introduction
============
The $f_1(1285)$ and $f_1(1420)$ mesons with quantum number $J^{PC}= 1^{++}$ are the members of the $1^3P_1$ states in the quark model language, and are mixtures of the pure octet $f_8$ and singlet $f_1$, where the mixing is characterized by the mixing angle $\theta$. The BaBar results for the upper bounds of $B^-\to f_1(1285)K^-,f_1(1420)K^-$ were available recently [@Burke]. The relative ratio of these two modes is highly sensitive to $\theta$ [@Cheng:2007mx]. On the other hand, in the two-body $B$ decay involving the $K$ meson in the final state, the amplitude receives large corrections from the chiral enhancement $a_6$ term which is inversely proportional to the strange-quark mass. The quark mass term mixes left- and right-handed quarks in the QCD Lagrangian. The spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry from $SU(3)_L \times SU(3)_R$ to $SU(3)_V$ is further broken by the quark masses $m_{u,d,s}$ when the baryon number is added to the three commuting conserved quantities $Q_u, Q_d$, and $Q_s$, respectively, the numbers of $q-\bar q$ quarks for $q=u,d$, and $s$. The nonzero quark condensate which signals dynamical symmetry breaking is the important parameter in QCD sum rules [@SVZ], while the magnitude of the strange quark mass can result in the flavor symmetry breaking in the quark condensate. In an earlier study $\langle \bar{s} s\rangle /\langle \bar{u} u\rangle \sim 0.8 <1$ was usually taken. However, very recently the Jamin-Lange approach [@Jamin:2001fw] together with the lattice result for $f_{B_s}/f_B$ [@Aoki:2010yq] and also the Schwinger-Dyson equation approach [@Williams:2007ef] can give a central value larger than 1.
In this paper, we shall embark on the study of the $f_1(1420)$ and $f_1(1285)$ mesons to determine the mixing angle $\theta$, strange quark mass, and strange quark condensate. In Sec. \[sec:theta\], we shall present detailed discussions on the determination of the mixing angle $\theta$. Substituting the $K_1(1270)$-$K_1(1400)$ mixing angle, which was extracted from the $B\to K_1 \gamma$ and $\tau\to K_1 \nu_\tau$ data, to the Gell-Mann-Okubo mass formula, we can derive the value of $\theta$. Alternatively, from the analysis of the decay ratio for $f_1(1285) \to \phi\gamma$ and $f_1(1285) \to \rho^0\gamma$, we have a more accurate estimation for $\theta$. In Sec. \[sec:sr\] we shall obtain the mass difference QCD sum rules for the $f_1(1420)$ and $f_1(1285)$ to determine the magnitude of the strange quark mass. From the sum rule analysis, we obtain the constraint ranges for $m_s$ and $\theta$ as well as for $\langle \bar{s} s\rangle$. Many attempts have been made to compute $m_s$ using QCD sum rules and finite energy sum rules [@Dominguez:2007my; @Chetyrkin:2005kn; @Narison:2005ny; @Kambor:2000dj; @Pich:1999hc; @Colangelo:1997uy; @Jamin:1994vr]. The running strange quark mass in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme at a scale of $\mu\approx$ 2 GeV is $m_s=101^{+29}_{-21}$ MeV given in the particle data group (PDG) average [@PDG]. More precise lattice estimates have been recently obtained as $m_s(2\, {\rm GeV})=92.2(1.3)$ MeV in [@McNeile:2010ji], $m_s(2\, {\rm GeV})=96.2(2.7)$ MeV in [@Aoki:2010dy], and $m_s(2\, {\rm GeV})=95.1(1.1)(1.5)$ MeV in [@Durr:2010aw]. These lattice results agree with strange scalar/pseudoscalar sum rule results which are $m_s \simeq 95(15)$ MeV. In the present study, we study the $m_s$ from a new frame, the $f_1(1420)$-$f_1(1285)$ mass difference sum rule, which may result in larger uncertainties due to the input parameters. Nevertheless, it can be a crosscheck compared with the previous studies. Further using the very recent lattice result for $m_s(2~{\rm GeV})=93.6\pm 1.0$ MeV as the input, we obtain an estimate for the strange quark condensate.
Singlet-octet mixing angle $\theta$ of the $1^{++}$ nonet {#sec:theta}
=========================================================
Definition {#sec:def}
----------
In the quark model, $a_1(1260)$, $f_1(1285)$, $f_1(1420)$, and $K_{1A}$ are classified in $1^{++}$ multiplets, which, in terms of spectroscopic notation $n^{2S+1}L_J$, are $1^3P_1$ $p$-wave mesons. Analogous to $\eta$ and $\eta^\prime$, because of SU(3) breaking effects, $f_1(1285)$ and $f_1(1420)$ are the mixing states of the pure octet $f_8$ and singlet $f_1$, $$\begin{aligned}
|f_1(1285)\rangle = |f_1\rangle\cos\theta+|f_8\rangle\sin\theta,
\qquad |f_1(1420)\rangle =
-|f_1\rangle\sin\theta+|f_8\rangle\cos\theta \,.
\end{aligned}$$ In the present paper, we adopt $$\begin{aligned}
f_1 &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(\bar u u + \bar dd + \bar ss), \\
f_8 &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}(\bar uu + \bar dd -2 \bar ss),\end{aligned}$$ where there is a relative sign difference between the $\bar{s}s$ contents of $f_1$ and $f_8$ in our convention. From the Gell-Mann-Okubo mass formula, the mixing angle $\theta$ satisfies $$\cos^2\theta =
\frac{3m_{f_1(1285)}^2 -\left(4m_{K_{1A}}^2-m_{a_1}^2\right)}
{3\left(m_{f_1(1285)}^2-m_{f_1(1420)}^2\right)}\,,\label{eq:GMOkubo}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
m_{K_{1A}}^2 &=& \langle K_{1A}| {\cal H}| K_{1A}\rangle
= m_{K_1(1400)}^2 \cos^2\theta_{K_1} + m_{K_1(1270)}^2 \sin^2\theta_{K_1} \,,
\end{aligned}$$ with ${\cal H}$ being the Hamiltonian. Here $\theta_{K_1}$ is the $K_1(1400)$-$K_1(1270)$ mixing angle. The sign of the mixing angle $\theta$ can be determined from the mass relation [@PDG] $$\tan\theta =\frac{4m_{K_{1A}}^2-m_{a_1}^2-3m_{f_1(1420)}^2}
{3 m_{18}^2} \,,\label{eq:GMOkubo2}$$ where $m_{18}^2=\langle f_1|{\cal H} |f_8 \rangle \simeq (m_{a_1}^2-m_{K_{1A}}^2)2\sqrt{2}/3 <0$, we find $\theta>0$. Because of the strange and nonstrange light quark mass differences, $K_{1A}$ is not the mass eigenstate and it can mix with $K_{1B}$, which is one of the members in the $1^1P_1$ multiplets. From the convention in [@Suzuki:1993yc] (see also discussions in [@Yang:2005gk; @Yang:2007zt]), we write the two physical states $K_1(1270)$ and $K_1(1400)$ in the following relations: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:mixing}
|K_1(1270)\rangle &=& |K_{1A}\rangle\sin\theta_K+ |K_{1B}\rangle\cos\theta_K, \nonumber \\
|K_1(1400)\rangle &=& |K_{1A}\rangle\cos\theta_K - |K_{1B}\rangle\sin\theta_K.
\end{aligned}$$ The mixing angle was found to be $|\theta_{K_1}|\approx 33^\circ, 57^\circ$ in [@Suzuki:1993yc] and $\approx \pm37^\circ, \pm58^\circ$ in [@ChengDAP]. A similar range $35^\circ\lsim |\theta_{K_1}| \lsim 55^\circ$ was obtained in [@Goldman]. The sign ambiguity for $\theta_{K_1}$ is due to the fact that one can add arbitrary phases to $|\bar K_{1A}\rangle$ and $|\bar K_{1B}\rangle$. This sign ambiguity can be removed by fixing the signs of decay constants $f_{K_{1A}}$ and $f_{K_{1B}}^\perp$, which are defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:k1a}
\langle 0 |\bar \psi\gamma_\mu \gamma_5 s |\bar K_{1A}(P,\lambda)\rangle
&=& -i \, f_{K_{1A}}\, m_{K_{1A}}\,\epsilon_\mu^{(\lambda)},
\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:k1b}
\langle 0 |\bar \psi\sigma_{\mu\nu}s |\bar K_{1B}(P,\lambda)\rangle
&=& i f_{K_{1B}}^\perp
\,\epsilon_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta} \epsilon_{(\lambda)}^\alpha
P^\beta,
\end{aligned}$$ where $\epsilon^{0123}=-1$ and $\psi \equiv u$ [or]{} $d$. Following the convention in [@Yang:2007zt], we adopt $f_{K_{1A}}>0$, $f_{K_{1B}}^\perp>0$, so that $\theta_{K_1}$ should be negative to account for the observable ${\cal B}(B\to K_1(1270) \gamma) \gg {\cal B}(B\to
K_1 (1400) \gamma)$ [@ChengKgamma; @Hatanaka:2008xj]. Furthermore, from the data of $\tau\to K_1(1270)\nu_\tau$ and $K_1(1400)\nu_\tau$ decays together with the sum rule results for the $K_{1A}$ and $K_{1B}$ decay constants, the mixing angle $\theta_{K_1}=(-34\pm 13)^\circ$ was obtained in [@Hatanaka:2008xj]. Substituting this value into (\[eq:GMOkubo\]), we then obtain $\theta^{\rm quad}=(23^{+17}_{-23})^\circ$ [@YangFF], i.e., $\theta^{\rm quad}=0^\circ - 40^\circ$ [^1].
The determination of $\theta$
-----------------------------
Experimentally, since $K^*\ov K$ and $K\ov K\pi$ are the dominant modes of $f_1(1420)$, whereas $f_0(1285)$ decays mainly to the $4\pi$ states, this suggests that the quark content is primarily $s\bar s$ for $f_1(1420)$ and $n\bar n=(u\bar{u} + d\bar{d})/\sqrt{2}$ for $f_1(1285)$. Therefore, the mixing relations can be rewritten to exhibit the $n\bar n$ and $s\bar s$ components which decouple for the ideal mixing angle $\theta_i=\tan^{-1}(1/\sqrt{2})\simeq 35.3^\circ$. Let $\bar{\alpha} =\theta_i -\theta$, we rewrite these two states in the flavor basis [^2], $$\begin{aligned}
f_1(1285) &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (\bar{u}u+\bar{d}d) \cos\bar\alpha + \bar{s}s\, \sin\bar\alpha \,, \nonumber\\
f_1(1420) &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (\bar{u}u+\bar{d}d) \sin\bar\alpha - \bar{s}s\, \cos\bar\alpha \,.\end{aligned}$$
Since the $f_1(1285)$ can decay into $\phi\gamma$, we know that $f_1(1285)$ has the $s \bar{s}$ content and $\theta$ deviates from its ideal mixing value. To have a more precise estimate for $\theta$, we study the ratio of $f_1(1285) \to \phi\gamma$ and $f_1(1285) \to \rho^0\gamma$ branching fractions. Because the electromagnetic (EM) interaction Lagrangian is given by $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal L}_I &=& -A_{\rm EM}^\mu (e_u \bar u\gamma_\mu u + e_d \bar d\gamma_\mu d + e_s \bar s\gamma_\mu s ) \nonumber\\
&=& -A_{\rm EM}^\mu \left( (e_u +e_d)\frac{\bar u\gamma_\mu u + \bar d\gamma_\mu d}{2}
+ (e_u -e_d)\frac{\bar u\gamma_\mu u - \bar d\gamma_\mu d}{2}
+ e_s \bar s\gamma_\mu s \right),\end{aligned}$$ with $e_u=2/3 e, e_d =-1/3 e$, and $e_s=-1/3 e$ being the electric charges of $u,d$, and $s$ quarks, respectively, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{{\cal B}(f_1(1285) \to \phi\gamma)}{{\cal B}(f_1(1285) \to \rho^0\gamma)}
&=&
\left(\frac{\langle\phi|e_s\bar{s}\gamma_\mu s|f_1(1285)\rangle}
{\langle\rho|(e_u-e_d)(\bar{u}\gamma_\mu u -\bar{d}\gamma_\mu d)/2|f_1(1285)\rangle}\right)^2
\underbrace{\left(\frac{m_{f_1}^2-m_\phi^2}{m_{f_1}^2 - m_\rho^2}\right)^3}_{\rm phase\ factor}
\nonumber\\
&=& \underbrace{\left(\frac{-e/3}{2e/3+e/3}\right)^2}_{\rm EM\ factor}
\left(\frac{\langle\phi|\bar{s}\gamma_\mu s|f_1(1285)\rangle}
{\langle\rho|(\bar{u}\gamma_\mu u -\bar{d}\gamma_\mu d)/2|f_1(1285)\rangle}\right)^2
\underbrace{\left(\frac{m_{f_1}^2-m_\phi^2}{m_{f_1}^2 - m_\rho^2}\right)^3}_{\rm phase\ factor}
\nonumber\\
&\approx& \frac{4}{9} \left(\frac{m_\phi f_\phi}{m_\rho f_\rho}\right)^2
\tan^2\bar\alpha \left(\frac{m_{f_1}^2-m_\phi^2}{m_{f_1}^2 - m_\rho^2}\right)^3 \,,\end{aligned}$$ where $f_1\equiv f_1(1285)$, and $f_\phi$ and $f_\rho$ are the decay constants of $\phi$ and $\rho$, respectively. Here we have taken the single-pole approximation [^3]: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\langle\phi|\bar{s}\gamma_\mu s|f_1(1285)\rangle}
{\langle\rho|(\bar{u}\gamma_\mu u -\bar{d}\gamma_\mu d)/2|f_1(1285)\rangle}
&\approx& \frac{m_\phi f_\phi g_{f_1\phi\phi}}
{m_\rho f_\rho g_{f_1\rho\rho}/\sqrt{2}} \frac{\sin\bar\alpha}{\cos\bar\alpha /\sqrt{2}} \nonumber\\
& \approx& \frac{m_\phi f_\phi}{m_\rho f_\rho}\times 2\tan\bar\alpha \,.\end{aligned}$$ Using $f_\rho =209\pm 1$ MeV, $f_\phi=221\pm 3$ MeV [@Beneke:2003zv], and the current data ${\cal B}(f_1(1285) \to \phi\gamma)=(7.4\pm2.6)\times 10^{-4}$ and ${\cal B}(f_1(1285) \to \rho^0 \gamma) =(5.5\pm1.3)\%$ [@PDG] as inputs, we obtain $\bar\alpha =\pm(15.8^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$, i.e., two fold solution $\theta=(19.4^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$ or $(51.1^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$. Combining with the analysis $\theta=(0 \sim 40)^\circ$ given in Sec. \[sec:def\], we thus find that $\theta=(19.4^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$ is much preferred and can explain experimental observables well.
Mass of the strange quark {#sec:sr}
=========================
We proceed to evaluate the strange quark mass from the mass difference sum rules of the $f_1(1285)$ and $f_1(1420)$ mesons. We consider the following two-point correlation functions, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:green-axial}
\Pi_{\mu\nu} (q^2) &=& i\int d^4x e^{iqx} \langle 0|{\rm T} (j_\mu(x)
j_\nu^{\dag} (0))|0\rangle =-\Pi_1(q^2) g_{\mu \nu} +\Pi_2(q^2)
q_\mu q_\nu \,,
\\
\Pi^\prime_{\mu\nu} (q^2) &=& i\int d^4x e^{iqx} \langle 0|{\rm T} (j^\prime_\mu(x)
j_\nu^{\prime\dag} (0))|0\rangle =-\Pi^\prime_1(q^2) g_{\mu \nu} +\Pi^\prime_2(q^2)
q_\mu q_\nu \,.\end{aligned}$$ The interpolating currents satisfying the relations: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle 0 |j^{(\prime)}_\mu(0) |f_1^{(\prime)}(P,\lambda)\rangle
=-if_{f_1^{(\prime)}} m_{f_1^{(\prime)}} \epsilon_\mu^{(\lambda)},
\label{eq:axial-decayconstant}\end{aligned}$$ are $$\begin{aligned}
j_\mu &=& \cos\theta j^{(1)}_\mu + \sin\theta j^{(8)}_\mu \,,
\\
j^\prime_\mu &=& -\sin\theta j^{(1)}_\mu + \cos\theta j^{(8)}_\mu \,,\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
j^{(1)}_\mu &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}
(\bar{u}\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 u + \bar{d}\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 d +\bar{s}\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 s) \,,
\\
j^{(8)}_\mu &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}
(\bar{u}\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 u + \bar{d}\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 d - 2\bar{s}\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 s) \,,\end{aligned}$$ and we have used the short-hand notations for $f_1 \equiv f_1(1285)$ and $f_1^\prime \equiv f_1(1420)$. In the massless quark limit, we have $\Pi_1=q^2\Pi_2$ and $\Pi^\prime_1=q^2\Pi^\prime_2$ if one neglects the axial-vector anomaly[^4]. Here we focus on $\Pi_1^{(\prime)}$ since it receives contributions only from axial-vector ($^3P_1$) mesons, whereas $\Pi_2^{(\prime)}$ contains effects from pseudoscalar mesons. The lowest-lying $f_1^{(\prime)}$ meson contribution can be approximated via the dispersion relation as $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{m_{f_1^{(\prime)}}^2 f_{f_1^{(\prime)}}^2}{m_{f_1^{(\prime)}}^2-q^2}
= \frac{1}{\pi}\int^{s_0^{f^{(\prime)}}}_0 ds
\frac{{\rm Im} \Pi_1^{(\prime){\rm OPE}}(s)}{s-q^2} \,, \label{eq:dispersion}\end{aligned}$$ where $\Pi_1^{(\prime){\rm OPE}}$ is the QCD operator-product-expansion (OPE) result of $\Pi_1^{(\prime)}$ at the quark-gluon level [@Yang:2007zt], and $s_0^{f_1^{(\prime)}}$ is the threshold of the higher resonant states. Note that the subtraction terms on the right-hand side of (\[eq:dispersion\]), which are polynomials in $q^2$, are neglected since they have no contributions after performing the Borel transformation. The four-quark condensates are expressed as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:factorization}
\langle 0|\bar q \Gamma_i \lambda^a q \bar q \Gamma_i \lambda^a
q|0\rangle =- a_2\frac{1}{16N_c^2}{\rm Tr}(\Gamma_i\Gamma_i) {\rm
Tr}(\lambda^a \lambda^a) \langle \bar qq\rangle^2 \,,\end{aligned}$$ where $a_2=1$ corresponds to the vacuum saturation approximation. In the present work, we have $\Gamma=\gamma_\mu$ and $\gamma_\mu\gamma_5$, for which we allow the variation $a_2 = -2.9\sim 3.1$ [@Narison:2005ny; @Ackerstaff:1998yj; @Maltman:2008nf]. For $\Pi_1^{(\prime){\rm OPE}}$, we take into account the terms with dimension $\leq 6$, where the term with dimension=0 ($D$=0) is up to ${\cal O} (\alpha_s^3)$, with $D$=2 (which is proportional to $m_s^2$) up to ${\cal O} (\alpha_s^2)$ and with $D$=4 up to ${\cal O} (\alpha_s^2)$. Note that such radiative corrections for terms can read from [@Braaten:1991qm; @Chetyrkin:1993hi; @Gorishnii:1990vf]. We do not include the radiative correction to the $D$=6 terms since all the uncertainties can be lumped into $a_2$. Note that such radiative corrections for terms with dimensions=0 and 4 are the same as the vector meson case and can read from [@Braaten:1991qm; @Chetyrkin:1993hi].
Further applying the Borel (inverse-Laplace) transformation, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Borel}
{\rm\bf B}[f(q^2)]=
\lim_{{\scriptstyle n\to \infty \atop\scriptstyle -q^2\to \infty}
\atop \scriptstyle -q^2/n^2 =M^2 {\rm fixed} }\frac{1}{n!} (-q^2)^{n+1}
\Bigg[{d\over dq^2}\Bigg]^n f(q^2),
\end{aligned}$$ to both sides of (\[eq:dispersion\]) to improve the convergence of the OPE series and further suppress the contributions from higher resonances, the sum rules thus read $$\begin{aligned}
f_{f_1}^2 m_{f_1}^2e^{-m_{f_1}^2/M^2}
&=& \int\limits_0^{s_0^{f_1}}\!\! \frac{s\, ds\,e^{-s/M^2}}{4\pi^2}
\left[1 + \frac{\alpha_s(\sqrt{s})}{\pi} + F_3 \frac{\alpha_s^2(\sqrt{s})}{\pi^2}
+ (F_4+F_4^\prime \cos^2\theta) \frac{\alpha_s^3 (\sqrt{s})}{\pi^3}
\right]\nonumber\\
& &
- (\cos\theta -\sqrt{2}\sin\theta)^2
[\overline{m}_s(\mu_\circ)]^2 \int\limits_0^{s_0^{f_1}}\!\! ds\,\frac{1}{2\pi^2} e^{-s/M^2}
\Bigg[1+ \bigg(H_1\ln\frac{s}{\mu_\circ^2}+H_2 \bigg) \frac{\alpha_s(\mu_\circ)}{\pi} \nonumber\\
& & \ \ \
+ \bigg(H_{3a}\ln^2\frac{s}{\mu_\circ^2}+H_{3b} \ln\frac{s}{\mu_\circ^2} +H_{3c} -\frac{H_{3a}\pi^2}{3}\bigg) \Big(\frac{\alpha_s(\mu_\circ)}{\pi}\Big)^2
\Bigg]\nonumber\\
& &
-\frac{1}{12} \left(1 -\frac{11}{18} \frac{\alpha_s(M)}{\pi}\right)\,
\langle\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}G^2\rangle \nonumber\\
& &
-\left[\frac{4}{27} \frac{\alpha_s(M)}{\pi}
+\left( -\frac{257}{486} +\frac{4}{3}\zeta(3) -\frac{2}{27} \beta_1 \gamma_E \right) \frac{\alpha_s^2 (M)}{\pi^2}\right]\,
\sum_{q_i\equiv u,d,s} \langle \overline{m}_i \bar q_{i} q_{i}\rangle \nonumber\\
& &
+ \frac{1}{3} (\sqrt{2}\cos\theta +\sin\theta)^2
\Bigg[
2 a_1 \overline{m}_{q} \langle \bar qq\rangle
- \frac{352\pi\alpha_s}{81 M^2} a_2 \langle\bar qq \rangle^2 \Bigg] \nonumber\\
& &
+ \frac{1}{3} (\cos\theta -\sqrt{2}\sin\theta)^2
\Bigg[
2 a_1 \overline{m}_{s} \langle \bar ss\rangle
- \frac{352\pi\alpha_s}{81 M^2} a_2 \langle\bar ss \rangle^2 \Bigg]
\,,\makebox[0.8cm]{}
\label{eq:SR-f1}\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
f_{f_1^\prime}^2 m_{f_1^\prime}^2e^{-m_{f_1^\prime}^2/M^2}
&=& \int\limits_0^{s_0^{f_1^\prime}}\!\! \frac{s\, ds\,e^{-s/M^2}}{4\pi^2}
\left[ 1 + \frac{\alpha_s(\sqrt{s})}{\pi} + F_3 \frac{\alpha_s^2(\sqrt{s})}{\pi^2}
+ (F_4+F_4^\prime \sin^2\theta) \frac{\alpha_s^3(\sqrt{s})}{\pi^3}
\right]\nonumber\\
& &
+ (\sin\theta +\sqrt{2}\cos\theta)^2
[\overline{m}_s(\mu_\circ)]^2\int\limits_0^{s_0^{f_1^\prime}}\!\! ds\,\frac{1}{2\pi^2} e^{-s/M^2}
\Bigg[1+ \bigg(H_1\ln\frac{s}{\mu_\circ^2}+H_2 \bigg) \frac{\alpha_s(\mu_\circ)}{\pi} \nonumber\\
& & \ \ \
+ \bigg(H_{3a}\ln^2\frac{s}{\mu_\circ^2}+H_{3b} \ln\frac{s}{\mu_\circ^2} +H_{3c} -\frac{H_{3a}\pi^2}{3}\bigg) \Big(\frac{\alpha_s(\mu_\circ)}{\pi}\Big)^2
\Bigg]\nonumber\\
& &
-\frac{1}{12} \left(1 -\frac{11}{18} \frac{\alpha_s(M)}{\pi}\right)\,
\langle\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}G^2\rangle \nonumber\\
& &
-\left[\frac{4}{27} \frac{\alpha_s (M)}{\pi}
+\left( -\frac{257}{486} +\frac{4}{3}\zeta(3) -\frac{2}{27} \beta_1 \gamma_E\right) \frac{\alpha_s^2(M) }{\pi^2}\right]\,
\sum_{q_i\equiv u,d,s} \langle \overline{m}_i \bar q_{i} q_{i}\rangle \nonumber\\
& &
+ \frac{1}{3} (\sqrt{2}\sin\theta -\cos\theta)^2
\Bigg[
2 a_1 \overline{m}_{q} \langle \bar qq\rangle
- \frac{352\pi\alpha_s}{81 M^2} a_2 \langle\bar qq \rangle^2 \Bigg] \nonumber\\
& &
+ \frac{1}{3} (\sin\theta +\sqrt{2}\cos\theta)^2
\Bigg[
2 a_1 \overline{m}_{s} \langle \bar ss\rangle
- \frac{352\pi\alpha_s}{81 M^2} a_2 \langle\bar ss \rangle^2 \Bigg]
\,,\makebox[0.8cm]{}
\label{eq:SR-f1p}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
F_3 &=& 1.9857-0.1153 n_f \simeq 1.6398 \quad {\rm for}\ n_f=3, \nonumber\\
F_4 &=& -6.6368-1.2001n_f-0.0052n_f^2 \simeq -10.2839 \quad {\rm for}\ n_f=3, \nonumber\\
F_4^\prime &=& -1.2395\Delta ,\nonumber\\
H_1 &=& -\frac{8}{81} \beta_1^2 = -2 , \quad
H_2= \frac{2}{9}\beta_2 + 4\beta_2 \Big( \frac{\gamma_1}{\beta_1} - \frac{\gamma_2}{\beta_2} \Big) -\frac{8}{9}\beta_1^2 -4\beta_1\simeq 3.6667 ,\nonumber\\
H_{3a} &=& 4.2499, \quad H_{3b}=-23.1667, \quad H_{3c}= 29.7624, \nonumber\\
\overline{m}_{q}\langle \bar qq\rangle &\equiv&
\frac{1}{2} \left( \overline{m}_{u}\langle \bar uu\rangle + \overline{m}_{d}\langle \bar dd\rangle \right), \quad
\langle\bar qq \rangle^2 \equiv
\frac{1}{2}\left( \langle\bar uu \rangle^2 + \langle\bar dd \rangle^2 \right), \nonumber\\
a_1 &=& 1+ \frac{7}{3}\frac{\alpha_s(M)}{\pi} + \left(\frac{85}{6}-
\frac{7}{6}\beta_1\gamma_E \right) \frac{\alpha_s^2(M)}{\pi^2},\end{aligned}$$ with $\beta_1=(2n_f-33)/6$, $\beta_2=(19n_f-153)/12$, $\gamma_1=2, \gamma_2=101/12 -5n_f/18$, and $n_f=3$ being the number of flavors and $\Delta=1$, and $0$ for $f_1$ (singlet) and $f_8$ (octet), respectively [@Gorishnii:1990vf]. In the calculation the coupling constant $\alpha_s(\sqrt{s})$ in Eqs. (\[eq:SR-f1\]) and (\[eq:SR-f1p\]) can be expanded in powers of $\alpha_s(M)$: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\alpha_s(\sqrt{s})}{\pi} &=& \frac{\alpha_s(M)}{\pi}
+\frac{1}{2} \beta_1 \ln\frac{s}{M^2} \left(\frac{\alpha_s(M)}{\pi} \right)^2
+\left(\frac{1}{2} \beta_2 \ln\frac{s}{M^2}+ \frac{1}{4} \beta_1^2 \ln^2\frac{s}{M^2}\right) \left(\frac{\alpha_s(M)}{\pi} \right)^3 \nonumber \\
&+& \left(\frac{\beta_3}{2} \ln\frac{s}{M^2} + \frac{5}{8}\beta_1\beta_2 \ln^2\frac{s}{M^2} + \frac{1}{8} \beta_1^3 \ln^3\frac{s}{M^2} \right) \left(\frac{\alpha_s(M)}{\pi} \right)^4 + \cdots,\end{aligned}$$ where $\beta_3\simeq -20.1198$. Using the renormalization-group result for the $m_s^2$ term given in [@Chetyrkin:1993hi], we have expanded the contribution to the order ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2 m_s^2)$ at the subtraction scale $\mu_\circ^2=2$ GeV$^2$ for which the series has better convergence than at the scale 1 GeV$^2$; however, the convergence of the series has no obvious change if using a higher reference scale. As in the case of flavor-breaking $\tau$ decay, the $D=2$ series converges slowly; nevertheless, we have checked that this term, which intends to make the output $m_s$ to be smaller in the fit, is suppressed due to the fact that the mass sum rules for $f_1(1285)$ and $f_1(1420)$ are obtained by applying the differential operator $M^4 \partial\ln /\partial M^2$ to both sides of (\[eq:SR-f1\]) and (\[eq:SR-f1p\]), respectively. Nevertheless, the differential operator will instead make the $D$=4 term containing $m_s \langle \bar ss\rangle$ become much more important than the $m_s^2$ term in determining the $f_1(1285)$-$f_1(1420)$ mass difference although the they are the same order in magnitude.
In the numerical analysis, we shall use $\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^{\rm (3)NLO}=0.360$ GeV, corresponding to $\alpha_s(1 {\rm GeV})=0.495$, $\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^{\rm (4)NLO}=0.313$ GeV, and the following values (at the scale $\mu=1$ GeV) [@Ioffe:2002be; @Narison:2005ny; @Ackerstaff:1998yj; @Maltman:2008nf]: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{array}{l}
\langle \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi} G_{\mu\nu}^a G^{a\mu\nu} \rangle=(0.009\pm 0.007)~ {\rm GeV}^4 ,\\
\langle \overline{m}_q\bar qq\rangle= -f_{\pi^+}^2 m_{\pi^+}^2/4\,,\\
\langle \bar qq \rangle^2 \simeq (-0.247)^6~{\rm GeV}^6 \,,\\
\langle \bar ss \rangle = (0.30\sim 1.3) \langle \bar qq\rangle \,, \\
a_2 = -2.9\sim 3.1 \,,
\end{array}\label{eq:parameters}\end{aligned}$$ where the value of $\langle \bar qq \rangle^2$ corresponds to $(m_u+m_d)(1 {\rm GeV}) \simeq\ 11~ {\rm MeV}$, and we have cast the uncertainty of $\langle \bar qq \rangle^2$ to $a_2$ in the $D=6$ term. We do not consider the isospin breaking effect between $\langle \bar uu \rangle$ and $\langle \bar dd \rangle$ since $\langle \bar dd \rangle / \langle \bar uu \rangle -1 \approx -0.007$ [@Gasser:1982ap] is negligible in the present analysis. The threshold is allowed by $s_0^{f_1}=2.70\pm0.15$ GeV$^2$ and determined by the maximum stability of the mass sum rule. For an estimate on the threshold difference, we parametrize in the form $(\sqrt{s_0^{f^\prime_1}} -\sqrt{s_0^{f_1}})/\sqrt{s_0^{f_1}} = \delta \times (m_{f_1^\prime}-m_{f_1})/m_{f_1}$, with $\delta =1.0\pm 0.3$. In other words, we assign a 30% uncertainty to the default value. We search for the allowed solutions for strange quark mass and the singlet-octet mixing angle $\theta$ under the following constraints: (i) Comparing with the observables, the errors for the mass sum rule results of the $f_1(1285)$ and $f_1(1420)$ in the Borel window $0.9$ GeV$^2\leq M^2 \leq 1.3$ GeV$^2$ are constrained to be less than 3% on average. In this Borel window, the contribution originating from higher resonances (and the continuum), modeled by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:model-higher-res}
\frac{1}{\pi}\int_{s_0^{f^{(\prime)}}}^\infty ds\, e^{-s/M^2}\, {\rm Im} \Pi_1^{(\prime){\rm
OPE}}(s) \,,\end{aligned}$$ is about less than 40% and the highest OPE term (with dimension six) at the quark level is no more than 10%. (ii) The deviation between the $f_1(1420)-f_1(1285)$ mass difference sum rule result and the central value of the data [@PDG] is within $1\sigma$ error: $|(m_{f_1^\prime}-m_{f_1})_{\rm sum \ rule} -144.6~{\rm MeV}|\leq 1.5~ {\rm MeV}$. The detailed results are shown in Table 1. We also check that if by further enlarging the uncertainties of $s_0^{f_1}$ and $\delta$, $\it e.g.$ 25%, the changes of results can be negligible. We obtain the strange quark mass with large uncertainty: $m_s (1\, {\rm GeV}) = 106.3 \pm 35.1 ~{\rm MeV}$ (i.e. $m_s (2\, {\rm GeV}) = 89.5 \pm 29.5 ~{\rm MeV}$) and $\langle \bar{s} s\rangle /\langle \bar{u} u\rangle = 0.56\pm 0.25$ corresponding to $\theta=(19.4^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$, where the values and $m_s$ and $\langle \bar s s \rangle$ are strongly correlated.
Further accounting for the average of the recent lattice results [@McNeile:2010ji; @Aoki:2010dy; @Durr:2010aw]: $m_s(2~{\rm GeV})=93.6\pm 1.0$ MeV and using the $\theta$ value that we have obtained as the inputs, we get $\langle \bar{s} s \rangle/ \langle \bar{u} u\rangle =0.41 \pm 0.09$ which is less than one and in contrast to the Schwinger-Dyson equation approach in [@Williams:2007ef] where the ratio was obtained as $(1.0\pm 0.2)^3$. Our prediction is consistent with the QCD sum rule result of studying the scalar/pseudoscalar two-point function in [@Dominguez:2007hc] where the authors obtained $\langle \bar{s} s \rangle/ \langle \bar{u} u\rangle = 0.4\sim 0.7$, depending on the value of the strange quark mass.
$m_s (1\, {\rm GeV})$ $\langle \bar{s} s\rangle /\langle \bar{u} u\rangle$ $\langle (\alpha_s/\pi) G^2\rangle$ $a_2$
---------- ------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------- ----------------
Fit I $106.3\pm 35.1$ $0.56\pm0.25$ $0.0106\pm0.0042$ $0.89\pm 0.62$
Fit II \[$124.7\pm 1.3]$ $0.41\pm0.09$ $0.0108\pm0.0037$ $0.95\pm 0.45$
: The fitting results in the $f_1(1284)$-$f_1(1420)$ mass difference sum rules. In fit II, we have taken the average of the recent lattice results for $m_s$, which is rescaled to 1 GeV as the input.[]{data-label="tab:result"}
Summary
=======
We have adopted two different strategies for determining the mixing angle $\theta$: (i) Using the Gell-Mann-Okubo mass formula and the $K_1(1270)$-$K_1(1400)$ mixing angle $\theta_{K_1}=(-34\pm 13)^\circ$ which was extracted from the data for ${\cal B}(B\to K_1(1270) \gamma), {\cal B}(B\to K_1(1400) \gamma), {\cal B}(\tau\to K_1(1270) \nu_\tau)$, and ${\cal B}(\tau\to K_1(1420) \nu_\tau)$, the result is $\theta = (23^{+17}_{-23})^\circ$. (ii) On the other hand, from the analysis of the ratio of ${\cal B}(f_1(1285) \to \phi\gamma)$ and ${\cal B}(f_1(1285) \to \rho^0\gamma)$, we have $\bar\alpha =\theta_i-\theta= \pm(15.8^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$, i.e., $\theta=(19.4^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$ or $(51.1^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$. Combining these two analyses, we deduce the mixing angle $\theta=(19.4^{+4.5}_{-4.6})^\circ$.
We have estimated the strange quark mass and strange quark condensate from the analysis of the $f_1(1420)$-$f_1(1285)$ mass difference QCD sum rule. We have expanded the OPE series up to dimension six, where the term with dimension zero is up to ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$, with dimension=2 up to ${\cal O}(m_s^2 \alpha_s^2)$ and with dimension=4 terms up to ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$. Further using the average of the recent lattice results and the $\theta$ value that we have obtained as the inputs, we get $\langle \bar{s} s \rangle/ \langle \bar{u} u\rangle =0.41 \pm 0.09$.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
This research was supported in part by the National Center for Theoretical Sciences and the National Science Council of R.O.C. under Grant No. NSC99-2112-M-003-005-MY3.
[99]{}
J.P. Burke, International Europhysics Conference on High Energy Physics, Manchester, England, July 19 Ð 25, 2007 (2007)..
H. Y. Cheng and K. C. Yang, Phys. Rev. D [**76**]{}, 114020 (2007). M.A. Shifman, A.I. Vainshtein and V.I. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. [**B147**]{} (1979) 385.
M. Jamin and B. O. Lange, Phys. Rev. D [**65**]{}, 056005 (2002). Y. Aoki, PoS [**LAT2009**]{}, 012 (2009).
R. Williams, C. S. Fischer and M. R. Pennington, Acta Phys. Polon. B [**38**]{}, 2803 (2007). C. A. Dominguez, N. F. Nasrallah, R. Rontsch and K. Schilcher, JHEP [**0805**]{}, 020 (2008). K. G. Chetyrkin and A. Khodjamirian, Eur. Phys. J. C [**46**]{}, 721 (2006). S. Narison, Phys. Rev. D [**74**]{}, 034013 (2006). J. Kambor and K. Maltman, Phys. Rev. D [**62**]{}, 093023 (2000). A. Pich and J. Prades, JHEP [**9910**]{}, 004 (1999). P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio, G. Nardulli and N. Paver, Phys. Lett. B [**408**]{}, 340 (1997). M. Jamin and M. Munz, Z. Phys. C [**66**]{}, 633 (1995). K. Nakamura et al. (Particle Data Group), J. Phys. G 37, 075021 (2010).
C. McNeile, C. T. H. Davies, E. Follana, K. Hornbostel and G. P. Lepage, Phys. Rev. D [**82**]{}, 034512 (2010); C. T. H. Davies [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**104**]{}, 132003 (2010). Y. Aoki [*et al.*]{} \[RBC Collaboration and UKQCD Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. D [**83**]{}, 074508 (2011). S. Durr [*et al.*]{}, arXiv:1011.2711 \[hep-lat\].
M. Suzuki, Phys. Rev. D [**47**]{} (1993) 1252. K. C. Yang, JHEP [**0510**]{}, 108 (2005). K. C. Yang, Nucl. Phys. B [**776**]{}, 187 (2007).
H.Y. Cheng, D [**67**]{}, 094007 (2003).
L. Burakovsky and T. Goldman, D [**56**]{}, 1368 (1997).
H.Y. Cheng and C.K. Chua, D [**69**]{}, 094007 (2004).
H. Hatanaka and K. C. Yang, Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{}, 094023 (2008) \[Erratum-ibid. D [**78**]{}, 059902 (2008)\]. K. C. Yang, Phys. Rev. D [**78**]{}, 034018 (2008). F. E. Close and A. Kirk, Z. Phys. C [**76**]{}, 469 (1997). M. Beneke and M. Neubert, Nucl. Phys. B [**675**]{}, 333 (2003).
K. Ackerstaff [*et al.*]{} \[OPAL Collaboration\], Eur. Phys. J. C [**7**]{}, 571 (1999) K. Maltman and T. Yavin, Phys. Rev. D [**78**]{}, 094020 (2008). E. Braaten, S. Narison and A. Pich, Nucl. Phys. B [**373**]{}, 581 (1992). K. G. Chetyrkin and A. Kwiatkowski, Z. Phys. C [**59**]{}, 525 (1993); arXiv:hep-ph/9805232. S. G. Gorishnii, A. L. Kataev and S. A. Larin, Phys. Lett. B [**259**]{}, 144 (1991). B. L. Ioffe and K. N. Zyablyuk, Eur. Phys. J. C [**27**]{}, 229 (2003). J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Phys. Rept. [**87**]{}, 77 (1982). C. A. Dominguez, N. F. Nasrallah and K. Schilcher, JHEP [**0802**]{}, 072 (2008).
[^1]: Replacing the meson mass squared $m^2$ by $m$ throughout (\[eq:GMOkubo\]), we obtain $\theta^{\rm lin}= (23^{+17}_{-23})^\circ$. The difference is negligible. Our result can be compared with that using $\theta_{K_1}=-57^\circ$ into (\[eq:GMOkubo\]), one has $\theta^{\rm quad}=52^\circ$.
[^2]: In PDG [@PDG], the mixing angle is defined as $\alpha =\theta -\theta_i +\pi/2$. Comparing it with our definition, we have $\alpha=\pi/2 -\bar\alpha$.
[^3]: The following approximation was used in [@Close:1997nm]: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\langle\phi|\bar{s}\gamma_\mu s|f_1(1285)\rangle}
{\langle\rho|(\bar{u}\gamma_\mu u -\bar{d}\gamma_\mu d)/2|f_1(1285)\rangle}
\approx 2\tan\bar\alpha \,. \nonumber\end{aligned}$$
[^4]: Considering the anomaly, the singlet axial-vector current is satisfied with $$\partial^\mu j^{(1)}_\mu=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(m_u \bar uu+ m_d\bar dd+ m_s\bar ss)+\frac{3\alpha_s}{4\pi}G\tilde{G}$$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
address: |
Department of Physics\
Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YB, U.K.
author:
- 'David H. Lyth'
title: ' Observational constraints on models of inflation from the density perturbation and gravitino production[^1]'
---
\#1\#2[3.6pt]{}
\#1[\#1]{}
\#1[\[\#1\]]{}
Introduction
============
Inflation is supposed to do two quite different jobs [@treview; @book]. Starting at the Planck scale, inflation should protect our patch of the universe against collapse, and against invasion by the presumably hostile region around it. Then, much later, when the rate of expansion is at least five orders of magnitude below the Planck scale, inflation is supposed to generate the specific initial conditions, that are required for the subsequent Hot Big Bang if it is to produce the observed Universe. The second job is done during the last 70 (or fewer) $e$-folds of inflation. Only that era is directly accessible to observation, and it is the focus of this article. The initial conditions include the following
- An extremely homogeneous and isotropic Universe
- A spatially flat Universe
- A clean Universe: no relics which would spoil nucleosynthesis, overclose the Universe, or otherwise contradict observation.
- A primordial curvature perturbation, whose spectrum is rather flat on cosmological scales.
Inflation sets the first and second conditions in a completely straightforward fashion. The same is true of the fourth condition, provided that the inflation is of the slow-roll variety. The third condition, though, might be problematic because the slow-roll inflation which generates the curvature perturbation may also generate light relics with gravitational-strength interactions, such as moduli with spin 0, and the gravitino with spin $3/2$. To get rid of these one might need a separate bout of late inflation, lasting only a few $e$-folds. According to present thinking, the late inflation would not be of the slow-roll variety, but rather what is called [@thermal] thermal inflation.
This article is in two parts. In the first part, I focus on the primordial density perturbation, and in particular on the spectral index which specifies the scale-dependence of its spectrum. The spectral index is a potentially very powerful discriminator between different inflation models. Already, the constraint on the spectral index from a best fit to relevant data is on the verge of ruling out hitherto popular models.
In the second part of the article, I discuss the production of gravitinos after slow-roll inflation. On the basis of the rather complete formalism recently presented by Kallosh et al. [@kklv2], it has been shown recently [@00grav] that the conjecture [@latetime] of late-time gravitino creation is likely to be correct: gravitinos are created at the ‘intermediate epoch’ when the Hubble parameter falls below the gravitino mass, or at reheating, whichever is earlier. This bout of late-time creation usually swamps the bout of creation just after inflation [@kklv; @gtr], leading to stronger cosmological constraints.
Inflation and the spectral index of the primordial curvature perturbation
=========================================================================
(energy density)${}^\frac14$
------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------
$10^{18}{\,\mbox{GeV}}$? Inflation begins
$10^{13}{\,\mbox{GeV}}$?? Primordial curvature perturbation freezes
Inflation ends soon afterwards
We [*don’t know*]{} what happens next, until …
$ 1{\,\mbox{MeV}}$ Nucleosynthesis
$1{\,\mbox{keV}}$ Primordial curvature perturbation unfreezes
Matter becomes clumpy
Radiation becomes anisotropic
$10^{-3}{\,\mbox{eV}}$ Present epoch
: A brief history of the Universe.
\[table1\]
Let us begin by recalling the history of the Universe, as summarized in Table \[table1\]. The curvature perturbation is generated when cosmological scales leave the horizon during inflation. Until these scales re-enter the horizon, long after inflation, it is time-independent (frozen in); this is the object that I am calling the [*primordial*]{} curvature perturbation. The freezing-in of the curvature perturbation on super-horizon scales is a direct consequence of the lack of causal interactions on such scales, under the sole assumption of energy conservation [@llmw], and independently of whether Einstein gravity is valid. This is extremely fortunate, since we know essentially nothing the Universe while cosmological scales are outside the horizon.
The spatial Fourier components of the primordial curvature perturbation are uncorrelated (Gaussian perturbation), which means that its stochastic properties are completely determined by its [*spectrum*]{} $\calp_\calr(k)$, defined essentially as the mean-square value of the spatial Fourier component with comoving wavenumber $k$. The [*spectral index*]{} n(k)1 + defines the shape of the spectrum.
A [*special case*]{}, predicted by most inflation models, is that of a practically scale-invariant $n$, giving $\calp_\calr \propto k^{(n-1)}$. The [*most special case*]{}, predicted only by rather special models of inflation, is that of a spectral index practically indistinguishable from $1$, giving a practically scale-invariant $\calp_\calr$.
By the time that cosmological scales re-enter the horizon, long after nucleosynthesis, we know the content of the Universe; there are photons, three types of neutrino with (probably) negligible mass, the baryon-photon fluid, the (non-baryonic) dark matter, and the cosmological constant. The primordial curvature perturbation is associated with perturbations in the densities of each of these components, which all vanish on a common spatial slicing (an adiabatic density perturbation). It is also associated with anisotropies in the momentum distributions. Using well-understood coupled equations, encapsulated say in the CMBfast package, the perturbations and anisotropies can be evolved forward to the present time, if we have a well-defined cosmological model. Here we will make the simplest assumption, namely the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology; the Universe is spatially flat, and the non-baryonic cold dark matter is cold (CDM). Flatness is the naive prediction of inflation, and there is no definite evidence against CDM.
I would like to report the result of a recent fit [@cl00] of the parameters of the $\Lambda$CDM model. The data set consisted of the following.
- The normalization $(2/5)\calp_\calr^{1/2}=1.94\times 10^{-5}$ from COBE data on the cmb anisotropy.
- Boomerang and Maxima data at the first and second peaks of the cmb anisotropy.
- Hubble parameter $h=0.65\pm0.075$, total density $\Omega_0=0.35\pm0.075$, baryon density $\Omega{_{\rm B}} h^2=0.019\pm 0.002$.
- Slope of galaxy correlation functions ${\widetilde\Gamma}=0.23\pm 0.035$
- RMS matter density contrast ${\widetilde\sigma_8}=0.56\pm0.059$ in sphere of radius $8h^{-1}{\,\mbox{Mpc}}$
The epoch of reionization was [*calculated*]{}, assuming that a fraction $f{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}}10^{-4}$ has collapsed.
The result (for $f\simeq 10^{-2}$) is n=0.990.05 \[nresult\] This is higher than that of Kinney et al. [@mkr] ($n=0.93\pm 0.05$) and of Tegmark et al. [@teg00] ($n=0.92\pm0.04$). Probably, this is because the former do not include ${\widetilde\sigma_8}$ or ${\widetilde\Gamma}$, while the latter do not include ${\widetilde\sigma_8}$, and have also a lower ${\widetilde\Gamma}$. Also, both have reionization redshift $z{_{\rm R}}\simeq 0$. We shall see that the tighter lower bound on $n$ implied by our analysis is significant, in the context of some models of inflation. (These are the only two analyses so far which include most of the relevant data, including the crucial nucleosynthesis constraint. A recent analysis [@dick00] omitting the latter gives $n=1.03\pm0.08$.)
Comparison with models of slow-roll inflation
=============================================
The near scale-independence of the primordial curvature perturbation presumably requires slow-roll inflation, in which the potential $V$ satisfies flatness conditions ${M_{\rm P}}|V'/V|\ll 1$ and ${M_{\rm P}}^2|V''/V|\ll 1$. (We do not consider the possibility of a break in the spectrum, associated with temporary failure of slow-roll; see for instance [@bgss].) Assuming a single-component inflaton and Einstein gravity, the prediction depends mainly on the inflaton potential $V(\phi)$, and the number of $e$-folds $N{_{\rm COBE}}$ of slow-roll inflation after the scales explored by COBE leave the horizon. (It depends also on the inflaton field value $\phi{_{\rm end}}$ when slow-roll ends, but in an interesting class of models this dependence is very weak.) The prediction of slow-roll inflation is 4[25]{}\_(k) &=& 1[75\^2[M\_[P]{}]{}\^2]{}\
& =& [M\_[P]{}]{}\^2 - 3[M\_[P]{}]{}\^2 $ \frac{V'}{V} $\^2 The right hand side is to be evaluated at the epoch of horizon exit $k=aH$, given by N(k)&& (k[\_[end]{}]{}/k) = [M\_[P]{}]{}\^2 \^\_[[\_[end]{}]{}]{} [d]{}\
N(k[\_[COBE]{}]{}) &=& 60 - - 13 - N\_0
The number $N_0$ (non-negative in any reasonable cosmology) parameterizes our ignorance about the history of the Universe between the end of slow-roll inflation and nucleosynthesis. It is zero in standard cosmology, but one bout of thermal inflation [@thermal] could generate $N_0\sim 10$, and two or more bouts are quite feasible.
Models of slow-roll inflation
-----------------------------
The easiest way of satisfying the flatness conditions is to have field values $\phi\gg{M_{\rm P}}$; then the flatness conditions are satisfied by $V=V_0f(\phi/{M_{\rm P}})$, where $f$ is any function whose value and derivatives are of order 1. In a non-hybrid model, $f$ should becomes steep so that inflation ends, but that still leaves a lot of freedom. The simplest choice is a monomial $V\propto \phi^2$ or $\phi^4$ (usually called chaotic inflation), but in the large-field regime monomials have no special significance. The reason is that all of the coefficients in a power series for $V$ are expected to have coefficients of order 1 in Planck units.
In principle, string theory presumably determines these coefficients. This idea does yield some proposals for the potential of special fields such as moduli [@treview; @bd] or fields corresponding to the distance between D-branes [@gia]. In the former case one might have inflation with the potential in the last row of Table 2. With this possible exception, it seems that if Nature has chosen to inflate at large field values, there is at present no theoretical guidance about the form of the potential.
For this reason, models of inflation based on current theoretical ideas [@treview] should invoke $\phi{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}{M_{\rm P}}$ and preferably $\phi\ll{M_{\rm P}}$. Then it is justified to focus on the renormalizable terms of the potential (quartic and lower). (One or two non-renormalizable terms might be invoked for special purposes.) By inflating along a flat direction of global supersymmetry, the flatness conditions are marginally satisfied. To have them well-satisfied, without fine-tuning, one can invoke an approximate global symmetry $\phi\to\phi+$const (shift symmetry). With any such symmetry, the potential is completely flat in the limit of exact symmetry, and (provided that the potential does not vanish in this limit) the approximate flatness required for inflation can be ascribed to the approximate symmetry [@treview; @ewan].
The difference between the large- and small field cases is neatly illustrated by a proposal [@kawasaki] reported at this meeting. It seeks to justify the potential $V\propto \phi^2$ at $\phi\gg{M_{\rm P}}$ by invoking a shift symmetry, but to achieve this a particular symmetry-breaking term is invoked. If instead all symmetry-breaking terms were allowed, with coefficients of order 1 in Planck units, the potential would be given by the generic power-series expansion mentioned earlier. While the shift symmetry justifies the flatness of the potential, it does not suggest any particular form for it because we are in the large-field regime.
Returning to the small-field regime, field theory with non-renormalizable terms essentially ignored allows only a few different types of term for the variation of $V$. With the reasonable assumption that one such term dominates over the relevant range of $\phi$, and with the restriction $n<1$, we arrive at essentially the models displayed in Table 2. Details of these models, with extensive references and possible complications, are given in [@treview]. One of these complications is the possibility, considered by several authors, that two terms need to be kept over the relevant range of $\phi$. While this can happen, it is clear that the dominance of one term is the generic situation in the sense that it will hold over most of the potential’s parameter space.
When the COBE normalization is imposed on the prediction, the small-field requirement can generally be satisfied with physically reasonable values of the parameters. The only significant exceptions are the logarithmic potential with $c\sim 1$ (as in $D$-term inflation), and the quadratic potential in the last line (more below on the latter), which both require $\phi\sim{M_{\rm P}}$.
Given the restriction on $\phi$, the flatness conditions require that $V_0$ dominates the potential in all of the models, leading to simple expressions for $\epsilon$ and $\eta$. The contribution of gravitational waves is negligibly small in all of them, and the formula for $n$ is well approximated by n-1=2\[nofvapprox\] . There are models giving $n-1$ both positive and negative, but in the former case an observational value for $n$ does not tell us much. For $n<1$, in contrast, $n$ is a good discriminator between models. Some predictions are listed in Table \[table2\]. Except in the last row, the prediction depends on $N$ and is therefore scale-dependent. However, since $n$ is constrained to be close to 1, the scale-dependence is negligible over the cosmological range $\Delta N\sim 4$, and accordingly one may set $N=N{_{\rm COBE}}$. In the ‘new’ inflation models, [Eq. (\[nresult\])]{} gives a non-trivial lower bound on $N$, which would almost exclude the $p=3$ model if this 1-$\sigma$ bound were taken seriously.
Another case of interest is the potential $V=V_0 -\frac12 m^2\phi^2
+\cdots$. More or less independently of the additional terms which stabilize the potential, the vev of $\phi$ is $\langle\phi\rangle\sim\sqrt{2V_0/m^2}
=[2/(1-n)]^{1/2} {M_{\rm P}}$. Depending on the nature of $\phi$, this kind of inflation has been termed ‘natural’, ‘topological’ and ‘modular’ (see for instance [@bd] for a recent espousal of modular inflation). In all cases the model is regarded as implausible if $\langle\phi\rangle$ is much bigger than ${M_{\rm P}}$, which means that it is viable only if $n$ is not too close to 1. Our 2-$\sigma$ bound $n{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}}0.9$ implies $\langle\phi\rangle {\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}}4.5{M_{\rm P}}$, which may perhaps be regarded as already disfavoring these models.
------------ ------------------------ --------------------------------------- -------- --------
model potential
$50$ $20$
$ V_0(1+c\ln\phi)$ $1-\frac1N$ 0.98 0.95
’mutated’ $V_0(1-c\phi^{-2})$ $1-\frac3{2N}$ $0.97$ $0.93$
’new’ $V_0(1-c\phi^4)$ $1-\frac3N$ $0.94$ $0.85$
’new’ $V_0(1-c\phi^3)$ $1-\frac4N$ $0.92$ $0.80$
’modular…’ $V_0-\frac12m^2\phi^2$ [ $1-\frac{m^2{M_{\rm P}}^2}{V_0}$]{}
------------ ------------------------ --------------------------------------- -------- --------
: Some field-theory models of inflation predicting a spectral index $n<1$.
\[table2\]
Running-mass models of inflation
================================
So far we focussed on models giving a practically scale-independent spectral index. This seems to be a generic prediction of inflation models based on spontaneously broken (global) supersymmetry. As Stewart pointed out some years ago, the opposite is the case for models based on softly broken supersymmetry [@running]. In such models, the inflaton mass runs with scale, and in the linear log approximation the potential is V=V\_0 -12 c $ \ln\frac{\phi}{\phi_*}-\frac12$ \^2 This leads to &=& s e\^[cN(k)]{} -c\
N& & (k/k[\_[COBE]{}]{} ) If $c$ is a gauge coupling, its expected magnitude is
|c|\~10\^[-2]{} 10\^[-1]{} With $c$ in the upper part of this range, the spectral index can change very significantly over the range $\Delta N\sim 4$ or so which corresponds to cosmological scales. (The other parameter $s$ controls end of inflation, and to avoid severe fine-tuning it should satisfy $\phi{_{\rm end}}\simeq\phi_*$.)
The fit mentioned earlier [@cl00] determines the region of $c$ and $s$ allowed by observation. A gauge coupling $c\sim 0.1$ for the inflaton is allowed, giving potentially observable scale-dependence of the spectral index.
Gravitino creation from the vacuum
==================================
There are strong cosmological constraints on the abundance of the gravitino, over most of the expected mass range. The light, practically stable gravitino typically predicted by gauge-mediated models of supersymmetry breaking must not overclose the Universe, while the heavier gravitino of gravity-mediated models must not interfere with nucleosynthesis. Only the very heavy gravitino predicted by anomaly-mediated supersymmetry breaking seems to be free from cosmological constraints.
It has long been known that gravitinos are efficiently produced by thermal collisions after reheating, and that to make these thermal gravitinos cosmologically safe usually requires a low reheat temperature and/or sufficient late-time entropy production. More recently, it has been noticed [@kklv; @gtr; @latetime] that gravitinos may be produced even more efficiently between the end of inflation and reheating, through the oscillation of the field that was responsible for the inflationary energy density. These gravitinos are created from the vacuum, through the amplification of the vacuum fluctuation.
The abundance of gravitinos created from the vacuum is determined by the evolution equation of the relevant mode function (the function multiplying the creation operator). There are separate mode functions for helicity $1/2$ and $3/2$, as seen by a comoving observer in the expanding Universe. The evolution of the helicity $3/2$ mode function is essentially the same as for a spin $1/2$ particle, whose effective mass is the field-dependent gravitino mass ${m_{3/2}(\phi)}$ appearing in the Lagrangian [@mm]. (We shall denote its vacuum value by simply ${m_{3/2}}$.) This means [@lrs] that the creation of helicity $3/2$ gravitinos from the vacuum takes place just after inflation, with number density $n\sim 10^{-2}{m_{3/2}^3(\phi)}$ just after creation. Barring an unforeseen cancellation, the supergravity expression for the potential requires that in the early Universe $|{m_{3/2}(\phi)}|{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}H$. As a result creation of helicity $3/2$ gravitinos from the vacuum is insignificant compared with gravitino production from thermal collisions.
The evolution of the helicity $1/2$ mode function is far more complicated. It was given first [@kklv; @gtr] in the case that only a single chiral superfield is relevant. This one-field case was at first investigated [@kklv; @gtr] in the approximation of unbroken supersymmetry in the vacuum. Under the reasonable approximation that the oscillating field has a quadratic potential derived from global supersymmetry, it was found that the creation of the helicity $1/2$ gravitino is the same as the creation of the inflatino. This may be traced to the fact that in this approximation there is gravitino-goldstino equivalence, the inflatino being the goldstino of spontaneously broken global supersymmetry. The number density is now $n\sim 10^{-2} M^3$ where $M$ is the mass of the oscillating field. This is bigger than the abundance of helicity $3/2$ gravitinos, since $M>H$ is required for the field to oscillate.
The problem with the approximation of unbroken supersymmetry in the vacuum is that it makes the gravitino massless in the vacuum, leaving the inflatino as a physical particle. For this reason, the one-field model was next studied [@latetime] under the assumption that the oscillating field also breaks supersymmetry in the vacuum, making it presumably a modulus of string theory. The result is now very different; unless reheating intervenes, gravitino creation continues until the ‘intermediate’ epoch, defined as the epoch at which the energy density is of order MS\^4 3[M\_[P]{}]{}\^2 [m\_[3/2]{}]{}\^2 corresponding to Hubble parameter $H={m_{3/2}}$. (It was assumed that inflation ends before the intermediate epoch, as is the case in a wide class of inflation models.)
The number density of gravitinos, just after creation ends, is again $n\sim 10^{-2} M^3$ (we discount for the moment the case that the energy density of created gravitinos becomes significant). If $M$ is bigger than ${m_{3/2}}$, this [*late-time gravitino creation*]{} is more efficient than creation just after the end of inflation. However, because the oscillating field is now required to break supersymmetry in the vacuum, $M$ cannot be many orders of magnitude bigger than ${m_{3/2}}$. As a result, it turns out that even late-time gravitino creation cannot be as efficient as thermal gravitino production. This one-field case is therefore of only academic interest.
Recently, a formalism has been given [@kklv2] which describes the helicity $1/2$ gravitino in the presence of any number of chiral and gauge supermultiplets. Using this formalism, it has recently been confirmed [@00grav] that late-time gravitino creation occurs in the generic case, leading to a gravitino abundance at least as big as the one found in the one-field model. I briefly explain how this comes about.
The equation for the evolution of the helicity $1/2$ mode function $\theta$ is 0 &=& $ \partial_0\partial_0 + k^2 + \hat B^\dagger \hat B + 2B_1\partial_0
+ \hat B' -ik \gamma_3\gamma_0 \hat A'
$\
&+& $ 2 B_1 - a{m_{3/2}(\phi)}$ $ \partial_0 +\hat B -ik\gamma_3 \gamma_0 \hat A $\
&-& \[63a\] where a prime and $\partial_0$ both denote differentiation with respect to conformal time, ${\mbox d}/{\mbox d}x_0\equiv a{\mbox d}/{\mbox d}t$. In this equation, $\hat A=A_1+\gamma_0 A_2$ and $\hat B
=B_1 + \gamma_0 B_2$, where A\_1 && \[a1first\]\
A\_2 && \[a2first\]\
B\_1 && $ -H A_1 + {m_{3/2}(\phi)}A_2$ \[a3\]\
B\_2 && -a 2 $$3H A_2 + {\left(}1+ 3 A_1{\right)}{m_{3/2}(\phi)}$$ \[a4\] An over-dot denotes ${\mbox d}/{\mbox d}t$, $\rho$ is the energy density, and $p$ is the pressure. The energy density and pressure appear because they determine the Einstein tensor of the Universe, which appears because we are evolving the gravitino mode function in curved spacetime. At least in the cases studied so far, the oscillation of $p$ caused by the oscillating field is the dominant cause of gravitino creation.
The last term involves = + 3[M\_[P]{}]{}\^2[m\_[3/2]{}\^2()]{}and $\Xi$ which is a linear combination of fermion fields, orthogonal to the combination that is eaten by the gravitino to acquire mass. The coefficient of each fermion field is a function of the scalar fields to which it couples.
The equation holds for each momentum $k/a$, where $a$ is the scale factor of the Universe. Flat spacetime field theory holds during an ‘initial’ era and a ‘final’ era. Up to slowly-varying pre-factors, the initial condition is $\theta=
\exp(-ikx_0)$, corresponding to the vacuum, and the final occupation number $|\beta|^2$ is read off from (while the gravitino remains relativistic) from $\theta
=\alpha \exp(ikx_0) + \beta\exp(-ikx_0)$. There is negligible creation in some adiabatic regime $k{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}}k{_{\rm max}}$, in which $\theta= \exp(-ikx_0)$ holds at all times.
If the only relevant fields form a chiral supermultiplet, $\Xi$ vanishes. This is the one-field case mentioned earlier, and it gives $k{_{\rm max}}\sim a{_{\rm int}}M$, where $M$ is the mass of the oscillating field and the subscript denotes the intermediate epoch. If the relevant fields form two chiral supermultiplets, $\Xi$ can be expressed in terms of $\theta$; this case was considered in detail in [@00grav], and shown to lead to the [*same*]{} estimate for $k{_{\rm max}}$. In the general case, $\Xi$ is an independent quantity, and the evolution of $\theta$ and the spin $1/2$ fields is given by a system of coupled equations. Without solving the system, the fact that $\Xi$ is an independent quantity means that, barring accidental cancellations, a lower bound on the gravitino abundance will be obtained by setting $\Xi=0$. This leads [@00grav] to the estimate k[\_[max]{}]{} \~a[\_[crea]{}]{} M where the subscript denotes the epoch when gravitino creation ends; it is the intermediate epoch or the epoch of reheating, whichever is earlier.
Because they are fermions, the abundance of created gravitinos can be estimated in terms of $k{_{\rm max}}$, and the occupation number $|\beta|^2$ for that wavenumber, n &\~& 1[2\^2]{} \^[k[\_[max]{}]{}]{}\_0 a\^[-3]{} |\_k|\^2 [d]{}k\
&\~& 10\^[-2]{} ||\^2(k[\_[max]{}]{}/a)\^3 \[11\] The corresponding energy density is $\rho\sim (k{_{\rm max}}/a) n$, and it cannot be bigger than the total. This leads to the estimate [@00grav] n \~{ 10\^[-2]{} (k[\_[max]{}]{}/a[\_[crea]{}]{})\^3, [\_[crea]{}]{}(a[\_[crea]{}]{}/k[\_[max]{}]{}) } (a[\_[crea]{}]{}/a)\^3,
In the case of gravity-mediated supersymmetry breaking, nucleosynthesis requires [@ns] n/s10\^[-13]{} \[nconst\] where $s$ is the entropy density. Thermally produced gravitinos are subject to this constraint, and keeping only them it requires [@ns] TR10\^9\[thermcon\] Here, $T{_{\rm R}}$ is the reheat temperature, defined as the temperature just after all or most of the energy in the oscillation is converted into radiation, and $\gamma^{-1}\geq 1$ is the entropy increase, if any, after reheating.
Now consider instead the gravitinos created from the vacuum. We can work out $n/s$ at nucleosynthesis, remembering that $n\propto a^{-3}$ is proportional to $\rho$ until reheating, and to $s\gamma$ thereafter. Considering only the non-relativistic regime, we find that gravitinos created from the vacuum lead to the following nucleosynthesis constraint if $T{_{\rm R}}{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}M{_{\rm S}}$ TR{10\^[-11]{}MS\^4/M\^3,10\^[-13]{} M} \[con1\] If instead $M{_{\rm S}}{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}T{_{\rm R}}{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}M$, we find again the second of the previous constraints, TR10\^[-13]{} M \[con2\] Finally, if $T{_{\rm R}}{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}}M{_{\rm S}}$ and $T{_{\rm R}}{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}}M$ we find TR 10\^4\^[1/3]{} M \[con3\]
The requirements that gravitinos do not spoil nucleosynthesis are [Eq. (\[thermcon\])]{}, plus the appropriate one of [Eqs. (\[con1\]), (\[con2\]) and (\[con3\])]{}. Before considering these constraints, we have to consider the possible entropy increase $\gamma^{-1}$. The most efficient mechanism of entropy release is thermal inflation [@thermal] (or some other type of inflation occuring after the intermediate epoch). One bout of thermal inflation gives huge entropy release, roughly $\gamma^{-1}\sim 10^{15}$, and there could be more than one. If there is no thermal inflation, significant entropy release can come only from an era of matter domination by an unstable particle. (For simplicity we exclude the case of two or more such eras.) Then \^[-1]{}\~T[\_[eq]{}]{}/ T[\_[decay]{}]{} \[gammaeq\] where $T{_{\rm decay}}$ is the temperature just after the particle decay (ie., the final reheat temperature) and $T{_{\rm eq}}$ is the temperature just before the era of matter domination. In this case, $\gamma T{_{\rm R}} \sim T{_{\rm decay}} (T{_{\rm R}}/T{_{\rm eq}} )$. The era of matter domination must end before nucleosynthesis, corresponding to $ T{_{\rm decay}} {\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}}10{\,\mbox{MeV}}$, which implies TR 10. \[con4\]
The region forbidden by nucleosynthesis, in the space of the three parameters $\gamma$, $T{_{\rm R}}$ and $M$, is given by [Eq. (\[thermcon\])]{}, the relevant one of [Eqs. (\[con1\]), (\[con2\]) and (\[con3\])]{}, plus [Eq. (\[con4\])]{} if there is no thermal inflation. When $T{_{\rm R}}{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}M{_{\rm S}}$, the boundary of this region depends only on $\gamma T{_{\rm R}}$ and $M$. For higher values of $T{_{\rm R}}$ it depends separately on $\gamma$ and $T{_{\rm R}}$. If $\gamma{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}10^{-12}$ there is no forbidden region. (In particular, there is no forbidden region if thermal inflation occurs.) If $M{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
\raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}10^7{\,\mbox{GeV}}$, the forbidden region is the same as for thermally produced gravitinos. Otherwise, gravitinos created from the vacuum rule out a significant portion of the parameter space, beyond what is ruled out by thermally produced gravitinos.
Where are we going with inflation models?
=========================================
By building and testing models of the early Universe, we obtain a unique window on the nature of the fundamental interactions. This is especially true of inflation model-building, because the crucially important curvature perturbation, once generated, is frozen in until well after nucleosynthesis.
In a few years we shall know $n(k)$ with accuracy $\pm 0.01$. This is the only observable [*function*]{} relating to physics far beyond the Standard Model! The measurement of $n(k)$, plus other constraints like gravitino abundance, will rule out most of the presently existing inflation models. Depending on whether or not $n$ is significantly different from 1, and on how much our understanding of string-derived field theory progresses, one model may have been selected as the best candidate.
The [*next frontier*]{} will be to discover how the inflaton sector talks to the Standard Model sector. There must indeed be communication because the inflaton field must decay into SM radiation (’reheating’). As a result, given continued progress (which might be the rub), top-down inflation model-builders [*will*]{} eventually meet up with bottom-up extenders of the Standard Model!
[99]{} D. H. Lyth and A. Riotto, Phys. Rep. [**314**]{}, 1 (1998). A. R. Liddle and D. H. Lyth, [*Cosmological inflation and large scale structure*]{}, Cambridge University Press (2000). D. H. Lyth and E. D. Stewart, ; . R. Kallosh, L. Kofman, A. Linde and A. Van Proeyen, hep-th/0006179. H. B. Kim and D. H. Lyth, hep-ph/0011262. D. H. Lyth, and hep-ph/0003120. R. Kallosh, L. Kofman, A. Linde and A. Van Proeyen, . G. F. Giudice, I. Tkachev and A. Riotto, JHEP 9908:009 (1999). A. R. Liddle, D. H. Lyth, K. Malik and D. Wands, . D. H. Lyth and L. Covi, ; L. Covi and D. H. Lyth, astro-ph/0008165. W. H. Kinney, A. Melchiorri and A. Riotto, astro-ph/0007357. M. Tegmark, M. Zaldarriaga and A. J. S. Hamilton, astro-ph/0008167 v2. J. R. Bond et al., astro-ph/0011378. J. Barriga, E. Gaztanaga, M. G. Santos and S. Sarkar, astro-ph/0011398. T. Banks, M. Dine and L. Motl, hep-th/0007206. G. Dvali and S. H. Tye, . J. D. Cohn and E. D. Stewart, ; hep-ph/0002214. M. M. Kawasaki, M. Yamaguchi and T. Yanagida, . Stewart E.D., ; L. Covi, D. H. Lyth and L. Roszkowski, ; L. Covi and D. H. Lyth, ; L. Covi, ; G. German, G. Ross G. and S. Sarkar, . A. L. Maroto and A. Mazumdar, . D. H. Lyth and D. Roberts, hep-ph/9609441, unpublished; D. H. Lyth, D. Roberts and M. Smith, . S. Sarkar, .
[^1]: Updated version of a talk at COSMO2K, to appear in the proceedings
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The diamond product is the poset operation that when applied to the face lattices of two polytopes results in the face lattice of the Cartesian product of the polytopes. Application of the diamond product to two Eulerian posets is a bilinear operation on the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-indices of the two posets, yielding a product on ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-polynomials. A lattice path interpretation is provided for this product of two ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-monomials.'
author:
- 'N. Bradley Fox'
title: A Lattice Path Interpretation of the Diamond Product
---
=8.5truein =11truein
Introduction
============
The ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index is a polynomial in the non-commutative variables ${{\bf{c}}}$ and ${{\bf{d}}}$ that efficiently encodes an Eulerian poset’s flag $f$-vector, which contains information on the number of chains through each set of ranks of the poset. One primary example of an Eulerian poset is the face lattice of a convex polytope. An important characteristic of the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index is that it is a useful invariant for computations, as explicit formulas have been developed to calculate the effect that poset and polytope operations have on the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index. Polytope operations that have been studied include the prism, pyramid, free join, Cartesian product, and truncation of a vertex, as well as their associated poset operations.
Ehrenborg and Readdy used coproducts and derivations in [@Ehrenborg_Readdy] to generate expressions for the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index of polytopes under operations such as the prism of a polytope, or more generally the Cartesian product of polytopes. The equivalent poset operation to this product is the diamond product. The expressions that were developed, unfortunately, were rather complicated and required the use of auxiliary variables ${{\bf{a}}}$ and ${{\bf{b}}}$. Ehrenborg and Fox [@Ehrenborg_Fox] (no relation to author) improved upon the earlier work by developing recursive formulas for the bilinear operator that corresponds to the diamond product.
The diamond product operator is non-negative on ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-indices, thus leading to the study of combinatorial interpretations of the resulting coefficients. Slone [@Slone] examined the specific case of the diamond product of two butterfly posets, whose ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-indices are simply powers of ${{\bf{c}}}$. He found that one can interpret the polynomial as a weighted sum of lattice paths. In this paper, a generalization of Slone’s lattice path interpretation is given for the diamond product of any two ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-monomials, in addition to a lattice path interpretation for the product of ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-monomials.
In Section 2 we introduce the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index of Eulerian Posets and its underlying coalgebra structure. In Section 3 we introduce the diamond product of two posets. The lattice path interpretation of this product is discussed in Section 4. Finally, we state an open problem in Section 5.
Posets, the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index, and coproducts
========================================================
Consider the poset $P$ to be a graded poset of rank $n+1$ with rank function $\rho$, unique minimum element $\hat{0}$, and unique maximum element $\hat{1}$. For further terminology on partially ordered sets, see [@Stanley Chapter 3].
A $\it{chain}$ $c$ in such a poset $P$ is a linearly ordered subset of $P$. We will only consider chains that contain the minimum element $\hat{0}$ and the maximum element $\hat{1}$; hence, we write $c$ as $c=\{\hat{0}=x_0<x_1<\cdots <x_k=\hat{1}\}$. Let $S$ be a subset of the set $\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$, and define $f_S(P)=f_S$ to be the number of chains in the poset $P$ whose elements $x_1,\ldots, x_{k-1}$ have ranks that are exactly the elements of the set $S$. The $2^n$ values of $f_S$ are collectively known as the $flag$ $f$-$vector$ of $P$. The $flag$ $h$-$vector$ is defined using the relation $$h_S=\sum_{T\subseteq S} (-1)^{|S-T|}\cdot f_T,$$ which is equivalent to $$f_S=\sum_{T\subseteq S} h_T.$$
Let ${{\bf{a}}}$ and ${{\bf{b}}}$ be non-commutative variables. For a subset $S$ of $\{1,\ldots,n\}$, define the ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-monomial $u_S=u_1\cdots u_n$ in which $u_i={{\bf{a}}}$ if $i\notin S$ and $u_i={{\bf{b}}}$ if $i\in S$. Define the ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-$index$ $\Psi(P)$ of the poset $P$ to be the ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-polynomial $$\Psi(P)=\sum_S h_S\cdot u_S,$$ where $S$ ranges over all subsets of $\{1,\ldots, n\}$.
The Möbius function $\mu$ of a poset $P$ is defined by $\mu(x,x)=1$ and the recursion $\mu(x,y)=-\sum_{x\leq z<y} \mu(x,z)$ for $x<y$. A poset $P$ is *Eulerian* if its Möbius function satisfies the relation $\mu(x,y)=(-1)^{\rho(y)-\rho(x)}$ for all intervals $[x,y]$ in $P$. A key example of Eulerian posets is the face lattice of a convex polytope. The following result was conjectured by Fine and later proved by Bayer and Klapper [@Bayer_Klapper].
\[cdindex\] The ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-index $\Psi(P)$ of an Eulerian poset $P$ is a non-commutative polynomial in ${{\bf{c}}}={{\bf{a}}}+{{\bf{b}}}$ and ${{\bf{d}}}={{\bf{a}}}\cdot {{\bf{b}}}+{{\bf{b}}}\cdot {{\bf{a}}}$.
When written in terms of ${{\bf{c}}}$ and ${{\bf{d}}}$, we call $\Psi(P)$ the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index of the poset $P$, although the same notation is used for the ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-index and the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index. The existence of the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index is equivalent to the fact that the flag $f$-vector of an Eulerian poset satisfies the generalized Dehn–Sommerville relations, due to Bayer and Billera in [@Bayer_Billera]. For examples and more information on the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index of posets, see [@Stanley Section 3.17].
We now briefly discuss the coalgebraic structures of the ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-index and the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index that were introduced in [@Ehrenborg_Readdy]. Given an abelian group $V$, a *coproduct* is a linear map $\Delta: V\longrightarrow V\otimes V$. We will use Sweedler notation to denote the coproduct of an element $v\in V$ as $\Delta(v)=\sum_v v_{(1)}\otimes v_{(2)}$, where this sum is over finitely many pairs $v_{(1)}$ and $v_{(2)}$. An abelian group $V$ with associative product $\cdot$ and coassociative coproduct $\Delta$ is called a *Newtonian coalgebra* if it satisfies the following identity $$\Delta(u\cdot v)=\sum_u u_{(1)} \otimes u_{(2)} \cdot v+\sum_v u\cdot v_{(1)} \otimes v_{(2)}.$$ It is straightforward to verify that the two coalgebras described below are both Newtonian.
First, let ${\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{a}}},{{\bf{b}}}\rangle}$ denote the polynomial ring in the non-commutative variables ${{\bf{a}}}$ and ${{\bf{b}}}$, where the degree of each variable is one. For an ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-monomial $u=u_1\cdots u_n$, define $$\Delta(u)=\sum_{i=1}^n u_1\cdots u_{i-1} \otimes u_{i+1}\cdots u_n,$$ and extend linearly to ${\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{a}}},{{\bf{b}}}\rangle}$. As examples, $\Delta(1)=0$ and $\Delta({{\bf{a}}})=\Delta({{\bf{b}}})=1\otimes 1$.
Next, consider the subring ${\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{c}}},{{\bf{d}}}\rangle}$ of ${\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{a}}},{{\bf{b}}}\rangle}$ generated by the variables ${{\bf{c}}}$ and ${{\bf{d}}}$ as defined in Theorem \[cdindex\]. Once one calculates $\Delta({{\bf{c}}})=\Delta({{\bf{a}}}+{{\bf{b}}})=2\cdot 1\otimes 1$ and $\Delta({{\bf{d}}})=\Delta({{\bf{a}}}\cdot {{\bf{b}}}+{{\bf{b}}}\cdot {{\bf{a}}})=1\otimes {{\bf{c}}}+{{\bf{c}}}\otimes 1$, it can be verified that ${\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{c}}},{{\bf{d}}}\rangle}$ is also a Newtonian coalgebra.
We now define two linear operators on these coalgebras. Let $G:{\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{a}}},{{\bf{b}}}\rangle}\longrightarrow {\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{a}}},{{\bf{b}}}\rangle}$ be the derivation given by the rules $G({{\bf{a}}})={{\bf{b}}}\cdot{{\bf{a}}}$, $G({{\bf{b}}})={{\bf{a}}}\cdot{{\bf{b}}}$, and the product rule $G(u\cdot v)=G(u)\cdot~v+~u\cdot~G(v)$. Since $G({{\bf{c}}})={{\bf{d}}}$ and $G({{\bf{d}}})={{\bf{c}}}\cdot{{\bf{d}}}$, $G$ becomes a linear operator on ${\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{c}}},{{\bf{d}}}\rangle}$ as well. Then let ${\operatorname{Pyr}}:~{\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{c}}},{{\bf{d}}}\rangle}\longrightarrow {\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{c}}},{{\bf{d}}}\rangle}$ be the linear operator defined by ${\operatorname{Pyr}}(u)=u\cdot {{\bf{c}}}+G(u)$.
The Diamond Product of Posets
=============================
Given two graded posets $P$ and $Q$, we define the *Cartesian product* of $P$ and $Q$ to be the poset $P\times Q=\{(x,y):x\in P,y\in Q\}$ with the order relation given by $(x,y)\leq_{P\times Q} (w,z)$ if $x\leq_P w$ and $y\leq_Q z$. Using this product, we can then define the *diamond product* of $P$ and $Q$ as the graded poset $P\diamond Q=(P-\{\hat{0}\})\times(Q-\{\hat{0}\})\cup \{\hat{0}\}$. This product corresponds to the *Cartesian product* of polytopes, defined as follows. For an $m$-dimensional polytope $V$ and $n$-dimensional polytope $W$, we say the Cartesian product of $V$ and $W$ is the $(m+n)$-dimensional polytope $$V\times W=\{(x_1,\ldots, x_{m+n})\in \mathbb{R}^{m+n}\text{ : } (x_1,\ldots, x_m)\in V, (x_{m+1},\ldots, x_{m+n})\in W\}.$$ The connection between the diamond product and Cartesian product was noted by Kalai in [@Kalai], where he stated that the face lattice of the Cartesian product of two polytopes corresponds to the diamond product of their face lattices, that is $\mathcal{L}(V\times W)=\mathcal{L}(V)\diamond \mathcal{L}(W).$ The diamond product specifically appears when studying the *prism* of a polytope, defined as ${\operatorname{Prism}}(V)=V\times I$, where $I$ is the unit interval. As stated in Proposition 4.1 of [@Ehrenborg_Readdy], $\mathcal{L}({\operatorname{Prism}}(V))=\mathcal{L}(V)\diamond B_2$.
Because of the importance of the prism operation and the Cartesian product in the study of polytopes, one needs to understand how these operations affect the ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$- or ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index of polytopes, or likewise their associated posets. This leads to the investigation of the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index of the diamond product of two Eulerian posets. Ehrenborg and Readdy [@Ehrenborg_Readdy] developed a bilinear operator for this purpose, as described in the following proposition. One can find the precise definition along with additional properties and recurrences for this operator in Section 6 of [@Ehrenborg_Fox] and Section 10 of [@Ehrenborg_Readdy].
\[diamond\_prop\] There exists a bilinear operator from ${\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{c}}},{{\bf{d}}}\rangle}\times {\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{c}}},{{\bf{d}}}\rangle}$ to ${\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{c}}},{{\bf{d}}}\rangle}$, denoted by $\diamond$, such that given any two Eulerian posets $P$ and $Q$, the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index of their diamond product is given by $$\Psi(P\diamond Q)=\Psi(P)\diamond \Psi(Q).$$\
Hence for two polytopes $V$ and $W$, the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index of the Cartesian product $V\times W$ is given by $$\Psi(V\times W)=\Psi(V)\diamond \Psi(W).$$
The bilinear operator described in Proposition \[diamond\_prop\] is denoted as $N(u,v)$ in the papers [@Ehrenborg_Fox] and [@Ehrenborg_Readdy], but we use the diamond product $u\diamond v$ to simplify the notation. Also note that the diamond product operator can be extended to be a product of ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-polynomials instead of only ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-polynomials.
The following statements made by Ehrenborg and Fox in [@Ehrenborg_Fox] give useful properties and a recursive formula for calculating the diamond product of two ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$- or ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-polynomials. Proposition \[diamond\_recursion\_ab\] is a reformulated version of Proposition 7.6 of [@Ehrenborg_Fox]. Likewise, Proposition \[diamond\_recursion\] is a reformulation of Theorem 7.1 of [@Ehrenborg_Fox], as was shown in Corollary 2.3.7 of [@Slone].
For any ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$- or ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-polynomials $u$, $v$, and $w$, the following are satisfied $$\begin{aligned}
u\diamond 1&= u,\\
u\diamond v&= v\diamond u,\\
u\diamond (v\diamond w)&=(u\diamond v)\diamond w.\end{aligned}$$
\[diamond\_recursion\_ab\] For any ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-polynomials $u$ and $v$, the diamond product satisfies the following recursions: $$\begin{aligned}
u\diamond (v\cdot {{\bf{a}}}) &=(u\diamond v)\cdot {{\bf{a}}}+ \sum_u (u_{(1)} \diamond v)\cdot {{\bf{a}}}\cdot{{\bf{b}}}\cdot u_{(2)},\label{diamond1ab}\\
u\diamond (v\cdot {{\bf{b}}}) &= (u\diamond v)\cdot {{\bf{b}}}+ \sum_u (u_{(1)} \diamond v)\cdot {{\bf{b}}}\cdot{{\bf{a}}}\cdot u_{(2)}\label{diamond2ab}.\end{aligned}$$
\[diamond\_recursion\] For any ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-polynomials $u$ and $v$, the diamond product satisfies the following recursions: $$\begin{aligned}
u\diamond (v\cdot {{\bf{c}}}) &=(u\diamond v)\cdot {{\bf{c}}}+ \sum_u (u_{(1)} \diamond v)\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot u_{(2)},\label{diamond1}\\
u\diamond (v\cdot {{\bf{d}}}) &= (u\diamond v)\cdot {{\bf{d}}}+ \sum_u (u_{(1)} \diamond v)\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot {\operatorname{Pyr}}(u_{(2)})\label{diamond2}.\end{aligned}$$
Lattice Path Interpretation for ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-monomials
================================================================
Before introducing the lattice path interpretation for ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-monomials, we first introduce a similar interpretation for the diamond product of two ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-monomials. Define the set of lattice paths $\Omega$ as words in the non-commutative letters ${{\bf{D}}}$, ${{\bf{R}}}$, and ${{\bf{U}}}$, where ${{\bf{D}}}$ is degree 2, and ${{\bf{R}}}$ and ${{\bf{U}}}$ are each degree 1. The letters correspond to the lattice path steps as follows $$\text{Right}: {{\bf{R}}}=(1,0), \text{ Up}: {{\bf{U}}}=(0,1), \text{ and Diagonal}: {{\bf{D}}}=(1,1).$$ Let $\Omega(p,q)$ be the set of lattice paths using only these 3 steps from $(0,0)$ to $(p,q)$ which do not contain ${{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{R}}}$ as a contiguous subword, that is, as a factor.
For a given pair of ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-monomials $u$ and $v$ with degrees $p$ and $q$, respectively, consider lattice paths in $\Omega(p,q)$ in which the axes are labeled by the words $u$ and $v$, as shown by the example in Figure \[ex\_ab\_path\]. We now define a weight function for such paths based on this labeling.
![: The lattice path ${{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{D}}}\in \Omega(4,3)$ labeled by the words $u={{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}{{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$ and $v={{\bf{b}}}{{\bf{b}}}{{\bf{a}}}$[]{data-label="ex_ab_path"}](LatticePathabEx.png)
For $p'\leq p$ and $q'\leq q$, define ${\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}: \Omega(p',q') \longrightarrow {\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{a}}},{{\bf{b}}}\rangle}$ to be the multiplicative map, taking concatenation to be the product, determined by the following rules: $$\begin{aligned}
{\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}({{\bf{R}}})&=\begin{cases}
{{\bf{a}}}& \text{if above an }{{\bf{a}}}\text{ label}\\
{{\bf{b}}}& \text{if above a }{{\bf{b}}}\text{ label},
\end{cases}\\
{\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}({{\bf{U}}})&= \begin{cases}
{{\bf{a}}}& \text{if to the right of an }{{\bf{a}}}\text{ label}\\
{{\bf{b}}}& \text{if to the right of a }{{\bf{b}}}\text{ label},
\end{cases}\\
{\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}({{\bf{D}}})&= \begin{cases}
{{\bf{a}}}\cdot{{\bf{b}}}& \text{if to the right of an }{{\bf{a}}}\text{ label}\\
{{\bf{b}}}\cdot{{\bf{a}}}& \text{if to the right of a }{{\bf{b}}}\text{ label}.
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}$$
For the example path in Figure \[ex\_ab\_path\], we have ${\operatorname{wt}}_{{{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}{{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}},{{\bf{b}}}{{\bf{b}}}{{\bf{a}}}}({{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{D}}})={{\bf{b}}}{{\bf{b}}}{{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}{{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$.
For a given ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-monomial $u$ of degree $p$, define $\tau(u)\in \Omega(p,0)$ as the word $\tau(u)={{\bf{R}}}^{\deg(u)}$. Now that we have notation for creating horizontal paths, we give the interpretation for the diamond product of two ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-monomials as a sum of weighted lattice paths.
For any two ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-monomials $u$ and $v$ of degree $p$ and $q$, respectively, the ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-polynomial $u\diamond v$ is given by the sum $$u\diamond v=\sum_{P\in \Omega(p,q)} {\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}(P).$$ \[lattice\_path\_\_ab\_thm\]
To keep the notation simpler, we will leave out the dependency on $u$ and $v$ of the weight function. The proof of this theorem is by induction on the degree $q$ of the monomial $v$. For the base case, we assume that $q$ is 0, making $v=1$, and that the degree $p$ of $u$ is any non-negative integer. The diamond product $u\diamond 1$ is $u$, and the only lattice path in $\Omega(p,0)$ is the horizontal path $\tau(u)$ of length $p$. The weight of this path $\tau(u)$ is ${\operatorname{wt}}(\tau(u))=u$ since it is only ${{\bf{R}}}$ steps along the labels of $u$; thus, the base case of the theorem is true.
Suppose the statement is true for any two words of degree $p'$ and $q'$ where $p'\leq p$ and $q'<q$. We first assume that the last letter of $v$ is ${{\bf{a}}}$, or $v=w\cdot {{\bf{a}}}$. According to Equation , we have $$u\diamond (w\cdot {{\bf{a}}}) =(u\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{a}}}+ \sum_u (u_{(1)} \diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{a}}}\cdot{{\bf{b}}}\cdot u_{(2)}.$$
By induction, the first term is $$(u\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{a}}}= \sum_{P\in \Omega(p,q-1)} {\operatorname{wt}}(P\cdot {{\bf{U}}}).
\label{ab_a}$$ Since the final ${{\bf{U}}}$ step is to the right of an ${{\bf{a}}}$ label, ${{\bf{a}}}$ is the correct weight for this step.
For the terms that result from the coproduct, we observe that the cases of $u$ being broken apart by the coproduct at either an ${{\bf{a}}}$ or a ${{\bf{b}}}$ are identical. We assume that either $u=y\cdot {{\bf{a}}}\cdot z$ or $u=y\cdot {{\bf{b}}}\cdot z$ where $y$ is of degree $i$. Hence, we have $u_{(1)}\otimes u_{(2)}=y\otimes z$ in each case since $\Delta({{\bf{a}}})=\Delta({{\bf{b}}})=1\otimes 1$. This gives the term $$(y\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{a}}}\cdot{{\bf{b}}}\cdot z=\sum_{P\in \Omega(i,q-1)} {\operatorname{wt}}(P\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot \tau(z)).
\label{ab_b}$$ Notice that the weight of a ${{\bf{D}}}$ step does not depend on the label below that step, rather it only depends on the label on the vertical axis. Since this ${{\bf{D}}}$ step is to the right of the ${{\bf{a}}}$ label that ends the word $v$, its weight is ${{\bf{a}}}\cdot{{\bf{b}}}$, which matches the left side of the equation.
Since we only consider lattice paths without consecutive ${{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{R}}}$ steps, every lattice path in $\Omega(p,q)$ must end in a ${{\bf{U}}}$ step or end in a ${{\bf{D}}}$ step followed by a horizontal path. The paths contained within equation correspond to the paths ending in ${{\bf{U}}}$, and the remaining possible paths with the ${{\bf{D}}}$ step are found in equation . Thus $\Omega(p,q)$ decomposes into a disjoint union of lattice paths as $$\begin{aligned}
\Omega(p,q)=&\{P\cdot {{\bf{U}}}: P\in \Omega(p,q-1)\}\\
&\dot\cup \{P\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot \tau(z): P\in \Omega(i,q-1), u=y\cdot {{\bf{a}}}\cdot z \text{ or } u=y\cdot{{\bf{b}}}\cdot z\},\end{aligned}$$ completing the proof if $v$ ends with the letter ${{\bf{a}}}$.
If we instead assume that $v=w\cdot {{\bf{b}}}$, then Equation gives us $$u\diamond (w\cdot {{\bf{b}}})=(u\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{b}}}+\sum_u (u_{(1)}\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{b}}}\cdot{{\bf{a}}}\cdot u_{(2)}.$$ This second situation follows nearly identically to the first case from this point. This is because the lattice paths ending in ${{\bf{U}}}$ would have ${{\bf{b}}}$ as the weight for this final step since it would be to the right of a ${{\bf{b}}}$ label. Additionally, the ${{\bf{D}}}$ step in lattices paths ending in a ${{\bf{D}}}$ step followed by a horizontal path will contribute a weight of ${{\bf{b}}}\cdot{{\bf{a}}}$ since this step will also be to the right of the final ${{\bf{b}}}$ label. This second case concludes the proof of the theorem.
Lattice Path Interpretation for ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-monomials
================================================================
To try to give a better understanding of the recursive formulas given in and that Ehrenborg and Fox developed for the diamond product of two ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-polynomials, Slone examined in [@Slone] the specific case of the diamond product of the form ${{\bf{c}}}^p\diamond {{\bf{c}}}^q$. He was able to interpret the coefficients of the resulting ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-polynomial using weighted lattice paths.
Concentrating on the diamond product of powers of ${{\bf{c}}}$, or ${{\bf{c}}}^p\diamond{{\bf{c}}}^q$, Slone defined the set of lattice paths $\Lambda$ as words in the non-commutative letters ${{\bf{D}}}$, ${{\bf{R}}}$, and ${{\bf{U}}}$, in which ${{\bf{D}}}$ has degree 2 whereas ${{\bf{R}}}$ and ${{\bf{U}}}$ both have degree 1. As defined in the ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-index case, these letters correspond to lattice path steps as follows
$$\text{Right}: {{\bf{R}}}=(1,0), \text{ Up}: {{\bf{U}}}=(0,1), \text{ and Diagonal}: {{\bf{D}}}=(1,1).$$
Let $\Lambda(p,q)$ be the set of lattice paths using only these 3 steps from $(0,0)$ to $(p,q)$ which do not contain ${{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{R}}}$ as a contiguous subword. Note that labeling the axes, as was done in the ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-index case, is not necessary here since each letter in the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-monomials is a ${{\bf{c}}}$. Define ${\operatorname{wt}}: \Lambda(p,q) \longrightarrow {\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{c}}},{{\bf{d}}}\rangle}$ to be the multiplicative map, taking concatenation to be the product, determined by ${\operatorname{wt}}({{\bf{D}}})=2{{\bf{d}}}$ and ${\operatorname{wt}}({{\bf{R}}})={\operatorname{wt}}({{\bf{U}}})={{\bf{c}}}.$ The main result of Slone’s work on the diamond product is the following statement, which is Proposition 2.4.2 in [@Slone].
For any non-negative integers $p$ and $q$, the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-polynomial ${{\bf{c}}}^p \diamond {{\bf{c}}}^q$ is given by the sum $${{\bf{c}}}^p \diamond {{\bf{c}}}^q=\sum_{P\in \Lambda(p,q)} {\operatorname{wt}}(P).$$
Now we extend Slone’s interpretation to look beyond the case of ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-monomials consisting of powers of ${{\bf{c}}}$ to the diamond product of any two ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-monomials. Define the set of lattice paths $\Gamma$ as words in the noncommutative letters ${{\bf{R}}}$, ${{\bf{U}}}$, ${{\bf{D}}}$, ${{\bf{\overline{R}}}}$, and ${{\bf{\overline{U}}}}$. We consider ${{\bf{R}}}$ and ${{\bf{U}}}$ to be degree $1$, and ${{\bf{D}}}$, ${{\bf{\overline{R}}}}$, and ${{\bf{\overline{U}}}}$ to be degree $2$. The letters correspond to the steps
$$\text{Right: } {{\bf{R}}}=(1,0), \text{ Up: } {{\bf{U}}}=(0,1), \text{ Diagonal: } {{\bf{D}}}=(1,1),$$ $$\text{Double Right: } \overline{\bf{R}}=(2,0), \text{ and Double Up: }\overline{\bf{U}}=(0,2).$$ Let $\Gamma(p,q)$ be the set of all lattice paths from the origin to $(p,q)$ using the 5 steps described above and which do not contain consecutive ${{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{R}}}$, ${{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{\overline{R}}}}$, ${{\bf{\overline{U}}}}{{\bf{R}}}$, or ${{\bf{\overline{U}}}}\,{{\bf{\overline{R}}}}$ steps.
We now restrict this set to a particular subset $\Gamma(u,v)$ given two ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-monomials $u$ and $v$ with the degrees of the monomials being $p$ and $q$, respectively. This subset within $\Gamma(p,q)$ requires that the word and its corresponding lattice path adhere to the following four rules, where we label the horizontal axis by the word $u$ and likewise label the vertical axis by $v$, as shown in Figure \[ex\_path\]. This is similar to the labels used earlier with ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-monomials except that the ${{\bf{d}}}$ label covers two units on the axis. In the example, we have $u=\bf{ddcc}$ and $v=\bf{cdc}$; hence, the degrees are $p=6$ and $q=4$, with the lattice path ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{\overline{R}}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{U}}}$ being shown.
![: The lattice path ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{\overline{R}}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{U}}}\in \Gamma({{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{c}}},{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}})$[]{data-label="ex_path"}](LatticePathExa.png)
The rules for a word $P\in \Gamma(p,q)$ to be in $\Gamma(u,v)$ are as follows:
1. No ${{\bf{U}}}$ step is allowed at the bottom of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label on the vertical axis.
2. Although an ${{\bf{R}}}$ step is allowed along the first part of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label on the horizontal axis, two consecutive ${{\bf{R}}}$ steps along such a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label are not allowed.
3. A ${{\bf{\overline{U}}}}$ step is only allowed at the bottom of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label on the vertical axis, and similarly, an ${{\bf{\overline{R}}}}$ step is only allowed at the left of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label on the horizontal axis.
4. If a ${{\bf{D}}}$ step is at the bottom of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label on the vertical axis, then the steps ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}$ above a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label on the horizontal axis and within the top half of this ${{\bf{d}}}$ label on the vertical axis are not allowed.
[One can compute the diamond product of $\bf{cd}$ and $\bf{dc}$ as ]{} $$\bf{cd}\diamond\bf{dc}=3\bf{cddc}+\bf{ccdcc}+\bf{ccdd}+\bf{cdccc}+2\bf{cdcd}+2\bf{ddcc}+4\bf{dcdc}+2\bf{dccd}+4\bf{ddd}.$$ [There are $13$ lattice paths in $\Gamma(\bf{cd},\bf{dc})$, which are shown in Figure \[example\]. Note that none of the paths begin with ${{\bf{U}}}$ as required by rule 1 since the word $\bf{dc}$ begins with ${{\bf{d}}}$. Additionally, due to rule 4, the path ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{U}}}$ is omitted. The terms of $\bf{cd}\diamond\bf{dc}$ can be obtained from the lattice paths by weighting each ${{\bf{R}}}$ and ${{\bf{U}}}$ step by ${{\bf{c}}}$, each ${{\bf{\overline{R}}}}$ and ${{\bf{\overline{U}}}}$ step by ${{\bf{d}}}$, and each ${{\bf{D}}}$ step by ${{\bf{d}}}$ if it is above a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label or by $2{{\bf{d}}}$ if it is above a ${{\bf{c}}}$ label, with the exception of making the coefficient $2$ for the lattice path ${{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{D}}}$. Some of the paths, such as ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{U}}}$ and ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}$, give the same term of $\bf{cd}\diamond\bf{dc}$, leading to only $9$ terms from the $13$ lattice paths. The paths and their corresponding weights are given in Table 1.]{}
![: The lattice paths in $\Gamma({{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}},{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}})$[]{data-label="example"}](LatticePathEx2.png)
\[table:table 1\]
Path ${{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{\overline{R}}}}\,{{\bf{\overline{U}}}}{{\bf{U}}}$ ${{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{U}}}$ ${{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{\overline{U}}}}{{\bf{D}}}$ ${{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{U}}}$ ${{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{U}}}$
-------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------
Weight ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}$ ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{c}}}$ ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{d}}}$ ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{c}}}$ ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}$
Path ${{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{D}}}$ ${{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{\overline{U}}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}$ ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{\overline{R}}}}{{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{U}}}$ ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{U}}}$
Weight $2{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$ ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}$ $2{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{c}}}$ $2{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}$
Path ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{D}}}$ ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{D}}}$ ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}$ ${{\bf{\overline{U}}}}{{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{\overline{R}}}}$
Weight $2{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$ $2{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{d}}}$ $2{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}}$ $2{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{d}}}$
: : The weights of the lattice paths in $\Gamma({{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}},{{\bf{d}}}{{\bf{c}}})$
The following definition gives the method of weighting the steps of the lattice paths in $\Gamma(u,v)$ for generic words $u$ and $v$ to obtain the $\bf{cd}$-index of the diamond product, albeit the choice of coefficient for weight of the ${{\bf{D}}}$ steps becomes complicated, explaining the need for the exception in the previous example.
For $u'$ an initial subword of $u$, that is, $u$ can be factored as $u=u'\cdot u''$, and $v'$ an initial subword of $v$, define ${\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}:\Gamma(u',v') \longrightarrow {\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{c}}},{{\bf{d}}}\rangle}$ to be the multiplicative map determined by
$${\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}({{\bf{R}}})={\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}({{\bf{U}}})={{\bf{c}}}, \hspace{.5cm}
{\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}({{\bf{\overline{R}}}})={\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}({{\bf{\overline{U}}}})={{\bf{d}}}, \hspace{.5cm}
{\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}({{\bf{D}}})=k{{\bf{d}}},$$ where depending on the location of a diagonal step ${{\bf{D}}}$, the scalar $k$ is given by
$k =
\begin{cases}
2 & \text{if above a }{{\bf{c}}}\text{ label and to the right of either a }{{\bf{c}}}\text{ label or the bottom of a }{{\bf{d}}}\text{ label}\\
2 & \text{if above the first part of a }{{\bf{d}}}\text{ label, to the right of a }{{\bf{c}}}\text{ label, and followed by a }{{\bf{U}}}\text{ step,}\\
& \text{a }{{\bf{\overline{U}}}}\text{ step, or a }{{\bf{D}}}\text{ step}\\
2 & \text{if above the first part of a }{{\bf{d}}}\text{ label, to the right of the bottom of a }{{\bf{d}}}\text{ label, }\\
& \text{and followed by a }{{\bf{U}}}\text{ step}\\
1 & \text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}$
Note that this weight function matches Slone’s weight function when we restrict our view to lattice paths in $\Gamma({{\bf{c}}}^p,{{\bf{c}}}^q)=\Lambda(p,q)$, because the coefficient of a ${{\bf{D}}}$ step will always be 2 in this situation.
With the weight function being formally defined, we can now state the main result, but we first define a map to create horizontal paths that will be useful in its proof, as was done with the map $\tau$ in the ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-index case. Define $\pi$ such that for a given ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-monomial $u$, $\pi(u)$ is the word in $\Gamma(u,1)$ resulting from replacing each ${{\bf{c}}}$ in $u$ with the step ${{\bf{R}}}$ and each ${{\bf{d}}}$ with the step ${{\bf{\overline{R}}}}$. This map will be important in the proof of Theorem \[lattice\_path\_thm\] since rules $2$ and $3$ imply that $\pi(u)$ is the only valid horizontal path along a portion of the horizontal axis labeled by $u$.
For any two ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-monomials $u$ and $v$, the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-polynomial $u\diamond v$ is given by the sum $$u\diamond v=\sum_{P\in \Gamma(u,v)} {\operatorname{wt}}_{u,v}(P).$$ \[lattice\_path\_thm\]
Again to simplify notation, the dependency of the weight function on the words $u$ and $v$ will be omitted. We will prove this result using induction on the degree $q$ of $v$. For the base case when $q=0$ and the degree of $u$ is any nonnegative integer $p$, we have that $v=1$. The diamond product $u \diamond 1$ is simply $u$, and the only lattice path in $\Gamma(u,1)$ is $\pi(u)$, the horizontal path along the labels from $u$. The fact that ${\operatorname{wt}}(\pi(u))=u$ shows that the base case is true.
Suppose the statement is true for any two words of degree $p'$ and $q'$ where $p'\leq p$ and $q'<q$. We will break up the proof for $u\diamond v$ according to the final letter of $v$.
**Case 1**: Assume $v=w\cdot {{\bf{c}}}$. Due to equation , we have $$u\diamond (w\cdot {{\bf{c}}})=(u\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{c}}}+\sum_u (u_{(1)}\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot u_{(2)}.$$
By induction, the first term is $$(u\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{c}}}=\sum_{P\in \Gamma(u,w)} {\operatorname{wt}}(P\cdot {{\bf{U}}}).
\label{a}$$ An illustration of the lattice paths in equation as well as the next equation can be seen in Figure \[proof\_example1\].
For the remaining terms that result from the coproduct, we must separately examine the cases of $u$ being broken apart by the coproduct at either a ${{\bf{c}}}$ or ${{\bf{d}}}$. If broken up at a ${{\bf{c}}}$, we assume $u=y\cdot {{\bf{c}}}\cdot z$; thus, $u$ splits such that $u_{(1)}\otimes u_{(2)}=2y\otimes z$. This gives the term $$(y\diamond w)\cdot 2{{\bf{d}}}\cdot z=\sum_{P\in \Gamma(y,w)} {\operatorname{wt}}(P\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot \pi(z)).
\label{b}$$ Since the ${{\bf{D}}}$ step is above the ${{\bf{c}}}$ label that is between $y$ and $z$ and to the right of a ${{\bf{c}}}$ label at the end of the word $v$, the weight of this step is correctly $2{{\bf{d}}}$.
![: Illustrations of the lattice paths described in the first two subcases of Case 1[]{data-label="proof_example1"}](LatticePathProofEx1.png)
If $u$ is instead broken up at a ${{\bf{d}}}$, we assume $u=y\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot z$; thus, $u$ splits as $y\otimes {{\bf{c}}}\cdot z+y\cdot {{\bf{c}}}\otimes z$. This leads to two terms, the first of which is $$(y\diamond w) \cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot {{\bf{c}}}\cdot z=\sum_{P\in \Gamma(y,w)} {\operatorname{wt}}(P\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot {{\bf{R}}}\cdot \pi(z)).
\label{c}$$ Although the ${{\bf{D}}}$ step is above the first part of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label and to the right of a ${{\bf{c}}}$ label, 1 is the correct coefficient of the weight of this ${{\bf{D}}}$ step since it is not followed by a ${{\bf{U}}}$, ${{\bf{\overline{U}}}}$, or ${{\bf{D}}}$ step. The lattice paths described in equation and the following equation can be seen in Figure \[proof\_example2\].
The other term we get is $$(y\cdot {{\bf{c}}}\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot z=\sum_{P'\in \Gamma(y\cdot {{\bf{c}}},w)}{\operatorname{wt}}(P')\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot z=\sum_{\substack{P\in \Gamma(y\cdot {{\bf{d}}},v)\\ \text{P ends with }{{\bf{D}}}}}{\operatorname{wt}}(P\cdot \pi(z)).
\label{d}$$ First, note that the ${{\bf{D}}}$ step that is appended to $P'$ to create $P$ has the correct coefficient of $1$ since it is above the second half of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label. As we switch labels from $y\cdot {{\bf{c}}}$ to $y\cdot {{\bf{d}}}$, it is important to notice that the coefficient of a ${{\bf{D}}}$ step above this ${{\bf{c}}}$ label does not change. The only scenario in which it could change is if it was to the right of the bottom of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label and was not followed by a ${{\bf{U}}}$ step, but this is impossible because a ${{\bf{U}}}$ step would be required to move vertically through the top half of the ${{\bf{d}}}$ label.
![: Illustrations of the lattice paths described in the last two subcases of Case 1[]{data-label="proof_example2"}](LatticePathProofEx2.png)
To avoid the subwords ${{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{R}}}$ and ${{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{\overline{R}}}}$, every lattice path in $\Gamma(u,w\cdot{{\bf{c}}})$ must either end in a ${{\bf{U}}}$ step or end in a ${{\bf{D}}}$ step followed by a horizontal path to the point $(p,q)$. The paths within the three types of terms resulting from the coproduct cover all possible ways for this ${{\bf{D}}}$ step to occur, either above a ${{\bf{c}}}$ label or above one of the two parts of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label. Thus $\Gamma(u,w\cdot{{\bf{c}}})$ decomposes as the disjoint union $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma(u,w\cdot{{\bf{c}}})=\,&\{P\cdot {{\bf{U}}}: P\in \Gamma(u,w)\} \label{e}\\
&\dot\cup\, \{P\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot \pi(z): P\in \Gamma(y,w), u=y\cdot {{\bf{c}}}\cdot z\}\label{f}\\
&\dot\cup\, \{P\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot {{\bf{R}}}\cdot \pi(z): P\in \Gamma(y,w),u=y\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot z\} \label{g}\\
&\dot\cup\, \{P\cdot \pi(z): P\in \Gamma(y\cdot {{\bf{d}}},v), P\text{ ends in }{{\bf{D}}}, u=y\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot z\},\label{h}\end{aligned}$$ where the set is from equation , from , from , and from . This concludes the proof for this case.
**Case 2**: Assume $v=w\cdot {{\bf{d}}}$. By applying equation , we have $$u\diamond(w\cdot {{\bf{d}}})=(u\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{d}}}+\sum_{u} (u_{(1)}\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot {\operatorname{Pyr}}(u_{(2)}).$$
The first term, by induction, gives us $$(u\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{d}}}=\sum_{P\in \Gamma(u,w)} {\operatorname{wt}}(P\cdot {{\bf{\overline{U}}}}).
\label{i}$$ See an illustration of the lattice paths in equation and the next equation in Figure \[proof\_example3\].
We once again separate the remaining terms from the coproduct depending on whether $u$ is broken up at a ${{\bf{c}}}$ or ${{\bf{d}}}$. If broken up at a ${{\bf{c}}}$, we assume $u=y\cdot {{\bf{c}}}\cdot z$; hence, $u$ splits into $u_{(1)}\otimes u_{(2)}=2y\otimes z$ as it did in Case 1. This gives the term $$\label{j}
(y\diamond w)\cdot 2{{\bf{d}}}\cdot {\operatorname{Pyr}}(z)=\sum_{\substack{P\in \Gamma(y,w), Q\in \Gamma({{\bf{c}}}\cdot z,{{\bf{d}}})\\ Q\text{ begins with }{{\bf{D}}}}}{\operatorname{wt}}(P\cdot Q).$$ The $2{{\bf{d}}}$ is the weight of the ${{\bf{D}}}$ step that it is above the ${{\bf{c}}}$ label since it is to the right of the bottom of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label, so it remains to show that ${\operatorname{Pyr}}(z)$ gives the weights of all of the remainders of the paths $Q$ after the ${{\bf{D}}}$ step. Since this step is at the bottom part of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label on the vertical axis, rule 4 causes any path with ${{\bf{D}}}{{\bf{R}}}$ along any ${{\bf{d}}}$ label to be invalid. There also cannot be any path with a ${{\bf{U}}}$ step, except possibly as the final step. Thus these paths only have horizontal steps with a ${{\bf{U}}}$ step at the end, or they only have horizontal steps with the exception of one ${{\bf{D}}}$ step, either above a ${{\bf{c}}}$ label or following an ${{\bf{R}}}$ step along a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label.
![: Illustrations of the lattice paths described in the first two subcases of Case 2[]{data-label="proof_example3"}](LatticePathProofEx3.png)
Recall that $${\operatorname{Pyr}}(z)=z\cdot {{\bf{c}}}+G(z).$$ The first term is $$z\cdot {{\bf{c}}}={\operatorname{wt}}(\pi(z)\cdot {{\bf{U}}}),$$ corresponding to the horizontal path with ${{\bf{U}}}$ appended to the end.
Since $G$ is a derivation, we apply the product rule to $z=z_1\cdots z_i$ to get $$G(z)= \sum_{j=1}^i z_1\cdots z_{j-1}\cdot G(z_j)\cdot z_{j+1}\cdots z_i.$$ If $z_j={{\bf{c}}}$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
z_1\cdots z_{j-1}\cdot G(z_j)\cdot z_{j+1}\cdots z_i&= z_1\cdots z_{j-1} \cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot z_{j+1}\cdots z_i\\
&= {\operatorname{wt}}(\pi(z_1\cdots z_{j-1})\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot\pi(z_{j+1}\cdots z_i)),\end{aligned}$$ corresponding to the paths where the ${{\bf{D}}}$ step is above a ${{\bf{c}}}$ label. The weight of this step has coefficient $1$ since it is along the top half of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label on the vertical axis. On the other hand, if $z_j={{\bf{d}}}$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
z_1\cdots z_{j-1}\cdot G(z_j)\cdot z_{j+1}\cdots z_i&= z_1\cdots z_{j-1} \cdot {{\bf{c}}}\cdot{{\bf{d}}}\cdot z_{j+1}\cdots z_i\\
&= {\operatorname{wt}}(\pi(z_1\cdots z_{j-1})\cdot {{\bf{R}}}\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot \pi(z_{j+1}\cdots z_i)),\end{aligned}$$ corresponding to the paths with ${{\bf{R}}}{{\bf{D}}}$ steps above the ${{\bf{d}}}$ label, where the coefficient of the weight of the ${{\bf{D}}}$ step is again $1$ by the same reasoning. Therefore, $G(z)$ gives the correct paths that combine with the initial ${{\bf{D}}}$ step to make up the paths $Q$, proving equation .
If $u$ is broken up at a ${{\bf{d}}}$, we assume $u=y\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot z$, and we have that $u$ splits as $y\otimes {{\bf{c}}}\cdot z+y\cdot {{\bf{c}}}\otimes z$. This gives two terms, the first being $$(y\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot {\operatorname{Pyr}}({{\bf{c}}}\cdot z)=\sum_{\substack{P\in \Gamma(y,w), Q\in \Gamma({{\bf{d}}}\cdot z,{{\bf{d}}})\\ Q\text{ begins with }{{\bf{D}}}}}{\operatorname{wt}}(P\cdot Q).
\label{k}$$ The ${{\bf{d}}}$ is the correct weight of the first ${{\bf{D}}}$ step in $Q$ since it cannot be followed by a ${{\bf{U}}}$ step. Otherwise, the path would be invalid since it would have ${{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{R}}}$ or ${{\bf{U}}}{{\bf{\overline{R}}}}$ as a subword. ${\operatorname{Pyr}}({{\bf{c}}}\cdot z)$ gives the weights of the remainders of the paths $Q$ due to an argument analogous to the one used in the previous subcase, because treating the second half of the ${{\bf{d}}}$ label on the horizontal axis as a ${{\bf{c}}}$ label does not change any of the weights of these paths. Illustrations of the lattice paths in equation and the following equation can be found in Figure \[proof\_example4\].
![: Illustrations of the lattice paths described in the last two subcases of Case 2[]{data-label="proof_example4"}](LatticePathProofEx4.png)
The second term from this situation is $$\begin{aligned}
(y\cdot {{\bf{c}}}\diamond w)\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot {\operatorname{Pyr}}(z)&=\left(\sum_{P'\in \Gamma(y\cdot{{\bf{c}}},w)} {\operatorname{wt}}(P')\right) \cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot {\operatorname{Pyr}}(z) \nonumber\\
&=\sum_{\substack{P\in \Gamma(i+1,q-2), Q\in\Gamma(p-i-2,1)\\ P\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot Q\in \Gamma(y\cdot{{\bf{d}}}\cdot z,w\cdot{{\bf{d}}})}} {\operatorname{wt}}(P\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot Q).
\label{l}\end{aligned}$$ Here, we are assuming the degree of $y$ is $i$; hence, the degree of $z$ is $p-i-2$. Note that the path $P'$ does not have its weight changed as it becomes the path $P$ when the ${{\bf{c}}}$ label is switched to become the first half of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label. This is true since the only possible difference could be the coefficient of a ${{\bf{D}}}$ step above the final ${{\bf{c}}}$ label. However, this coefficient will not change since it must be followed by a ${{\bf{U}}}$ or ${{\bf{\overline{U}}}}$ step if the ${{\bf{D}}}$ step is not the final step in $P'$, or it is followed by a ${{\bf{D}}}$ step if it is the final step in $P'$. The coefficient of $1$ is correct for the ${{\bf{D}}}$ step between the paths $P$ and $Q$ since it is above the second part of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label. Although it is not possible to partition the labels in order to have the correct weights when writing $P$ and $Q$ as elements of $\Gamma(x,x')$ for some ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-monomials $x$ and $x'$ as was done in the previous cases, it is still clear that the contribution that $Q$ makes to the weight is ${\operatorname{Pyr}}(z)$, similarly to the last two subcases.
The lattice paths in $\Gamma(u,w\cdot {{\bf{d}}})$ must either end in a ${{\bf{\overline{U}}}}$ step, or by rule 1, there must be two ${{\bf{D}}}$ steps to the right of the last ${{\bf{d}}}$ label of $v=w\cdot {{\bf{d}}}$ with horizontal paths between and after these steps. The three types of terms from the coproduct consist of all ways for these ${{\bf{D}}}$ steps to occur, with the three types being distinguished by whether the first ${{\bf{D}}}$ step is above a ${{\bf{c}}}$ label, the first part of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label, or the second part of a ${{\bf{d}}}$ label. Therefore, $\Gamma(u,w\cdot {{\bf{d}}})$ decomposes as the disjoint union $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma(u,w\cdot {{\bf{d}}})&=\,\{P\cdot \overline{\bf{U}} : P\in \Gamma(u,w)\} \label{m}\\
&\dot\cup \,\{P\cdot Q: P\in \Gamma(y,w), Q\in \Gamma({{\bf{c}}}\cdot z, {{\bf{d}}}), Q\text{ begins with }{{\bf{D}}}, u=y\cdot {{\bf{c}}}\cdot z\} \label{n}\\
&\dot\cup \, \{P\cdot Q: P\in \Gamma(y,w),Q \in \Gamma({{\bf{d}}}\cdot z,{{\bf{d}}}), Q\text{ begins with } {{\bf{D}}}, u=y\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot z\} \label{o}\\
&\dot\cup \,\{P\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot Q: P\in \Gamma(i+1,q-2), Q\in \Gamma(p-i-2,1),\label{p}\\
&\hspace{.5cm} P\cdot {{\bf{D}}}\cdot Q\in \Gamma(y\cdot{{\bf{d}}}\cdot z,w\cdot{{\bf{d}}}), u=y\cdot {{\bf{d}}}\cdot z\}, \nonumber\end{aligned}$$where the set is from equation , from , from , and from . This decomposition gives us the proof for the case of $v$ ending in a ${{\bf{d}}}$, concluding the proof of the theorem.
Concluding Remarks
==================
The effect on the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index of a second important operation on posets was studied in [@Ehrenborg_Fox] and [@Ehrenborg_Readdy]. This operation is the Cartesian product of posets, defined at the beginning of Section 3. As the diamond product of posets is related to the Cartesian product of polytopes, the Cartesian product of posets is connected to the *free join* of polytopes, defined as follows. If $V$ is an $m$-dimensional polytope and $W$ is an $n$-dimensional polytope, then embed $V$ and $W$ in $\mathbb{R}^{m+n+1}$ by $$V'=\{(x_1,\ldots,x_m,\underbrace{0\ldots,0}_n,0)\in\mathbb{R}^{m+n+1}: (x_1,\ldots x_m)\in V\}$$ and likewise by $$W'=\{(\underbrace{0,\ldots, 0}_m,x_1,\ldots,x_n,1)\in \mathbb{R}^{m+n+1}:(x_1,\ldots,x_n)\in W\}.$$ Then the free join $V\ovee W$ is the $(m+n+1)$-dimensional polytope defined as the convex hull of $V'$ and $W'$. Kalai [@Kalai] observed that the face lattice of the free join of two polytopes is the Cartesian product of the two face lattices, i.e., for two polytopes $V$ and $W$ we have $\mathcal{L}(V\ovee W)=\mathcal{L}(V)\times \mathcal{L}(W)$. Ehrenborg and Readdy [@Ehrenborg_Readdy] developed a bilinear operator from ${\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{a}}},{{\bf{b}}}\rangle}\times {\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{a}}},{{\bf{b}}}\rangle}$ to ${\mathbb{Z}\langle{{\bf{a}}},{{\bf{b}}}\rangle}$, called the mixing operator $M$, in order to study the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index of the Cartesian product of posets, or likewise the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index of the free join of polytopes. As with the diamond product operator, Section 6 of [@Ehrenborg_Fox] and Section 10 of [@Ehrenborg_Readdy] give the definition and recurrences for this operator. The recurrence is nearly identical to that of the diamond product; however, differing initial conditions cause the degree of $M(u,v)$ to be one higher than the degree of $u\diamond v$. Is there a similar lattice path interpretation for this product? Even a good interpretation for the easier cases of ${{\bf{c}}}^m \times {{\bf{c}}}^n$ or the Cartesian product of ${{\bf{a}}}{{\bf{b}}}$-monomials is currently unknown.
Recently Carl Lee (personal communication) found an equation that relates the free join and Cartesian product of polytopes, while also involving the pyramid and prism operations. Together with Ehrenborg, the author used a chain counting argument to show it is true for ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-indices of the analogous operations on posets. It states that for two posets $P$ and $Q$, we have $$\Psi(P\times Q)=\Psi({\operatorname{Pyr}}(P)\diamond Q)+\Psi(P\diamond {\operatorname{Pyr}}(Q))-\Psi({\operatorname{Prism}}(P\diamond Q)).$$ If one could develop lattice path interpretations for the three simpler terms on the right hand side, it would allow us to have an interpretation for the Cartesian product $P\times Q$.
A different approach to studying how flag $f$-vectors change during poset operations such as the Cartesian product and diamond product is by using quasi-symmetric functions. The quasi-symmetric function of a poset is multiplicative with respect to Cartesian product; see [@Ehrenborg_Hopf Proposition 4.4]. Similarly, the type $B$ quasi-symmetric function of a poset is multiplicative with respect to the diamond product; see [@Ehrenborg_Readdy_Tchebyshev Theorem 13.3]. Could this approach be helpful in gaining a better understanding of these product operators?
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
The author would like to thank Richard Ehrenborg for reading earlier versions of this paper. The author was partially supported by National Security Agency grant H98230-13-1-0280.
[9]{}
[[M. Bayer and L. Billera,]{} Generalized Dehn-Sommerville relations for polytopes, spheres and Eulerian partially ordered sets, [*Invent. Math*]{} [**79**]{} (1985) 143–157.]{}
[[M. Bayer and A. Klapper,]{} A new index for polytopes, [*Discrete Comput. Geom.*]{} [**6**]{} (1991) 33–47.]{}
[[R. Ehrenborg,]{} On posets and Hopf algebras, [*Adv. Math.*]{} [**119**]{} (1996) 1–25.]{}
[[R. Ehrenborg and H. Fox,]{} Inequalities for ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-indices of joins and products of polytopes, [*Combinatorica*]{} [**23**]{} (2003) 427–452.]{}
[[R. Ehrenborg and M. Readdy,]{} Coproducts and the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index, [*J. Algebraic Combin.*]{} [**8**]{} (1998) 273–299.]{}
[[R. Ehrenborg and M. Readdy,]{} The Tchebyshev transforms of the first and second kind, [*Ann. Comb.*]{} [**14**]{} (2010) 211–244.]{}
[[G. Kalai,]{} A new basis for polytopes, [*J. Combin. Theory Ser. A*]{} [**49**]{} (1988) 191–209.]{}
[[M. Slone,]{} Homological combinatorics and extensions of the ${{\bf{c}}}{{\bf{d}}}$-index (Doctoral Dissertation), [*University of Kentucky,*]{} (2008)]{}
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this work we study analytic Levi-flat hypersurfaces in complex algebraic surfaces. First, we show that if this foliation admits chaotic dynamics (i.e. if it does not admit a transverse invariant measure), then the connected components of the complement of the hypersurface are modifications of Stein domains. This allows us to extend the CR foliation to a singular algebraic foliation on the ambient complex surface. We apply this result to prove, by contradiction, that analytic Levi-flat hypersurfaces admitting a transverse affine structure in a complex algebraic surface have a transverse invariant measure. This leads us to conjecture that Levi-flat hypersurfaces in complex algebraic surfaces that are diffeomorphic to a hyperbolic torus bundle over the circle are fibrations by algebraic curves.'
address: 'Laboratoire de Mathématiques d’Orsay, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay, 91405 Orsay, France'
author:
- 'Carolina <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Canales González</span>'
bibliography:
- 'mybib.bib'
title: 'Levi-flat hypersurfaces and their complement in complex surfaces'
---
Introduction
============
In this work, we study real analytic hypersurfaces in complex algebraic surfaces that satisfy a certain partial differential equation that we describe here below. Given a real hypersurface $M$ in a complex surface $X$, we define the Cauchy-Riemann distribution on $M$, called in abbreviated form CR distribution, that in a point $p$ of $ M $ is the unique complex line contained in $T_pM$, i.e. the distribution $TM\cap iTM$. The hypersurface $M$ is called Levi-flat if the CR distribution is integrable. This means that through any point of $M$ passes a non-singular holomorphic curve of $X$ that is completely contained in $M$. These curves correspond then to the leaves of a foliation on $M$, noted ${\mathcal{F}}$ hereafter, called the Cauchy-Riemann foliation or CR foliation. The condition that ensures a real hypersurface to be Levi-flat can be synthesized by the vanishing of the Levi form. The purpose of this work is to understand the interaction between the dynamics of the CR foliation, the topology of the hypersurface, and the geometry of its complement in the ambient surface.
Before stating our results, let us give some examples of Levi-flat hypersurfaces, which we organize following the dynamic complexity of their CR foliation. This gives us the opportunity to introduce some terminology borrowed from the theory of dynamical systems.
#### **Periodic Levi-flat Hypersurfaces.** {#periodic-levi-flat-hypersurfaces. .unnumbered}
These hypersurfaces are those fibered by algebraic curves. They appear in all birational equivalence classes of algebraic surfaces. In fact, any complex algebraic surface admits a pencil that, after a finite number of blow-ups, becomes a singular fibration. A family of fibers of such a fibration parametrized by the circle describes a periodic Levi-flat hypersurface. The topology of these Levi-flat hypersurfaces can be very rich: all Thurston’s geometries except the spherical geometry are realized by Levi-flat hypersurfaces of this type. Certain compact quotients of each of the following models appear thus as a periodic Levi-flat hypersurface $${\mathbb{S}}^2\times{\mathbb{R}},\ {\mathbb{R}}^3,\ \mathrm{Nil},\ \mathrm{Sol},\ {\mathbb{H}}^2\times{\mathbb{R}}, \ \widetilde{\mathrm{SL}(2,{\mathbb{R}})},\ {\mathbb{H}}^3.$$ We refer to [@Deroin-Dupont] for more details on these constructions.
#### **Quasi-periodic Levi-flat hypersurfaces.** {#quasi-periodic-levi-flat-hypersurfaces. .unnumbered}
Emblematic examples of these are linear hypersurfaces in a complex torus. In this case, the CR foliation is a linear foliation of a real torus of dimension three. In general, we will say that a Levi-flat hypersurface is *quasi-periodic* if its CR foliation is defined (up to a double cover) by a closed differential form, or equivalently as the pre-image by a smooth map of a codimension 1 linear foliation on a torus. Examples of such hypersurfaces appear in line bundles of degree zero on a curve, and therefore in the neighbourhood of linearizable curves in complex surfaces. Arnol’d has provided such examples in the blow-up of ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^2$ in nine generic points with respect to the Lebesgue measure [@Arnold § 27].
#### **Chaotic Levi-flat hypersurfaces.** {#chaotic-levi-flat-hypersurfaces. .unnumbered}
These are the hypersurfaces for which the CR foliation admits no transverse invariant measure. A transverse invariant measure is a family of Borel measures on the transversals to the foliation that are invariant under any holonomy map. To get an idea of these objects, a property satisfied by chaotic Levi-flat hypersurfaces is the existence of a leaf with hyperbolic holonomy, see [@Deroin-Kleptsyn]: some leaves wind around others with exponential rate. Important examples of such hypersurfaces are constructed in flat ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$-bundles with real monodromy over a curve: just consider the corresponding ${\mathbb{R}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$-bundle. [^1]
These three classes do not describe all Levi-flat hypersurfaces in complex algebraic surfaces. For example, there are Levi-flat hypersurfaces containing algebraic curves, but that are not periodic. This is the case of the Levi-flat hypersurfaces constructed by Nemirovskiĭ, see [@Nemirovskii]. Furthermore, although we know no example of this kind, one could imagine that there are analytic Levi-flat hypersurfaces that admit a non atomic transverse invariant measure but that is singular with respect to the Lebesgue measure. Such hypersurfaces would be similar to quasi-periodic Levi-flat hypersurfaces, yet still different.
An important part of this work concerns the study of the geometrical properties of the connected components of the complement of a Levi-flat hypersurface. These exterior components are by definition pseudoconvex and, as we shall see, it is interesting to understand how this local convexity property globalizes. Here are several ideas of global convexity that we present in “increasing order”:
1. \[itm:weakpsconv\] Weakly pseudoconvex: there is a plurisubharmonic exhaustion function.
2. \[itm:holosconv\] Holomorphically convex: the holomorphic convex envelope of a compact is compact.
3. \[itm:stpsconv\] Strongly pseudoconvex: there is an exhaustion function that is strictly plurisubharmonic outside a compact.
4. \[itm:stein\] Stein: it is holomorphically convex and holomorphic functions separate points.
It is well known that in the case of a domain with ${\mathcal{C}}^2$ boundary in a compact complex manifold, each of these properties implies the previous one. The implication \[itm:stein\] $\Rightarrow$ \[itm:stpsconv\] is valid for any complex manifold. This follows from the fact that a complex manifold is Stein if and only if it admits a strictly plurisubharmonic exhaustion function, according to a theorem of Grauert, see [@Grauert]. The implication \[itm:stpsconv\] $\Rightarrow$ \[itm:holosconv\] is a theorem due to Grauert [@Grauert] and Narasimhan [@Narasimhan]: it shows in particular that, by Remmert’s reduction, a strongly pseudoconvex domain is a modification of a Stein variety. We see then that \[itm:stpsconv\] and \[itm:stein\] are very close: we pass from one to the other by a blow-up procedure.
It turns out that global convexity properties of the exterior components of an algebraic Levi-flat hypersurface are intimately related to the dynamics of the CR foliation. For instance, a famous example of Grauert in [@Grauert-modifications] shows that the exterior of a linear hypersurface in a complex torus is always pseudoconvex, and it is holomorphically convex when the CR foliation is periodic. This phenomenon generalizes to quasi-periodic Levi-flat hypersurfaces. However, exterior components of quasi-periodic Levi-flat hypersurfaces are never strongly pseudoconvex. Indeed, in these components there are holomorphic curves or Levi-flat hypersurfaces arbitrarily close to their boundary, which doesn’t allow the strictly subharmonicity of an exhaustion function near the boundary.
The main result of this work states that *external components of (analytic) chaotic Levi-flat hypersurfaces are strongly pseudoconvex*, i.e. modifications of a Stein space by the result of Grauert and Narasimhan mentioned above. This result was known in particular cases, including that of the hypothetical Levi-flat hypersurfaces of the complex projective plane by Takeuchi’s theorem, see [@Takeuchi-projectif], or flat bundles in ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$ over a curve of genus $\geq 2$ whose monodromy is real, faithful and discrete (i.e. associated to the uniformization of a curve with the same genus of the base), according to a theorem of Diederich and Ohsawa [@Diederich-Ohsawa]. It is interesting to remark that our condition, although quite general, is not optimal: in the very interesting article [@Nemirovskii], Nemirovskiĭ defines Levi-flat hypersurfaces in some elliptical surfaces that cut the surface into Stein domains. These Levi-flat hypersurfaces contain invariant elliptic curves and therefore are not chaotic. However they admit similar turbulence properties to those satisfied by chaotic Levi-flat hypersurfaces. It would be interesting to understand what is the optimal condition for this problem, but we do not pursue such a study in this paper.
To prove our result, we analyze the geometry of neighbourhoods of chaotic Levi-flat hypersurfaces, building positive curvature metrics on the normal bundle to the foliation. Our construction is based on the work of Deroin and Kleptsyn in [@Deroin-Kleptsyn], where the heat equation along the leaves of the foliation is considered: it is shown that under the chaotic hypothesis, the leaves converge exponentially quickly towards each other along brownian foliated trajectories. It is this phenomenon that allows us to build the mentioned metric on the normal bundle of the CR foliation. A theorem of Brunella is used then to deduce the strongly convexity of the exterior components of the hypersurface, see [@Brunella-ample].
Our study of global convexity properties of the exterior components of a Levi-flat hypersurface has several consequences. The first one is the following rigidity property: *every analytic chaotic Levi-flat hypersurface is tangent to a singular complex algebraic foliation defined on the ambient surface.* This fact follows from extension techniques of analytic objects in modified Stein spaces, which are now classic, see [@Siu-Trautman; @LinsNeto; @Ivashkovich-bochner; @Merker-Porten], but that we detail in this text, particularly the delicate passage through critical levels of the plurisubharmonic exhaustion function. Thus, chaotic Levi-flat hypersurfaces appear as regular invariant sets of algebraic differential equations. So this is a new manifestation of the GAGA principle (“Géométrie Analytique Géométrie Algébrique”) in the context of Levi-flat hypersurfaces, but whose validity requires dynamic assumptions, unlike the conventional case. Indeed, without the chaotic hypothesis, Sad noticed that there are counterexamples: the quasi-periodic Levi-flat hypersurfaces constructed by Arnol’d in the blow-up of ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^2$ in nine generic points are not tangent to a complex algebraic foliation.
It seems reasonable to think that the algebraic differential equations constrained to preserve a real analytic set are sufficiently rare to be classifiable. As a comparison, in the theory of iteration, we know all the rational applications of a complex variable whose Julia sets are analytical: there are only Tschebychev polynomials and Blaschke products. This interesting problem, certainly a difficult one, will not be considered in this generality here. However, we can use the above-mentioned rigidity properties to study particular classes of Levi-flat hypersurfaces. This technique allows us to understand the structure of transversely affine analytic Levi-flat hypersurfaces, i.e. whose holonomy pseudogroup is given in an analytical coordinate by affine transformations of the form $x\in{\mathbb{R}}\mapsto ax+b\in{\mathbb{R}}$, with $a\in{\mathbb{R}}^*$ and $b\in{\mathbb{R}}$. We show, by combining our rigidity result with a theorem of Ghys, that *a transversely affine Levi-flat hypersurface in a complex algebraic surface is quasi-periodic, or contains an algebraic curve*. This result echoes the recent work of Pereira and Cousin on the classification of singular transversely affine algebraic foliations of codimension 1, see [@Cousin-Pereira].
Our study of transversely affine analytic Levi-flat hypersurfaces has interesting consequences for the geometry of analytic Levi-flat hypersurfaces that are diffeomorphic to a hyperbolic torus bundle. These manifolds are bundles with toric fibers ${\mathbb{T}}^2={\mathbb{R}}^2/{\mathbb{Z}}^2$ whose monodromy is isotopic to a linear automorphism $A\in\mathrm{GL}(2,{\mathbb{Z}})$ with eigenvalues of norm different from 1. We conjecture that *analytic Levi-flat hypersurfaces of complex algebraic surfaces that are diffeomorphic to a hyperbolic torus bundle are periodic*. We are not able to prove this conjecture, [^2] but we do have a result that goes in this direction: we show that *analytic Levi-flat hypersurfaces in complex algebraic surfaces that are diffeomorphic to a hyperbolic torus bundle contain an elliptic curve*. This gives in particular an alternative proof of a recent theorem of Deroin and Dupont [@Deroin-Dupont] in the analytic case: *analytic Levi-flat hypersurfaces in surfaces of general type have a non solvable fundamental group*. The proof of these results is immediate if one remembers the beautiful classification of codimension 1 analytical foliations on hyperbolic torus bundles, due to Ghys and Sergiescu [@Ghys-Sergiescu]. These foliations are of two types: either they are analytically conjugated to the suspension of the stable or unstable foliation associated to the matrix $A$ (in which case they are chaotic and transversely affine, which is excluded for the CR foliation of a Levi-flat in an algebraic surface), or they admit a compact leaf that is a torus and isotopic to a fiber of the bundle.
#### **Acknowledgements** {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
I would like to thank my advisors, Betrand Deroin and Christophe Dupont, and their institutions, for their help and the discussions about this work. I would also like to thank the referee for carefully reading this manuscript and the suggestions made.
Preliminaries
=============
In this section, we give some well-known definitions and results in order to fix notations. These notations will be kept throughout all the text.
Foliations
----------
\[def:feuilletage3reel\] Let $M$ be a compact analytic 3-manifold. A foliation ${\mathcal{F}}$ by Riemann surfaces on $M$ is an atlas ${\mathcal{A}}=\{(U_j,\varphi_j)\}_{j\in J}$ for $M$ that is maximal with respect to the following properties:
1. For all $j\in J$, $\varphi_j:U_j\to A_j\times B_j$ is an analytic diffeomorphism, where $A_j$ is an open disc in ${\mathbb{C}}$ and $B_j=]0,1[$.
2. If $(U_j,\varphi_j)$ and $(U_k,\varphi_k)$ belong to ${\mathcal{A}}$ with $U_j\cap U_k\neq\emptyset$, then $$\varphi_{jk}:=\varphi_j\circ\varphi_k^{-1}:\varphi_k(U_j\cap U_k)\to\varphi_j(U_j\cap U_k)$$ is of the form $$\varphi_{jk}(z_k,t_k)=(f_{jk}(z_k,t_k),g_{jk}(t_k)),$$ where $f_{jk}$ and $g_{jk}$, are analytic functions and $f_{jk}$ depends holomorphically of $z_k$.
We will note $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ and $T_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ the *tangent* and *normal bundle* of the foliation respectively, which are line bundles given by the transition functions $\left\{\frac{{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}g_{jk}}{{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}t_k}\right\}$ and $\left\{\frac{{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}f_{jk}}{{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}z_k}\right\}$ respectively. We define also the *conormal bundle* to the foliation $N^*_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ by taking $\left\{(\frac{{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}g_{jk}}{{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}t_k})^{-1}\right\}$ as transition functions.
A *metric* $m$ on these bundles will be given locally in the chart $(U_j,(z_j,t_j,\xi_j))$ by a collection of functions $$m_j(z_j,t_j,\xi_j)=e^{-\sigma_j(z_j,t_j)}{\left\lvert\xi_j\right\rvert}^2$$ where $\sigma_j$ is a ${\mathcal{C}^\infty}$ function and the *curvature* of $m$ will be given locally by the (1,1)-form $$\Theta_{m_j}=\frac{i}{2\pi}\partial\bar\partial_{{\mathcal{F}}}\sigma_j:=\frac{i}{2\pi}\frac{\partial^2\sigma_j}{\partial z\partial\bar z}.$$
We can also define a foliation on a compact 3-manifold by local submersions, vector fields or differential forms. This follows from Frobenius’ Theorem.
Let $M$ be a compact analytic 3-manifold. Let $E=\{E_p\}_{p\in M}$ be an analytic distribution of planes and $\{\omega_p\}_{p\in M}$ be a family of differential 1-forms such that $\ker(\omega_p)=E_p$. The following conditions are equivalent:
1. For all $p\in M$, there exists a submanifold $N$ of $M$, such that $\iota_*(T_pN)=E_p$, where $\iota:N\to M$ is the natural inclusion.
2. For all vector fields $X_1,X_2$ in $E$ we have that $[X_1,X_2]$ belongs to $E$, where $[\cdot,\cdot]$ is the Lie bracket of vector fields.
3. For all $p\in M$ the differential form ${\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\omega_p$ vanishes on $\ker(\omega_p)$, i.e. ${\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\omega\wedge\omega=0$.
4. For all $p\in M$ there exists a neighbourhood $U$ of $p$ and a differential 1-form $\eta$ on $U$ such that ${\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\omega=\eta\wedge\omega$.
5. For all $p\in M$ there exists a neighbourhood $U$ of $p$ and functions $f,g:U\to{\mathbb{R}}$ such that $\omega=f{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}g$.
If one of the conditions is verified, we will say that the distribution of planes $E$ is Frobenius integrable.
Let $X$ be a complex surface. We define a *holomorphic foliation* ${\mathcal{G}}$ on $X$ in a similar way as Definiton \[def:feuilletage3reel\]: we change the transversal real coordinates $t_j\in]0,1[$ for complex coordinates $w_j\in{\mathbb{D}}$ and functions $f_{jk}, g_{jk}$ become holomorphic.
We define also in a similar way the *normal bundle* $N_{{\mathcal{G}}}$, the *conormal bundle* $N_{{\mathcal{G}}}^*$ and a metric $m$ on these bundles. The *curvature* of $m$ will be given locally by the (1,1)-form $$\Theta_{m_j}=\frac{i}{2\pi}\partial\bar\partial_X\sigma_j,$$ where $\partial_X:=\partial_z+\partial_w$ and $\bar\partial_X:=\partial_{\bar z}+\partial_{\bar w}$.
Propositions \[prop:defparsubmersions\], \[prop:deffeuilletageformediff\] and \[prop:Frobeniusholo\] are holomorphic versions of Frobenius’ Theorem.
\[prop:defparsubmersions\] Let ${\mathcal{G}}$ be a non-singular holomorphic foliation. There exists a cover $\{U_j\}_{j\in J}$ of $X$ by open sets and a family of submersions $g_j:U_j\to{\mathbb{C}}$, such that if $U_j\cap U_k\neq\emptyset$ then $g_j=H_{jk}\circ g_k$, where $H_{jk}:g_k(U_j\cap U_k)\subset{\mathbb{C}}\to{\mathbb{C}}$ is a holomorphic function.
A singular holomorphic foliation on $X$ is given by a non-singular holomorphic foliation on $X$ defined away from a finite set of points. We note $\operatorname{sing}({\mathcal{G}})$ this finite set and we call it the singular set of the foliation.
The following proposition characterizes singular holomorphic foliations using holomorphic 1-forms. We remark that on a complex surface every holomorphic 1-form $\omega$ is integrable because ${\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\omega\wedge\omega$ is a 3-form.
\[prop:deffeuilletageformediff\] Let ${\mathcal{G}}$ be a singular holomorphic foliation on $X$. There exists an open cover $\{U_j\}_{j\in J}$ of $X$ and a collection of holomorphic 1-forms $\omega_j$ on $U_j$ with isolated zeros such that if $U_j\cap U_k\neq\emptyset$ then $$\omega_j=h_{jk}\,\omega_k\, ,\text{ where } h_{jk}\in{\mathcal{O}}^*(U_j\cap U_k).$$ Moreover, the set $\operatorname{sing}({\mathcal{G}})$ is equal to $\cup_{j\in J}\{\omega_j=0\}$.
The following proposition is immediate.
\[prop:Frobeniusholo\] Let ${\mathcal{G}}$ be a non-singular holomorphic foliation on $X$. Let $g_j:U_j\to{\mathbb{C}}$ be a familly of holomorphic submersions such that $g_j=H_{jk}\circ g_k$ as in Proposition \[prop:defparsubmersions\]. Then we can take $\omega_j={\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}g_j$ and $h_{jk}=H'_{jk}$ in Proposition \[prop:deffeuilletageformediff\].
To finish this section we define the notion of meromorphic 1-form defining a singular foliation on a complex surface $X$.
\[def:feuilletageformemero\] Let ${\mathcal{G}}$ be a singular holomorphic foliation on $X$ defined by a collection of holomorphic 1-forms $\{\omega_j\}_{j\in J}$ as in Proposition \[prop:deffeuilletageformediff\]. We say that a meromorphic 1-form $\omega$ on $X$ defines ${\mathcal{G}}$ if, for all $j\in J$ and for all $p\in U_j$ that is not a zero nor a pole of $\omega$, we have $\ker\omega(p)=\ker\omega_j(p)$.
Finally, we explain how the existence of meromorphic sections of the conormal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{G}}}^*$ allows us to construct meromorphic 1-forms on $X$ that define the foliation in the sense of Definition \[def:feuilletageformemero\]. This will be useful in Section \[sec:feuilletagesaffinesdeg\].
\[prop:sectmerom\] Let $X$ be a complex surface and let ${\mathcal{G}}$ be a singular holomorphic foliation on $X$. Let $\{U_j\}_{j\in J}$ be an open cover of $X\setminus\operatorname{sing}({\mathcal{G}})$ and $g_j:U_j\to{\mathbb{C}}$ be submersions that define ${\mathcal{G}}$ as in Proposition \[prop:defparsubmersions\]. Let $f=(f_j)$ be a meromorphic section of $N^*_{{\mathcal{G}}}$. Then the collection of meromorphic 1-forms $\omega_j:=f_j{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}g_j$ glues into a meromorphic 1-form on $X$ that defines the foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ in the sense of Definition \[def:feuilletageformemero\].
Levi-flat hypersurfaces {#sec:LeviPlats}
-----------------------
Levi-flat hypersurfaces are real hypersurfaces of complex surfaces that are foliated by Riemann surfaces. The complex structure of the leaves is of course compatible with the complex structure of the ambient surface. Their name is justified by the vanishing of the Levi-form.
\[def:leviplat\] Let $X$ be a complex surface and $M\subset X$ be a compact analytic 3-manifold. Let $T_pM\subset T_pX$ be the tangent space to $M$ in the point $p$. We say that $M$ is a Levi-flat hypersurface if the distribution of planes $E_p:=T_pM\cap iT_pM$ on $M$ is Frobenius integrable. We note ${\mathcal{F}}$ the corresponding foliation by Riemann surfaces on $M$ and we call it the Cauchy-Riemann foliation, or CR foliation, of $M$.
In the following, we give some examples that illustrate each of the notions of Levi-flat hypersurfaces mentioned in the introduction: periodic, quasi-periodic and chaotic.
Our first example is a periodic Levi-flat in an algebraic surface that is diffeomorphic to a hyperbolic torus bundle. Here is the idea of its construction, which is detailed in [@Deroin-Dupont].
We consider a pencil of cubics in ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^2$, for example the pencil of cubics that in affine coordinates are defined by $$C_t:=\overline{\{y^2=x(x-1)(x-t)\}},$$ where $t\in{\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$. These cubics are smooth if $t\neq\{0,1,\infty\}$. They intersect all in nine distinct points $p_1,\ldots,p_9$ of the projective complex plane. Blowing-up ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^2$ in these nine points, we obtain a rational surface $X$ provided with a singular fibration whose fibers are the strict transforms $\hat{C_t}$ of the curves $C_t$ in $X$.
Let us now move the variable $t$ along a loop in ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1\setminus\{0,1,\infty\}$. The union of curves $\hat{C_t}$ in $X$ is an immersed Levi-flat hypersurface that is diffeomorphic to a torus bundle by construction. If the curve described by $t$ is complicated enough, then the monodromy of this bundle is hyperbolic. We obtain a periodic Levi-flat hypersurface diffeomorphic to a hyperbolic torus bundle in a rational surface, but a priori this hypersurface is only immersed if the curve described by $t$ is not simple.
To obtain an embedded Levi-flat hypersurface of this type, we have to take the preimage of this construction by a cover over ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$, whose only ramification points are $0,1,\infty$, and in which the curve described by $t$ transforms into a simple loop.
Our second example is a perturbation of the first one due to Arnol’d, see [@Arnold].
In order to describe it, we will need the following notion: a curve $C$ in a complex surface $X$ is linearizable if the inclusion of $C$ in its normal bundle extends to a biholomorphism from a neighbourhood of $C$ to a neighbourhood of its image in the normal bundle. If a smooth curve with trivial self-intersection in a complex surface is linearizable, then there exist quasi-periodic Levi-flat hypersurfaces arbitrarily near $C$. Indeed, it suffices to consider the zero section of the normal bundle: we can take then the levels of the unique flat metric on it.
If we choose nine points $p_1,\ldots,p_9$ generically in ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^2$, then there exists a unique cubic $C$ passing through these nine points. This cubic is of self-intersection 9, so the strict transform $\hat{C}$ of $C$ in the blow-up $X$ of ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^2$ along the points $p_1,\ldots,p_9$ has trivial self-intersection. In [@Arnold] Arnol’d shows that this curve is linearizable. Then there are quasi-periodic Levi-flat hypersurfaces in its neighbourhood. A remark of Sad shows that these hypersurfaces are never tangent to an algebraic foliation of $X$.
Let $\Sigma$ be a compact Riemann surface of genus $\geq2$. Let $\rho:\pi_1(\Sigma)\to\mathrm{PSL}(2,{\mathbb{R}})$ be a representation of the fundamental group of $\Sigma$ in the group of real Moebius transformations. We define a complex surface $X$ as the quotient of ${\mathbb{D}}\times{\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$ by the relation $(z,t)\sim(\gamma\cdot z,\rho(\gamma)t)$ for all $\gamma\in\pi_1(\Sigma)$. We note $X:=\Sigma\ltimes_\rho{\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$. Let $p:{\mathbb{D}}\times{\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1\to X$ be the projection to the quotient space $X$. Then $M:=p({\mathbb{D}}\times{\mathbb{S}}^1)=\Sigma\ltimes_\rho{\mathbb{R}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$ is a Levi-flat hypersurface in $X$. As we will see, this Levi-flat hypersurface is chaotic for generic representations $\rho$.
Dynamics of Levi-flat hypersurfaces {#sec:dynamique}
===================================
In this section we will prove that if ${\mathcal{F}}$ is a foliation by Riemann surfaces on a compact 3-manifold without transverse invariant measure, then the normal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ of the foliation has a metric with positive curvature. It is the crucial part of this work.
Dynamics on foliated 3-manifolds
--------------------------------
Let $M$ be a compact 3-manifold and ${\mathcal{F}}$ a codimension 1 foliation on $M$. Recall that a *transverse invariant measure* is a family of finite measures $\{\mu_{{\mathcal{T}}}\}_{{\mathcal{T}}}$ on each transversal ${\mathcal{T}}$ of the foliation ${\mathcal{F}}$ such that every holonomy map $h_\gamma:\mathrm{dom}(h_\gamma)\subset{\mathcal{T}}_0\to{\mathcal{T}}_1$ verifies $\mu(h_\gamma (B))=\mu(B)$ on the borelian subsets of $\mathrm{dom}(h_\gamma)$. An invariant transverse measure is *ergodic* if it cannot be written as a convex non trivial combination of two different transverse invariant measures.
It is not common for a foliation to have a transverse invariant measure. We have the following result in the case of Fuchsian representations.
\[exe:fibre\_plat\_monodromie\_reelle\] Let $\Sigma$ be a Riemann surface and $\rho:\pi_1(\Sigma)\to\mathrm{PSL}(2,{\mathbb{R}})$ a representation of the fundamental group of $\Sigma$. Define $M:=\Sigma\ltimes_\rho{\mathbb{R}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$. Then there exists a transverse invariant measure on $M$ if and only if the representation $\rho$ is elementary, i.e. the image of $\pi_1(\Sigma)$ by $\rho$ is conjugated to
- a subgroup of $\mathrm{SO}(2)$, or
- a subgroup of the affine group, or
- a subgroup of the group generated by $z\mapsto\frac 1z$ and $z\mapsto az$, where $a\in{\mathbb{R}}^*$.
In the first case the invariant transverse measure is the Lebesgue measure, in the other cases it is a sum of two Dirac masses. See for example the book of Beardon [@Beardon §5.1].
One can’t always find invariants measures for a foliation, but we can always find *harmonic measures*, see [@FoliationsII Chapter 2.1]. These were introduced by Garnett [@Garnett]. If $\mathbf g$ is a metric on the tangent bundle $T_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ of the foliation with laplacian $\Delta_{\mathbf g}$, a probability measure $\mu$ on $M$ is $\mathbf g$-harmonic if for all $f\in{\mathcal{C}}_{{\mathcal{F}}}^\infty(M)$ we have $\int_M\Delta_{\mathbf g}f(x)\,{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\mu(x)=0.$
These measures generalize in some sense transverse invariant measures: given a harmonic measure, we can construct a family of transverse measures that are, on average, invariant by holonomies with respect to the heat distribution on the leaves. We can construct these measures by hand in some cases, see [@FoliationsII] for the case of hyperbolic torus bundles and [@Garnett] for the case of unit tangent bundle of hyperbolic Riemann surfaces.
We can associate to an ergodic harmonic measure a number, called Lyapunov exponent, which measures the exponential rate of separation of leaves. In [@Deroin-Kleptsyn] Deroin and Kleptsyn prove that for an ergodic $\mathbf g$-harmonic measure $\mu$ on $M$ the *Lyapunov exponent* of $\mu$ is $$\lambda(\mu)=-\int_M\varphi\,{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\mu,$$ where $\varphi:M\to{\mathbb{R}}$ is the function verifying $\Theta_{m_{{\mathcal{F}}}}=\varphi\cdot\operatorname{vol}_{\mathbf g}$ and $m_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ is a metric on the normal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$.
In [@Deroin-Kleptsyn] also, they prove that the Lyapunov exponent of an invariant measure is zero and that it is negative when the foliation doesn’t have an invariant measure:
[@Deroin-Kleptsyn]\[thm:corothmb\] Let $M$ be a compact 3-manifold foliated by Riemann surfaces and $\mathbf g$ a metric on $T_{{\mathcal{F}}}$. If ${\mathcal{F}}$ doesn’t have a transverse invariant measure then ${\mathcal{F}}$ has a finite number of minimal sets ${\mathcal{M}}_1,\ldots,{\mathcal{M}}_r$, each supports a unique $\mathbf g$-harmonic measure $\nu_i$ and each Lyapunov exponent $\lambda(\nu_i)$ is $<0$. Every harmonic measure on $M$ is a convex combination of $\nu_1,\ldots,\nu_r$.
Dynamics and positive curvature {#sec:deroinmodifie}
-------------------------------
In this section we show that if a compact 3-manifold foliated by Riemann surfaces has no transverse invariant measure then the normal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ has a metric whose curvature is positive. We begin with the following lemma, whose proof is inspired by [@Deroin-Kleptsyn].
\[lem:enleverintegrale\] Let $M$ be a compact 3-manifold and ${\mathcal{F}}$ a foliation by Riemann surfaces. Let $\mathbf g$ be a metric on the tangent bundle $T_{{\mathcal{F}}}$. Let $\varphi:M\to{\mathbb{R}}$ be a continuous function such that $\int_M \varphi \, d\nu>0$ for all ${\mathbf g}$-harmonic measure $\nu$ on $M$. Then there exists $g\in{\mathcal{C}^\infty}_{{\mathcal{F}}}(M)$ such that $\varphi-\Delta_{\mathbf g} g>0$.
We consider the space $C^0(M)$ of continuous functions $\phi:M\to{\mathbb{R}}$. It is a Banach space for the topology of uniform convergence. We note $E$ the closed subspace $$E :=\{\phi\in C^0(M)\mid\exists (g_n)_n \in{\mathcal{C}^\infty}_{{\mathcal{F}}}(M)\text{ such that } {\left\lVert\phi-\Delta_{\mathbf g} g_n\right\rVert}_\infty\to0\}$$ and $C$ the cone $$C :=\{\psi\in C^0(M)\mid\psi>0 \text{ on } M\}.$$ The set $C$ is a convex cone because for every $\alpha>0$ and every function $\psi\in C$, the function $\alpha\psi$ is in $C$. We note $F=C^0(M)/E$ and $\pi:C^0(M)\to F$ the canonical projection. Since $E$ is closed, ${\left\lVert\pi(\phi)\right\rVert}:=\inf_{e\in E}{\left\lVert\phi-e\right\rVert}_\infty$ defines a norm on the space $F$, hence $F$ is a Banach space. Moreover the projection $\pi$ is linear and continuous.
Let $\varphi\in C^0(M)$ such that $\int_M \varphi{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\nu>0$ for every harmonic measure $\nu$. To show that there exists $g\in{\mathcal{C}^\infty}_{{\mathcal{F}}}(M)$ such that $\varphi-\Delta_{\mathbf g} g>0$, it is enough to prove that $\pi(\varphi)\in\pi(C)$.
Indeed, if $\pi(\varphi)\in\pi(C)$ then there exists a function $c\in C$ and a function $e\in E$ such that $\varphi=c+e$. Since $M$ is compact and $c$ is a continuous function on $M$ there exists $\epsilon>0$ such that $c\geq\epsilon$. Therefore we have $\varphi-e\geq\epsilon$ on $M$. According to the definition of $E$ there exist $g\in{\mathcal{C}^\infty}_{{\mathcal{F}}}(M)$ such that ${\left\lverte-g\right\rvert}_\infty<\epsilon/2$. Consequently we have $\varphi-\Delta_{\mathbf g} g\geq\epsilon/2$ as desired.
So we have to prove that $\pi(\varphi)\in\pi(C)$. By contradiction we suppose that $\pi(\varphi)\not\in\pi(C)$. The set $\pi(C)$ is convex and open in $F$. We use the classical Hahn-Banach theorem for $\pi(C)$ and the closed subset $\{\pi(\varphi)\}$ of $F$. According to this theorem there exists a linear continuous functional $L:F\to{\mathbb{R}}$ and $\alpha\in{\mathbb{R}}$ such that $L(\pi(\varphi))\leq\alpha$ and $L\geq\alpha$ on $\pi(C)$. We verify that this gives us $$\label{eq:alphaescero}
L(\pi(\varphi))\leq0 \text{ and } L\geq0 \text{ on } \pi(C).$$ If we take a sequence of constant functions $\epsilon_n\in C$ such that $\epsilon_n\to0$, then since $L$ and $\pi$ are linear and continuous we have $\alpha\leq L(\pi(\epsilon_n))\to L(\pi(0))=0$. Hence $\alpha\leq0$ and then $L(\pi(\varphi))\leq0$. To verify $L\circ\pi\geq0$ on $C$, we suppose by contradiction that there exists $g\in C$ such that $L(\pi(g))=\beta<0$. Since $C$ is a cone, and $L$ and $\pi$ are linear, for all $\lambda\in{\mathbb{R}}$ we have $$L(\pi(\lambda g))=\lambda L(\pi(g))=\lambda\beta\to -\infty, \text{ if } \lambda\to +\infty$$ and this is a contradiction with $L(\pi(C))\geq\alpha$. This shows .
We define a linear functional $\tilde L$ on the space $C^0(M)$ by $\tilde L(\phi):=L(\pi(\phi))$. It is positive since, by definition of $\tilde L$ on $C$, we have $\tilde L(\psi)=L(\pi(\psi))>0$ for every function $\psi\in C$. Since $\tilde L$ is positive, the Riesz Representation Theorem tells us that there exists a positive measure $\nu$ representing $\tilde L$, i.e. $\tilde L(\phi)=\int_M \phi{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\nu$ for all $\phi\in C^0(M)$. This measure is $\mathbf g$-harmonic because for every ${\mathcal{C}^\infty}$-function $g$ we have $\tilde L(\Delta_{\mathbf g} g)=L(\pi(\Delta_{\mathbf g} g))=0$, since $\Delta_{\mathbf g} g \in E$.
Thus, we have constructed a harmonic measure $\nu$ such that $$\int_M \varphi \, {\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\nu=L(\pi(\varphi))=\tilde L(\varphi)\leq0.$$ But by hypothesis $\int_M \varphi \, d\nu>0$ has to be positive. This contradiction shows that $\pi(\varphi)\in\pi(C)$.
\[thm:metriquecourburepositive\] Let $M$ be a compact 3-manifold and let ${\mathcal{F}}$ be a foliation by Riemann surfaces on $M$. If ${\mathcal{F}}$ doesn’t have a transverse invariant measure then $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ has a metric with positive curvature.
Let $\tilde m$ be a metric on the normal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ and $\mathbf g$ a metric on the tangent bundle $T_{{\mathcal{F}}}$. Let $\varphi:M\to{\mathbb{R}}$ be the continuous function such that $\Theta_{m_{{\mathcal{F}}}}=\varphi\cdot\operatorname{vol}_{\mathbf g}$. According to Theorem \[thm:corothmb\], since the foliation ${\mathcal{F}}$ doesn’t have a transverse invariant measure, every $\mathbf g$-harmonic measure $\nu$ supported on $M$ is a convex combination $\nu=\sum_i t_i\nu_i$, with $\nu_i$ a ergodic harmonic measure of Lyapunov exponent $\lambda(\nu_i)<0$. In particular, we have $$-\int_M \varphi \, {\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\nu = - \sum_i t_i \int_M \varphi \, {\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\nu_i = \sum_i t_i \lambda(\nu_i) < 0.$$ Then Lemma \[lem:enleverintegrale\] gives us a ${\mathcal{C}^\infty}$-function $g$ such that $$\varphi-\Delta_{\mathbf g} g>0 \text{ on } M.$$ We define $$m_{{\mathcal{F}}}= \tilde m \cdot e^g.$$ The curvature of this metric on $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ verifies $$\Theta_{m_{{\mathcal{F}}}}=\Theta_{\tilde m}-\frac{i}{2\pi}\partial\bar\partial_{{\mathcal{F}}} g=\left(\varphi - \Delta_{\mathbf g} g\right) \operatorname{vol}_{\mathbf g}.$$ Hence the curvature of $m_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ is positive because $\varphi-\Delta_{\mathbf g} g$ is positive on $M$.
We end this section with some particular examples where we can construct explicitly a metric on the normal bundle of the CR foliation with positive curvature.
\[exe:mesure\_lisse\] Let ${\mathcal{F}}$ be a foliation by Riemann surfaces of a compact $3$-manifold, and $\mathbf g$ a metric on $T{\mathcal{F}}$. Let $\mu$ be a harmonic measure. We suppose that $\mu$ is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure, and that its density is a continuous function that is everywhere strictly positive. In this case, we can split the harmonic measure into the product of the volume form along the leaves associated to the metric $\mathbf g$ and a transverse volume element. This transverse volume allows us to build a metric on the normal bundle of the foliation. The measure $\mu$ being harmonic, we get that the norm of a non zero plane section of the normal bundle, with respect to the Bott connection, is a positive function and it is harmonic along the leaves. Hence the curvature of this metric is non negative, since the laplacian of the logarithm of a positive harmonic function is non positive.
The existence of a harmonic measure that is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure is not very common. Indeed, it could happen that ${\mathcal{F}}$ has minimal exceptional sets, and in this case $\mu$ is supported on the union of these minimals [@Deroin-Kleptsyn]. These minimals are conjectured to be of Lebesgue measure zero. Moreover, even in the case where the foliation is minimal, the harmonic measures will often be singular with respect to the Lebesgue measure. We refer to the papers [@Deroin-Kleptsyn-Navas-circle1; @Deroin-Kleptsyn-Navas-circle2] for these delicate questions. However, there exist some particular cases where the harmonic measures are smooth and have a positive density. This is the case for homogeneous foliations for example.
Let $G$ be a Lie group of dimension 3. We suppose that $G$ contains a lattice $\Gamma$ and a copy of the affine group $$A=\{x\mapsto ux+v \mid u\in{\mathbb{R}}^*_+, v\in{\mathbb{R}}\}.$$ Let $M:=\Gamma\backslash G$ and ${\mathcal{F}}$ the foliation of $M$ defined by the locally free action of $A$ on $M$ by the left product given by $$a\cdot\Gamma g := \Gamma g a^{-1} \text{ for every } a\in A, \ g\in G.$$
We consider on $A$ the metric $\mathbf g=\frac{{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}u^2+{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}v^2}{u^2}$ with constant curvature $-1$. We verify that it is invariant by left multiplication. We remark that $\mathbf g$ is not invariant by right multiplication, nor is its volume. If $D_a:a'\in A\mapsto a'a^{-1}\in A$ is the right product by $a^{-1}$, we have $$\label{eq:equivariancedroite}
D_a^*\operatorname{vol}_{\mathbf g}=u\operatorname{vol}_{\mathbf g}.$$ The orbits of the action of $A$ on $M$ are quotients of $A$ by a discrete subgroup of $A$ acting on the left. Consequently $\mathbf g$ endows the leaves of ${\mathcal{F}}$ with a riemannian metric with constant curvature $-1$.
Let $\tilde{\mu}$ be a Haar measure on $G$. This measure is bi-invariant by $\Gamma$, hence it descends to a volume measure $\mu$ on $M$ that is invariant by the action of the affine group $A$. This form decomposes into the product $\mu ={\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\operatorname{vol}_{\mathbf g}\wedge\omega$, where $\omega$ is a form that gives the foliation ${\mathcal{F}}$. By relation , and the invariance of $\mu$ by right multiplication, we obtain $$D_a^*\omega=\frac 1u\omega, \text{ for every } a\in A.$$ In particular, if $s$ is a plane section of the normal bundle of ${\mathcal{F}}$ along the leaves, we have $\omega(s)=ku$, with $k$ a constant, for any parametrisation of the leaf seen as an orbit of the affine group. This shows that the curvature of the metric $m_{\mathcal{F}}:={\left\lvert\omega\right\rvert}$ on the normal bundle of ${\mathcal{F}}$ is given by $\Theta_{m_{\mathcal{F}}}=\frac{1}{4\pi}\operatorname{vol}_{\mathbf g}$. In particular, it is positive.
We remark that in the case where $G$ is the group $\mathrm{Sol}:={\mathbb{R}}_{>0}\ltimes{\mathbb{R}}^2$, where ${\mathbb{R}}_{>0}$ acts on ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ by $u\cdot(v,w):=(uv,u^{-1}w)$, the manifolds $M$ that we obtain in this way are, up to a finite cover, hyperbolic torus bundles. We send the reader to [@Garnett] for a more geometric view-point in the case where $G=\mathrm{PSL}(2,{\mathbb{R}})$.
Geometry of the complement {#sec:geocp}
==========================
In this section we prove the following
\[thm:complementfortementpconvLP\] Let $X$ be a compact complex surface, $M$ a compact real analytic Levi-flat hypersurface in $X$. If $M$ doesn’t have a transverse invariant measure, then the connected components of $X\setminus M$ are modifications of Stein spaces.
This result was known in some particular cases, in particular in the case of hypothetical Levi-flat hypersurfaces of the complex projective plane by a theorem of Takeuchi [@Takeuchi-projectif], or in the case of flat ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$-bundles over a curve of genus $\geq 2$ with real, faithful and discrete monodromy (i.e. associated to the uniformisation of a curve with the same genus as the base), by a theorem of Diederich and Ohsawa [@Diederich-Ohsawa]. It is interesting to remark that our condition, although quite general, is not optimal: in the interesting work [@Nemirovskii], Nemirovskiĭ defines Levi-flat hypersurfaces in some elliptic surfaces, that separate the surface in Stein domains. These Levi-flat hypersurfaces contain some elliptic invariant curves, and hence they are not chaotic. However they have turbulent properties similar to those satisfied by chaotic Levi-flat hypersurfaces. It would be interesting to understand what is the optimal condition for this problem, but we don’t push this question further in this work.
To prove our result, the idea is to construct an exhaustion function on the complement of the Levi-flat hypersurface that is strictly pseudoconvex outside of a compact set. Doing this we obtain that $X\setminus M$ is strongly pseudoconvex. Using a result of Grauert [@Grauert-modifications] we get that $X\setminus M$ is a modification of a Stein domain. We follow the following strategy:
1. Construct a metric with positive curvature on the normal bundle of the CR foliation.
2. Extend the CR foliation locally.
3. Extend the metric with positive curvature locally.
4. Construct a strictly pseudoconvex exhaustion function on the complement.
The first step is Theorem \[thm:metriquecourburepositive\], which we proved in Section \[sec:dynamique\]. The second step is a well known result that we can find in [@LinsNeto] or [@Cartan-LeviPlat]:
\[prop:extentionvoisinage\] Let $X$ be a complex surface, $M$ a real analytic Levi-flat hypersurface in $X$ and ${\mathcal{F}}$ the Cauchy-Riemann foliation of $M$. Then, there exists a neighbourhood $U$ of $M$ in $X$ and a non-singular holomorphic foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ on $U$ such that ${\mathcal{G}}|_M={\mathcal{F}}$.
The last step is a result of Brunella:
\[thm:complementopseudoconvexo\][@Brunella-ample] Let $X$ be a compact complex surface and $M$ a real analytic Levi-flat hypersurface in $X$. We suppose that $M$ is invariant by a foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ defined on some neighbourhood $U$ of $M$ in $X$. Moreover, we suppose that the normal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ of the foliation has a metric with positive curvature. Then there exists a neighbourhood $U'\subset U$ of $M$ in $X$ and a strictly plurisubharmonic function $h:U'\to(-\infty,+\infty]$ such that
1. $h(p)\to+\infty$ when $p\to M$.
2. $h$ is an exhaustion function on $U'\setminus M$.
We remark that Brunella proves this result in ${\mathcal{C}}^{2,\alpha}$ regularity. The idea is to construct several local strictly plurisubharmonic exhaustion functions on the complement of $M$ and the difficult part is to glue them together.
The only step that we are left then in order to prove Theorem \[thm:complementfortementpconvLP\] is the third. We will extend the metric on $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ with positive curvature along the leaves to a metric on the normal bundle of the extended foliation with positive curvature in every direction. The continuity of the curvature will be needed.
But before doing this, let us give some examples of applications of Theorem \[thm:complementfortementpconvLP\].
Examples of modified Stein complements {#sec:exemples}
--------------------------------------
#### **${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$-bundles with real monodromy**
In this paragraph we consider the flat bundles over a curve $\Sigma$ associated to the real representation $\rho:\pi_1(\Sigma)\to\mathrm{PSL}(2,{\mathbb{R}})$ that we introduced in Example \[exe:fibre\_plat\_monodromie\_reelle\].
In this case, the hypersurface $M:=\Sigma\ltimes_\rho{\mathbb{R}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$ of $X:=\Sigma\ltimes_\rho{\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$ is a Levi-flat hypersurface and cuts $X$ into two domains $D^\pm:=\Sigma\ltimes_\rho{\mathbb{H}}^\pm$, where ${\mathbb{H}}^\pm:=\{z\in{\mathbb{C}}\mid\pm{\operatorname{Im}}z>0\}$ are the upper and lower half-planes.[^3] We have seen that $M$ admits a transverse invariant measure only in the case where $\rho$ is elementary, see Example \[exe:fibre\_plat\_monodromie\_reelle\]. We obtain then
\[cor:exemples\] If $\rho$ is non elementary, then the domains $D^\pm$ are modifications of Stein domains.
This result was shown by Diederich and Ohsawa in [@Diederich-Ohsawa] in the case where $\rho$ is a faithful and discrete representation with values in $\mathrm{PSL}(2,{\mathbb{R}})$, i.e. corresponding to the uniformisation of a curve of the same genus as $\Sigma$. In an earlier article [@Diederich-Ohsawa-weak] they have shown, without conditions on $\rho$, that the domains $D^\pm$ are always weakly pseudoconvex. In the two cases, the argument lies on the existence of harmonic equivariant maps. In the case where the monodromy is faithful and discrete, the argument to show strongly pseudoconvexity lies on the Schoen-Yau theorem, which says that a harmonic equivariant map between two hyperbolic compact surfaces is a diffeomorphism [@Schoen-Yau].
It is interesting to remark that the components $D^\pm$ are not always Stein surfaces, even though they are minimal (i.e. they do not contain a rational curve). Indeed, it can happen that these domains contain sections of the natural fibration $X\to\Sigma$.
To see this, take an integer $0\leq k<2g-2$, where $g$ is the genus of $\Sigma$, and $k$ points $p_1,\ldots,p_k$ of $\Sigma$ that we assume distinct for simplicity. A theorem of Troyanov assures then that there exists a unique hermitian metric $\mathbf{g}$ on $\Sigma\setminus\{p_1,\ldots,p_k\}$ of curvature $-1$ with conic singularities of angle $4\pi$ on the $p_i$’s. See [@Troyanov] for more details.
The fact that these conic angles are multiples of $2\pi$ shows that on the universal cover $\widetilde{\Sigma}$ of $\Sigma$, the metric $\mathbf{g}$ is the preimage of the Poincaré metric $\frac{{\left\lvert{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}z\right\rvert}^2}{({\operatorname{Im}}z)^2}$ on the half-plane ${\mathbb{H}}^+$ by a holomophic map $D:\widetilde{\Sigma}\to{\mathbb{H}}^+$, i.e. $$\pi^*\mathbf{g} = D^*\frac{{\left\lvert{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}z\right\rvert}^2}{({\operatorname{Im}}z)^2}$$ where $\pi:\widetilde{\Sigma}\to\Sigma$ is the cover map. Since the metric $\pi^*\mathbf{g}$ is invariant by the fundamental group of $\Sigma$, the map $D$ is equivariant by some representation $$\rho:\pi_1(\Sigma)\to\mathrm{Isom}^+\left({\mathbb{H}}^+,\frac{{\left\lvert{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}z\right\rvert}}{({\operatorname{Im}}z)^2}\right)\simeq\mathrm{PSL}(2,{\mathbb{R}}),$$ called the holonomy of the conic metric.
The $\rho$-equivariant map $D:\widetilde{\Sigma}\to{\mathbb{H}}^+$ defines a holomorphic section $\Sigma\to D^+=\Sigma\ltimes_\rho{\mathbb{H}}^+$. The representation $\rho$ is of Euler class $k-2g+2$ and by consequence it is non elementary. Hence, the domain $D^+$ is an example of a modification of a Stein domain that is minimal, but admitting an exceptional set containing a curve of genus $g\geq2$.
#### **Torus bundles**
This example, given by Nemirovskiĭ [@Nemirovskii], is a Levi-flat hypersurface with Stein complement in a complex surface obtained by taking the quotient of a line bundle over an elliptic curve. What is interesting is that this Levi-flat has algebraic curves, showing that our Theorem \[thm:complementfortementpconvLP\] is not optimal.
Let $\Sigma$ be a compact Riemann surface and $L\to\Sigma$ a holomorphic line bundle. We consider a meromorphic section $s:\Sigma\to L$ with only simple zeros and poles. We note $Z$ the zeroes and $P$ the poles and we suppose that there exists at least a zero or a pole. Let $\Sigma^*=\Sigma\setminus(Z\cup P)$. We note $L^*$ the fiber bundle $L$ without the zero section. On each fiber $L^*_x$ of $L^*$ over $x\in\Sigma^*$, we consider the real line passing by $s(x)$ that we note $l_x$. The set ${\mathbb{R}}s=\{l_x\}_{x\in\Sigma^*}$ of all lines is an analytic Levi-flat whose leaves are biholomorphic to $\Sigma^*$. The set $E:=\overline{{\mathbb{R}}s}$ is an analytic Levi-flat in the bundle $L^*$.
We consider the equivalence relation on $L^*$ given by $p\sim 2p$. We note $X:=L^*/\sim$ the quotient space that is then a torus bundle over $\Sigma$. The quotient of $\overline{{\mathbb{R}}s}$ by this relation is a Levi-flat hypersurface that cuts $X$ into two Stein domains. Indeed, every connected component of the complement is a trivial fibration in annuli over $\Sigma^*$. The annulus and the surface $\Sigma^*$ are both open Riemann surfaces and hence they are Stein by a theorem of Behnke and Stein. Finally, the product of two Stein spaces is Stein.
Local extension of the metric with positive curvature
------------------------------------------------------
To extend a metric with positive curvature along the leaves on $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ to a metric with positive curvature in every direction on $N_{{\mathcal{G}}}$, where ${\mathcal{F}}$ is the CR foliation and ${\mathcal{G}}$ is the local extension of ${\mathcal{F}}$, we will use the following lemmas. The first one is a classical result that we can find in [@LinsNeto]:
\[lem:formelocaleLeviPlat\] Let $X$ be a complex surface and $M$ a real analytic Levi-flat hypersurface in $X$. For all $p\in M$ there exist a neighbourhood $U_p$ of $p$ homeomorphic to a ball, and a holomorphic function $H=u+iv$ defined in $U_p$ such that ${\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}H(p)\neq0$ and $M\cap U_p=\{v=0\}$.
The second one gives a condition for the Levi form of a function to be positive. We recall that the Levi form of a function $f$ defined on an open set $U\subset{\mathbb{C}}^2$ is the hermitian form over ${\mathbb{C}}^2$ defined by $$L_f(p)(\zeta_1,\zeta_2)=
\frac{\partial^2f(p)}{\partial z\partial\bar z}\zeta_1\bar \zeta_1
+\frac{\partial^2f(p)}{\partial z\partial\bar w}\zeta_1\bar \zeta_2
+\frac{\partial^2f(p)}{\partial w\partial\bar z}\zeta_2\bar \zeta_1
+\frac{\partial^2f(p)}{\partial w\partial\bar w}\zeta_2\bar \zeta_2.$$ We say that $L_f$ is positive on $U$ if $L_f(p)(\zeta_1,\zeta_2)>0$ for all $p\in U$ and every $(\zeta_1,\zeta_2)\in{\mathbb{C}}^2\setminus\{(0,0)\}$. Moreover we have the relation $$i\partial\bar\partial f\wedge i\alpha\wedge\bar\alpha=L_f(\alpha_1.\alpha_2)\operatorname{vol}_X$$ for every 1-form $\alpha=-\alpha_2{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}z+\alpha_1{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}w$. So the Levi form of $f$ is positive if and only if the (1,1)-form $i\partial\bar\partial f$ is positive.
\[lem:formeLeviestpositive\] If $\frac{\partial^2f(p)}{\partial z\partial\bar z} > 0$ and if ${\left\lvert\frac{\partial^2f(p)}{\partial z\partial\bar w}\right\rvert}^2 < \frac{\partial^2f(p)}{\partial z\partial\bar z}\frac{\partial^2f(p)}{\partial w\partial\bar w}$ for all $p \in U$, then the (1,1)-form $i\partial\bar\partial_X f$ is positive on $U$.
We remark that with these hypothesis $\frac{\partial^2f(p)}{\partial z\partial\bar z}>0$ if and only if $\frac{\partial^2f(p)}{\partial w\partial\bar w}>0$. To prove the lemma it suffices to show that $L_f(p)>0$ on ${\mathbb{C}}^2\setminus\{(0,0)\}$. If $\alpha_1=0$ and $\alpha_2\neq0$ then $L_f(p)(\alpha_1,\alpha_2)={\left\lvert\alpha_2\right\rvert}^2\frac{\partial^2f}{\partial w\partial\bar w}$ and we are done. Now, if $\alpha_1\neq0$ then $L_f(p)(\alpha_1,\alpha_2)={\left\lvert\alpha_1\right\rvert}^2L_f(p)(1,\frac{\alpha_2}{\alpha_1})$. It is sufficient then to prove $$L_f(p)(1,\alpha) = \frac{\partial^2f}{\partial z\partial\bar z}+2{\operatorname{Re}}\left(\frac{\partial^2f}{\partial w\partial\bar z}\alpha\right)+\frac{\partial^2f}{\partial w\partial\bar w}{\left\lvert\alpha\right\rvert}^2 > 0$$ for all $\alpha\in{\mathbb{C}}$. We remark that $$L_f(p)(1,\alpha)\geq\frac{\partial^2f}{\partial z\partial\bar z}-2{\left\lvert\frac{\partial^2f}{\partial w\partial\bar z}\right\rvert}{\left\lvert\alpha\right\rvert}+\frac{\partial^2f}{\partial w\partial\bar w}{\left\lvert\alpha\right\rvert}^2.$$ This quadratic polynomial is positive because its first coefficient is and its discriminant is negative.
Now we can extend our metric:
\[prop:extensionmetrique\] Let $X$ be a complex surface, $M$ a real analytic Levi-flat hypersurface in $X$ and ${\mathcal{F}}$ its Cauchy-Riemann foliation. We suppose that the normal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ has a metric with positive curvature in the direction of the leaves. Then there exists a neighbourhood $U'$ of $M$ in $X$ and a non-singular holomorphic foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ on $U'$ such that ${\mathcal{G}}|_M={\mathcal{F}}$ and the normal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{G}}}$ has a metric with positive curvature in every direction.
We note $m_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ a metric on the normal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ on $M$ with positive curvature in the direction of the leaves.
By Proposition \[prop:extentionvoisinage\] there exists a neighbourhood $U$ of $M$ in $X$ and a non-singular holomorphic foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ defined on $U$ such that ${\mathcal{G}}|_M={\mathcal{F}}$.
We take a cover of $U$ by charts $(U_j,(z_j,w_j))$ such that $M\cap U_j=\{{\operatorname{Im}}(w_j)=0\}$ as in Lemma \[lem:formelocaleLeviPlat\]. In these charts we note $m_j:= m_{{\mathcal{F}}}|_{U_j}$, $m_j(z_j,t_j,\xi_j)=e^{-\sigma_j(z_j,t_j)}{\left\lvert\xi_j\right\rvert}^2$.
We extend $m_j$ to $U_j$ by $\tilde m_j(z_j,w_j,\tilde\xi_j):=m_j(z_j,{\operatorname{Re}}(w_j)){\left\lvert\tilde\xi_j\right\rvert}^2$. We consider a partition of unity $\{\phi_j\}_{j\in J}$ subordinate to the cover $\{U_j\}_{j\in J}$ and we define $\tilde m=\sum_j\phi_j\tilde m_j$. By continuity, this extends the metric $m_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ to a metric $\tilde m$ on the bundle $N_{{\mathcal{G}}}$ that has positive curvature in the direction of the leaves. To obtain a positive curvature in every direction we set $$m_{{\mathcal{G}}}:=\tilde m\exp(-Cd_M^2)$$ where $d_M$ is the distance to $M$ (with respect to a fixed metric on $X$) and $C$ is a constant. The curvature of $m_{{\mathcal{G}}}$ is then equal to $$\Theta_{m_{{\mathcal{G}}}}=\Theta_{\tilde m}+C{\frac{i}{2\pi}}\partial\bar\partial_X d_M^2,$$ that we will write in the following way $$\frac{i}{2\pi}\partial\bar\partial_X\left[-\log(m_{{\mathcal{G}}})\right] = \frac{i}{2\pi}\partial\bar\partial_X\left[-\log(\tilde m\exp(-C d_M ^2))\right].$$ We will show that this $(1,1)$-form is positive when $C$ is big enough. By Lemma \[lem:formeLeviestpositive\] it is sufficient to verify the inequality $$\begin{gathered}
{\left\lvert\frac{\partial^2}{\partial w\partial\bar z}\left[-\log(\tilde m)+Cd_M(\cdot)^2\right]\right\rvert}^2\\
< \left(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial z\partial\bar z}\left[-\log(\tilde m)
+Cd_M(\cdot)^2\right]\right)\left(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial w\partial\bar w}\left[-\log(\tilde m)
+Cd_M(\cdot)^2\right]\right)\end{gathered}$$ on a neighbourhood of $M$. By continuity of these derivatives, it is sufficient to verify this inequality on $M$. Let $p\in U$ and $U_j$ be an open set of the cover of $U$ containing $p$. On $U_j$ we can write the distance $d_M$ in the following way $$d_M^2(z_j(p),w_j(p))={\operatorname{Im}}(w_j(p))^2 h(z_j(p),w_j(p))$$ where $h$ is smooth and positive. The laplacian in the direction of the leaves is then $$\frac{\partial^2}{\partial z\partial\bar z}\left[-\log(\tilde m)+Cd_M(\cdot)^2\right]
= \frac{\partial^2}{\partial z\partial\bar z}[-\log(\tilde m)]
+C{\operatorname{Im}}(w_j)^2\frac{\partial^2}{\partial z\partial\bar z}h(z_j,w_j).$$ In the point $p\in M$ the first term on the left hand side is a positive $(1,1)$-form, it is in fact the curvature of $\tilde m$ in the direction of the leaves. The second term is zero in $p\in M$ because ${\operatorname{Im}}(w_j)=0$. The laplacian in the direction of the leaves is then positive. Now, the transverse laplacian is equal to $$\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial^2}{\partial w\partial\bar w}\left[-\log(\tilde m)+Cd_M(\cdot)^2\right]
= \frac{\partial^2}{\partial w\partial\bar w}[-\log(\tilde m)]\\
+\frac{C}{4}\left(2h(z_j,t_j)+(2w_j-2\bar w_j)\frac{\partial}{\partial w_j}h(z_j,w_j)
-(2w_j-2\bar w_j)\frac{\partial}{\partial\bar w_j}h(z_j,w_j)\right.\\
\left.+4{\operatorname{Im}}(w_j)^2\frac{\partial^2}{\partial w_j\partial\bar w_j}h(z_j,w_j)\right)\end{gathered}$$ On $M$ we have ${\operatorname{Im}}(w_j)=0$, hence the transverse laplacian is equal to $$\frac{\partial^2}{\partial w\partial\bar w}\left[-\log(\tilde m)+Cd_M(\cdot)^2\right]
=\frac{\partial^2}{\partial w\partial\bar w}[-\log(\tilde m)]+\frac{C}{2}h(z_j,t_j)$$ that is positive and big if $C$ is big enough. We calculate finally the mixed derivative $$\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial^2}{\partial w\partial\bar z}\left[-\log(\tilde m)+Cd_M(\cdot)^2\right]
=\frac{\partial^2}{\partial w\partial\bar z}[-\log(\tilde m)]\\
+C\left(\frac{-1}{4}(2w_j-2\bar w_j)\frac{\partial}{\partial\bar z}h(z_j,w_j)
+{\operatorname{Im}}(w_j)^2 \frac{\partial^2}{\partial w\partial\bar z} h(z_j,w_j)\right).\end{gathered}$$ On $M$ this mixed derivative is equal to $$\frac{\partial^2}{\partial w\partial\bar z}\left[-\log(\tilde m)+Cd_M(\cdot)^2\right]
=\frac{\partial^2}{\partial w\partial\bar z}[-\log(\tilde m)].$$ We see then that if we take a big constant $C$ the desired inequality is verified on $M$.
Extension of foliations {#sec:extensionglobale}
=======================
We show a result on the extension of foliations to strongly pseudoconvex domains in complex algebraic surfaces. We extend the foliation little by little through the levels of the strictly plurisubharmonic exhaustion function. Passing through the non critical levels is classic and consists in the construction of well placed Hartogs figures. We detail the gluing of extensions in the different Hartogs figures on a given level of the exhaustion function. We also detail how to pass through the critical levels of the exhaustion function, which doesn’t use the delicate construction of Hartogs figures near critical points, see [@Siu-Trautman; @LinsNeto; @Merker-Porten; @Ivashkovich-bochner].
All this will allow us to extend the CR foliation of a chaotic analytic Levi-flat hypersurface in a complex algebraic surface to a complex analytic global foliation. This has been used by Lins Neto [@LinsNeto] to show the non existence of Levi-flat hypersurfaces in complex projective spaces of dimension $\geq 3$. In this case, the connected components of the complement of the Levi-flat hypersurface are Stein by a theorem of Takeuchi [@Takeuchi-projectif].
\[thm:extension\] Let $X$ be a complex algebraic surface and $V\Subset X$ a strongly pseudoconvex domain. Let $K\subset V$ be a compact containing the exceptional set $A$ of $V$ and such that $U=V\setminus K$ is connected. Then every holomorphic foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ on $U$ extends to a holomorphic foliation on $V$.
By Theorem \[thm:complementfortementpconvLP\], the connected components of the complement of a Levi-flat hypersurface whose normal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{G}}}$ has a metric with positive curvature are modifications of Stein domains. By a result of Coltoiu and Mihalache [@Coltoiu-Mihalache], such a connected component has a continuous exhaustion function $\rho:V\to[-\infty,\infty)$, with value $-\infty$ on the exceptional set $A$, that is ${\mathcal{C}^\infty}$ and strictly plurisubharmonic outside $A$. Moreover, perturbing $\rho$ on the set $V\setminus A$ in the topology ${\mathcal{C}}^2$, we can suppose that $\rho|_{V\setminus A}$ is a Morse function, i.e. its critical points are non degenerate and the levels $\rho^{-1}(t)$ have at most one critical point for $t\in{\mathbb{R}}$. This function will help us to extend the foliation, defined on a neighbourhood of the Levi-flat hypersurface, to the entire complex surface.
We will start by extending the foliation to $V$ without its exceptional set $A$ (sections \[sec:passageniveauNC\] and \[sec:passageniveauC\]). Next, we will extend the foliation to $A$ (section \[sec:extensionsurA\]). Using Remmert’s Reduction [@Peternell Section 2.1], this will be done by extending a meromorphic function (representing the slope of the leaves) on a singular space. To do this it will be fundamental to use Hartogs figures and Levi’s Extension Theorem [@Levi] for meromorphic functions, which we recall now:
\[thm:levi\] Let $X$ be a complex surface. Let $H$ be a Hartogs figure in $X$ and $f$ a meromorphic function on $H$. Then $f$ can be extended to a meromorphic function on $\hat H$.
We recall that a Hartogs figure $H\subset X$ is an open set biholomorphic to $$\label{eq:Hartogs}
\{(z_1,z_2)\in{\mathbb{D}}(R_1)\times{\mathbb{D}}(R_2) \mid {\left\lvertz_1\right\rvert}>R_1-r_1 \text{ or } {\left\lvertz_2\right\rvert}<r_2)\}\subset{\mathbb{C}}^2 \, ,$$ with $0<r_k<R_k$ for $k=1,2$. Its holomorphic envelope is $\hat H\simeq{\mathbb{D}}(R_1)\times{\mathbb{D}}(R_2)$.
For $t\in{\mathbb{R}}$, we define $$K_t:=\{\rho\leq t\} \, ,\, V_t:=V\setminus K_t\, ,$$ and $$E=\{t\in{\mathbb{R}}\mid \text{there exists a foliation } {\mathcal{G}}_t \text{ on } V_t \text{ such that } {\mathcal{G}}_t|_{U\cap V_t}={\mathcal{G}}\}.$$ We remark that if $t\in E$, then the extension ${\mathcal{G}}_t$ of ${\mathcal{G}}|_{U\cap V_t}$ to $V_t$ is unique. This is because the exhaustion function $\rho$ doesn’t have a local maximum (because it is plusisubharmonic) and hence each connected component of $V_t$ intersects $U$. In particular, for all $t,t'\in E$, with $t<t'$, we have $({\mathcal{G}}_t)|_{V_{t'}}={\mathcal{G}}_{t'}$. Hence, if $t_*$ is the infimum of $E$, there exists a singular holomorphic foliation ${\mathcal{G}}_{t_*}$ on $V_{t_*}$ that extends ${\mathcal{G}}_t$ for all $t\in E$. We have to show that $t_*=-\infty$.
Passing through non critical levels {#sec:passageniveauNC}
-----------------------------------
In this paragraph we show that $t_*$ can’t be a non critical value of $\rho$. This follows from the following classical result.
\[lem:passageniveaunoncritique\] If $t$ is a non critical value of $\rho$ and if ${\mathcal{G}}_t$ is a singular holomorphic foliation defined on $V_t$, then there exists $\epsilon>0$ and a foliation ${\mathcal{G}}_{t-\epsilon}$ defined on $V_{t-\epsilon}$ extending ${\mathcal{G}}_t$.
In order to prove this, we will apply the extension theorems of Hartogs and Levi, that respectively extend holomorphic and meromorphic functions defined on a Hartogs figure to its convex envelope.
We will need the following result, which gives the normal form of strictly plurisubharmonic functions on a neighbourhood of a non critical point. For a proof, see the book of Henkin and Leiterer [@Henkin-Leiterer Theorem 1.4.14].
\[thm:formenormalenoncritique\] Let $\rho$ be a strictly plurisubharmonic function of class ${\mathcal{C}}^2$ defined on a neighbourhood of 0 in ${\mathbb{C}}^2$. If ${\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\rho(0)\neq0$, then there exists a biholomorphism $h:U\to V$, where $U$ and $V$ are neighbourhoods of 0 in ${\mathbb{C}}^2$, such that the function $\rho\circ h^{-1}$ is strictly convex (in the real sense) on $V$.
This theorem allows us to place Hartogs figures near the levels of a strictly plurisubharmonic function:
\[prop:boitesdehartogs\] For every $t\in{\mathbb{R}}$ and every non critical $p\in\rho^{-1}(t)$, there exists an embedding $\iota:\hat{H}\to V$, such that
1. $\iota(H)\subset V_t,$
2. $\iota(\hat{H})$ contains a neighbourhood of $p$,
3. $\iota(\hat{H})\cap V_t$ is connected.
We choose coordinates $z_1,z_2$ centered at $p$ such that the function $\rho$ is a strictly convex function (in the real sense). Up to a linear change of coordinates, we may assume that the kernel of $d\rho(0,0)$ contains ${\mathbb{C}}\times\{0\}$.
We consider the Hartogs figure $H$ defined by Equation with $R_1,R_2$ very small and $R_2$ much smaller than $r_1$. By the strict convexity of $\rho$, the Hartogs figure $H'=H+(0,\frac{r_2+R_2}{2})$ is completely contained in $V_t$ and its convex envelope $\hat{H'}=\hat{H}+(0,\frac{r_2+R_2}{2})$ contains the origin.
To show that the intersection $\hat{H'}\cap V_t$ is connected, we see that the slices $(\{z_1\}\times{\mathbb{C}})\cap(\hat{H'}\cap V_t)$ are, in the coordinate $z_2$, discs ${\left\lvertz_2\right\rvert}<R_2$ without a convex set of ${\mathbb{C}}$ that do not intersect the disc ${\left\lvertz_2\right\rvert}<\frac{r_2+R_2}{2}$ (because the level $\rho\leq t$ is convex). Such a set is connected and contains the annulus $r_2<|z_2|<\frac{r_2+R_2}{2}$. It follows that the fibered union of these sets (i.e. $\hat{H}+(0,\frac{r_2+R_2}{2})\cap V_t$) is connected.
We start with the proof of the following result.
\[lem:extensionvoisinage\] Let $t\in{\mathbb{R}}$. For every regular point $p\in\rho^{-1}(t)$ there exists a neighbourhood $W_p$ of $p$ in $V$ such that ${\mathcal{G}}_t$ extends to $V_t\cup W_p$.
Let $(U_p,\phi_p)$ be a chart of $X$ centered at $p$. The function $\tilde\rho:=\rho\circ\phi_p^{-1}$ is strictly plurisubharmonic on a neighbourhood of 0 in ${\mathbb{C}}^2$. We consider the function $\iota$ of Proposition \[prop:boitesdehartogs\] that places a Hartogs figure $H$ in $\phi_p(V_t\cap U_p)$. Let ${\mathcal{G}}'$ be the restriction of ${\phi_p}_*({\mathcal{G}}_t)$ to $H\subset{\mathbb{C}}^2$. We will prove that there exists a differential 1-form $\omega$ with isolated zeroes on $\hat H$ that defines ${\mathcal{G}}'$ on $H$.
Let $\{U_j\}_{j\in J}$ be a cover of $H$ by flow boxes and $\{\omega_j\}_{j\in J}$ be 1-forms defined on the open sets $U_j$ that give the foliation ${\mathcal{G}}'$ as in Proposition \[prop:deffeuilletageformediff\]. Taking $(z,w)$ as coordinates in the chart $\phi_p$, we can write $$\omega_j=g^1_j{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}z+g^2_j{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}w ,$$ where $g^1_j,g^2_j\in{\mathcal{O}}(U_j)$. By Proposition \[prop:deffeuilletageformediff\] there exist non vanishing holomorphic functions $h_{jk}$ defined on $U_j\cap U_k$ such that $$\omega_j=h_{jk}\omega_k.$$ The two last expressions imply that if $U_j\cap U_k\neq\emptyset$ then $$\label{eq:cambiocoordenadas}
g^1_j=h_{jk}g^1_k\quad,\quad g^2_j=h_{jk}g^2_k.$$
If $g^l_j$ is identically zero for a $j\in J$, the last equation and the fact that $H$ is connected tell us that $g^l_j$ is zero for all $j\in J$. Since the forms $\omega_j$ are not equally zero, the function $g^l_j$ is not identically zero for at least one $l\in\{1,2\}$ and all $j\in J$. We suppose that $g^1_j$ is not identically zero. Then $\frac{g^2_j}{g^1_j}$ defines a meromorphic function $f_j$ on $U_j$. Equation implies that if $U_j\cap U_k\neq\emptyset$ then $f_j=f_k$ on $U_j\cap U_k$. Hence there exists a meromorphic function $f$ defined on $H$ such that $f|_{U_j}=f_j$. By Levi’s Extension Theorem \[thm:levi\], this function $f$ extends to a meromorphic function on $\hat H$ that we call $\hat f$. We define a meromorphic 1-form on $\hat H$ by $$\eta:={\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}z+\hat f{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}w.$$
Since $\hat H$ is a polydisc, there exists a function $h\in{\mathcal{O}}(\hat H)$ and a holomorphic differential 1-form $\omega$ defined on $\hat H$ with isolated zeroes such that $h\eta=\omega$. We see that for all $j\in J$ there exists $g_j\in{\mathcal{O}}^*(U_j)$ such that $\omega|_{U_j}=g_j\omega_j$. Then the foliation $\tilde{{\mathcal{G}}}$ defined by $\omega$ on $\hat H$ extends ${\mathcal{G}}'$. This extension coincides with ${\phi_p}_*({\mathcal{G}}_t)$ on the set $\{\tilde\rho>0\}\cap\hat H$ since, by construction of our Hartogs figure, this intersection is connected.
This extension is unique because for any other differential 1-form $\omega'$ on $\hat H$ whose foliation extends ${\phi_p}_*({\mathcal{G}}_t)$, there exists a non vanishing holomorphic function $a$ on $\phi_p(V_t\cap U_p)$ such that $\omega=a\omega'$. The open set $\hat H$ being connected, the form $\omega\wedge\omega'$ is zero on $\hat H$. Hence there exists a non vanishing holomorphic function $\tilde a$ on $\hat H$ such that $\omega=\tilde a\omega'$. To finish we pullback the foliation $\tilde{{\mathcal{G}}}$ on $V$ by the chart map $\phi_p$. The open set $W_p$ is then $\phi_p^{-1}(\hat H)$.
By Lemma \[lem:extensionvoisinage\], for all $p\in\rho^{-1}(t)$, we have an open set $W_p$ of $V$ containing $p$ such that ${\mathcal{G}}$ extends to $W_p$. Its intersection with $\rho^{-1}(t)$ defines an open set $V'_p$ of $\rho^{-1}(t)$ containing $p$. The family $\{V'_p\}$, for $p$ in $\rho^{-1}(t)$, is then a cover of $\rho^{-1}(t)$. Since this hypersurface is compact, we can choose a finite subcover $\{V'_j\}_{j=1,\ldots,n}$, where $V'_j=V'_{p_j}$.
For $p\in\rho^{-1}(t)$, we define $J_p\subset\{1,\ldots,n\}$ the set of indexes $j$ such that $p\in W_{p_j}$. The intersection $W_{0,p}:=\bigcap_{j\in J_p}W_{j}$ is an open neighbourhood of $p$. We note $r_p:=\mathrm{dist}(p,\partial W_{0,p})$ and we define $$W_p':=B_p(r_p/3),\qquad W':=\bigcup_{p\in\rho^{-1}(t)}W'_p.$$ We note $W_j:=W_{p_j}$ and ${\mathcal{G}}_j$ the extension of ${\mathcal{G}}$ to $W_j$ given by Lemma \[lem:extensionvoisinage\]. Let $\omega_j$ be a holomorphic 1-form on $W_j$ that defines the foliation ${\mathcal{G}}_j$.
\[lem:extennsionuniquessensintesection\] For all $p\in\rho^{-1}(t)$ and all $j\in J_p$, the foliations ${\mathcal{G}}_j|_{W'_p}$ coincide. More precisely, there exists a holomorphic function $h$, not vanishing on $W'_p\subset W_j\cap W_k$, such that $\omega_j=h_{jk}\omega_k$ on $W_p'$.
The foliations ${\mathcal{G}}_j|_{W'_p}$ and ${\mathcal{G}}_k|_{W'_p}$ coincide on $W'_p\cap V_t$ by construction. Hence $\omega_j\wedge\omega_k=0$ restricted to $W'_p\cap V_t$. Since $W'_p$ is connected, the product of these two forms is still zero on $W'_p$. So there exists a holomorphic function $h$, not vanishing on $W'_p\subset W_j\cap W_k$, such that $\omega_j=h_{jk}\omega_k$ on $W_p'$.
\[lem:extensionVepsilon\] The foliation ${\mathcal{G}}_t$ extends in a unique way to $W'$.
First we show the uniqueness. Let ${\mathcal{G}}_1$ and ${\mathcal{G}}_2$ be two extensions of ${\mathcal{G}}_t$ to $W'$. Since by definition the sets $W'_p$ cover $W'$, it is sufficient to show that ${\mathcal{G}}_1|_{W'_p}={\mathcal{G}}_2|_{W'_p}$ for all $p\in\rho^{-1}(t)$. The arguments used in the proof of Lemma \[lem:extennsionuniquessensintesection\] give us the result.
Now we show the existence. We cover $W'$ with the open sets $$W'_j:=\bigcup_{q\in W_j\cap\rho^{-1}(t)}W_q'\subset W_j.$$ Since ${\mathcal{G}}_t$ extends to $W_j$ then ${\mathcal{G}}_t$ extends to $W'_j$. It is sufficient to show then, that for all $j\neq k\in\{1,\ldots,n\}$ we have $\omega_j=h_{jk}\omega_k$ on $W'_j\cap W'_k$ with $h_{jk}$ a non vanishing holomorphic function.
To do this, we verify that $$W'_j\cap W'_k=\bigcup_{q\in W_j\cap W_k\cap \rho^{-1}(t)}W_q'.$$ The inclusion $\supset$ come from the definition of $W_j'$. In the other sense, if $x\in W_j'\cap W_k'$, then there exists $q_j,q_k\in\rho^{-1}(t)$ such that $q_j\in W_j$, $q_k\in W_k$ and $x\in W_{q_j}'\cap W_{q_k}'$. To obtain the conclusion, it suffices that $q_j$ or $q_k$ be in $W_j\cap W_k$. If this is not the case, then $d(q_j,q_k)\geq d(q_j,\partial W_j)\geq r_{q_j}$ and also $d(q_j,q_k)\geq d(q_k,\partial W_k)\geq r_{q_k}$. Since by definition $W_{p}' = B_p(r_p/3)$, we would obtain that $W_{q_j}'$ and $W_{q_k}'$ are disjoints, which is a contradiction.
Let $q_0\in W_j'\cap W_k'$. Then there exists $q_1\in W_j\cap W_k\cap \rho^{-1}(t)$ such that $q_0\in W_{q_1}'\subset W_j\cap W_k$. By Lemma \[lem:extennsionuniquessensintesection\] there exists a holomorphic function $h^1_{jk}$, not vanishing on $W_{q_1}'$, such that $\omega_j=h^1_{jk}\omega_k$ on $W_{q_1}'$. Now, if $q_2\in W_j\cap W_k\cap\rho^{-1}(t)$ and $q_0\in W_{q_2}'$, we also have $\omega_j=h^2_{jk}\omega_k$ on $W_{q_2}'$. We can deduce then $$h^1_{jk}(q_0)=h^2_{jk}(q_0).$$ For all $q_0\in W_j'\cap W_k'$ we can then define $h_{jk}(q_0):=h^1_{jk}(q_0)$, and this does not depend on the choice of $q_1$. The function $h_{jk}$ is a non vanishing holomorphic function because it satisfies these properties everywhere locally. Since $\omega_j=h_{jk}\omega_k$ on $W_j'\cap W_k'$, this ends the proof.
\[lem:voisinage\] $W'$ is an open neighbourhood of $\rho^{-1}(t)$ in $X$. In particular, there exists $\epsilon>0$ such that $\rho^{-1}(]t-\epsilon,t+\epsilon[)\subset W'$.
For all $q\in\rho^{-1}(t)$ we define $$d_{\partial W'}(q):=\inf_{q'\in\partial W'}{\left\lvert\rho(q)-\rho(q')\right\rvert}.$$ It is the distance between $q$ and the border of $W'$ measured with the function $\rho$. This function is continuous and defined on the compact $\rho^{-1}(t)$, so it reaches its minimum at a point $q_0\in\rho^{-1}(t)$. This minimum is not zero because the set of critical points of $\rho$ is discrete in $V$. Finally, $W'$ contains $\rho^{-1}(]t-\epsilon,t+\epsilon[)$, where $\epsilon=d_{\partial W'}(q_0)$.
Lemmas \[lem:extensionVepsilon\] and \[lem:voisinage\] conclude the proof of Lemma \[lem:passageniveaunoncritique\].
Passing through critical levels {#sec:passageniveauC}
-------------------------------
In this paragraph we show that $t_*$ cannot be a critical value of the restriction of $\rho$ to $V\setminus A$. This follows essentially from the fact that the indexes of the function $\rho$ in its critical points can take only the values $0, 1$ or $2$. Remember that the index of a critical point is the maximal dimension of a subspace of the tangent space at this point such that the Hessian of the function is negative. For a strictly plurisubharmonic function on a complex surface such a space cannot have dimension $\geq 3$, otherwise it would contain a complex line on which the Levi form of the function would be negative.
Formally, the passage of critical values will be possible thanks to the following perturbation result.
\[lem:perturbation\] Let $p_*$ be a critical point of the exhaustion function $\rho|_{V\setminus A}$ and $I_*$ be a neighbourhood of $t_*=\rho(p_*)$ such that $\rho^{-1}(I_*)$ does not contain any other critical points. Then there exists a continuous function $\rho':V\to[-\infty,+\infty)$ such that
1. $\rho'$ coincides with $\rho$ on $V\setminus\rho^{-1}(I_*)$.
2. $\rho'$ is smooth and strictly plurisubharmonic on $V\setminus A$.
3. $\rho'$ admits a unique critical point $p'_*$ in $\rho^{-1}(I_*)$ and $\rho'(p_*)>\rho'(p'_*)$.
4. The critical levels $\rho^{-1}(]t_*,+\infty))$ and $\rho'^{-1}(]t'_*, + \infty))$ have connected intersection, where $t'_*=\rho(p'_*)$.
Before proving this lemma, let us explain why it gives us a contradiction if $t_*$ is supposed to be $>-\infty$ and a critical value of $\rho$. In fact, applying the techniques of Section \[sec:passageniveauNC\] to the function $\rho'$, we would be able to extend the foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ to a singular holomorphic foliation $({\mathcal{G}})'_{t'_*}$ defined on the critical level $\rho'>t'_*$ (indeed, if we note $t_*^+$ the border of $I_*$ bigger than $t_*$, the foliation ${\mathcal{G}}_{t_*}$ is defined on $(\rho')^{-1}(t_*^+)$ and therefore we could extend it to the next critical level of $\rho'$, i.e. the level $(\rho')^{-1}(t_*')$).
Since the intersection of the levels $\rho^{-1}(]t_*,+\infty))$ and $\rho'^{-1}(]t'_*,+\infty))$ is connected, the foliations ${\mathcal{G}}_{t_*}$ and $({\mathcal{G}})'_{t'_*}$ coincide on the intersection of their definition domains. We can then extend the foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ to a foliation defined on $\rho^{-1}(]t_*,+\infty))\cup\rho'^{-1}(]t'_*,+\infty))$ that contains a neighbourhood of $p_*$. Applying the techniques of Section \[sec:passageniveauNC\], this allows us to show that ${\mathcal{G}}$ extends to a foliation on a level of type $\rho^{-1}( ]t_*-\epsilon,+\infty))$ where $\epsilon>0$. This contradicts the minimality of $t_*$.
Since the index of $\rho$ in $p_*$ is $\leq 2$, the Morse Lemma gives us coordinates $(x_1,x_2,y_1,y_2)$ centered at $p_0$ such that [^4] $$\label{eq:Morse}
\rho=x_1^2+x_2^2\pm y_1^2\pm y_2^2.$$ We consider a neighbourhood $W_*$ of $p_*$ and a number $\epsilon_*>0$ such that the coordinates $(x_1,x_2,y_1,y_2)$ take $W_*$ to the bidisc $${\mathbb{D}}_{\epsilon_*}\times{\mathbb{D}}_\epsilon:=\{x_1^2+x_2^2\leq\epsilon_*^2\text{ and }y_1^2+y_2^2\leq\epsilon^2\}.$$ We will choose $\epsilon_*>\epsilon>0$ small enough for $W_*$ to be contained in $\rho^{-1}(I_*)$, and we will suppose in what follows that $\epsilon$ is very small with respect to $\epsilon_*^2$.
To simplify notations, we can suppose that $t_*=0$ (we can consider the function $\rho-t_*$). We introduce
- a smooth function $\delta:{\mathbb{D}}_{\epsilon_*}\to{\mathbb{R}}_+$ such that $\delta(0,0)>0$, $\delta(y_1,y_2)=0$ if $y_1^2+y_2^2\geq\epsilon^2/2$, and with ${\mathcal{C}}^2$-norm smaller than $\epsilon$
- a smooth function $\phi:[0,\epsilon^2_*]\to[0,1]$ that satisfies $\phi=1$ on $[0,\epsilon_*^2/3]$ and $\phi=0$ on $[2\epsilon_*^2/3,\epsilon_*^2]$.
We define then $$\rho''=(x_1-\delta(y_1,y_2))^2+x_2^2\pm y_1^2\pm y_2^2,$$ and $$\rho'=(1-\phi(x_1^2+x_2^2))\rho+\phi(x_1^2+x_2^2)\rho''.$$
The function $\rho'$ coincides with $\rho$ outside $W_*$, therefore it satisfies condition one of the lemma. Moreover, it is $\epsilon$ close to $\rho$ in the ${\mathcal{C}}^2$ norm, so that it satisfies condition 2 if $\epsilon$ is small enough. In this case the point $p'_*$ of coordinates $(\delta(0,0),0,0,0)$ is the only critical point of $\rho'$ in $W_*$, therefore in $\rho^{-1}(I_*)$. We have then $\rho'(p_*)=\delta(0,0)^2>0$, hence condition 3 is equally satisfied.
We have to prove condition 4. For this we will take slices $(y_1,y_2)=(c_1,c_2)$ as in the proof of Proposition \[prop:boitesdehartogs\], where $c_1^2+c_2^2\leq\epsilon^2$. If $x_1^2+x_2^2\geq\epsilon_*^2/3$ then we have $$\rho=x_1^2+x_2^2\pm y_1^2\pm y_2^2\geq\epsilon_*^2/3-\epsilon^2>0$$ and $$\rho''=(x_1-\delta(y_1,y_2))^2+x_2^2\pm y_1^2\pm y_2^2=\epsilon_*^2/3+O(\epsilon)>0$$ therefore $\rho'>0$. If $x_1^2+x_2^2<\epsilon_*^2/3$, then $\phi=1$, and hence $\rho>0$ and $\rho'>0$ are equations of the exterior of small discs contained in $x_1^2+x_2^2<\epsilon_*^2/3$. In summary, in the slice $(y_1,y_2)=(c_1,c_2)$ the place where $\rho$ and $\rho'$ are $>0$ is described by the exterior of the union of two small discs contained in the disc centered in the origin and of radius $\epsilon_*/\sqrt{3}$. In particular, this shows that the set $$\{\rho>0\}\cap\{\rho'>0\}\cap W_*$$ is connected. Now, the set $\{\rho>0\}$ retracts by deformation to $\{\rho>0\}\cap V\setminus W_*$ (by a radial retraction in coordinates $x$). The equality $$\{\rho>0\}\cap\{\rho'>0\}=\left(\{\rho>0\}\setminus W_*\right)\cup\left(\{\rho>0\}\cap\{\rho'>0\}\cap W_*\right)$$ shows that this set is connected and concludes the proof of Lemma \[lem:perturbation\].
Extension through the exceptional set {#sec:extensionsurA}
-------------------------------------
We will need the following two results:
[@Ivashkovich Corollary 1.5]\[lem:extensionfonctionspacenormal\] Let $Y$ be a reduced and normal complex surface. Let $B\subset Y$ be a finite set of points. Then every meromorphic function $f$ on $Y\setminus B$ extends to a meromorphic function on $Y$.
[@Peternell Section 2.1]\[prop:reduccionderemmert\] Let $V$ be a holomorphically convex complex surface. Then there exists a normal Stein space $Y$ and a proper and surjective holomorphic function $\pi:V\to Y$ such that:
1. The fibers of $\pi$ are connected.
2. $\pi_\ast({\mathcal{O}}_V)={\mathcal{O}}_Y$.
3. The canonical map ${\mathcal{O}}_Y(Y)\to{\mathcal{O}}_V(V)$ is an isomorphism.
4. For every holomorphic map $\sigma:V\to Z$ with $Z$ a Stein space there exists a unique holomorphic map $\tau:Y\to Z$ such that $\sigma=\tau\circ\pi$.
Now we can proceed to the last step of our proof.
\[prop:extensionsurA\] Let $X$ be a compact complex surface, let $V\Subset X$ be a strongly pseudoconvex domain and let $A$ be the exceptional set of $V$. Let ${\mathcal{G}}$ be a holomorphic foliation on $V\setminus A$. Then ${\mathcal{G}}$ extends to a holomorphic foliation $\tilde{{\mathcal{G}}}$ on $V$.
The idea is similar to that used to exhibit differential forms defining the foliation in a neighbourhood of singularities: we will extend the slope of the leaves.
First we will construct this slope function outside $A$. Let $\Phi:X\to{\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^N$ be an embedding of the algebraic surface $X$. Let $[z_0:\ldots:z_N]$ be homogeneous coordinates of ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^N$. Up to reducing $N$ and composing $\Phi$ by an automorphism of ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^N$, we may assume that $\Phi(X)$ is not contained in the hyperplane $\{z_N=0\}$ and hence $\Omega_1:=\Phi^*{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}(z_0/z_N)$ and $\Omega_2:=\Phi^*{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}(z_1/z_N)$ are a basis of the space of meromorphic differential 1-forms on $X$.
Let $\{U_j\}_{j\in J}$ be a cover of $V\setminus A$ such that on each $U_j$ the foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ is defined by $\omega_j:=f_j\Omega_0+g_j\Omega_1$, where $f_j$ and $g_j$ are meromorphic functions. On $U_j \cap U_k\neq\emptyset$ we have $$\Omega_0+\frac{g_j}{f_j}\Omega_1=\Omega_0+\frac{g_k}{f_k}\Omega_1.$$ The collection $\left\{g_k/f_k\right\}$ defines then a meromorphic function on $V\setminus A$, noted $F$. The foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ is then defined on $V\setminus A$ by $$\Omega:=\Omega_0+F\Omega_1,$$ and the function $F$ corresponds to the slope of the leaves. Let $\pi:V\to Y$ be the Remmert’s Reduction of $V$ and let $\tilde F$ be the meromorphic function defined on $Y\setminus\pi(A)$ by $\tilde F:=F\circ\pi^{-1}$. Since $\pi(A)$ is a finite set of points, and since $V$ is a normal analytic space, $\tilde F$ extends to a meromorphic function on $Y$, noted $\tilde F_{ext}$ (see Lemma \[lem:extensionfonctionspacenormal\]). We pullback this function to a meromorphic function on $V$ by setting $\hat F:=\tilde F_{ext}\circ\pi$. We define like that a meromorphic 1-form on $V$ $$\hat\Omega:=\Omega_0+\hat F\Omega_1$$ that extends the meromorphic form $\Omega$. This extends the foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ to the exceptional set $A$.
Transversely affine foliations {#sec:feuilletagestransaffines}
==============================
In this part we apply the previous results in the context of transversely affine foliations. In the first section we define these foliations on compact 3-manifolds and we study the case of hyperbolic torus bundles as in [@Ghys-Sergiescu]. In the second section we define degenerate transversely affine foliations on complex surfaces as in Scárdua’s work [@Scardua]. We have chosen to call these foliations *degenerate* instead of *singular* to avoid creating any confusion with a singular holomorphic foliation. The third section is devoted to an extension theorem for transversely affine foliations using the same ideas as in the last section. We show next that a transversely affine Levi-flat hypersurface in a compact algebraic complex surface necessarily has a transverse invariant measure. This allows us to establish that if a hyperbolic torus bundle appears as a Levi-flat hypersurface in a compact algebraic complex surface, then its Cauchy-Riemann foliation necessarily has a compact leaf. Indeed, Ghys and Sergiescu [@Ghys-Sergiescu] give a classification of foliations on these bundles: up to conjugation, these foliations either have a compact leaf or they correspond to stable and unstable foliations of Anosov’s flow. These last foliations are transversely affine and do not have a transverse invariant measure.
Transversely affine foliations on 3-manifolds
---------------------------------------------
Let $M$ be a compact 3-manifold and ${\mathcal{F}}$ a foliation by Riemann surfaces on $M$. We say that ${\mathcal{F}}$ is *transversely affine* if it has an atlas for which the transversal changes of coordinates $g_{jk}$ of Definition \[def:feuilletage3reel\] are affine or, equivalently, if there exists a cover $\{U_j\}_{j\in J}$ of $M$ and a family of local submersions $g_j:U_j\to{\mathbb{R}}$ such that for all $j,k\in J$, on $U_j\cap U_k$ there exist $a_{jk}\in{\mathbb{R}}^*,b_{jk}\in{\mathbb{R}}$ such that $g_j=a_{jk}g_k+b_k$. For more details one can consult the book of Godbillon [@Godbillon Chapter III].
Before passing to complex surfaces, we study the example of hyperbolic torus bundles of Ghys and Sergiescu [@Ghys-Sergiescu].
#### Hyperbolic torus bundles and model foliations {#par:fibreshyperboliquesentores}
Let ${\mathbb{T}}^2={\mathbb{R}}^2/{\mathbb{Z}}^2$ be a real torus and let $A$ be a matrix in $\mathrm{GL}(2,{\mathbb{Z}})$. Let ${\mathbb{T}}^3_A$ be the 3-manifold obtained as the quotient of ${\mathbb{T}}^2\times{\mathbb{R}}$ by the equivalence relation $(p,0)\sim(Ap,1)$ for all $p\in{\mathbb{T}}^2$. We call such a manifold a torus bundle over the circle.
We say that this bundle is hyperbolic if $A$ is hyperbolic, i.e. if ${\left\lvert\operatorname{tr}A\right\rvert}>2$. We will restrict our study to the case $\det A=1$ and $\operatorname{tr}A>2$.
A hyperbolic matrix $A$ defines a hyperbolic automorphism of the torus ${\mathbb{T}}^2$. This automorphism has two eigenvectors of irrational slope. The foliation of the plane ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ by parallel lines to one of these directions passes to the quotient torus ${\mathbb{T}}^2$ as a linear foliation. Moreover the foliation produced on ${\mathbb{T}}^2\times{\mathbb{R}}$ is invariant by the map $(p,0)\sim(Ap,1)$ and hence it defines a foliation by planes on the bundle ${\mathbb{T}}^3_A$. We call these foliations the model foliations of ${\mathbb{T}}^3_A$. They are all transversely affine and moreover
[@Ghys-Sergiescu]\[thm:Ghysfeuilletages\] Let ${\mathbb{T}}^3_A$ be an orientable hyperbolic torus bundle. Then every transversely orientable foliation of class ${\mathcal{C}}^r$ on ${\mathbb{T}}^3_A$ with $r\geq2$ and without compact leaves is ${\mathcal{C}}^{r-2}$ conjugated to one of the model foliations.
Transversely affine foliations on complex surfaces
--------------------------------------------------
In this section we define the notion of degenerate transversely affine foliation on a complex surface as in the papers of Scárdua [@Scardua], Camacho and Scárdua [@Camacho-Scardua] and Cousin-Pereira [@Cousin-Pereira]. The latter gives a beautiful classification of these foliations that precises Singer’s characterization of foliations having a liouvillian first integral.
### Transversely affine foliations {#transversely-affine-foliations}
Let $X$ be a complex surface. Let ${\mathcal{G}}$ be a (non-singular) holomorphic foliation on $X$. The foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ is transversely affine if there exists a foliated atlas $\{(U_j,\varphi_j)\}_{j\in J}$ such that on $U_j\cap U_k\neq\emptyset$ we have $$\varphi_{jk}(z_k,w_k)=(f_{jk}(z_k,w_k),a_{jk}w_k+b_{jk})=(z_j,w_j)$$ with $a_{jk}, b_{jk}\in{\mathbb{C}}$, $a_{jk}\neq0$. A singular holomorphic foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ defined on a complex surface $X$ is transversely affine if it is transversely affine on $X\setminus\operatorname{sing}({\mathcal{G}})$.
Let $X$ be a complex surface, $M$ be an analytic Levi-flat hypersurface in $X$ and ${\mathcal{F}}$ the Cauchy-Riemann foliation of $M$. Let $U$ be a neighbourhood of $M$ in $X$ such that ${\mathcal{F}}$ extends to a non-singular holomorphic foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ on $U$ (such a neighbourhood exists by Proposition \[prop:extentionvoisinage\]). If ${\mathcal{F}}$ is transversely affine on $M$ then ${\mathcal{G}}$ is transversely affine on $U$.
Let $\{(U_j,(z_j,w_j))\}$ be a family of charts of $M$ such that $M\cap U_j=\{{\operatorname{Im}}(w_j)=0\}$, see Lemma \[lem:formelocaleLeviPlat\]. Since the extended foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ is holomorphic, there exists a sequence $\{c_l\}$ of complex numbers such that $$w_j=\sum_{l=0}^\infty c_lw_k^l.$$ If ${\mathcal{F}}$ is transversely affine, then for $t_j={\operatorname{Re}}(w_j)$ and $t_k={\operatorname{Re}}(w_k)$ we have $$t_j=a_{jk}t_k+b_{jk}$$ where $a_{jk}\in{\mathbb{R}}^*$ and $b_{jk}\in{\mathbb{R}}$. These two equations tell us that $c_0=b_{jk}$, $c_1=a_{jk}$ and $c_l=0$ for all $l\geq 2$. Hence $w_j=a_{jk}w_k+b_{jk}$, the foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ is transversely affine.
### Degenerate transversely affine foliations {#sec:feuilletagesaffinesdeg}
\[prop:formestransaffinecomplexe\] Let $X$ be a complex algebraic surface and ${\mathcal{G}}$ a holomorphic foliation on $X$. Let $\omega$ be a meromorphic 1-form on $X$ defining ${\mathcal{G}}$. We say that ${\mathcal{G}}$ has a degenerate transverse affine structure, or that ${\mathcal{G}}$ is a degenerate transversely affine foliation, if there exists a closed meromorphic 1-form $\eta$ on $X$ such that ${\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\omega=\eta\wedge\omega$.
Logarithmic foliations and Bernoulli foliations on ${\mathbb{P}}{\mathbb{C}}^2$ are examples of such structures, see [@Scardua] for more details. Degenerate transversely affine foliations can also be defined by connections, see the paper of Cousin and Pereira [@Cousin-Pereira]. If $\omega$ is a holomorphic section of $N_{{\mathcal{G}}}\otimes\Omega^1_X$, then ${\mathcal{G}}$ is degenerately transversely affine if there exists a divisor $D$ of $X$ and a meromorphic flat connection $$\nabla:N_{{\mathcal{G}}}\to N_{{\mathcal{G}}}\otimes\Omega^1_X(*D)$$ such that $\nabla(\omega)=0$, where $\Omega^1_X(*D)$ is the sheaf of meromorphic 1-forms on $X$ with poles on $D$. The irreducible components of $D$ are invariant by the foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$. Moreover we have the following property, see [@Cousin-Pereira Proposition 2.2]
\[prop:metcourbnulle\] In $H^2(X,{\mathbb{C}})$, the Chern class of the normal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{G}}}$ is equal to $$c_1(N_{{\mathcal{G}}})=-\sum\alpha_C[C]$$ where the sum is over all the irreducible components of $D$, and where $\alpha_C\in{\mathbb{C}}$ is the residue $Res_C(\nabla)$ of any meromorphic 1-form defining $\nabla$ in a generic point of $C$.
Extension of transversely affine foliations
-------------------------------------------
\[thm:extensionstructuretransverse\] Let $X$ be an algebraic complex surface and $V\Subset X$ a strongly pseudoconvex domain. Let $K\subset V$ be a compact such that $U=V\setminus K$ is connected and contains the exceptional set of $V$. Then every regular transversely affine foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ on $U$ extends to a degenerate transversely affine foliation on $V$.
By Theorem \[thm:extension\] the foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$ defined on $U$ extends to a foliation $\tilde{{\mathcal{G}}}$ on $V$. Let $\omega$ be a meromorphic 1-form on $X$ defining $\tilde{{\mathcal{G}}}$.
\[prop:sectionstransaffinecomplexe\] There exists a closed meromorphic 1-form $\eta$ on $U$ such that ${\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\omega=\eta\wedge\omega$ on $U$.
Let $\{U_j\}_{j\in J}$ be a cover of $U$ by flow boxes of the transversely affine foliation ${\mathcal{G}}$. Let $\{g_j:U_j\to{\mathbb{C}}\}$ be a collection of holomorphic local submersions defining the transverse affine structure of ${\mathcal{G}}$ on $U$. On each $U_j\cap U_k\neq\emptyset$, we have $$\label{eq:affine}
g_j=a_{jk}g_k+b_{jk} \quad \text{ where } \quad (a_{jk},b_{jk})\in{\mathbb{C}}^*\times{\mathbb{C}}.$$ Let $f=(f_j)_{j\in J}$ be a meromorphic section of $N_{{\mathcal{G}}}$ associated to $\omega$ such that $\omega|_{U_j}=f_j{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}g_j$ on $U_j$ (see Proposition \[prop:sectmerom\]). We will verify that the meromorphic 1-forms $\frac{{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}f_j}{f_j}$ glue together on $U$. Since $\omega|_{U_j}$ come from the global differential form $\omega$, on each $U_j\cap U_k\neq\emptyset$ we have $$\label{eq:local}
f_j{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}g_j=f_k{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}g_k.$$ Derivating Equation and replacing the result in we obtain $f_ja_{jk}=f_k$. Thus $$\frac{{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}f_j}{f_j}=\frac{{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}f_k}{f_k}.$$ We can then define a meromorphic 1-form $\eta$ on $U$ by $\eta|_{U_j}=\frac{{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}f_j}{f_j}$. Moreover we have ${\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\omega|_{U_j}={\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}f_j\wedge{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}g_j=({\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}f_j/f_j)\wedge f_j{\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}g_j=\eta|_{U_j}\wedge\omega|_{U_j}$, hence ${\mathop{}\!\mathrm{d}}\omega=\eta\wedge\omega$ in $U$.
The form $\eta$ extends to $V$ because $V$ is strongly pseudoconvex. To see this, it is sufficient to apply to $\eta$ the methods from section \[sec:extensionglobale\]. This establishes Theorem \[thm:extensionstructuretransverse\].
Existence of invariant measures {#sec:constructionmetrique-mesuretrasinv}
-------------------------------
\[thm:mesuretransinv\] Let $X$ be a complex algebraic surface. Let $M$ be an analytic Levi-flat hypersurface of $X$. We suppose that the Cauchy-Riemann foliation of $M$ is transversely affine. Then this foliation has a transverse invariant measure.
We suppose that ${\mathcal{F}}$, the Cauchy-Riemann foliation on $M$, does not have a transverse invariant measure. By Theorem \[thm:metriquecourburepositive\], the normal bundle $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ of $M$ has a metric with positive curvature in the direction of the leaves that we note $m_{{\mathcal{F}}}$.
By Section \[sec:extensionglobale\], the foliation ${\mathcal{F}}$ defined on the Levi-flat hypersurface $M$ extends to a holomorphic foliation $\tilde{{\mathcal{G}}}$ on the whole surface $X$. By Theorem \[thm:extensionstructuretransverse\] this extended foliation is transversely affine on a neighbourhood of $M$ and degenerately transversely affine on $X$. By Proposition \[prop:metcourbnulle\] the bundle $N_{\tilde{{\mathcal{G}}}}\otimes{\mathcal{O}}(\sum\alpha_C[C])$ is flat on $X$, where $C$ denotes the irreducible components of the divisor $D$ where the transverse structure degenerates. Since $X$ is kählerian, this bundle has a metric with trivial curvature by the $\partial\bar\partial$-Lemma. Since the irreducible components $C$ of $D$ do not meet a neighbourhood of $M$, the bundle $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ has, on $M$, a metric $m_0$ with trivial curvature.
The metrics $m_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ and $m_0$ on $N_{{\mathcal{F}}}$ are related by $m_{{\mathcal{F}}}=e^{-\tau}m_0$, where $\tau:M\to{\mathbb{R}}$ is a function of class ${\mathcal{C}^\infty}$. The curvatures of these two metrics are related then on $M$ by the equation $$\label{eq:RelationCourbures-dem2}
\frac{i}{2\pi}\partial\bar\partial_{{\mathcal{F}}}(-\log m_{{\mathcal{F}}})=\frac{i}{2\pi}\partial\bar\partial_{{\mathcal{F}}}\tau+\frac{i}{2\pi}\partial\bar\partial_{{\mathcal{F}}}(-\log m_0).$$ The last term on the right hand side is zero because it is equal to the curvature of the metric $m_0$. Now, since $M$ is compact and $\tau$ is continuous, the function $\tau$ reaches its maximum on $M$ at a point $p$. The restriction of $\tau$ to the leaf of ${\mathcal{F}}$ passing by $p$ reaches also its maximum at $p$ and then $i\partial\bar\partial_{{\mathcal{F}}}\tau$ is negative on $p$. We obtain a contradiction because the left term in the equation is strictly positive.
As we announced in the introduction, combining this result with the following theorem of Ghys, which gives the nature of transverse invariant measures on foliated 3-manifolds that are transversely affine, we obtain that a transversely affine Levi-flat hypersurface in an algebraic complex surface is quasi-periodic or has an algebraic curve.
\[thm:classificationmesuresGhys\][@Ghys] Let $M$ be a compact analytic 3-manifold and let ${\mathcal{F}}$ be a codimension 1 analytic foliation on $M$. We suppose that ${\mathcal{F}}$ is transversely affine and that it has an ergodic transverse invariant measure $\mu$. Then $\mu$ is of one of the following types:
1. $\mu$ is supported on a compact leaf of ${\mathcal{F}}$.
2. ${\mathcal{F}}$ is Riemannian, i.e. there exists a riemannian metric on the normal bundle of ${\mathcal{F}}$ that is invariant by holonomy and $\mu$ is the volume measure associated to this metric.
Hyperbolic torus bundles as Levi-flat hypersurfaces
---------------------------------------------------
Let $X$ be an algebraic complex surface. Let $M$ be an analytic Levi-flat hypersurface on $X$ diffeomorphic to a hyperbolic torus bundle. Then the Cauchy-Riemann foliation on $M$ has at least one compact leaf.
If the Cauchy-Riemann foliation on $M$ does not have a compact leaf, then it is conjugated to the stable or unstable foliation on $M$ by Ghys and Sergiescu’s Theorem \[thm:Ghysfeuilletages\]. These foliations are transversely affine and do not have a transverse invariant measure. Theorem \[thm:mesuretransinv\] gives us then a contradiction.
Under the hypotheses of the last theorem, we can ask if the Cauchy-Riemann foliation has several compact leaves, or even if it is a fibration in compact Riemann surfaces. The following proposition, communicated to us by Étienne Ghys, shows that this is not always the case (in particular, [@Ghys-Sergiescu Proposition 2, p194] is not true).
Every hyperbolic torus bundle ${\mathbb{T}}^3_A$ admits foliations by Riemann surfaces presenting simultaneously compact and non compact leaves.
Let us view ${\mathbb{T}}^3_A$ as a quotient of a Lie group $G$ of dimension 3 by a lattice $\Gamma\subset G$. Let $G={\mathbb{R}}\ltimes{\mathbb{R}}^2$ where the semi-direct product is given by the action of ${\mathbb{R}}$ on ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ $$t\cdot(x,y)=(e^tx,e^{-t}y),$$ Let $A$ be a hyperbolic matrix. Let $\Lambda$ be a lattice invariant by the matrix $A$. We define $\Gamma={\mathbb{Z}}\log\lambda\ltimes\Lambda$. Then $${\mathbb{R}}^2/\Lambda\to\Gamma\backslash G\to{\mathbb{Z}}\log\lambda\backslash{\mathbb{R}}$$ is a torus bundle. We define 3 one-parameter groups $$\begin{aligned}
\phi_t:{\mathbb{R}}\to G:t\mapsto(t,0,0)\\
\phi_x:{\mathbb{R}}\to G:x\mapsto(0,x,0)\\
\phi_y:{\mathbb{R}}\to G:y\mapsto(0,0,y)\end{aligned}$$ that give us respective vector fields $Z,X$ and $Y$, which applied to a ${\mathcal{C}^\infty}$-function $h:\Gamma\backslash G\to{\mathbb{R}}$ and calculated at a point $p=(t_0,x_0,y_0)$ give $$Z\cdot h(p)=\frac{\partial h}{\partial t}(p),\qquad
X\cdot h(p)=e^{t_0}\frac{\partial h}{\partial x}(p),\qquad
Y\cdot h(p)=e^{-t_0}\frac{\partial h}{\partial y}(p).$$
These satisfy moreover the commutator relations: $$[Z,X]=X,\,[Z,Y]=-Y \text{ and } [X,Y]=0.$$
These vector fields give us a frame of the tangent bundle of the group $G$. With them we can define foliations by giving integrable distributions of planes, for example $${\mathbb{R}}Z+{\mathbb{R}}X,\,{\mathbb{R}}Z+{\mathbb{R}}Y,\,{\mathbb{R}}X+{\mathbb{R}}Y,$$ that correspond respectively to unstable, stable and trivial foliations. With these three fields we can build a foliation without Reeb component and with compact leaves on our torus bundle. Indeed, let $f:G\to{\mathbb{R}}$ be an analytic function that depends only on $t$ and let $${\mathcal{C}}:={\mathbb{R}}X+{\mathbb{R}}(Z+f(t)Y)$$ be a distribution of planes on $G/\Gamma$. We verify that this is an integrable distribution: $$\begin{aligned}
[X,Y+f(t)Z]
&= [X,Y]+[X,f(t)Z]\\
&= X(f(t)Z)-f(t)ZX\\
&= (X\cdot f)Z+f(t)[X,Z]\\
&= (X\cdot f)Z-f(t)X\quad(\text{since }[X,Z]=-X)\\
&= -f(t)X\quad\text{(since $f$ does not depend on $t$).}\end{aligned}$$ So $[X,Y+f(t)Z]=-f(t)X$ belongs to ${\mathcal{C}}$ and our distribution is integrable. This foliation has compact leaves for all $t\in{\mathbb{R}}$ such that $f(t)=0$. They are tori of the fibration. It does not have Reeb components: between two compact leaves the leaves are dense and wind around the compact leaves.
[^1]: In particular, when the monodromy of the ${\mathbb{C}}{\mathbb{P}}^1$-bundle is that given by the uniformization of the base curve $C$, the CR foliation of the previously considered hypersurface is analytically conjugated to the weak stable foliation of the geodesic flow on $C$ equipped with its conformal metric with curvature $-1$. Such a flow is the emblematic example of a chaotic flow, reinforcing the terminology used here.
[^2]: Note here that Proposition 2 in [@Ghys-Sergiescu] would demonstrate this conjecture, but Étienne Ghys warned us about the existence of a counterexample to this statement, which he kindly let us reproduce in this text.
[^3]: Remark that we could adapt our arguments to the case of representations with values in $\mathrm{PGL}(2,{\mathbb{R}})$, which would allow us to produce examples of non orientable Levi-flat hypersurfaces that don’t cut $X$ into two connected components $D^\pm$ but define a unique component $D$ instead. We will not be doing this in order to simplify the exposition.
[^4]: These real coordinates have no reason to be holomorphic!
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We report the constraints of $H_0$ obtained from Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) combined with the latest baryonic acoustic oscillations (BAO) measurements. We use the BAO measurements from the 6dF Galaxy Survey (6dFGS), the SDSS DR7 main galaxies sample (MGS), the BOSS DR12 galaxies and the eBOSS DR14 quasars. Adding the recent BAO measurements to the cosmic microwave background (CMB) data from WMAP, we constrain cosmological parameters $\Omega_m=0.298\pm0.005$, $H_0=68.36^{+0.53}_{-0.52}$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\sigma_8=0.8170^{+0.0159}_{-0.0175}$ in a spatially flat $\Lambda$ cold dark matter ($\Lambda$CDM) model, and $\Omega_m=0.302\pm0.008$, $H_0=67.63\pm1.30$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\sigma_8=0.7988^{+0.0345}_{-0.0338}$ in a spatially flat $w$CDM model, respectively. The combined constraint on $w$ from CMB and BAO in a spatially flat $w$CDM model is $w=-0.96\pm0.07$. Our measured $H_0$ results prefer a value lower than 70 km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, consistent with the recent data on CMB constraints from Planck (2018), but in $3.1\sim 3.5\sigma$ tension with local measurements of Riess et al. (2018) in $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM framework, respectively. Compared with the WMAP alone analysis, the WMPA+BAO analysis reduces the error bar by 75.4% in $\Lambda$CDM model and 95.3% in $w$CDM model.'
author:
- 'Xue Zhang$^{1}$ [^1] and Qing-Guo Huang$^{1,2,3}$ [^2]'
title: 'Constraints on $H_0$ from WMAP and baryon acoustic osillation measurements'
---
Introduction
============
As we know, the Hubble constant $H_0$ are in tension between the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) measurements from Planck [@Ade:2015xua; @Aghanim:2018eyx] and the type Ia supernova measurements from SH0ES [@Riess:2016jrr; @Riess:2018] (SNe, $H_0$, for the Equation of State of dark energy). The value of $H_0$ can be directly obtained by the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) and the CMB measurements (see [@Freedman:2010xv] for review on determining the Hubble constant). Riess et al. (2016) [@Riess:2016jrr] reported $H_0=73.24 \pm 1.74$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ (2.4% precision) from Cepheids in the hosts of Type Ia supernovae (SNIa). Recently Riess et al. (2018) [@Riess:2018] improves the precision to 2.3%, yielding $73.48 \pm 1.66$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$. On the other hand, the Planck survey reported $H_0=67.27 \pm 0.66$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ (0.98% precision; TT,TE,EE+lowP) in 2015 [@Ade:2015xua] and $67.27 \pm 0.60$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ (0.89% precision; TT,TE,EE+lowE) in 2018 [@Aghanim:2018eyx]. There exist a $3.7\sigma$ tension between the new results of Planck and SH0ES. Addison et al. (2016) [@Addison:2015wyg] have discussed the internal tension inferred from the Planck data itself. They have analyzed the Planck TT power spectra in detail and found that the Hubble constant $H_0 = 69.7\pm1.7$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ at the lower multipoles ($\ell < 1000$) and $H_0 = 64.1\pm1.7$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ at the higher multipoles ($\ell \geq 1000$). The measured value of $H_0$ is much lower in the case of $\ell \geq 1000$.
At present it is difficult to explain the $H_0$ disagreement in the standard cosmological model. The tensions among datasets could be due to some underestimated systematic error associated with the experiments. Of course, we cannot exclude the possibility of new physics beyond the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology [@Sola:2017znb; @Zhao:2017cud; @Qing-Guo:2016ykt; @DiValentino:2016hlg; @Pourtsidou:2016ico; @Wang:2015wga; @Wyman:2013lza], so the additional crosschecks are expected. In this paper we again call for another independent precise CMB measurements, namely Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP). The 9-year WMAP reported a 3% precision determination of $H_0=70.0 \pm 2.2$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ in a spatially flat $\Lambda$CDM model [@Hinshaw:2012aka]. On the other hand, Cheng et al. [@Cheng:2014kja] combined various BAO data sets to get relatively tight constraints on $H_0 = 68.17^{+1.55}_{-1.56}$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$. Combining the recent BAO measurements, Wang et al. [@Wang:2017yfu] reported $H_0=69.13 \pm 2.34$ km s$^{-1}$ (3.38% precision). In addition, The Advanced LIGO and Virgo [@Abbott:2017xzu] reported the a strong signal of GW170817 from the merger of a binary neutron-star system and determined the Hubble constant $H_0=70.0^{+12.0}_{-8.0}$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$. Addison et al. (2018) [@Addison:2017fdm] show that WMAP, Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT), South Pole Telescope (SPT) surveys, and primordial deuterium abundance constraints can be used together with some BAO data to provide the values of $H_0$, which are $2.4\sim 3.1\sigma$ lower than SH0ES, independent of Planck. Combining galaxy and Ly$\alpha$ BAO observations with the primordial deuterium abundance, a value of $H_0=66.98 \pm 1.18$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ has been estimated. This value also have $3\sigma$ tension with local $H_0$ measurement. These measurements, independent of SH0ES and Planck constraints, seem to favor a lower $H_0$ value that is more consistent with Planck result. See [@Busti:2014dua; @Wang:2016iij; @Yu:2017iju; @Gomez-Valent:2018hwc; @Park:2018fxx; @Park:2018tgj; @Miao:2018zpw; @Yang:2018euj; @Yang:2018uae; @Yang:2018qmz; @Freedman:2017yms; @Zhang:2018jfu] for more literature on $H_0$.
Beyond the spatially flat standard cosmological model and without SH0ES and Planck measurements, it would be interesting to study the Hubble constant constraints. So, in this work we combine the BAO with WMAP measurements to place constraints on $H_0$ in $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM cosmology. The paper is organized as follows. In section \[md\], we will introduce the model and data sets used in this work. In section \[r\], we present our main results. We conclude in section \[sd\].
Model and Data {#md}
==============
In this paper we discuss the spatially flat $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM model, first using the nine-year WMAP data only, then combined with the additional BAO data sets. We use the BAO measurements from the 6dFGS survey [@Beutler:2011hx], the SDSS DR7 MGS [@Ross:2014qpa], the BOSS DR12 (9-zbin) [@Wang:2016wjr], and the eBOSS DR14 measurement [@Ata:2017dya]. Their effective redshifts and constraints are listed in Table \[tab:BAO\].
Experiment $z_\text{eff}$ Measurement Constraint
------------------- ---------------- -------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------
6dFGS 0.106 $r_d/D_V$ $0.336 \pm 0.015$ Mpc
SDSS DR7 MGS 0.15 $D_V$ $(664 \pm 25)(r_d/r_{d,\text{fid}})$ Mpc
BOSS DR12 (9zbin) 0.31 $D_A/r_d; H*r_d$ $(6.29 \pm 0.14 )$ Mpc; $(11.55 \pm 0.70)\times 10^3 $ km/s
0.36 $D_A/r_d$; $H*r_d$ $ (7.09 \pm 0.16 )$ Mpc; $(11.81 \pm 0.50)\times 10^3 $ km/s
0.40 $D_A/r_d$; $H*r_d$ $ (7.70 \pm 0.16 )$ Mpc; $(12.12 \pm 0.30)\times 10^3 $ km/s
0.44 $D_A/r_d$; $H*r_d$ $ (8.20 \pm 0.13 )$ Mpc; $(12.53 \pm 0.27)\times 10^3 $ km/s
0.48 $D_A/r_d$; $H*r_d$ $ (8.64 \pm 0.11 )$ Mpc; $(12.97 \pm 0.30)\times 10^3 $ km/s
0.52 $D_A/r_d$; $H*r_d$ $ (8.90 \pm 0.12 )$ Mpc; $(13.94 \pm 0.39)\times 10^3 $ km/s
0.56 $D_A/r_d$; $H*r_d$ $ (9.16 \pm 0.14 )$ Mpc; $(13.79 \pm 0.34)\times 10^3 $ km/s
0.59 $D_A/r_d$; $H*r_d$ $ (9.45 \pm 0.17 )$ Mpc; $(14.55 \pm 0.47)\times 10^3 $ km/s
0.64 $D_A/r_d$; $H*r_d$ $ (9.62 \pm 0.22 )$ Mpc; $(14.60 \pm 0.44)\times 10^3 $ km/s
eBOSS DR14 1.52 $D_V$ $(3843 \pm 147)(r_d/r_{d,\text{fid}})$ Mpc
: BAO distance measurements used in this work.[]{data-label="tab:BAO"}
The angular diameter distance takes the form of $$D_A (z) = \frac{1}{1+z} \int^z_0 \frac{d z'}{H(z')}.$$ For the comoving sound horizon at the end of the baryon drag epoch $z_d$, we take $r_d \equiv r_s (z_d)$. The volume-averaged effective distance $D_V$ is a combination of the angular diameter distance $D_A(z)$ and Hubble parameter $H(z)$, $$D_V(z)=\[(1+z)^2 D_A^2(z)\frac{cz}{H(z)}\]^{1/3}.$$
We use the CosmoMC package [@Lewis:2002ah] to sample the parameter space. Our analysis employs the same Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) formalism used in previous analyses [@Abbott:2018wog; @Brout:2018jch; @Ade:2018gkx; @Chen:2018dbv; @Chen:2017ayg; @Huang:2015vpa]. We explore the WMAP-only and WMAP+BAO likelihood with MCMC simulations of the posterior distribution for the six base parameters as given in Planck Collaboration [@Ade:2015xua; @Aghanim:2018eyx]. This approach naturally generates the likelihoods of parameters, which are marginalized over all other fitting parameters. The six basic parameters are the baryon density today, $\Omega_b h^2$, the cold dark matter density today, $\Omega_c h^2$, 100 $\times$ approximation to $r_*/D_A$, $100 \theta_{\rm MC}$, the reionization optical depth, $\tau$, the log power of the primordial curvature perturbations, $\ln(10^{10} A_s)$, and the scalar spectrum power-law index, $n_s$.
Result {#r}
======
FIG. \[fig:lcdm\] and FIG. \[fig:wcdm\] shows 2-dimensional marginalized constraints on the six MCMC sampling parameters of the $\Lambda$CDM model and $w$CDM model used to explore the posterior of parameters, and plotted against the following derived parameters (the Hubble constant $H_0$, matter density parameter $\Omega_m$ and late-time clustering amplitude $\sigma_8$). Our results are based on 9-year WMAP (TT,TE,EE+lensing). Here we plot the results using the combined datasets of 6dF+MGS+DR12(9-zbin)+DR14 (labeld by BAO). The blue contours show the constraints using 9-year WMAP data alone, and the red contours include BAO data sets (WMAP+BAO). It is easy to see the BAO method is sensitive to the change of $H_0$, $\Omega_m$ and $\sigma_8$, so it can be effectively improve the constraint of WMAP-only.
![Likelihood contours (68% and 95%) of cosmological parameters in a flat $\Lambda$CDM model derived from WMAP and WMAP + BAO respectively.[]{data-label="fig:lcdm"}](lcdm.pdf){width=".75\textwidth"}
![Likelihood contours (68% and 95%) of cosmological parameters in a flat $w$CDM model derived from WMAP and WMAP + BAO respectively.[]{data-label="fig:wcdm"}](wcdm.pdf){width=".75\textwidth"}
![Confidence contours for $\Omega_m$-$H_0$ in $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM model using WMAP+BAO data sets.[]{data-label="fig:omegam_h0"}](omegam_h0.pdf){width=".35\textwidth"}
FIG. \[fig:omegam\_h0\] presents 68% and 95% likelihood contours for the $\Omega_m$-$H_0$ plane for the WMAP+BAO data sets. The red contours correspond to a flat $\Lambda$CDM model and the blue contours correspond to the $w$CDM model. FIG. \[fig:h0\] shows the marginalized likelihood distribution of $H_0$ and summarized the $H_0$ measurements from other two methods. Blue line and red lines show constraints in $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM model respectively using 9-year WMAP data and BAO data. Clearly, adding the recent BAO as a complementary to WMAP, our measured $H_0$ results consistent with the recent data on CMB constraints from Planck (2018), which prefer a value lower than 70 km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$. These shows in 3.1 and $3.5\sigma$ tension with local measurements of Riess et al. (2018) in $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM framework, respectively.
![Marginalized $H_0$ constraints for the $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM model and comparison of the SH0ES and Planck measurements.[]{data-label="fig:h0"}](h0.pdf){width=".5\textwidth"}
Table \[tab:result\] gives marginalized parameter constraints from the WMAP CMB spectra with and without BAO. Parameter 68% intervals in the $\Lambda$CDM model and $w$CDM model from WMAP CMB power spectra in combination with BAO. The first group is the base six parameters in $\Lambda$CDM model, which are sampled in the MCMC analysis. The second group lists the representative derived parameters ($H_0$, $\Omega_m$ and $\sigma_8$). The third group shows the $\chi^2$ of WMAP and each BAO data sets. The column labeled ’WMAP’ is 9-year WMAP only. The first two columns give results of six parameter $\Lambda$CDM from 9-year WMAP data, with and without BAO measurements. The last two columns give results in $w$CDM framework from WMAP data only and when BAO are added. Adding BAO measurements to WMAP, we constrain cosmological parameters $\Omega_m=0.298\pm0.005$, $H_0=68.36^{+0.53}_{-0.52}$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ (0.78 % precision), $\sigma_8=0.8170^{+0.0159}_{-0.0175}$ for a flat $\Lambda$CDM model, and $\Omega_m=0.302\pm0.008$, $H_0=67.63\pm1.30$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ (1.93 % precision), $\sigma_8=0.7988^{+0.0345}_{-0.0338}$ for a flat wCDM model. The combined constraint on $w$ from WMAP+BAO in a flat $w$CDM model is $w=-0.96\pm0.07$. Compared with the WMAP alone analysis, the WMPA+BAO analysis reduces the error bar by 75.4% in $\Lambda$CDM model and 95.3% in $w$CDM model.
---------------------------- ------------------------------ --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ---------------------------------
\*[Parameter]{}
WMAP WMAP+BAO WMAP WMAP+BAO
$\Omega_b h^2$ $0.02264 \pm 0.00050$ $0.02248 \pm 0.00043$ $0.02261^{+0.00049}_{-0.00057}$ $0.02260 \pm 0.00046$
$\Omega_c h^2$ $0.1136^{+0.0048}_{-0.0046}$ $0.1162 \pm 0.0018$ $0.1140^{+0.0048}_{-0.0049}$ $0.1148 \pm 0.0030$
$100 \theta_{\rm MC}$ $1.04007 \pm 0.00221$ $1.03961^{+0.00201}_{-0.00203}$ $1.04002^{+0.00230}_{-0.00227}$ $1.03998^{+0.00215}_{-0.00195}$
$\tau$ $0.0891^{+0.0123}_{-0.0148}$ $0.0856^{+0.0112}_{-0.0132}$ $0.0885^{+0.0121}_{-0.0148}$ $0.0874^{+0.0120}_{-0.0138}$
$\ln(10^{10} A_s)$ $3.092 \pm 0.029$ $3.092^{+0.026}_{-0.030}$ $3.091^{+0.029}_{-0.030}$ $3.092^{+0.026}_{-0.030}$
$n_s$ $0.9728^{+0.0122}_{-0.0139}$ $0.9678^{+0.0098}_{-0.0099}$ $0.9722^{+0.0126}_{-0.0166}$ $0.9713^{+0.0111}_{-0.0112}$
$w$ - - $-1.59^{+1.26}_{-0.53}$ $-0.96 \pm 0.07$
$H_0$ $69.65^{+2.08}_{-2.37}$ $68.36^{+0.53}_{-0.52}$ $94.49^{+16.48}_{-46.45}$ $67.63 \pm 1.30$
$\Omega_m$ $0.284^{+0.025}_{-0.028}$ $0.298 \pm 0.005$ $0.230^{+0.081}_{-0.197}$ $0.302 \pm 0.008$
$\sigma_8$ $0.8075^{+0.0242}_{-0.0222}$ $0.8170^{+0.0159}_{-0.0175}$ $0.9697^{+0.2024}_{-0.3639}$ $0.7988^{+0.0345}_{-0.0338}$
$\chi^2_{\rm WMAP}$ $7564.0676$ $7563.3854$ $7564.8138$ $7563.4906$
$\chi^2_{\rm 6 DF}$ - $0.0383$ - $0.0628$
$\chi^2_{\rm MGS}$ - $2.1741$ - $1.8435$
$\chi^2_{\rm DR12(9zbin)}$ - $13.4406$ - $14.4571$
$\chi^2_{\rm DR14}$ - $0.0280$ - $0.0165$
$\chi^2_{\rm BAO}$ - $15.6810$ - $16.3799$
---------------------------- ------------------------------ --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ---------------------------------
: Parameter constraints in $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM from the WMAP with and without BAO.[]{data-label="tab:result"}
Summary and discussion {#sd}
======================
In this paper, we determine the Hubble constant $H_0$ using the cosmic microwave background (CMB) data from WMAP and the latest baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) measurements in a spatially flat $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM cosmology. Adding BAO measurements to WMAP, we constrain cosmological parameters $\Omega_m=0.298\pm0.005$, $H_0=68.36^{+0.53}_{-0.52}$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ (0.78 % precision), $\sigma_8=0.8170^{+0.0159}_{-0.0175}$ in a flat $\Lambda$ cold dark matter ($\Lambda$CDM) model, and $\Omega_m=0.302\pm0.008$, $H_0=67.63\pm1.30$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ (1.93 % precision), $\sigma_8=0.7988^{+0.0345}_{-0.0338}$ in a flat $w$CDM model. The combined constraint on $w$ from CMB and BAO for a flat $w$CDM model is $w=-0.96\pm0.07$. By adding the recent BAO as a complementary to WMAP, our measured $H_0$ results consistent with the recent data on CMB constraints from Planck (2018), which prefer a value lower than 70 km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$. These shows in 3.1 and $3.5\sigma$ tension with local measurements of Riess et al. (2018) in $\Lambda$CDM and $w$CDM framework, respectively. Compared with the WMAP alone analysis, the WMPA+BAO analysis reduces the error bar by 75.4% in $\Lambda$CDM model and 95.3% in $w$CDM model.
Our results indicate that the combination of WMAP and BAO datasets gives a tight constraint on the Hubble constant comparable to that adopting Planck data. In order to soften the model-dependent constraint using CMB and BAO data, we also extend our analysis to more general dark energy model ($w$CDM cosmology), but there is still a significant tension between the global fitting CMB and BAO datasets and local determination.
[**Acknowledgments**]{}
We acknowledge the use of HPC Cluster of ITP-CAS. This work is supported by grants from NSFC (grant No. 11575271, 11690021, 11747601), the Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Grant No. XDB23000000), Top-Notch Young Talents Program of China, and Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences of CAS.
[99]{} P. A. R. Ade [*et al.*]{} \[Planck Collaboration\], Astron. Astrophys. [**594**]{}, A13 (2016) doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525830 \[arXiv:1502.01589 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. N. Aghanim [*et al.*]{} \[Planck Collaboration\], arXiv:1807.06209 \[astro-ph.CO\].
A. G. Riess [*et al.*]{}, Astrophys. J. [**826**]{}, no. 1, 56 (2016) \[arXiv:1604.01424 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. A. G. Riess [*et al.*]{}, Astrophys. J. [**855**]{}, no. 2, 136 (2018) \[arXiv:1801.01120 \[astro-ph.SR\]\].
W. L. Freedman and B. F. Madore, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. [**48**]{}, 673 (2010) \[arXiv:1004.1856 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
G. E. Addison, Y. Huang, D. J. Watts, C. L. Bennett, M. Halpern, G. Hinshaw and J. L. Weiland, Astrophys. J. [**818**]{}, no. 2, 132 (2016) \[arXiv:1511.00055 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
J. Sol角, A. G車mez-Valent and J. de Cruz P谷rez, Phys. Lett. B [**774**]{}, 317 (2017) \[arXiv:1705.06723 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. G. B. Zhao [*et al.*]{}, Nat. Astron. [**1**]{}, 627 (2017) \[arXiv:1701.08165 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. Q. G. Huang and K. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C [**76**]{}, no. 9, 506 (2016) \[arXiv:1606.05965 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri and J. Silk, Phys. Lett. B [**761**]{}, 242 (2016) \[arXiv:1606.00634 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. A. Pourtsidou and T. Tram, Phys. Rev. D [**94**]{}, no. 4, 043518 (2016) \[arXiv:1604.04222 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. Y. Wang, G. B. Zhao, D. Wands, L. Pogosian and R. G. Crittenden, Phys. Rev. D [**92**]{}, 103005 (2015) \[arXiv:1505.01373 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. M. Wyman, D. H. Rudd, R. A. Vanderveld and W. Hu, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**112**]{}, no. 5, 051302 (2014) \[arXiv:1307.7715 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
G. Hinshaw [*et al.*]{} \[WMAP Collaboration\], Astrophys. J. Suppl. [**208**]{}, 19 (2013) \[arXiv:1212.5226 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. C. Cheng and Q. G. Huang, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. [**58**]{}, no. 9, 599801 (2015) \[arXiv:1409.6119 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. Y. Wang, L. Xu and G. B. Zhao, Astrophys. J. [**849**]{}, no. 2, 84 (2017) \[arXiv:1706.09149 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. B. P. Abbott [*et al.*]{} \[LIGO Scientific and Virgo and 1M2H and Dark Energy Camera GW-E and DES and DLT40 and Las Cumbres Observatory and VINROUGE and MASTER Collaborations\], Nature [**551**]{}, no. 7678, 85 (2017) \[arXiv:1710.05835 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. G. E. Addison, D. J. Watts, C. L. Bennett, M. Halpern, G. Hinshaw and J. L. Weiland, Astrophys. J. [**853**]{}, no. 2, 119 (2018) \[arXiv:1707.06547 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
V. C. Busti, C. Clarkson and M. Seikel, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**441**]{}, 11 (2014) \[arXiv:1402.5429 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. D. Wang and X. H. Meng, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. [**60**]{}, no. 11, 110411 (2017) \[arXiv:1610.01202 \[gr-qc\]\]. H. Yu, B. Ratra and F. Y. Wang, Astrophys. J. [**856**]{}, no. 1, 3 (2018) \[arXiv:1711.03437 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. A. G車mez-Valent and L. Amendola, JCAP [**1804**]{}, no. 04, 051 (2018) \[arXiv:1802.01505 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. C. G. Park and B. Ratra, arXiv:1807.07421 \[astro-ph.CO\]. C. G. Park and B. Ratra, arXiv:1809.03598 \[astro-ph.CO\]. H. Miao and Z. Huang, Astrophys. J. [**868**]{}, no. 1, 20 (2018) \[arXiv:1803.07320 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, R. C. Nunes, S. Vagnozzi and D. F. Mota, JCAP [**1809**]{}, no. 09, 019 (2018) \[arXiv:1805.08252 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. W. Yang, A. Mukherjee, E. Di Valentino and S. Pan, arXiv:1809.06883 \[astro-ph.CO\]. W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, E. N. Saridakis and S. Chakraborty, arXiv:1810.05141 \[astro-ph.CO\]. W. L. Freedman, Nat. Astron. [**1**]{}, 0169 (2017) \[arXiv:1706.02739 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. X. Zhang, Q. G. Huang and X. D. Li, arXiv:1801.07403 \[astro-ph.CO\].
F. Beutler [*et al.*]{}, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**416**]{}, 3017 (2011) \[arXiv:1106.3366 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. A. J. Ross, L. Samushia, C. Howlett, W. J. Percival, A. Burden and M. Manera, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**449**]{}, no. 1, 835 (2015) \[arXiv:1409.3242 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. Y. Wang [*et al.*]{} \[BOSS Collaboration\], Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**469**]{}, no. 3, 3762 (2017) \[arXiv:1607.03154 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. M. Ata [*et al.*]{}, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**473**]{}, no. 4, 4773 (2018) \[arXiv:1705.06373 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
A. Lewis and S. Bridle, Phys. Rev. D [**66**]{}, 103511 (2002) \[astro-ph/0205436\].
T. M. C. Abbott [*et al.*]{} \[DES Collaboration\], arXiv:1811.02374 \[astro-ph.CO\]. D. Brout [*et al.*]{} \[DES Collaboration\], arXiv:1811.02377 \[astro-ph.CO\]. P. A. R. Ade [*et al.*]{} \[BICEP2 and Keck Array Collaborations\], \[arXiv:1810.05216 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. L. Chen, Q. G. Huang and K. Wang, arXiv:1808.05724 \[astro-ph.CO\]. L. Chen, Q. G. Huang and K. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C [**77**]{}, no. 11, 762 (2017) \[arXiv:1707.02742 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. Q. G. Huang, K. Wang and S. Wang, JCAP [**1512**]{}, no. 12, 022 (2015) \[arXiv:1509.00969 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
[^1]: [email protected]
[^2]: [email protected]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
\#1[[$\backslash$\#1]{}]{}
The functional form of the Eliashberg function, $\alpha^2F(\omega)$, in amorphous metals has been the subject of debate for a long time. Experimentally, there is uniform agreement that in amorphous simple metals the low-frequency part of the Eliashberg function is strongly enhanced over what is observed in crystalline materials.[@BergmannR] The functional form at low frequencies, although difficult to determine experimentally, is usually found to be linear.[@transitionmetals] This experimental observation has given rise to a substantial theoretical debate. Bergmann[@Bergmann71] and many others[@linear] argued that a disorder enhancement of the electron-phonon coupling leads to a linear low-frequency behavior of the Eliashberg function, in accord with experiment. This was disputed by Schmid [@Schmid73] and by Keck and Schmid[@KeckSchmid], who claimed that this disorder enhancement was spurious, and due to an incorrect application of the Fröhlich model to disordered materials. Schmid’s calculation gave instead $\alpha^2F(\omega\rightarrow 0)\sim\omega^3$, in disagreement with experiment. The $\omega^3$ result was also confirmed by others.[@Eisenriegler] Since different models and different calculational methods had been used by these various authors, the theoretical problem was widely considered unsolved for a long time. This disagreement was finally settled by Reizer and Sergeyev,[@ReizerSerg] who explicitly pointed out the errors in Ref. and showed that a correct calculation leads to Schmid’s result independent of the model and the method used. This led to the unsatisfying situation that a theoretically credible result, viz. Schmid’s $\alpha^2F(\omega\rightarrow 0)\sim\omega^3$, disagreed with experiment, while incorrect arguments led to $\alpha^2F(\omega\rightarrow 0)\sim\omega$ in agreement with the experimental observations. This situation was summarized by one of us,[@DB] who also argued that no existing comparison between theory and experiment had been careful and accurate enough to really rule out Schmid’s result. However, recent experiments by Watson and Naugle have shown that Schmid’s result is not compatible with experiments on amorphous CuSn alloys.[@Naugle]
At this point it is important to distinguish between Schmid’s general theory for the electron-phonon coupling in impure metals, and his and others’ specific model calculations. Since the work of Reizer and Sergeyev showed that Schmid’s general theory is physically correct, the search for reasons behind the discrepancy between his results and experiment should then turn to the model assumptions. On the electronic side the main assumption is that of nearly free electrons. It is hard to see how this could qualitatively fail in simple metals as long as the resistivities are moderate, and the electronic states are effectively three-dimensional. On the phonon side, Schmid assumed undamped Debye phonons, an assumption that is necessary in order to obtain the $\omega^3$-law as the asymptotic low-frequency behavior. As was shown in Ref. , the inclusion of phonon damping by electrons leads to a [*linear*]{} low-frequency asymptotic behavior (albeit with a prefactor that is too small by several orders of magnitude to explain the experimental results), which then crosses over to Schmid’s $\omega^3$-law. The prefactor of the linear term is proportional to the phonon damping. This raises the possibility that very strong phonon damping (which would have to be of other than electronic origin) might lead to a linear term in $\alpha^2F(\omega)$ whose prefactor is large enough to account for the experimental observations.
In order to pursue this last point, let us recall that besides the problems with the Eliashberg function mentioned above, amorphous materials have properties of entirely phononic origin that are hard to understand. In particular the thermal conductivity, $\kappa$, shows an enigmatic behavior. Even though it has been stressed that the thermal conductivity is not understood in any temperature region, the general phenomenology is clear, consistent, and well documented.[@FreemanAnderson; @amorphoussolids] As a function of temperature $T$, the thermal conductivity behaves like $\kappa\sim T^2$ for $T/\Theta\alt 10^{-2}$, with $\Theta$ the Debye temperature. The origin for the phonon scattering in this region is not known for certain. The phenomenological two-level system concept has often been invoked in this context,[@amorphoussolids] but no consensus has ever been reached. For $10^{-2}\alt T/\Theta\alt 10^{-1}$ the thermal conductivity is approximately independent of $T$. This is the so-called plateau region, which is characterized by strong, and strongly frequency dependent, phonon scattering of uncertain origin. Finally, for $T/\Theta\agt 10^{-1}$ the thermal conductivity becomes $T$-dependent again, but it is not even clear whether the heat transport in this region is by phonons, much less what the scattering mechanisms are.
This poor state of physical understanding notwithstanding, the above phenomenology is remarkably universal, and seems to be characteristic of amorphous materials, both insulating,[@FreemanAnderson] and metallic.[@metals] It has been used to deduce the following behavior of the phonon mean-free path, $l_{ph}$, as a function of frequency. For frequencies $\omega\alt 10^{-2} k_B\Theta/\hbar$, $l_{ph}$ is a linear function of frequency. For intermediate frequencies, $10^{-2}\alt\hbar\omega/k_B\Theta
\alt 10^{-1}$, $l_{ph}$ goes as a high power, $n$, of frequency. $n$ has been reported to be at least $4$, and possibly larger. This intermediate frequency regime corresponds to the plateau region in the thermal conductivity. At still higher frequencies, $\omega\agt 10^{-1} k_B\Theta/\hbar$, the phonon mean free path either becomes frequency independent,[@ACAnderson] or is a linear function of frequency again.[@FreemanAnderson]
In this paper we propose a connection between the thermal properties of amorphous materials as described above, and the low-frequency behavior of the Eliashberg function. In particular we show that Anderson’s phenomenological functional form of the phonon mean-free path, if used in Schmid’s theory for the electron-phonon coupling, explains the observed behavior of the Eliashberg function as well as the observed behavior of the thermal transport. Let us start from the expression for the Eliashberg function, based on Schmid’s general theory,[@Schmid73] that was derived in Ref. ,
\[eqs:1\] $$\alpha^2F(\omega) = \frac{1}{2\pi^2 N_F}\sum_{{\bf q},b}\ \alpha_b({\bf q})\
\frac{c_b}{\omega_b^2({\bf q})}\ {\rm Im}\,D_b^R({\bf q},\omega)\quad.
\label{eq:1a}$$ Here $D_b^R({\bf q},\omega)$ is the retarded phonon propagator, whose imaginary part reads, $${\rm Im}\,D_b^R({\bf q},\omega) =
\frac{4\omega\omega_b^2({\bf q})\gamma_b({\bf q})}
{\left(\omega^2 - \omega_b^2({\bf q})\right)^2
+ 4\omega^2\gamma_b^2({\bf q})}
\quad,
\label{eq:1b}$$
where $\gamma({\bf q})$ is the phonon damping coefficient. In writing Eqs. (\[eqs:1\]) we have assumed a free electron model with $N_F$ the electronic density of states per spin at the Fermi level. We have also assumed Debye phonons with one longitudinal and two transverse branches labeled by $b$ ($b=L,T$), speed of sound $c_b$, and dispersion $\omega_b({\bf q}) = c_b q$. $\alpha_b({\bf q})$ in Eq. (\[eq:1a\]) is the electronic contribution to the sound attenuation coefficient, for which we use the standard Pippard result,[@Pippard]
\[eqs:2\] $$\alpha_b({\bf q}) = \kappa_b\,f_b(ql)\quad,
\label{eq:2a}$$ where $\kappa_b = (v_F/c_b)(\rho_e/\rho_{ion})/l$ with $v_F$ the Fermi velocity, $l$ the electronic mean-free path, and $\rho_e$ and $\rho_{ion}$ the electronic and ionic mass density, respectively. The functions $f_{L,T}$ are given by,[@Pippard] $$f_L(x) = \frac{1}{3}\ \frac{x^2\arctan(x)}{x-\arctan(x)}\ -\ 1\quad,
\label{eq:2b}$$ $$f_T(x) = \frac{1}{2x^3}\ \left[2x^3 + 3x - 3(x^2+1)\arctan(x)\right]\quad.
\label{eq:2c}$$
With phonon damping exclusively by electrons, as was assumed in Ref., one has $\gamma_b({\bf q}) = c_b\alpha_b({\bf q})/2$. Here, however, we will consider the possibility of nonelectronic contributions to $\gamma_b({\bf q})$. Accordingly, we write $$\gamma_b({\bf q}) = \tilde\gamma\,c_b\,q_D\,g(q/q_D)\quad,
\label{eq:3}$$ where $q_D$ is the Debye wavenumber, $\tilde\gamma$ is a number, and $g$ is some function that determines the wavenumber or frequency dependence of the phonon damping. The latter we model after Anderson’s proposal,[@ACAnderson] which has been extracted phenomenologically from thermal transport measurements in amorphous materials. Anderson’s model consists of the three distinct regions mentioned above: (1) A low frequency region where the damping is a linear function of frequency, (2) an intermediate region where the damping goes as a large power of the frequency, and (3) a high frequency region where the damping is independent of frequency.[@highfrequencyfootnote] The intermediate region corresponds to the characteristic plateau that is observed in the T-dependent thermal conductivity. We thus model the function $g(x)$ in Eq. (\[eq:3\]) as, $$g(x) = 10^n y\ \frac{x/y + (x/y)^n}{10^n + (x/y)^n}\quad.
\label{eq:4}$$ Here $y$ is the onset of the plateau region in units of the Debye wavenumber, the width of the plateau region has been assumed to be one decade, and $n$ is the power that characterizes the frequency dependence of the phonon mean-free path in the plateau region.
Before we turn to a numerical evaluation of the integral, Eq. (\[eq:1a\]), that determines $\alpha^2F(\omega)$, let us consider the low-frequency behavior analytically. Asymptotically, $\alpha^2F(\omega)\sim\omega/\omega_{\alpha}$, with a slope $\omega_{\alpha}^{-1}$. The latter we estimate for a clean system, i.e. in the limit $l\rightarrow\infty$. In this limit only longitudinal phonons contribute, and we can use the asymptotic form of the function $f_L$ in Eq. (\[eq:2b\]), $f_L(x\rightarrow\infty) = \pi x/6$. Then we obtain, $$\frac{\epsilon_F}{\omega_{\alpha}} = \frac{\tilde\gamma}{6\pi}\
\frac{q_D}{k_F}\ \left(\frac{v_F}{c_L}\right)^3\
\frac{\rho_e}{\rho_{ion}}\
\int_0^1 \frac{dx}{x}\ g(x)\quad.
\label{eq:5}$$ Typical parameter values are $q_D/k_F\approx 1$, $v_F/c_L\approx 10^3$, and $\rho_e/\rho_{ion}\approx 10^{-5}$. For the parameters $y$ and $n$ in Eq. (\[eq:4\]) we take [@ACAnderson] $y\approx 0.02$ and $n\approx 4$. Finally, $\tilde\gamma$ determines the overall scale for the phonon mean-free path $l_{ph}$. A typical value is $l_{ph}\approx 1{\rm cm}$ at a frequency of 1GHz. With $c_L\approx 2\times 10^5 {\rm cm/s}$ this corresponds to $\tilde\gamma\approx 2\times 10^{-4}$. This yields $\epsilon_F/\omega_{\alpha}\approx 1,700$. With a Fermi energy $\epsilon_F\approx 10{\rm eV}$ we obtain $\omega_{\alpha}\approx 6{\rm meV}$. This value for $\omega_{\alpha}$ is of the same order of magnitude as the one typically obtained from tunneling experiments.[@BergmannR; @Naugle]
Now that we have seen that we obtain promising results for $\alpha^2F(\omega\rightarrow 0)$ with reasonable parameter values, let us calculate $\alpha^2F(\omega)$ numerically, and compare quantitatively with experiments. Watson and Naugle[@Naugle] have performed a detailed study of amorphous SnCu. For the stoichiometry ${\rm Sn}_{.87} {\rm Cu}_{.13}$ they quote the following parameter values: $\epsilon_F = 1.54\times 10^{-11}{\rm erg}$, $k_F = 1.59\times 10^8{\rm cm^{-1}}$, $v_F = 1.84\times 10^8{\rm cm/s}$, $l = 9.58\times 10^{-9}{\rm cm}$, $q_D = 1.31\times 10^8{\rm cm^{-1}}$, $c_L =1.6\times 10^5{\rm cm/s}$, $c_T = 8.1\times 10^4{\rm cm/s}$. Of these, the electronic parameters are much better known than the two sound velocities. Using these parameters, as well as $n=5$, $y=0.015$, and $\tilde\gamma=
8.0\times 10^{-5}$, we have calculated $\alpha^2F(\omega)$ for frequencies up to $1.6{\rm meV}$, which was the lower frequency cutoff in the experiment of Ref. . The high frequency behavior resulting from our calculation would not be realistic anyway due to our using a Debye model. The result was shown in Ref. , and was used as low-frequency input in a McMillan-Rowell inversion procedure to obtain $\alpha^2F$ from tunneling data. It is also shown again as the curve labeled $n=5$ in Fig. \[fig:1\]. For the inversion procedure an overall factor multiplying the calculated $\alpha^2F$ was used as a fit parameter. The need for such an overall scale factor is not surprising, given our free electron model. The factor used for the best fit is equivalent to a deviation of the density of states in Eq. (\[eq:1a\]) from its free electron value by 14%. A comparison between the calculated and the measured tunneling density of states then provides a measure of how well the low-frequency input describes the actual system. Watson and Naugle found that our calculated $\alpha^2F$ does very well, although not quite as well as if one assumes a strictly linear low-frequency behavior. It should be stressed that our calculation used strictly the parameters as provided by the experimentalists, some of which are not known very accurately. Since the inversion procedure is quite involved no attempt was made to fine tune the parameters.
This result shows that Schmid’s theory with a phonon damping that accounts for the thermal transport properties characteristic of amorphous metals gives good agreement between the calculated Eliashberg function and tunneling data. In contrast, the same theory with phonon damping by electrons only is not capable of explaining the experimental results.[@Naugle]
In addition to this comparison between theory and experiment, let us demonstrate the effects of some parameter changes on $\alpha^2F$. We consider the four results for $\alpha^2F$ shown in Fig. \[fig:1\]. The curve labeled $n=5$ was obtained with the parameters as given above. The slight bulge in this curve results from the leveling off of the phonon mean-free path at the high-frequency end of the plateau region. This moderates the rapid increase of $\alpha^2F$ at lower frequencies, which is due to the strong frequency dependence of the phonon mean-free path. With a weaker frequency dependence of the phonon mean-free path in the plateau region, i.e. a smaller exponent $n$ in Eq. (\[eq:4\]), the initial slope of $\alpha^2F$ is much smaller, and over the frequency range considered $\alpha^2F$ shows a purely positive curvature. Conversely, a still larger exponent $n$ leads to a purely negative curvature of $\alpha^2F$. This is demonstrated in Fig. \[fig:1\]. The curves with stronger curvature all led to substantially less good agreement with experiment than the one for $n=5$. We have also considered the sensitivity of the result to the ratio of the longitudinal and transverse speeds of sound, which is not known very accurately. We have found only a very weak dependence of the functional form of $\alpha^2 F$ on this ratio in the region $1.8<c_L/c_T<2.5$. Finally, we have changed the damping parameter, $\tilde\gamma$, with all other parameters held fixed. This was found to have a very similar effect to changing $n$, with $\alpha^2 F$ changing from negative to positive curvature as $\tilde\gamma$ is increased, or the phonon mean-free path at a reference frequency is decreased. The effect of changing $\tilde\gamma$ by a factor of ten was roughly equivalent to changing $n$ by one. For instance, with $n=4$ and $\tilde\gamma = 8\times 10^{-4}$ we obtained a curve that was hardly distinguishable from the one for $n=5$ shown in Fig. \[fig:1\]. Generally, we found that with reasonable parameters for simple metals we need $4\alt n\alt 6$ in order for our explanation of the behavior of $\alpha^2 F$ to be viable.
In conclusion, we have shown that Schmid’s theory of electron-phonon coupling in impure metals can account for the observed low-frequency behavior of the Eliashberg function in amorphous simple metals if one assumes a strong phonon damping consistent with the one extracted from measurements of the thermal conductivity. While the physics underlying the strong damping is not known, this observation unifies two seemingly unconnected, and separately mysterious, properties of amorphous materials. It suggests that strong phonon scattering is a very fundamental feature of the amorphous state, and that understanding its origin would explain many different properties of amorphous materials at once.
We would like to thank Don Naugle for rekindling our interest in the present problem, and for numerous discussions. This work was supported by the NSF under grant numbers DMR-92-09879 and DMR-90-19525.
See, e.g., G. Bergmann, Phys. Rep. [**27C**]{}, 159 (1976). It is worth mentioning that the low-frequency enhancement may be absent, and the low-frequency behavior of $\alpha^2F$ smaller than linear, in amorphous transition metals, D. B. Kimhi and T. H. Geballe, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**45**]{}, 1039 (1980). This difference between simple metals and transition metals is not well understood, and needs more experimental attention. For the purpose of our discussion we restrict ourselves to simple metals. G. Bergmann, Phys. Rev. B [**3**]{}, 3797 (1971). H. Takayama, Z. Phys. [**263**]{}, 329 (1973); S.G. Lisitin, Fiz. Nizk. Temp. [**1**]{}, 1516 (1975) \[Sov. J. Low Temp. Phys. [**1**]{}, 728 (1975)\]; S.J. Poon and T.H. Geballe, Phys. Rev. B [**18**]{}, 233 (1978). A. Schmid, Z. Phys. [**259**]{}, 421 (1973). B. Keck and A. Schmid, J. Low Temp. Phys. [**24**]{}, 611 (1976). E. Eisenriegler, Z. Phys. [**258**]{}, 185 (1973); G. Grünewald and K. Scharnberg, Z. Phys. [**268**]{}, 197 (1974); Z. Phys. B [**20**]{}, 61 (1975). M.Yu. Reizer and A.V. Sergeyev, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. [**90**]{}, 1056 (1986) \[Sov. Phys. JETP [**63**]{}, 616 (1986)\]. D. Belitz, Phys. Rev. B [**36**]{}, 2513 (1987). P. W. Watson III and D. G. Naugle, preceding paper, Phys. Rev. B [**xx**]{}, xxx (1995); and private communication. J. J. Freeman and A. C. Anderson, Phys. Rev. B [**34**]{}, 5684 (1986). , edited by W. A. Phillips, Springer (New York 1981). H. v. Löhneysen and F. Steglich, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**39**]{}, 1205 (1977); J. R. Matey and A. C. Anderson, J. Non-Cryst. Solids [**23**]{}, 129 (1977). A. C. Anderson, in [*Amorphous Solids*]{}, Ref. , Fig.5.3. A. B. Pippard, Philos. Mag. [**46**]{}, 1104 (1955). As mentioned before, the behavior in the high-frequency region, above the plateau, is uncertain. We have also tried a linear frequency dependence for $l_{ph}$ in this region.[@FreemanAnderson] In our results for $\alpha^2F$ we have found no qualitative differences between this assumption and the one of a frequency independent $l_{ph}$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'A Faraday rotation experiment can set limits on the magnetic moment of a electrically-neutral, dark-matter particle, and the limits increase in stringency as the candidate-particle mass decreases. Consequently, if we assume the dark-matter particle to be a thermal relic, our most stringent constraints emerge at the keV mass scale. We discuss how such an experiment could be realized and determine the limits on the magnetic moment as a function of mass which follow given demonstrated experimental capacities.'
author:
- Susan Gardner
title: 'Shedding Light on Dark Matter: A Faraday Rotation Experiment to Limit a Dark Magnetic Moment '
---
Introduction
============
Disparate astronomical observations provide compelling evidence for additional, non-luminous matter, or dark matter, in gravitational interactions. The evidence includes the persistence of the galactic rotation curves to distances for which little luminous matter is present [@Faber:1979pp; @rubin], the relative strength and shape of the galaxy-distribution power spectrum at large wave numbers [@galcluster], and the pattern of acoustic oscillations in the power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background [@bao]. The cosmological evidence, in aggregrate, points to the assessment that dark matter comprises some twenty-three percent of the energy density of the universe, with a precision of a few percent [@concord]. Yet we know little about the nature of dark matter — we do not know its mass, its quantum numbers, or even with surety that it is indeed composed of isolated elementary particles. A recent gravitational lensing study does disfavor a modification of gravity in explanation of its effects [@bullet]: we shall assume [@Zhang:2007nk] that dark matter exists and is matter.
We do know other things about dark matter [@olivetasi; @silk]; namely, that it is not hot [@wfd], and that it appears to lack both electric and color charge [@ellis; @echarge; @echargeexp; @echargeastro; @ccharge; @comment]. Here we use temperature, i.e., whether dark matter is “cold” or “hot,” to connote whether dark matter is non-relativistic or relativistic, respectively, at the redshift at which it decouples from matter in the cooling early Universe. For so-called thermal relics, this criterion selects the mass of the dark candidate as well, so that colder particles are heavier. However, alternative production scenarios can exist, and very light particles can also act as cold dark matter, as in the case of the axion [@axioncdm]. Nevertheless, model-dependent constraints do exist on the mass of the candidate particle, and we consider them in Sec. \[masslimit\].
The evidence for dark matter emerges from astrophysical observations of gravitational interactions, but establishing its couplings to Standard Model (SM) particles has proven elusive. Nevertheless, such a quest is of great import, for it is through such means that its mass and quantum numbers can ultimately be determined. Indeed all direct and indirect means of detecting dark matter rely on the notion that it does indeed experience weak or electromagnetic interactions to some degree. Turning to the known particles of the SM for guidance, the neutron shows us that a particle can have both a vanishing electric charge and a significant magnetic moment. Thus we wish to constrain the possibility that dark matter has a small electromagnetic coupling, via its magnetic moment. We review the existing constraints on this possibility in Sec. \[mulimit\].
In this paper we consider a new technique for the direct detection of dark matter, namely, through use of the gyromagnetic Faraday effect [@svg]. Alternatively, this effect can be used to limit a possible magnetic moment $\mu$ of a dark-matter particle of mass $M$. Let us consider how this could work. An electrically neutral medium of particles which possesses a net magnetization in an external magnetic field is circularly birefringent, even if the medium is isotropic. This implies that the propagation speed of light in the medium depends on the state of its circular polarization, so that light prepared in a state of linear polarization will suffer a rotation of the plane of that polarization upon transmission through the medium [@polder; @hogan], as long as it does not travel at right angles to the external magnetic field. We term this the gyromagnetic Faraday effect, after Ref. [@EEbook]. Note that we need not rely on any existing magnetization of the dark matter in order to realize an effect. Rather we imagine a Faraday rotation experiment mounted in a region with a large external magnetic induction $\bm{B}_0$ and dark matter of spin $S$ incident on it in the direction of $\bm{B}_0$. If the value of $\mu B_0$ is larger than the dark matter particle’s kinetic energy in the Earth’s rest frame, then the field region acts as a spin-filter, or longitudinal Stern-Gerlach, device — at least the highest energy spin configuration cannot enter the field region. This technique is used to polarize ultra-cold neutrons (UCNs) in the UCNA experiment at Los Alamos with near 100% efficiency [@Tipton:2000qi]. Thus, viewed in the Earth’s rest frame, the dark matter which sweeps through the field region can possess a net magnetization. If light transits this medium in the direction of the magnetic field, and if we define $k_\pm$ to be the wave number for states with right- ($+$) or left-handed ($-$) circular polarization, then the rotation linearly polarized light suffers in its transit through the medium is given by the angle $\phi = (k_+ - k_-)l/2$, where $l$ is the length of transmission through the medium. If $\phi$ is non-zero once all systematic effects which could mimic the signal are excluded, we have evidence for dark matter with a non-zero magnetic moment.
The direct detection of dark matter with a magnetic moment could be realized in a variety of ways. For example, one could search for anomalous recoil events in scattering from nuclei, in just the manner one searches for spin-independent and spin-dependent dark matter-nucleon interactions [@stodolsky; @Smith:1988kw; @Gaitskell:2004gd]. Indeed, an experimental signal of the latter, from the DAMA experiment [@Bernabei:1996vj], has been interpreted as a limit on a putative dark-matter magnetic moment, namely of $\mu < 1.4\cdot 10^{-4} \mu_N$ for a dark matter candidate of 100 GeV in mass [@Pospelov:2000bq]. In such experiments, however, the light dark-matter candidates we discuss give rise to momentum transfers which are much too small to be detected, even if the channeling effect proposed by Ref. [@channel] and studied in Ref. [@damastudy] is operative for the events studied in the DAMA/LIBRA NaI detector [@Bernabei:2008yi] — note Ref. [@Petriello:2008jj] for further discussion. Alternatively, a dark matter magnetic moment can be found through either nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) or Faraday rotation studies. A NMR signal is typically realized through the detected change in magnetic field incurred through a spin-flip transition of the magnetic-moment-carrying particle, induced by an applied radio frequency. However, very small magnetic fields are more efficiently discovered through magnetoptical studies [@SLR; @BRoptmag]. Thus we focus on the use of Faraday rotation to detect dark matter. Precision optical rotation studies have also been conducted in which the external magnetic field is oriented at right angles to the direction of the propagating light, to the end, e.g., of testing the optical birefringence of the vacuum, or, alternatively, of limiting the photon-axion coupling [@Cameron:1993mr; @Zavattini:2005tm]. Such an experimental configuration does not support a nonzero Faraday effect, yet the empirical parameters used in these studies are useful to us, for we employ them to estimate the limit on the magnetic moment as a function of mass in the set-up we consider.
A great variety of dark matter candidates, consistent with the various astrophysical constraints, exist in the literature [@Roszkowski:2004jc; @dmsag]. Indeed, their masses vary from some $10^{-32}$ to $10^{15}$ GeV, and their interaction cross sections — with nucleons — vary over orders of magnitude as well. Typical direct detection strategies rely on the observation of “anomalous” nuclear recoils [@dmsag; @Smith:1988kw; @Gaitskell:2004gd], so that their sensitivity is typically to candidates of ${\cal O}$(100 GeV) in mass scale. The experiment we suggest is sensitive to a completely different window in parameter space — to dark-matter candidates of crudely ${\cal O}$(1 MeV) or less in mass. Although constraints can be set through cosmological studies [@svg], terrestrial studies are amenable to better control, for the existence of cosmological magnetic fields have not yet been established [@Blasi:1999hu].
Let us conclude our introduction by outlining the sections to follow. We begin by describing, in Secs. \[masslimit\] and \[mulimit\], respectively, the mass and magnetic moment constraints which exist on a light dark-matter candidate with a non-zero magnetic moment. We then proceed to review the gyromagnetic Faraday effect in Sec. \[faraday\] and to describe in concrete terms the experimental limits on $\mu$ one might possibly attain in Sec. \[setup\]. We conclude with a summary in Sec. \[summ\].
Mass Contraints {#masslimit}
===============
In standard Big-Bang cosmology, the nature of dark matter impacts the formation of the large-scale structure of the Universe. In particular, if dark matter is cold and collisionless, then galaxy formation proceeds via a hierarchial clustering, namely, from the merging of small protogalactic clumps, on ever larger scales [@White:1977jf; @fwd; @pancake; @Davis:1985rj]. In contrast, if dark matter is hot, the hierarchy is inverted, so that large protogalactic disks form first, which then clump [@fwd; @pancake]. Galaxies, however, are observed at much larger redshifts than such simulations predict [@fwd; @pancake]. Moreover, observations of particular classes of quasar absorption lines, the so-called damped Lyman-$\alpha$ systems, thought to be the evolutionary progenitors of galaxies today, also favor the former scenario [@DLAS]. It has also been argued that hot dark matter, i.e., most notably, light, massive neutrinos, cannot explain the galactic rotation curves [@tremaine]. However, the cold-dark-matter paradigm does have difficulties in confronting small-scale structure; it yields, in effect, too much clumpiness below the Mpc scale. Warm dark matter has been advocated as a way to alleviate these difficulties [@wdm]. Limits on the mass of warm dark matter emerge from the comparison of the observations of the Lyman-$\alpha$ absorption spectrum with numerical simulations [@viel1; @Seljak:2006qw; @Viel:2006kd; @viel]; the limits depend on the particle considered, and the manner in which it is produced [@petraki], yielding [@viel], at 2$\sigma$, $M \gtrsim 4$ keV for a thermal relic and $M \gtrsim 28$ keV for a massive sterile neutrino [@Dodelson:1993je].
Cosmological constraints also exist on the mass of a dark-matter particle. If the particles annihilate via the weak interaction, then $\sigma_{ann} v$ is parametrically set by ${\cal N}_AG_F^2 M^2$, where $G_F$ is the Fermi constant, ${\cal N}_A$ is a dimensionless factor, and we assume $\sigma_{ann} \propto 1/v$. In this case avoiding a dark-matter abundance in excess of the observed relic density bounds $M$ from below. Indeed, under these conditions the mass of the cold dark-matter particle must exceed ${\cal O}(2\,\hbox{GeV})$ to avoid closing the Universe [@mlimit]. The resulting lower bound on $M$ can be relaxed in different ways. Feng and Kumar [@fengkumar], e.g., have emphasized that the appearance of $G_F$ in $\sigma_{ann} v$ is simply parametric, that $G_F$ can be replaced with $g_{\rm eff}$, and that the effective coupling $g_{\rm eff}$ can be small without having the precise numerical value of $G_F$. Thus if $g_{\rm eff} > G_F$, the bound on $M$ is weakened. Indeed, such considerations permit dark matter candidates which confront the relic density and big-bang nucleosynthesis constraints successfully but yet range from the keV to the TeV scale in mass [@fengkumar; @fengtuyu].
In this paper we consider what empirical constraints can be placed on the magnetic moment of a dark matter particle. This hypothesis gives rise to a new annihilation mechanism, though both a dark matter particle and its antiparticle must be present to realize it. We recall that particles with magnetic moments are invariably described by complex field representations, so that such a particle and its anti-particle are physically distinct — by the CPT theorem we expect the magnetic moments of such particles to differ only in sign. If the particle-antiparticle annihilation is mediated by a magnetic moment interaction, then $\sigma_{ann} v$ is parametrically set by ${\cal N}_A^\prime \alpha^2 {\mu}^2$ with ${\cal N}_A^\prime$ a dimensionless parameter, as long as $M \gtrsim m_e$, the electron mass. The annihilation of still lighter mass dark matter candidates follows a different parametric form. That is, if the particles annihilate to Standard Model particles, then $\sigma_{ann} v$ is suppressed by higher powers of the coupling constant — at least. Alternatively, if they annihilate to “secluded” dark matter particles, note, e.g., Ref. [@kroli], then $\sigma_{ann} v$ is of form ${\cal N}_A^\prime
\alpha \alpha^\prime {\mu}^2$, where $\alpha^\prime$ is the electromagnetic coupling of the secluded particles and ${\cal N}_A^\prime$ is a dimensionless parameter. Generally, we expect the magnetic moment $\mu$ to be of form $\mu=\kappa e \hbar/2M$, where $\kappa$ is the anomalous magnetic moment, so that $\sigma_{ann} v$ scales as $1/M^2$. The presence of an additional annihilation mechanism should make the light dark matter candidates we consider, of ${\cal O}(\hbox{keV})$ scale in mass, say, decouple as matter and not radiation, so that constraints on the number of relativistic degrees of freedom during the epoch of big-bang nucleosynthesis also do not apply. This new annihilation mechanism becomes more effective as the candidate mass grows lighter. Nevertheless it is still possible to saturate the dark-matter density with such a candidate particle, for the efficacy of the annihilation process can be mitigated by a particle-antiparticle excess [@leptonasym; @Sigurdson:2004zp]. Thus the dark matter relic density need not bound the magnetic moment from above. Moreover, we emphasize that dark matter could have multiple components, so that an upper bound on the magnetic moment could also be evaded by diluting the magnetic-moment-carrying particle with other sorts of dark matter. We shall assume these various annihilation mechanisms are effective enough to permit dark matter candidates as light as ${\cal O}(1\,\hbox{keV})$ in mass.
The intensity and morphology of galactic positron emission, as studied by the INTEGRAL satellite [@integral], has prompted much discussion of dark matter candidates with electromagnetic interactions [@boehm; @Beacom:2004pe; @Beacom:2005qv; @Hooper:2007tu; @Hooper:2008im; @Bernabei:2008mv; @fengkumar; @Khalil:2008kp], which are of ${\cal O}$(1 MeV) scale in mass, as well as of other possibilities, as, e.g., in Refs. [@Bertone:2004ek; @Wang:2005cqa; @Finkbeiner:2007kk; @Pospelov:2007xh]. If the pattern of the INTEGRAL spectra are indeed explained by dark matter, then additional constraints follow on its nature. For example [@Beacom:2004pe; @Beacom:2005qv], observational constraints on the diffuse photon flux also impose limits on the mass of the dark-matter candidate $\chi$ through internal bremsstrahlung corrections to the annihilation process $\chi \chi \to e^+ e^-$. Such constraints apply to our scenario as well; the upshot is that the dark particle’s mass is limited to be less than a few MeV [@Beacom:2004pe; @Beacom:2005qv]. In our case internal bremsstrahlung contributions can also be generated by the magnetic-moment-carrying particle. However, we note that soft photon emission via a M1 transition of an isolated magnetic dipole is slow compared to the rate set by the inverse age of the universe, as we discuss in greater detail in Sec. \[faraday\], so that no meaningful limit follows on its magnetic moment. In what follows we consider candidate particles which range from ${\cal O}$(1 keV) to ${\cal O}$(100 MeV) in mass, though our limits are most effective at sub-MeV mass scales.
Magnetic Moment Contraints {#mulimit}
==========================
Various constraints on the magnetic moment of a dark-matter particle for masses in excess of $1$ MeV have been considered in Ref. [@Sigurdson:2004zp]. We review these and more, in order to provide a context for the direct detection experiment we suggest. In the mass window of interest to us, two experimental constraints are important — one comes from precision electroweak measurements [@Sigurdson:2004zp], and the other comes from low-energy $e^+ e^-$ collider data, namely from the process $e^+ e^- \to \nu\bar\nu \gamma$ [@Grotch:1988ac; @Tanimoto:2000am]. This last constrains the magnetic moment of the invisible particle directly and thus offers a constraint on a dark-matter magnetic moment as well. The authors of these studies use data at center-of-mass energies sufficient to produce a $\nu_\tau\bar\nu_\tau$ pair, given accelerator constraints on its mass [@Grotch:1988ac] — this easily includes our mass range of interest. Interpreting their results as a limit on the anomalous magnetic moment of the tau neutrino, the low-energy analyses conclude $\mu_{\nu_\tau} < 4 \cdot 10^{-6}\mu_B$ at 90% CL [@Grotch:1988ac], and $\mu_{\nu_\tau} < 9.1 \cdot 10^{-6}\mu_B$ at 90% CL [@Tanimoto:2000am] from distinct data sets. A more severe limit on the $\nu_\tau$ magnetic moment does exist [@donut]; however, the nature of the $e^+e^-$ limits allows us to interpret them in a manner useful to our current study. For a discussion of how low-energy $e^+ e^-$ collider data can probe particular MeV dark matter models [@boehm], see Ref. [@Borodatchenkova:2005ct].
Precision electroweak measurements also constrain the magnetic moment [@Sigurdson:2004zp]. The quantity $\Delta \hat r$ captures radiative corrections to the relationship between the fine-structure constant $\alpha$, the Fermi constant $G_F$, and the $W^\pm$ and $Z$ masses, $M_W$ and $M_Z$ [@Marciano:1999ih]. The difference between the empirically determined value of $\Delta \hat r$ and that computed in the Standard Model provides a window $\Delta \hat r^{\rm new}$ to which a dark-matter particle can contribute. Following Refs. [@Sigurdson:2004zp; @Profumo:2006im], we assume $\Delta \hat r^{\rm new}$ is given by the vacuum polarization correction to the photon self-energy from a dark-matter particle with a magnetic moment, with no other adjustments. We choose to study the quantity $\Delta \hat r$ as its uncertainty is dominated by that in the running of $\alpha$ [@pdg2006]. Thus we consider [@Marciano:1999ih] $$M_W^2 = \frac{\pi\alpha}{\sqrt{2} G_F}
\frac{1}{{\hat s}_z^2
(1 - \Delta\hat r)} \,,$$ where ${\hat s}_z$ is computed in the $\overline{\hbox{MS}}$ scheme and is $(1 - M_W^2/M_Z^2)$ up to small corrections. To compute $\Delta\hat r^{\rm new}$, we first recall the general form of the electromagnetic vertex with Dirac and Pauli form factors [@peskin], namely, $\Gamma^{\mu}(k+q,k) = \gamma^\mu F_1(q^2)
+ i \sigma^{\mu \nu} q_\nu F_2(q^2)/2M$, where in our case $F_1=0$ and $F_2=\kappa$. Using the conventions of Ref. [@peskin], we introduce the polarization tensor $$i \Pi^{\mu\nu}_{2,tt}(q) =
\kappa^2 e^2 \int \frac{d^4 k}{(2\pi)^4}
\hbox{tr} \left\{
\sigma^{\mu \alpha} \frac{q_\alpha}{2M}
\frac{(\slash{\!\!\!k} + m)}{(k^2 - M^2)}
\sigma^{\nu \beta} \frac{q_\beta}{2M}
\frac{(\slash{\!\!\!k} + \slash{\!\!\!q}
+ m)}{((k + q)^2 - M^2)} \,,
\right\} \,,$$ with $\sigma^{\mu\nu}\equiv i[\gamma^\mu,\gamma^\nu]/2$. Noting $ \Pi^{\mu\nu}_{2,tt}(q) = (q^2 g^{\mu\nu} - q^\mu q^\nu) \Pi_{2,tt}(q^2)$ and $$\Delta \hat r^{\rm new} = \Pi_{2,tt}(M_Z^2) - \Pi_{2,tt}(0) - M_Z^2
\left(\frac{\partial \Pi_{2,tt}(k^2)}{\partial k^2}
\Bigg|_{k^2=0} \right)\,,$$ we use standard techniques [@peskin] to determine $$\Delta \hat r^{\rm new} =
- \frac{\kappa^2 \alpha}{4\pi} \int_0^1 dx
\left\{
\left(1 + \frac{x(1-x) M_Z^2}{M^2}\right) \log
\left( 1 - \frac{x(1-x) M_Z^2}{M^2}\right)
+ \frac{x(1-x) M_Z^2}{M^2}
\right\} \,
\label{rnew1}$$ and, in the limit $a\equiv (M_Z/M)^2 \gg 1$, that [@note] $$\Delta \hat r^{\rm new} \sim - \kappa^2 \frac{\alpha}{4\pi}
\left( \frac{a}{6}\log a - \frac{a}{9} + O(1)\right) \,.
\label{rnew2}$$ With $\Delta \hat r^{\rm new} < 0.0010$ at 95% CL [@pdg2006], we find, e.g., with $M=m_e$, the electron mass, that $|\kappa| < 4.1\cdot 10^{-6}$, whereas if $M=m_e/10$ that $|\kappa| < 3.4\cdot 10^{-6}$ [@svg].
A variety of astrophysical constraints exist on the magnetic moment of the neutrino, and they can be adapted to our current case as well. They emerge, in particular, from the impact of the additional cooling mechanism such would render on stellar evolution and lifetimes and on supernovae [@Raffelt:1990yz; @Heger:2008er]. An additional, albeit somewhat weaker, constraint comes from confronting element abundances with the predictions of big-bang nucleosynthesis, to yield, e.g., $\mu_\nu < 2.9\cdot 10^{-10} \mu_B$ [@Dolgov:2002wy]. These constraints can be significantly weakened by the candidate particle’s mass [@Grotch:1988ac]; the ability to produce particles of ${\cal O}(10 \,\hbox{keV})$ in mass and more in plasma at stellar temperatures is limited. In the case of big-bang nucleosynthesis, the constraints on the magnetic moment of a massive tau neutrino are also weakened, though values as large as $\mu_\nu \sim 10^{-6} \mu_B$ are nevertheless excluded [@Dolgov:2002wy].
The constraints we have considered in this section can be weakened by other means as well. Since they arise from the effects of particle production, the most economical mechanism is compositeness; to include this, we need only include a form factor at each electromagnetic vertex. Thus we replace $\kappa \to \kappa/(1 - {M_Z^2}/{M_c^2})^{2}$, where $M_c$ is the compositeness scale, in our earlier formulae. Thus for $M=m_e/10$ our earlier bound of $|\kappa| < 3.4\cdot 10^{-6}$ [@svg] from $\Delta \hat r$ relaxes to $|\kappa| < 1.5$ if $M_c = 2$ GeV. In this scenario, however, the electrically charged constituents may well give rise to other observable effects. One possibility which avoids this would be to give a known charged particle, such as an electron, a small hidden sector interaction, so that it can help constitute dark matter, though its contribution to $\Delta \hat r$ has already been taken into account. We proceed to consider the manner in which direct constraints can be set on $\mu$.
Gyromagnetic Faraday Effect {#faraday}
===========================
A medium of free electric charges in an external magnetic field is circularly birefringent and gives rise to a Faraday effect [@jackson], as long as the light doe not propagate at right angles to the magnetic field. This effect has long been used in radio astronomy to study the properties of the interstellar medium [@radio]. A Faraday effect can also arise in an electrically neutral medium in an external magnetic field, if the constituents carry magnetic moments and if they are aligned by that magnetic field to give the medium some net magnetization [@polder; @hogan]. We consider the latter possibility exclusively.
To derive the gyromagnetic Faraday effect, we apply a magnetic induction $\bm{B}_0$ in a magnetizable medium with circularly polarized electromagnetic waves propagating parallel to it. The external field induces a magnetization $\bm{{\cal M}}_{\rm tot}$, i.e., a net magnetic moment/volume, where $\bm{{\cal M}}_{\rm tot} =
\bm{{\cal M}}_0 + \bm{{\cal M}}$ and $\bm{{\cal M}}_0$ results from $\bm{B}_0$ alone. The total magnetization of a medium at rest in the laboratory frame obeys the Larmor precession formula $$\frac{ d \bm{{\cal M}}_{\rm tot} }{dt} =
\frac{g\mu_M}{\hbar}
\bm{{\cal M}}_{\rm tot} \times \bm{B}_{\rm tot} \,,
\label{larmor}$$ so that $g\mu_M/\hbar$, noting $\mu_M\equiv e\hbar/2 M$ with $e>0$ for a particle of mass $M$, is the gyromagnetic ratio of the magnetic-moment-carrying particle. We note $\mu= S g \mu_M$, where $S$ is the spin of the particle. The gyromagnetic Faraday effect was first derived for a ferromagnetic material [@polder; @hogan], for which use of the magnetic field $\bm{H}$ is appropriate. Since dark matter is only weakly self-interacting at most, our hypothesized dark matter should be treated as a paramagnetic material — so that we employ the magnetic induction $\mathbf{B}$ throughout, though the use of $\bm{H}$ is also commonplace [@schiff]. Corrections to the Larmor formula result if the medium’s particles move at a significant fraction of the speed of light, or if the particles possess a non-zero electric dipole moment [@Bargmann:1959gz]. We shall neglect the latter possibility and, moreover, shall consider dark-matter candidates for which relativistic effects are ultimately small corrections.
To determine the relativistic corrections to Eq. (\[larmor\]), we first construct the covariant classical equation of motion for a single spin in homogeneous electromagnetic fields. This is germane as we can and indeed do neglect the mutual interactions of the dark-matter particles, so that the magnetization is given by the quantum-mechanical expectation value of the spin operator for a single particle times the number density; and the time evolution of the expectation value is itself described by that of the associated classical equation of motion. The latter, for a charged particle with a spin, is given by the Bargmann-Michel-Telegdi equation [@Bargmann:1959gz]. We cannot use this result directly because no forces act on electrically neutral particles in homogeneous electromagnetic fields, so that no Thomas precession term is present [@rauchwerner]. Nevertheless, well-known treatments [@jackson] can be readily adapted to this case. Requiring $d{\cal U}^\alpha/d\tau = 0$, where ${\cal U}=c\gamma(1,\bm{\beta})$ is the 4-velocity of the particle in the laboratory frame and ${\cal S}$ is its spin, namely ${\cal S}=({\cal S}^0,\bm{{\cal S}})$, we find that $$\frac{d{\cal S}^\alpha}{d\tau}
= \frac{g \mu_M}{\hbar} \left(
F^{\alpha\beta} {\cal S}_\beta +
\frac{U^\alpha}{c^2} \left({\cal S}_\lambda F^{\lambda \mu} U_{\mu}\right)
\right)\,,$$ where $F^{\alpha \beta}$ is the field-strength tensor in SI units and $\tau$ is the proper time of the particle. Thus in the laboratory frame the magnetization evolves as $$\gamma
\frac{d \bm{{\cal M}}_{\rm tot} }{dt} =
\frac{g\mu_M}{\hbar}
\left(
\bm{{\cal M}}_{\rm tot}
\times ({\bm{B}}_{\rm tot} -
\bm{\beta} \times \frac{{\bm{E}}_{\rm tot}}{c})
+ \gamma^2 \bm{\beta}
(\bm{\beta} \times \bm{{\cal M}}_{\rm tot} )\cdot ({\bm{B}}_{\rm tot} -
\bm{\beta} \times \frac{{\bm{E}}_{\rm tot}}{c})
\right)\,,
\label{larmorbeta}$$ where we emphasize $\gamma$ is the Lorentz factor, namely $\gamma\equiv 1/\sqrt{1-\beta^2}$. To proceed, we separate $\bm{B}_{\rm tot}$ and $\bm{E}_{\rm tot}$ as $\bm{B}_{\rm tot}=\bm{B}_0 + \bm{B}$ and $\bm{E}_{\rm tot}=\bm{E}_0 + \bm{E}$, so that $\bm{{\cal M}}_0$ results exclusively from the external electromagnetic fields $\bm{B}_0$ and $\bm{E}_0$. Working to leading order in the small quantities $\bm{{\cal M}}$, $\bm{B}$, and $\bm{E}$, which arise in the presence of electromagnetic radiation, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma
\frac{d \bm{{\cal M}} }{dt} &=&
\frac{g\mu_M}{\hbar}
\Bigg(
\bm{{\cal M}}_0
\times ({\bm{B}}_{0} -
\bm{\beta} \times \frac{{\bm{E}}_{0}}{c}) +
\bm{{\cal M}}
\times ({\bm{B}}_{0} -
\bm{\beta} \times \frac{{\bm{E}}_{0}}{c}) +
\bm{{\cal M}}_0
\times ({\bm{B}} -
\bm{\beta} \times \frac{{\bm{E}}}{c}) \nonumber\\
&&+ \gamma^2 \bm{\beta}
\Big(
(\bm{\beta} \times \bm{{\cal M}}_0)\cdot ({\bm{B}}_{\rm tot} -
\bm{\beta} \times \frac{{\bm{E}}_{\rm tot}}{c})
+
(\bm{\beta} \times \bm{{\cal M}})\cdot ({\bm{B}}_{0} -
\bm{\beta} \times \frac{{\bm{E}}_{0}}{c})
\Big)
\Bigg)\,.
\label{larmorbeta2}\end{aligned}$$ We can consider the evolution of the dark matter magnetization in vacuum, i.e., in the absence of ordinary matter, or in matter. Since the largest external fields we can apply obey ${B}_0 \gg {E}_0/c$ in vacuum, we set $E_0=0$ henceforth. We note, however, that the atomic-scale separation of electric charges in matter permit the opposite limit, ${B}_0 \ll {E}_0/c$, so that the analysis of the magnetization in that case can be altogether distinct. We set this possibility aside for later discussion and continue with the analysis in vacuum. We note that the ability to establish a vacuum relies on the presence of matter with conventional electromagnetic and strong couplings; dark matter is sufficiently weakly interacting that vacuum technology does not affect it. Hence we use “vacuum” to connote the absence of ordinary matter. In this case we apply $\bm{B}_0$ in the $\hat{\bm{x}}$-direction and choose $\bm{\beta}$ to be parallel or antiparallel to $\hat{\bm{x}}$ as well. As we have mentioned, the entry of dark matter into the magnetic field region acts as a spin filter device. The dark matter which does enter the apparatus can thus possess a net magnetization, so that $\bm{{\cal M}}_0$ is in the $\hat{\bm{x}}$-direction[^1]. As a result Eq. (\[larmorbeta2\]) reduces to $$\gamma
\frac{d \bm{{\cal M}} }{dt} =
\frac{g\mu_M}{\hbar}
\left(
\bm{{\cal M}}
\times {\bm{B}}_{0}
+
\bm{{\cal M}}_0
\times ({\bm{B}} -
\bm{\beta} \times \frac{{\bm{E}}}{c})
\right)\,.
\label{larmorvac}$$ Choosing the wave vector $\bm{k}$ of the light in the $\hat{\bm{x}}$-direction as well, we recall $\bm{E} = -c \hat{\bm{x}}\times \bm{B}$ and let $\bm{B}(\bm{x},t) = B_\pm \bm{e}_{\pm}
\exp(i k_\pm x -i \omega t)$, where $\bm{e}_\pm \equiv \hat{\bm{y}} \pm i \hat{\bm{z}}$. We define the polarization state with positive helicity, $\mathbf{e}_+$, to be right-handed, which differs from the convention used in optics. In steady state, we find $\bm{{\cal M}}= {\cal M}_\pm \bm{e}_{\pm}$ and finally that $${\cal M}_\pm = \pm \frac{\omega_M (1+\beta)}{\gamma\omega \pm \omega_B} B_\pm
\equiv \chi_\pm B_\pm \,,
\label{solnvac}$$ where we have chosen $\bm{\beta}=-\beta \hat{\bm{x}}$ and defined $\omega_M\equiv g\mu_M {\cal M}_0/\hbar$ and $\omega_B\equiv g\mu_M B_0/\hbar$. Since $k_\pm =(\omega/c)\sqrt{1 + \chi_\pm}$, we have $$k_\pm = \frac{\omega}{c} \sqrt{1 \pm
\frac{\omega_M(1+\beta)}{\gamma \omega \pm \omega_B}} \,,
\label{kpm}$$ or that $$k_+ - k_- = \frac{\omega_M (1+\beta)}{\gamma c}
\left( 1 + {\cal O}\left(
\frac{\omega_B^2}{\gamma^2\omega^2}\right)\right)\,,
\label{kdiff}$$ where we note for conceivable light sources that $\omega \gg \omega_B, \omega_M$. Physically, the magnetic field associated with the passing electromagnetic wave tugs on the spinning particle in a direction perpendicular to ${\cal M}_0$, prompting it to emit radiation which interferes with the light traveling in the forward direction, generating the birefringence. The Faraday rotation angle $\phi$ is simply $\phi = (k_+ - k_-)l/2$, where $l$ is the total distance travelled by the photon. The quantity $\omega_M$ is signed, so that the sense of the rotation angle determines the sign of $g$. If $\beta=0$, we recover the result of Ref. [@svg], whereas in the extreme relativistic limit, i.e., as $\gamma\to\infty$, $\chi_\pm \to 0$ and thus $\phi$ vanishes as well. The average value of $k_\pm$ is not altered to leading order in small quantities, namely, $$k_{\rm avg} \equiv \frac{1}{2}(k_+ + k_-)
= \frac{\omega}{c}
\left(1
+ {\cal O}\left(\frac{\omega_B \omega_M}{\gamma^2\omega^2}\right)
\right) \,,$$ so that an appreciable Faraday rotation can accrue in the absence of an effect on the average group velocity. Thus far we have considered the Faraday rotation of linearly polarized light consequent to passage a distance $l$ through a medium; practical considerations demand that we determine its properties under reflection as well. If we reverse the direction of the light, Eq. (\[solnvac\]) is unaltered save for the sign of the term in $\beta$. The last does change sign since $\bm{E} = -c \hat{\bm{k}}\times \bm{B}$. Thus if we set $\beta=0$, an initially right-handed circularly polarized wave, e.g., travels both forward [*and*]{} backward with wave number $k_+$, so that the rotation angle accrues coherently under momentum reversal. The additional Faraday rotation associated with the explicit $\beta$-dependent term in Eq. (\[kpm\]), however, cancels under a round-trip transit. Such contrasting behavior is long familiar from the study of birefringence in chiral media [@EEbook], which break macroscopic parity invariance. Similar conclusions have been drawn from an analysis of parity-violating photon–external-field interactions as well [@Hu:2007vx]. Thus the net rotation angle after a round-trip, or after many, of a [*total*]{} travel length $l$ is $$\phi_0 = \frac{\omega_M l}{2\gamma c}
\left( 1 + {\cal O}\left(
\frac{\omega_B^2}{\gamma^2\omega^2}\right)\right)\,.
\label{phi0}$$ Neglecting the ${\cal O}(\omega^{-2})$ corrections and working in the $\beta\to 0$ limit, this becomes simply $$\phi_0 = \frac{g \mu_M {\cal M}_0 l}{2\hbar c}\left(1 + {\cal O}\left(\beta^2
\right)\right)
\,,
\label{phisma}$$ which agrees with the result of the non-relativistic treatment in Ref. [@svg]. For a system at rest in thermal equilibrium, the magnetization ${\cal M}_0$ is a simple function of the applied magnetic field. We recall that for a system of spin $1/2$ particles, e.g., each with magnetic moment $\mu$, the magnetization for a system with number density $n_M$ at temperature $T$ is [@polreview] $${\cal M}_0 = n_M \mu \tanh \left(
\frac{\mu B_0}{k_B T}
\right) \,,
\label{magnet}$$ though it is of little practical relevance to the current circumstance, for the system we consider approaches thermal equilibrium extremely slowly. That is, a dilute gas in an external magnetic field polarizes through spontaneous emission, and the rate $W$ for this process is given by that of a magnetic dipole transition [@sobelman]: $$W = \frac{4}{3\hbar} \left(\frac{\omega}{c}\right)^3 \left(g\mu_M\right)^2 \,,$$ where $\omega = g \mu_M B/\hbar$. Thus even if $\mu_M = \mu_B$, the Bohr magneton, and $B=25$ T, we would have $W \sim 1\cdot 10^{-6}\,\hbox{s}^{-1}$, which is trivial compared to the average rate with which dark matter is expected to transit an experimental apparatus. Although dark matter may possess some primordial magnetization, it is likely so small [@svg] that it is important to realize other means of polarizing it. For the particular geometry we consider, as we have noted, the onset of the magnetic field region acts as a spin filter device. Although this method should yield some net magnetization for any non-zero spin $S$, we explicitly assume a spin $1/2$ candidate in what follows. If the velocity $\bm{v}_M$ of the incoming particles is aligned with the direction of the magnetic field, then particles with $v_M \equiv \beta c < v_{\rm stop}$ can only enter the magnetic field region if their magnetic moment is aligned with it, where $v_{\rm stop}$ is such that $$\frac{1}{2} M v_{\rm stop}^2 = |\mu| B_0 \,.
\label{vstop}$$ We have set any external electric field to zero and have neglected corrections of ${\cal O}(\beta^2)$. The dark matter which does enter the apparatus can thus possess a net magnetization; namely, $${\cal M}_0 = n_M \mu {\cal P}\,,
\label{Mcalc}$$ where ${\cal P}$ is the polarization of the spins. We define ${\cal P}\equiv (N_+ - N_-)/(N_+ + N_-)$, where $N_+$ and $N_-$ are the number of spins pointing in and against the direction of $\bm{B}_0$, respectively. If $\mu \to -\mu$ then ${\cal M}_0\to {\cal M}_0$ just as in Eq. (\[magnet\]). We study the value of ${\cal P}$ as a function $\mu B_0$, $M$, and astrophysical parameters in the next section.
Before proceeding, we return to the notion of studying the Faraday rotation of dark matter passing through ordinary matter. In this regard, we wish to consider matter comprised of atoms with closed electron shells, so that there are no unpaired electrons present to engender a gyromagnetic Faraday effect. The exceptionally large electric fields associated with atoms and nuclei [@fermi] [^2], make it possible for $|\bm{\beta}\times \bm{E}_0|/c$ to exceed presently achievable external magnetic fields [@record]. Such considerations yield significant limits on the neutron electric dipole moment [@purcell], e.g., from neutron-noble gas scattering [@fermi; @rabi]. Returning to Eq. (\[larmorbeta2\]), we choose $\hat{\bm{x}} \parallel \hat{\bm{k}}$ as in previous case, but now choose $\bm{\beta} \perp \hat{\bm{x}}$ so that $\bm{\beta}\times \bm{E}_0$ can also be in the $\hat{\bm{x}}$ direction. Counting $|\bm{\beta}\times \bm{E}_0|/c$ as a parameter of ${\cal O}(1)$ and neglecting terms of ${\cal O}(\beta^2)$ and higher, we have $$\frac{d \bm{{\cal M}} }{dt} =
\frac{g\mu_M}{\hbar}
\left(
-\bm{{\cal M}}
\times \left( {\bm{\beta}}\times \frac{\bm{E}_0}{c} \right)
+
\bm{{\cal M}}_0
\times \left({\bm{B}} -
\bm{\beta} \times \frac{{\bm{E}}}{c}\right)
\right)\,,
\label{larmormed}$$ and the steady-state solution $${\cal M}_\pm = \pm \frac{\omega_M }{\omega \mp \omega_E} B_\pm \,,
\label{solnmed}$$ where $\omega_E\equiv g\mu_M |\bm{\beta}\times \bm{E}_0|/\hbar c$, which yields the rotation angle $$\phi_0 =
\frac{g \mu_M {\cal M}_0 l}{2\hbar c}
\left( 1 + {\cal O}\left(
\frac{\omega_E^2}{\omega^2}\,, \beta^2\right) \right)\,,
\label{phi0mat}$$ irrespective of whether round-trip paths are executed by the light. In this context, then, the effective magnetic field is relevant simply to the value of ${\cal{M}}_0$. Here, too, we need to determine the polarization of the dark matter which penetrates the material. Suppose $\bm{\beta}=\beta \hat{\bm{y}}$ and that it is possible to choose a material for which ${E}_{0\,z} \gg E_{0\,x}$, so that the effective magnetic field is in the $\hat{\bm{x}}$ direction. The force on the dark-matter particle in entering the medium is $\bm{\nabla} (\bm{\mu}\cdot (\bm{\beta}\times \bm{E}_0/c))$; since we can expect the magnitude of $\bm{E}_0$ to depend on $y$, a longitudinal Stern-Gerlach effect is still possible in this geometry. A force in the $z$ direction can engender the more familiar transverse Stern-Gerlach effect, but the increasing diameter of the laser beam as a result of scattering in its passage through the material may make it impossible to exploit this feature. Thus we tentatively conclude that it ought be possible to realize a meaningful Faraday rotation study in matter as well, with potential gains in sensitivity to a possible dark matter magnetic moment. We now return to the vacuum case, to describe how such an experiment can be realized and to estimate the limits on $\mu$ one could possibly obtain.
A Faraday Rotation Experiment {#setup}
=============================
Although the Faraday rotation effect we discuss can be found through correlation studies of the polarization of the cosmic microwave background [@svg], a terrestrial Faraday rotation experiment offers a number of advantages. Current bounds on primordial magnetic fields [@Blasi:1999hu] make any primordial magnetization associated with dark matter small [@svg] and difficult to probe, particularly in experiments executed over terrestrial length scales. However, in this case, as we shall demonstrate, one can apply a very strong magnetic field of known strength, and polarize the dark matter to an appreciable degree. Moreover, as we have seen, the Faraday rotation associated with a magnetic moment accrues coherently under momentum reversal, so that the measurement can be made in a small cavity and yet have a long effective path length. Measurements of very small rotation angles are also possible; the recent PVLAS experiment, for example, was able to achieve sensitivity to rotation angles of ${\cal O}(10^{-8})$ [@Zavattini:2005tm] — this stands in constrast to a sensitivity of ${\cal O}(10^{-4})$ anticipated with the future CMBpol satellite [@planck].
A schematic of the Faraday rotation experiment we propose is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:schem\]. Its ingredients comprise a laser, a linear polarizer, an evacuated optical cavity through which the light makes multiple passes and to which a longitudinal, steady magnetic field has been applied, and an analyzer. The technical requirements of a sensitive Faraday rotation measurement may demand a more sophisticated setup; however, such details are not needed for our estimate of the limit on $\mu$ for a given sensitivity to the rotation angle. We emphasize that since dark matter carries neither electric charge nor suffers strong interactions [@silk], it is unaffected by vacuum pumps and, indeed, can pass into cavities free from ordinary matter. The generic setup we propose, save for the nature of the magnetic field, is common to the PVLAS experiment [@Zavattini:2005tm], which investigated the optical properties of the vacuum, as well. As that experiment was sensitive to extremely small changes in the photon polarization, we adopt it as a reference — we use certain of the parameters chosen in that experiment in order to estimate the achievable bounds on the magnetic moment as a function of the mass of the dark-matter candidate.
![\[fig:schem\] Schematic of the Faraday rotation experiment described in text.](schem2.png)
A remark concerning the orientation of the apparatus in our schematic is in order. In our derivation of Eq. (\[phisma\]) we chose $\hat{\bm{\beta}}=\hat{\bm{x}}$, though our result is of more general validity. That is, if we return to Eq. (\[larmorbeta2\]), setting $\bm{E}_0=0$ and working to ${\cal O}(\beta^2)$, we see that the absence of the ${\cal O}(\beta)$ term in Eq. (\[phisma\]) results from the transformation properties of $\bm{E}$ under momentum reversal — regardless of the direction of $\bm{\beta}$. Consequently, we need not orient the direction of the magnetic field with respect to the dark matter “wind” in any particular way, as we indicate in Fig. \[fig:schem\]. It will turn out, however, that the choice of the orientation of the apparatus with respect to the Earth’s velocity can modify the efficacy of the longitudinal Stern-Gerlach device.
In order to evaluate the sensitivity of the scheme we suggest to a dark matter magnetic moment, we need to make assumptions concerning its local velocity distribution and number density. Both of the latter quantities are relevant to the computation of ${\cal M}_0$ via Eq. (\[Mcalc\]), which gives rise to the rotation angle in Eq. (\[phisma\]). To do this we adopt the “canonical model” [@golwala; @Lewin:1995rx] employed in the analysis of direct detection experiments [@stodolsky; @Smith:1988kw; @Gaitskell:2004gd] for cold dark matter. That is, we assume that the dark matter in our galaxy resides in a non-rotating halo and that the velocity distribution function $f(\bm{v})$ in that halo is that of an isothermal sphere. This assumption is motivated by simplicity. More realistic distributions can affect the expected event rates, as well as their temporal variation [@Green:2002ht; @Green:2003yh; @Fornengo:2003fm]. We note that $\bm{v}=\bm{v}_M + \bm{v}_E$, where $\bm{v}_M$ is the velocity of dark matter relative to the Earth, which we introduced earlier, and $\bm{v}_E$ is the velocity of the Earth relative to the nonrotating halo of the galaxy. The value of $v$ can range up to the galactic escape velocity, roughly $650\,\hbox{km/s}$ [@golwala], though we do not impose this cut-off in what follows, because the normalization of the resulting distribution differs by less than 1% [@Lewin:1995rx]. Thus the form of $f$ is that of a Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution: $$f(\bm{v}_M,\bm{v}_E) =
\frac{1}{\pi^{3/2} v_0^3}
\exp\left(-\frac{(\bm{v}_M + \bm{v}_E)^2}{v_0^2}\right)\,.
\label{maxwell}$$ The velocity $v_0$ is related to the root-mean-square velocity of the distribution; for a galaxy with a flat rotation curve it is argued to be equal to the radial velocity of the galactic disk [@Drukier:1986tm] and thus in practice is taken to be $v_0\approx 220\,\hbox{km/s}$ [@golwala]. The velocity $\bm{v}_E$ is determined by the sum of $$\bm{v}_E= \bm{u}_r + \bm{u}_{s} + \bm{u}_{e} \,,$$ where $\bm{u}_r$ is the velocity of the galactic disk in an inertial reference frame, $\bm{u}_{s}$ is the velocity of the Sun with respect to the galactic disk, and $\bm{u}_{e}$ is the velocity of the Earth about the Sun. Assuming the Milky Way is axisymmetric, $\bm{u}_r$ is fixed by the circular velocity at the Sun’s radius from the galactic center, which is $220\pm 20$ km/s [@Kerr:1986hz; @pdg2008]. In galactic coordinates $(-\hat{\bm{r}},\hat{\bm{l}},\hat{\bm{z}})$ [@Dehnen:1997cq], in km/s, we thus employ [@golwala]: $\bm{u}_r = (0,220,0)$, which follows if the Milky Way is axisymmetric, and $\bm{u}_s = (9,12,7)$. The approximate speed of the Earth about the Sun is 30 km/s, whereas its approximate speed about its axis is 0.5 km/s. We ignore the effects of the Earth’s rotation about its axis in our analysis, as it is no larger than the error in $\bm{u}_s$ [@Dehnen:1997cq; @binney]. Moreover, $\bm{v}_E$ is dominated by motion along the longitudinal coordinate $\hat{\bm{l}}$. Noting this and that the ecliptic is oriented at an angle of roughly $60^\circ$ with respect to the galactic equatorial plane means we can approximate the piece of $\bm{u}_E$ in the longitudinal direction $\hat{\bm{l}}$ as $30 \cos 60^\circ \cos (2\pi((t - 152.5)/365.25))$, to estimate $\bm{v}_E\approx (232 + 15 \cos (2\pi((t - 152.5)/365.25)))
\hat{\bm{l}}$ [@golwala]. We retain this approximation for simplicity, though the presence of the other components of $\bm{v}_E$, as well as a more realistic velocity distribution, are important to an assessment of the event rates, the size and phase of any temporal variations therein, and dark-matter exclusion limits to better than ${\cal O}(100\%)$ [@Green:2002ht; @Copi:2002hm; @Green:2003yh]. We note, too, that more precise determinations of the astronomical inputs also exist [@Dehnen:1997cq; @binney].
Finally, to complete our description of the model, we choose a dark matter mass density of $\rho = 0.3\, \hbox{GeV/cm}^3$ [@golwala]. The currently accepted range for $\rho$ is $0.2 - 0.4\, \hbox{GeV/cm}^3$ [@binneytr; @Jungman:1995df] for a smooth matter distribution with a spherical halo. Models of galaxy formation which relax the smoothness assumption can give rise to local dark matter densities both larger and smaller than this range [@Kamionkowski:2008vw], where we refer to Ref. [@Ellis:2008hf] for a succinct summary of the possibilities. Some of the uncertainties in the model we outline can be correlated. For example, an elliptical halo, and concomitant triaxial velocity distribution, can yield somewhat higher local densities [@Gates:1995dw; @Kamionkowski:1997xg]. Unfortunately, direct information on the dark-matter mass density in our solar system is sparse, and observational bounds exceed the estimate we employ by orders of magnitude [@Khriplovich:2006sq; @Khriplovich:2007qt; @Iorio:2006cn; @Sereno:2006mw; @Frere:2007pi; @Xu:2008ep].
To realize a limit on $\mu$, we assert in what follows that dark matter is comprised of a single type of spin $1/2$ particle with fixed $M$ and $\mu$, though we emphasize that the detection of a signal does not require that the particle have spin $1/2$. Our numerical estimate is in two distinct parts. Operating in the canonical model, we first assess the polarization of the dark matter in the magnetic field region as function of $M$ and $\mu$. With this in hand, we can then determine the limit on $|\mu|$ with $M$ which follows from a given limit on the magnitude of the Faraday rotation angle.
We now proceed to estimate the polarization. We assume that the magnetic field is uniform in some direction $\hat{\bm{x}}$. If this is realized in a finite volume, with no magnetic field external to it, then a longitudinal Stern-Gerlach effect exists at each field boundary — i.e., the “wrong” spin state suffers a repulsive force at each surface. In what follows we assume a slab geometry and estimate the polarization resulting from crossing a single interface; we assume the magnetic field is perpendicular to the interface. In this case the polarization condition is on $\bm{v}_M\cdot\hat{\bm{B}}_0 \le v_{\rm stop}$, where $v_{\rm stop}$ is fixed by Eq. (\[vstop\]). Thus the fraction of particles which enter the magnetic field region with 100% polarization is $$f_{\rm pol} = \frac{1}{2} \int d^3v_M \,
f(\bm{v}_M, \bm{v}_E) \Theta ({v}_{\rm stop}
- |\bm{v}_M\cdot \hat{\bm{B}}_0|) \,,
\label{filter}$$ so that its polarization in the magnetic field region is ${\cal P} = ({\rm sgn}\, \mu) f_{\rm pol}/(1 - f_{\rm pol})$, and its number density is $n_M = \rho(1 - f_{\rm pol})/M$. The evaluation of Eq. (\[filter\]) yields two pieces, which are distinguished by whether $|\bm{v}_M|$ is larger or smaller than $v_{\rm stop}$. The term with $|\bm{v}_M|\le v_{\rm stop}$ can be evaluated irrespective of the orientation of the magnetic field region, whereas the term with $|\bm{v}_M|\ge v_{\rm stop}$ depends on the value of $\bm{v}_E \cdot \bm{B}_0$. With Eq. (\[maxwell\]), we see that $f$ is maximized for $\bm{v}_M$ in the neighborhood of $-\bm{v}_E$, so that if $v_{\rm stop} \ll v_E$, the term with $|\bm{v}_M|\ge v_{\rm stop}$ dominates $f_{\rm pol}$, and the relative orientation of $\bm{v}_E$ and $\bm{B}_0$ becomes important. If, moreover, we make $\bm{v}_E\perp \bm{B}_0$, then we can have both $\bm{v}_M = - \bm{v}_E + \bm{\delta}$ and $\bm{v}_M \cdot \hat{\bm{B}}_0 = \bm{\delta}\cdot \hat{\bm{B}}_0$ with $\delta$ small — we expect $f_{\rm pol}$ to be maximized for this geometry. Thus to set a limit on $\mu$ irrespective of the orientation of $\bm{v}_E$ and $\bm{B}_0$, we choose $\bm{v}_E\parallel \hat{\bm{B}}_0$, as this geometry gives the smallest value of $f_{\rm pol}$ for fixed $\mu$ and $M$. Ultimately the assessment of the limit on $\mu$ in a real experiment will depend on the geometry and orientation of the magnetic field, but our procedure should bound from above the limit on $\mu$ to be found from a given sensitivity to the Faraday rotation angle per unit length. In this, we implicitly assume that dark matter is described by a single constituent. In this special case we find $$f_{\rm pol}^\parallel = \frac{1}{4}
\left(
\hbox{erf}\left(\frac{v_{\rm stop} - v_E}{v_0}\right) +
\hbox{erf}\left(\frac{v_{\rm stop} + v_E}{v_0}\right)
\right)
\,.
\label{fpol}$$ Since $\hbox{erf}(z) \to 1$ as $z\to \infty$, $f_{\rm pol}\to 1/2$ as $v_{\rm stop}\to \infty$, as required. The form of Eq. (\[fpol\]) emerges from a partial cancellation of the contributions from the $v_M \le v_{\rm stop}$ and $v_M \ge v_{\rm stop}$ regimes, so that we pause to consider whether the inclusion of an escape velocity in this particular case could modify our results. In this event, the normalization of Eq.(\[filter\]) changes slightly, but negligibly [@Lewin:1995rx], and the integrand accrues a factor of $\Theta(v_{\rm esc} - |\bm{v}_M + \bm{v}_E|)$. For $v_{\rm stop} \ll v_E$, this additional factor does not restrict the region of integration unless $v_M \gtrsim 600$ km/s; finally, we conclude that the continued neglect of $v_{\rm esc}$ is justified. Solving Eq. (\[vstop\]), we find $v_{\rm stop} \approx 4.51 \hbox{km/s}\,\sqrt{\kappa B_0[T]} (m_e/M)$, where $B_0[T]$ is in tesla and $m_e$ is the electron mass. Employing a 7 T magnet, as used in the UCNA experiment [@ucna], though magnets of up to 20 T are commerically available [@oxinst], we find for $M=m_e$ and $\kappa=1$, with $\mu = \kappa \mu_M$, that $v_{\rm stop}\approx 6$ km/s. The polarization fraction $|{\cal P}|$ as a function of day, using $f_{\rm pol}$ from Eq. (\[fpol\]), is shown for various $v_{\rm stop}$ and $v_0$ in Fig. \[fig:pol\]. Day-by-day variations in the polarization exist since $f_{\rm pol}$ grows larger as $|\bm{v}_E|$ decreases. The time variation is more marked for the $\bm{v}_E\parallel \bm{B}_0$ geometry we have chosen, as the precise value of $\bm{v}_E$ impacts the range of velocities which enter the magnetic field region, and, hence, the polarization. For definitenss, we choose day 335 to set limits on $\mu$. The experiment we consider can be sensitive to both annual and daily signal variations, in principle. This follows from the duration of the photon–dark-matter interrogation time, which, in turn, is set by the size and finesse of the cavity in which the experiment is realized. We note that the total travel length $l$ of the laser light in the PVLAS experiment is $l=4.4\cdot 10^6\,\hbox{cm}$ [@Zavattini:2005tm], which corresponds to an interrogation time of ${\cal O} (0.1\,\hbox{msec})$. This admits the possibility of using pulsed magnetic fields, which can be much stronger — as much as 89 T [@NHFML]. Irrespective of this, studies with the magnetic field on and then off are important to establishing a non-zero signal, if it is present.
We now consider how a limit on the magnetic moment follows from our determined polarization and a given sensitivity to the Faraday rotation angle per unit length. For a spin-$1/2$ candidate, the rotation angle of Eq. (\[phi0\]) can be written as $$\phi_0 = {\cal P}\kappa^2 \left( \frac{m_e}{M} \right)^3 \mu_B^2 \frac{n_e l}{\hbar c}
\approx
(6.84 \cdot 10^{-23} \hbox{cm}^2 )n_e[\hbox{cm}^{-3}]l[\hbox{cm}] {\cal P}\kappa^2 \left( \frac{m_e}{M} \right)^3 \,,
\label{phi0num}$$ with $n_e \equiv \rho(1- f_{\rm pol})/m_ec^2$ and ${\cal P}$ from $f_{\rm pol}$ as per Eq. (\[fpol\]). We note, too, that if dark matter were a mixture of particle and antiparticles of the same mass that the rotation angle could cancel, at least in part. We can rewrite Eq. (\[phi0num\]) in terms of a limit on $|\mu|$ by replacing $\kappa m_e/M$ with $\mu [\mu_B]$. The most stringent limits on $|\kappa|$ emerge for $M \ll m_e$. For fixed $M$, its numerical value rests on the ability to determine $\phi_0/l$. In the PVLAS experiment [@Zavattini:2005tm], the error in $\phi_0/l$ is determined to be $0.5 \cdot 10^{-12}$ rad/m. Since $l=4.4\cdot 10^4\,\hbox{m}$, $\phi_0$ itself is determined to $2.2\cdot 10^{-8}$ rad. Assuming then that $\phi_0/l$ can be determined to $1 \cdot 10^{-12}$ rad/m at 95% confidence interval, we find the limit on $|\kappa|$, or $|\mu|$, as a function of $M$. In Fig. \[fig:limit\] we show the limit on $|\kappa|$ for candidate masses up to 1 MeV, whereas in Fig. \[fig:biglimit\] we show the limit on $|\mu|$ for masses from 1 to 100 MeV. The limits depend on the dark-matter polarization ${\cal P}$ as well. To illustrate the relative importance of ${\cal P}$ and the determination of $\phi_0/l$ to the limit on $|\kappa|$, we show not only how the limits change if $B_0$ is increased from $7$ to $20$ T but also, in Fig. \[fig:fpollimit\], the value of $|{\cal P}|$ associated with each limiting value of $|\kappa|$ in Fig. \[fig:limit\]. The increase in $B_0$ makes little difference at the lightest mass scales we consider, simply because the polarization at these scales is already near unity. Indeed, increasing the value of $B_0$ simply increases the largest value of $M$ for which we can reasonably constrain the value of $|\kappa|$. Our assessment of the polarization as per Eq. (\[fpol\]) is that of a lower bound, yet the polarizations we find are large enough that our upper bounds on $|\kappa|$ are no more than a factor of a few larger than what we would find after a realistic simulation of the geometry and orientation of the magnetic field region. It thus emerges that the limits to be set depend overwhelmingly on the ability to determine $\phi_0/l$. Let us consider then the determination of this quantity and its consequences carefully.
In Figs. (\[fig:limit\]) and (\[fig:biglimit\]) we show how the limits improve as the determination of $\phi_0/l$ improves by orders of magnitude. This can be realized by either increasing $l$ or by bettering the measurement of the rotation angle. We note, in particular, that better determinations of $\phi_0$ are possible [@budker], and indeed that precision polarimetry at the shot-noise limit has been demonstrated [@budkim; @Budker:2002zz]. In this limit the error in $\phi_0$ is set, crudely, by the number of photons counted, $\delta \phi_0 \simeq 1/(2\sqrt{I_o T})$, where $I_0$ is the number of photons per second and $T$ is the measurement time. Assuming a $1$ W laser in the optical regime, so that $E_\gamma \approx 1$ eV, we have $\delta \phi_0 \simeq 2 \cdot 10^{-10}\,
\hbox{rad-s}/\sqrt{T[s]}$ [@budker; @Budker:2002zz]. Moreover, it has been demonstated that the use of squeezed light makes it possible to evade this quantum limit and realize yet more precise polarimetry [@squeeze; @Budker:2002zz]. All this suggests that the significant gains in the determination of $\phi_0/l$ we consider and more are indeed possible. Interestingly, as the determination of $\phi_0/l$ becomes more precise, increasing the value of $B_0$ becomes more important to an improved limit on $|\kappa|$. We note, e.g., that if $M=100$ MeV and $B =89$ T that the polarization fraction associated with the value of $|\mu|$ which follows from a limit of $\phi_0/l$ of $10^{-15}$ rad/m at 95% confidence level is $|{\cal P}| \approx 0.09$.
We have determined the direct limits on $|\mu|$, or $|\kappa|$, which would follow from a non-observation of Faraday rotation at a given sensitivity. As they stand the limits constrain the possibility that the dark-matter particle is a composite built from electromagnetically charged constituents. Significantly more severe limits would be needed to challenge the possibility that a dark-magnetic magnetic moment exists by dint of quantum-loop effects. Thus we wish to consider the prospect of radical improvement in our limits. Improvements can come from bettering the determination of $\phi_0/l$, increasing $B_0$, or, finally, noting Eq. (\[phi0num\]), from increasing the number density $n_e$. The ability to limit the value of $\phi_0/l$ beyond that established by the PVLAS experiment [@Zavattini:2005tm] has already been demonstrated [@budkim; @Budker:2002zz], and the ultimate limit to the determination of $\phi_0/l$ has not yet been established [@squeeze]. Moreover, as discussed in Sec. \[faraday\], mounting the Faraday rotation experiment in matter can yield magnetic fields which are larger by orders of magnitude, and can possibly realize larger values of the dark-matter polarization ${\cal P}$ at fixed $\mu$ and $M$. Figures \[fig:limit\] and \[fig:fpollimit\] give a sense of the outcome as a result of such improvements. Let us now turn to the last possibility.
For the usually assumed Galactic halo density, $n_e$ is only some $600\,\hbox{cm}^{-3}$, so that the number densities associated with warm dark matter are still very low indeed. We wish to consider whether the value of $n_e$ can yield to experimental manipulation. In particular, we would like to increase the dark-matter number density in a particular region of momentum space. At first glance this would seem impossible [@golub], because Liouville’s theorem demands that the density of the phase-space fluid for a system governed by a Hamiltonian is a constant of motion. Yet the Maxwell-Boltzmann velocity distribution we assume, cum gravitational potential, is a solution of Liouville’s equation, so that a modest increase of number density can be realized by reducing the gravitational potential. Significant gains, however, are also possible, if inelastic processes operate, as in this case Liouville’s theorem no longer limits the density. Such considerations are crucial to the construction of superthermal, ultra-cold-neutron sources [@golub]; however, adapting this technology to our current context does not appear to be practical.
Summary {#summ}
=======
A Faraday effect also exists for light transiting a dark medium of electrically neutral particles with non-zero magnetic moments in an external magnetic field [@svg]. We have used this notion to describe a Faraday rotation experiment which can lead to the direct detection of dark matter were it to possess a magnetic moment $\mu$. Alternatively, a null result can be used to limit the magnetic moment of a dark matter particle. The set-up involves an evacuated optical cavity to which an external magnetic field has been applied and through which the light makes multiple passes in the direction of the magnetic field. We assume the dark matter wind in the Earth rest frame sweeps through the apparatus. The size of the Faraday rotation angle is proportional to the magnetization of the dark matter, so that it is important to give the magnetic moments some net alignment. For particles with sufficiently low kinetic energy, the passage into the magnetic field region itself acts as a longitudinal Stern-Gerlach device; the highest energy state in the magnetic field can be barred from entering the apparatus, engendering a net polarization. We note that such a technique has been used to polarize ultra-cold neutrons with near 100% efficiency [@Tipton:2000qi]. Employing the usual assumptions [@golwala] concerning the mass density and velocity distribution of galactic dark matter employed in the analysis of existing direct detection experiments, we have estimated, for fixed astronomical input, the polarization of the dark matter in the magnetic field region as a function of its mass and magnetic moment, as well as of the applied magnetic field. Given a local dark-matter mass density, our limits on $|\mu|$ then follow from the strength of the applied magnetic field $B_0$ and from the ability to measure $\phi_0/l$, the Faraday rotation angle accrued per unit length.
We have studied a range of candidate masses compatible with dark matter as a warm thermal relic, namely, from $1$ keV to $100$ MeV. This window in candidate masses is not accessible via other direct detection techniques and thus is unique to our study. We find the strongest limits on $|\mu|$ emerge at the lightest mass scales we consider. In setting our limits we have employed the specifics of existing, related experiments as far as possible [@Zavattini:2005tm; @Tipton:2000qi], though we note that the possibility of more precise polarimetry has already been demonstrated [@budkim; @Budker:2002zz]. The sensitivity of the limits we obtain are such that they constrain the possibility that dark matter is a composite with a magnetic moment, akin to a stable neutron without its strong interactions. Indeed this analogy has proven useful in adapting technology used to manipulate neutrons to our current case. The technical limits of the polarimetry measurements have not yet been established [@squeeze; @Budker:2002zz], and mounting the experiment in matter with concomitant gains in the applied magnetic field may prove feasible, so that we can ultimately expect better limits on $|\mu|$ than those found in this paper.
[Acknowledgments]{}
===================
I am grateful to Geoff Greene for helpful discussions and particularly for suggesting that dark matter candidates with a magnetic moment could be polarized with a longitudinal Stern-Gerlach device. I thank Dima Budker for helpful comments and correspondence and for bringing Ref. [@SLR] to my attention. I also thank Jeff Nico and Tom Gentile for many tolerant discussions and much encouragement, as well as Bob Golub and Mike Romalis for helpful remarks. I would like to thank the SLAC theory group, the Institute for Nuclear Theory, the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, as well as the Center for Particle Astrophysics and Theoretical Physics at Fermilab, for gracious hospitality and to acknowledge partial support from the U.S. Department of Energy under contract DE–FG02–96ER40989, and from the National Science Foundation under Grant No. NSF PHY05-51164.
[99]{} S. M. Faber and J. S. Gallagher, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. [**17**]{}, 135 (1979). A. Bosma, Astron. J. [**86**]{}, 1825; V. C. Rubin, N. Thonnard, and W. K. . Ford, Astrophys. J. [**238**]{}, 471 (1980); V. C. Rubin, D. Burstein, W. K. . Ford, and N. Thonnard, Astrophys. J. [**289**]{}, 81 (1985); T. S. van Albada and R. Sancisi, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. [**A320**]{}, 447 (1986). For a review, see Y. Sofue and V. Rubin, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. [**39**]{}, 137 (2001). D. J. Eisenstein and W. Hu, Astrophys. J. [**496**]{}, 605 (1998); D. J. Eisenstein [*et al.*]{} \[SDSS Collaboration\], Astrophys. J. [**633**]{}, 560 (2005). For a review, see R. C. Nichol, Gen. Rel. Grav. [**40**]{}, 249 (2008). W. Hu and N. Sugiyama, Astrophys. J. [**444**]{}, 489 (1995); Phys. Rev. D [**51**]{}, 2599 (1995); G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski, A. Kosowsky, and D. N. Spergel, Phys. Rev. D [**54**]{}, 1332 (1996); M. Zaldarriaga, D. N. Spergel, and U. Seljak, Astrophys. J. [**488**]{}, 1 (1997). For a review, see W. Hu and S. Dodelson, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. [**40**]{}, 171 (2002). D. N. Spergel [*et al.*]{} \[WMAP Collaboration\], Astrophys. J. Suppl. [**148**]{}, 175 (2003); M. Tegmark [*et al.*]{} \[SDSS Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. D [**69**]{}, 103501 (2004). D. Clowe, M. Bradac, A. H. Gonzalez, M. Markevitch, S. W. Randall, C. Jones, and D. Zaritsky, Astrophys. J. [**648**]{}, L109 (2006). P. Zhang, M. Liguori, R. Bean, and S. Dodelson, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**99**]{}, 141302 (2007).
K. A. Olive, arXiv:astro-ph/0503065, as well as arXiv:astro-ph/0301505, and references therein. G. Bertone, D. Hooper, and J. Silk, Phys. Rept. [**405**]{}, 279 (2005). S. D. M. White, C. S. Frenk, and M. Davis, Astrophys. J. [**274**]{}, L1 (1983). J. R. Ellis, J. S. Hagelin, D. V. Nanopoulos, K. A. Olive, and M. Srednicki, Nucl. Phys. B [**238**]{}, 453 (1984). See also H. Goldberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**50**]{}, 1419 (1983). B. Holdom, Phys. Lett. B [**178**]{}, 65 (1986); S. Dimopoulos, D. Eichler, R. Esmailzadeh, and G. D. Starkman, Phys. Rev. D [**41**]{}, 2388 (1990) and references therein; A. De Rujula, S. L. Glashow, and U. Sarid, Nucl. Phys. B [**333**]{}, 173 (1990).
P. F. Smith and J. R. J. Bennett, Nucl. Phys. B [**149**]{}, 525 (1979); P. F. Smith, J. R. J. Bennett, G. J. Homer, J. D. Lewin, H. E. Walford, and W. A. Smith, Nucl. Phys. B [**206**]{}, 333 (1982); P. F. Smith, Contemp. Phys. [**29**]{}, 159 (1988) and references therein; T. K. Hemmick [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. D [**41**]{}, 2074 (1990); P. Verkerk, G. Grynberg, B. Pichard, M. Spiro, S. Zylberajch, M. E. Goldberg, and P. Fayet, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**68**]{}, 1116 (1992); T. Yamagata, Y. Takamori, and H. Utsunomiya, Phys. Rev. D [**47**]{}, 1231 (1993); P. Mueller, L. B. Wang, R. J. Holt, Z. T. Lu, T. P. O’Connor, and J. P. Schiffer, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**92**]{}, 022501 (2004). A. Gould, B. T. Draine, R. W. Romani, and S. Nussinov, Phys. Lett. B [**238**]{}, 337 (1990).
J. Rich, R. Rocchia, and M. Spiro, Phys. Lett. B [**194**]{}, 173 (1987); G. D. Starkman, A. Gould, R. Esmailzadeh, and S. Dimopoulos, Phys. Rev. D [**41**]{}, 3594 (1990). The empirical and astrophysical constraints we cite apply to candidate particles of varying mass, but in any event only to candidates with masses in excess of 20 GeV. The non-observation of long-range (Coulombic), dark matter self-interactions [@Spergel:1999mh] can also be interpreted as evidence in favor of the electric neutrality of dark matter.
D. N. Spergel and P. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**84**]{}, 3760 (2000). Note, e.g., P. Sikivie, Lect. Notes Phys. [**741**]{}, 19 (2008), for a review. S. Gardner, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**100**]{}, 041303 (2008). D. Polder, Phil. Mag. [**40**]{}, 99 (1949).
C. L. Hogan, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**25**]{}, 253 (1953). S. J. Orfanidis, http://www.ece.rutgers.edu/$\,\tilde{ }$orfanidi/ewa$\,$.
B. Tipton [*et al.*]{}, AIP Conf. Proc. [**539**]{}, 286 (2000). A. Drukier and L. Stodolsky, Phys. Rev. D [**30**]{}, 2295 (1984). P. F. Smith and J. D. Lewin, Phys. Rept. [**187**]{}, 203 (1990). R. J. Gaitskell, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. [**54**]{}, 315 (2004). R. Bernabei [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Lett. B [**389**]{}, 757 (1996). M. Pospelov and T. ter Veldhuis, Phys. Lett. B [**480**]{}, 181 (2000). E. M. Drobyshevski, arXiv:0706.3095. R. Bernabei [*et al.*]{}, Eur. Phys. J. C [**53**]{}, 205 (2008). R. Bernabei [*et al.*]{} \[DAMA Collaboration\], arXiv:0804.2741 \[astro-ph\]. F. Petriello and K. M. Zurek, arXiv:0806.3989 \[hep-ph\]. I. M. Savukov, S.-K. Lee, and M. V. Romalis, Nature [**442**]{}, 1021 (2006).
D. Budker and M. V. Romalis, “Optical Magnetometry,” Nature Physics [**3**]{}, 227 (2007). R. Cameron [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. D [**47**]{}, 3707 (1993). E. Zavattini [*et al.*]{} \[PVLAS Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**96**]{}, 110406 (2006) \[Erratum-ibid. [**99**]{}, 129901 (2007)\]; Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{}, 032006 (2008). L. Roszkowski, Pramana [**62**]{}, 389 (2004). The Dark Matter Scientific Assessment Group (DMSAG) A Joint Sub-panel of HEPAP and AAAC Report on the Direct Detection and Study of Dark Matter, July 5, 2007, http://www.science.doe.gov/hep/dmsagreportjuly18,2007.pdf$\,$, note Fig. 20. P. Blasi, S. Burles, and A. V. Olinto, Astrophys. J. [**514**]{}, L79 (1999).
S. D. M. White and M. J. Rees, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**183**]{}, 341 (1978). C. S. Frenk, S. D. M. White, and M. Davis, Astrophys. J. [**271**]{}, 417 (1983). J. R. Bond, J. Centrella, A. S. Szalay, and J. Wilson, in [*Formation and Evolution of Galaxies and Large Structures in the Universe*]{}, ed. J. Andouze and J. Tran Thanh Van, (Dordrecht-Reidel 1984), p. 87.
M. Davis, G. Efstathiou, C. S. Frenk, and S. D. M. White, Astrophys. J. [**292**]{}, 371 (1985). G. Kauffmann, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**281**]{}, 475 (1996); J. X. Prochaska and A. M. Wolfe, Astrophys. J. [**487**]{}, 73 (1997); M. Rauch [*et al.*]{}, arXiv:0711.1354 \[astro-ph\] and references therein. S. Tremaine and J. E. Gunn, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**42**]{}, 407 (1979). P. Bode, J. P. Ostriker, and N. Turok, Astrophys. J. [**556**]{}, 93 (2001); B. Moore, T. Quinn, F. Governato, J. Stadel, and G. Lake, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. [**310**]{}, 1147 (1999); V. Avila-Reese, P. Colin, O. Valenzuela, E. D’Onghia, and C. Firmani, Astrophys. J. [**559**]{}, 516 (2001); M. Miranda and A. V. Macci[ò]{}, arXiv:0706.0896v1.
M. Viel, J. Lesgourgues, M. G. Haehnelt, S. Matarrese, and A. Riotto, Phys. Rev. D [**71**]{}, 063534 (2005). U. Seljak, A. Makarov, P. McDonald, and H. Trac, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**97**]{}, 191303 (2006). M. Viel, J. Lesgourgues, M. G. Haehnelt, S. Matarrese, and A. Riotto, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**97**]{}, 071301 (2006). M. Viel, G. D. Becker, J. S. Bolton, M. G. Haehnelt, M. Rauch, and W. L. W. Sargent, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**100**]{}, 041304 (2008). K. Petraki and A. Kusenko, Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{}, 065014 (2008). S. Dodelson and L. M. Widrow, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**72**]{}, 17 (1994). P. Hut, Phys. Lett. B [**69**]{}, 85 (1977); B. W. Lee and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**39**]{}, 165 (1977); M. I. Vysotsky, A. D. Dolgov and Y. B. Zeldovich, JETP Lett. [**26**]{}, 188 (1977) \[Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. [**26**]{}, 200 (1977)\]. J. L. Feng and J. Kumar, arXiv:0803.4196 \[hep-ph\].
J. L. Feng, H. Tu, and H. B. Yu, arXiv:0808.2318 \[hep-ph\]. W. Krolikowski, arXiv:0803.2977 \[hep-ph\]. P. Hut and K. A. Olive, Phys. Lett. B [**87**]{}, 144 (1979); D. V. Nanopoulos, D. Sutherland, and A. Yildiz, Lett. Nuovo Cim. [**28**]{}, 205 (1980).
K. Sigurdson, M. Doran, A. Kurylov, R. R. Caldwell, and M. Kamionkowski, Phys. Rev. D [**70**]{}, 083501 (2004) \[Erratum-ibid. D [**73**]{}, 089903 (2006)\].
J. Knodlseder [*et al.*]{}, Astron. Astrophys. [**441**]{}, 513 (2005); P. Jean [*et al.*]{}, Astron. Astrophys. [**445**]{}, 579 (2006) and references therein.
C. Boehm, D. Hooper, J. Silk, M. Casse, and J. Paul, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**92**]{}, 101301 (2004); C. Boehm, P. Fayet, and J. Silk, Phys. Rev. D [**69**]{}, 101302 (2004); D. Hooper, F. Ferrer, C. Boehm, J. Silk, J. Paul, N. W. Evans, and M. Casse, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**93**]{}, 161302 (2004). Note also C. Boehm, T. A. Ensslin, and J. Silk, J. Phys. G [**30**]{}, 279 (2004); C. Boehm and P. Fayet, Nucl. Phys. B [**683**]{}, 219 (2004). J. F. Beacom, N. F. Bell, and G. Bertone, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**94**]{}, 171301 (2005). J. F. Beacom and H. Yuksel, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**97**]{}, 071102 (2006).
D. Hooper, M. Kaplinghat, L. E. Strigari, and K. M. Zurek, Phys. Rev. D [**76**]{}, 103515 (2007). D. Hooper and K. M. Zurek, Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{}, 087302 (2008). R. Bernabei [*et al.*]{} \[DAMA Collaboration\], arXiv:0802.4336 \[astro-ph\]. S. Khalil and O. Seto, arXiv:0804.0336 \[hep-ph\].
G. Bertone, A. Kusenko, S. Palomares-Ruiz, S. Pascoli, and D. Semikoz, Phys. Lett. B [**636**]{}, 20 (2006).
W. Wang, C. S. J. Pun, and K. S. Cheng, Astron. Astrophys. [**446**]{}, 943 (2006). D. P. Finkbeiner and N. Weiner, Phys. Rev. D [**76**]{}, 083519 (2007); I. Cholis, L. Goodenough, and N. Weiner, arXiv:0802.2922 \[astro-ph\]. M. Pospelov and A. Ritz, Phys. Lett. B [**651**]{}, 208 (2007). H. Grotch and R. W. Robinett, Z. Phys. C [**39**]{}, 553 (1988).
N. Tanimoto, I. Nakano, and M. Sakuda, Phys. Lett. B [**478**]{}, 1 (2000).
R. Schwienhorst [*et al.*]{} \[DONUT Collaboration\], Phys. Lett. B [**513**]{}, 23 (2001).
N. Borodatchenkova, D. Choudhury, and M. Drees, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**96**]{}, 141802 (2006). W. J. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D [**60**]{}, 093006 (1999) and references therein. S. Profumo and K. Sigurdson, Phys. Rev. D [**75**]{}, 023521 (2007). J. Erler and P. Langacker, review in W. M. Yao [*et al.*]{} \[Particle Data Group\], J. Phys. G [**33**]{}, 1 (2006). M. E. Peskin and D. V. Schroeder, [*An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory*]{} (Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA, 1995). Our detailed expressions for $\Delta \hat r^{\rm new}$ in Eqs. (\[rnew1\],\[rnew2\]) disagree with those in Refs. [@Sigurdson:2004zp; @Profumo:2006im], and our numerical limits are more severe, in part because we employ the better known quantity $\Delta \hat r$, rather than $\Delta r$ [@Marciano:1999ih; @pdg2006].
G. G. Raffelt, Phys. Rept. [**198**]{}, 1 (1990). A. Heger, A. Friedland, M. Giannotti, and V. Cirigliano, arXiv:0809.4703 \[astro-ph\] and references therein.
A. D. Dolgov, Phys. Rept. [**370**]{}, 333 (2002) and references therein.
J. D. Jackson, [*Classical Electrodynamics, $3^{\rm rd}$ ed.*]{} (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1999).
B. F. Burke and F. Graham-Smith, [*An Introduction to Radio Astronomy*]{}, Second Edition (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002).
L. I. Schiff, [*Quantum Mechanics, $3^{\rm rd}$ ed.*]{} (McGraw-Hill Companies, New York, 1968).
V. Bargmann, L. Michel, and V. L. Telegdi, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**2**]{}, 435 (1959).
H. Rauch and S. A. Werner, [*Neutron Interferometry: Lessons in Experimental Quantum Mechanics*]{} (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000), p. 74 and references therein. X. P. Hu and Y. Liao, Eur. Phys. J. C [**53**]{}, 635 (2008). A. Abragam, [*The Principles of Nuclear Magnetism*]{} (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1978), p. 2.
I. I. Sobel’man, [*Introduction to the Theory of Atomic Spectra*]{} (Pergamon, Oxford, 1972), p. 331.
E. Fermi and L. Marshall, Phys. Rev. [**72**]{}, 1139 (1947).
Note, e.g., http://www.magnet.fsu.edu/mediacenter/factsheets/records.html$\,.$
E. M. Purcell and N. F. Ramsey, Phys. Rev. [**78**]{}, 807 (1950).
W. W. Havens, I. I. Rabi, and L. J. Rainwater, Phys. Rev. [**72**]{}, 634 (1947).
J. Q. Xia, H. Li, G. B. Zhao, and X. Zhang, arXiv:0708.1111 \[astro-ph\]. S. R. Golwala, http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/preprints/cdms/golwalathesis/$\,.$ J. D. Lewin and P. F. Smith, Astropart. Phys. [**6**]{}, 87 (1996). A. M. Green, Phys. Rev. D [**66**]{}, 083003 (2002). A. M. Green, Phys. Rev. D [**68**]{}, 023004 (2003) \[Erratum-ibid. D [**69**]{}, 109902 (2004)\]. N. Fornengo and S. Scopel, Phys. Lett. B [**576**]{}, 189 (2003). A. K. Drukier, K. Freese, and D. N. Spergel, Phys. Rev. D [**33**]{}, 3495 (1986).
F. J. Kerr and D. Lynden-Bell, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**221**]{}, 1023 (1986). C. Amsler [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Lett. [**B667**]{}, 1 (2008).
W. Dehnen and J. Binney, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**298**]{}, 387 (1998). J. Binney and M. Merrifield, [*Galactic Astronomy*]{} (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1998) p. 30.
C. J. Copi and L. M. Krauss, Phys. Rev. D [**67**]{}, 103507 (2003). J. Binney and S. Tremaine, [*Galactic Dynamics*]{} (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1987) p. 226.
G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski, and K. Griest, Phys. Rept. [**267**]{}, 195 (1996). M. Kamionkowski and S. M. Koushiappas, Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{}, 103509 (2008). J. Ellis, K. A. Olive, and C. Savage, Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{}, 065026 (2008). E. I. Gates, G. Gyuk, and M. S. Turner, Astrophys. J. [**449**]{}, L123 (1995). M. Kamionkowski and A. Kinkhabwala, Phys. Rev. D [**57**]{}, 3256 (1998). I. B. Khriplovich and E. V. Pitjeva, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D [**15**]{}, 615 (2006). I. B. Khriplovich, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D [**16**]{}, 1475 (2007).
L. Iorio, JCAP [**0605**]{}, 002 (2006). M. Sereno and Ph. Jetzer, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**371**]{}, 626 (2006).
J. M. Fr[è]{}re, F. S. Ling, and G. Vertongen, Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{}, 083005 (2008).
X. Xu and E. R. Siegel, arXiv:0806.3767 \[astro-ph\]. M. Makela, H. O. Back, D. Melconian, and B. Plaster, AIP Conf. Proc. [**842**]{}, 808 (2006). Note, e.g., “standard solenoid magnets” at http://www.oxinst.com/$\,$. http://www.magnet.fsu.edu/magnettechnology/research/magnetprojects/index.html$\,$. D. Budker, private communication.
D. Budker, D. F. Kimball, S. M. Rochester, V. V. Yashchuk, and M. Zolotorev, Phys. Rev. A [**62**]{}, 043403 (2000).
D. Budker, W. Gawlik, D. F. Kimball, S. M. Rochester, V. V. Yashchuk, and A. Weis, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**74**]{}, 1153 (2002) and references therein. P. Grangier, R. E. Slusher, B. Yurke, and A. LaPorta, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**59**]{}, 2153 (1987).
R. Golub and J. M. Pendlebury, Rep. Prog. Phys., 439 (1979). Note the discussion on p. 453 in regards to Liouville’s theorem.
[^1]: This follows irrespective of the sign of $g$. For $g{\stackrel{>}{<}}0$, however, the spins preferentially point in the $\pm\hat{\bm{x}}$ direction.
[^2]: In H-atom, e.g., a test charge a Bohr radius away from the proton sees $E/c \approx 2\cdot 10^3$ T.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The quantization of Einstein-Maxwell theory with a cosmological constant is considered. We obtain all logarithmically divergent terms in the one-loop effective action that involve only the background electromagnetic field. This includes Lee-Wick type terms, as well as those responsible for the renormalization group behaviour of the electric charge (or fine structure constant). Of particular interest is the possible gauge condition dependence of the results, and we study this in some detail. We show that the traditional background-field method, that is equivalent to a more traditional Feynman diagram calculation, does result in gauge condition dependent results in general. One resolution of this is to use the Vilkovisky-DeWitt effective action method, and this is presented here. Quantum gravity is shown to lead to a contribution to the running charge not present when the cosmological constant vanishes. This re-opens the possibility, suggested by Robinson and Wilczek, of altering the scaling behaviour of gauge theories at high energies although our result differs. We show the possibility of an ultraviolet fixed point that is linked directly to the cosmological constant.'
author:
- 'David J. Toms'
title: 'Quantum gravity, gauge coupling constants, and the cosmological constant'
---
Introduction
============
Einstein gravity when quantized about a fixed background (for example flat space) is not renormalizable [@tHooftVeltman; @DeservanN1; @DeservanN2; @DeservanN3; @DeserTsaovanN]. The basic reason for this is that the gravitational coupling constant $G$ has units of inverse mass squared in natural ($\hbar=c=1$) units. From the standard quantum field theory point of view this means that when working to higher orders in perturbation theory the degree of divergence of diagrams must increase with the order that one is working to. Naively, we expect a behaviour like $(G\Lambda_c^2)$ to some positive power, where $\Lambda_c$ is a momentum cutoff with the power increasing with the number of loops.
The natural energy scale is set by the Planck mass $M_P=(\hbar c/G)^{1/2}\sim 10^{19}$GeV. Provided that we restrict ourselves to energies $E\ll M_P$ it is expected that an effective field theory treatment of Einstein’s theory is valid. Indeed classical general relativity is well tested, so we know that quantum effects must be very small. The methodology for realizing this is the effective field theory framework. Its application to gravity was emphasized by Donoghue [@Donoghue1; @Donoghue2]. (See [@Burgess] for a comprehensive and readable review.) What is it expected is that any fundamental theory should give the same results as quantization of Einstein’s theory plus matter fields at energies below the Planck scale. We will concentrate on quantization of Einstein-Maxwell theory is an example.
Robinson and Wilczek [@RobWilczek] presented a calculation that claimed quantum gravity could alter the behaviour of running gauge coupling constants in Yang-Mills theory. Their calculation showed that the renormalization group $\beta$-function receives a purely quantum gravitational contribution that tends to render all theories asymptotically free, irrespective of what happens in the absence of gravity. The phenomenological consequences of their calculation were examined in [@Gogoladze], and in addition attracted attention from possible applications [@Huang] to the weak gravity effect [@ArkaniHamed; @Banks]. In view of the potential importance of the Robinson-Wilczek result a number of independent examinations were undertaken.
Doubt was first cast on the Robinson-Wilczek conclusion by Pietrykowski [@Piet] who showed that their result was gauge condition dependent. By choosing a different gauge no quantum gravitational correction to the $\beta$-function was found. Because of the question of gauge condition dependence, a subject that will be studied in depth later in the present paper, we undertook a gauge condition independent calculation [@DJT1] and supported the conclusion of Pietrykowski; in pure Einstein-Maxwell theory the $\beta$-function receives no contribution from quantum gravity. Dimensional regularization [@tHooft3] was used in [@DJT1], and this is only sensitive to logarithmic divergences. Because the quantum gravity calculation of [@RobWilczek] involved quadratic divergences, the role of regularization dependence of the result was studied [@Ebertetal] in Einstein-Yang-Mills theory. By using both a momentum space cut-off, and ensuring gauge invariance by applying the Taylor-Slavnov-Ward-Takahashi identities [@Taylor; @Slavnov; @Ward; @Takahashi], it was shown [@Ebertetal] that the quadratic divergences cancelled and that the result agreed with what was found using dimensional regularization. No purely quantum gravitational contribution to the $\beta$-function was found in agreement with [@Piet; @DJT1]. A further analysis [@TangWu] showed that it was possible to find a regularization scheme that could result in a non-zero gravitational contribution to the $\beta$-function, although the relation with previous work mentioned is unclear at this point. More recent work has examined the applications to Yukawa and $\phi^4$ interactions [@RodSchustnew] (see also [@Perc]) and to higher dimensions [@EbertetalJHEP]. Implications for the Lee-Wick [@LeeWick1; @LeeWick2] mechanism for gravity have also been considered [@Wu1; @Wu2; @RodSchust]. It is also worth noting that a string calculation [@Kiritsis] in a supersymmetric model results in no gravitational correction to the $\beta$-function.
In contrast to the negative results found for pure gravity, we showed [@DJT2] that if a cosmological constant was present, then a non-zero quantum gravitational correction to the $\beta$-function could be obtained, that was different from what Robinson and Wilczek [@RobWilczek] found, but that still tended to result in asymptotic freedom. One purpose of the present paper is to give more details of the calculation described in [@DJT2]. Another is to extend the calculation to the poles in the effective action that involve higher derivatives of the electromagnetic field, including those of the Lee-Wick type. A third is to show that when calculated using traditional background-field methods, or equivalently using standard Feynman rules, the pole terms calculated do depend on the choice of gauge condition. This will be illustrated by explicit calculation below. The gauge condition independent background-field method due to Vilkovisky [@Vilkovisky1; @Vilkovisky2] and DeWitt [@DeWittVD] will be used, and dimensional regularization adopted. This method is outlined in Sec. \[VD\] and applied to Einstein-Maxwell theory in the subsequent sections. We can make a brief comment on quadratic divergences at this stage to justify the use of dimensional regularization. It is possible to show that the quadratic divergences are completely independent of the Vilkovisky-DeWitt correction to the traditional background-field formalism. Thus the quadratic divergences will agree with what is found using a traditional Feynman diagram calculation and cancel as found in [@Ebertetal]. Only logarithmic divergences will survive and these are calculable by dimensional regularization.
The gauge independent effective action\[VD\]
============================================
Introduction\[VD1\]
-------------------
In the quantization of any gauge theory there are two main problems to be addressed. The first is that the results must be invariant under the underlying gauge transformations that define the theory. Within the background-field method this is relatively easy to do [@DeWittDynamical; @Honerkamp; @tHooftgauge; @DeWittQGII; @Boulware]. A classic paper showing how this works in Yang-Mills theory is Abbott’s [@Abbott] calculation of the $\beta$-function to two-loop order. Within a more traditional Feynman diagram calculation, gauge independence is guaranteed by the Slavnov-Taylor-Ward-Takahashi identities satisfied by the various $n$-point functions [@Ward; @Takahashi; @Taylor; @Slavnov]. It is therefore possible to ensure gauge invariance of the calculation, even after regularization.
The second problem that must be overcome concerns the possible dependence of the results on the choice of gauge condition. Within the context of the functional integral approach to the background-field method, the gauge condition must be introduced to avoid over-counting field configurations that are related by gauge transformations in the integration over the space of all fields. This is usually dealt with by the imposition of a gauge condition and the associated ghost fields, the Faddeev-Popov [@FaddeevPopov] method. The choice of gauge condition is arbitrary, and it is at this stage that the dependence on this arbitrary choice can enter the calculation. If we focus on the computation of the effective action using the background-field method, then the effective action can become dependent upon the choice of gauge condition.
An early example that illustrates the dependence of the effective action on the gauge condition is the calculation of the effective potential (a special case of the effective action) in scalar quantum electrodynamics at one-loop order by Dolan and Jackiw [@DolanJackiw1]. The one-loop effective potential was shown to depend explicitly on parameters used to implement the gauge condition. A later computation by Dolan and Jackiw [@DolanJackiw2] showed that the one-loop effective potential computed in the unitary gauge differed from that previously calculated. This gauge condition dependence can affect physically measurable quantities, such as the critical temperature in finite-temperature field theories, so is not a problem that can be ignored. Often the gauge condition independence is obscured in calculations because a convenient choice of gauge condition is made to expedite the calculations, and all trace of the parameters disappears. This does not solve the problem, merely hides it.
A key feature of the background-field method that leads to a possible dependence on the gauge conditions at one-loop order is that it is necessary to expand the field about an arbitrary background field that is not the solution to the classical equations of motion. (After all, one motivation for the use of the effective potential in gauge theories was to study symmetry breaking due to radiative corrections by minimizing the effective potential to determine the ground state [@ColemanWeinberg]. This is not the same as the effective potential evaluated at a classical solution.) It is possible to modify the background-field method as discussed by Nielsen [@Nielsen] for scalar electrodynamics to obtain a result for the effective potential that does not depend on the choice of gauge condition, thereby ensuring that physical consequences of the theory do not depend on this choice. However, another approach is more direct: modify the background-field method at the start to ensure that the effective action is independent of gauge condition. This modification was suggested originally by Vilkovisky [@Vilkovisky1; @Vilkovisky2] and refined by DeWitt [@DeWittVD] to apply to all orders in the loop expansion, and it is this approach that we will adopt here. A brief outline of some of the more important features for the calculations needed in this paper follow in the next section. (A more pedagogical review can be found in [@ParkerTomsbook].)
Vilkovisky-DeWitt effective action\[VDeffectiveaction\]
-------------------------------------------------------
The use of DeWitt’s condensed index notation [@DeWittDynamical] is almost indispensable here. We will consider only bosonic gauge fields denoted by the generic symbol $\varphi^i$. Here $i$ stands for all of the normal gauge indices, spacetime indices, as well as the dependence on the spacetime coordinates. Repeated indices are summed over in the usual way in the Einstein summation convention, but in addition carry an integration over the included spacetime coordinates. Let $S\lbrack\varphi\rbrack$ represent the classical action functional for the theory. We assume that the theory has a gauge invariance that can be described using infinitesimal parameters $\delta\epsilon^\alpha$. (Again $\alpha$ is a condensed index.) We will assume that the infinitesimal gauge transformation can be written as $$\label{VD2.1}
\delta\varphi^i=K^{i}_{\alpha}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack\delta\epsilon^\alpha$$ for some functional $K^{i}_{\alpha}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack$ that can be regarded as the generator of gauge transformations. (We will be more explicit about what $K^{i}_{\alpha}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack$ is in the next subsection.) Invariance of the action functional $S\lbrack\varphi\rbrack$, that is $S\lbrack\varphi+\delta\varphi\rbrack=S\lbrack\varphi\rbrack$ holds to first order in $\delta\epsilon^\alpha$, results in $$\label{VD2.2}
K^{i}_{\alpha}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack S_{,i}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack=0$$ where $S_{,i}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack$ denotes the functional derivative of $S\lbrack\varphi\rbrack$ with respect to $\varphi^i$. Hamilton’s principle of stationary action tells us that $S_{,i}=0$ are the classical equations of motion; thus, (\[VD2.2\]) expresses the fact that these equations are invariant under a gauge transformation.
We have already mentioned the problem of quantization of gauge theories using the integration method over the space of all fields (the Feynman path integral). If we naively integrate over the space of all gauge fields we will include fields as different even though they are physically equivalent under the gauge transformation (\[VD2.1\]). We can think of all fields related by gauge transformations as belonging to the same equivalence class and we wish to integrate in the functional integral only over distinct equivalence classes. The first step in the implementation of this is to introduce a gauge condition (sometimes call the gauge-fixing condition) $$\label{VD2.3}
\chi^\alpha\lbrack\varphi\rbrack=0.$$ We require $\chi^\alpha\lbrack\varphi+\delta\varphi\rbrack=\chi^\alpha\lbrack\varphi\rbrack$ hold only if $\delta\epsilon^\alpha=0$. The consequence of this is that $$\label{VD2.4}
Q^{\alpha}{}_{\beta}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack\delta\epsilon^\beta=0$$ has only the solution $\delta\epsilon^\beta=0$ where we have defined $$\label{VD2.5}
Q^{\alpha}{}_{\beta}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack=\chi^{\alpha}{}_{,i}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack K^{i}_{\beta}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack\;.$$ Provided that $\det Q^{\alpha}{}_{\beta}\ne0$, (\[VD2.4\]) does imply that $\delta\epsilon^\beta=0$ is the only solution as required. ($\det Q^{\alpha}{}_{\beta}$ is the Faddeev-Popov [@FaddeevPopov] factor that we will return to later.) Note also that the gauge condition can depend on the background field, although we will not indicate this dependence explicitly.
The next step in the Vilkovisky-DeWitt effective action relies on assuming that the space of all fields is equipped with a metric tensor $g_{ij}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack$. We can write a line element as usual. In the case of Yang-Mills theory and gravity there are natural choices that do not involve the introduction of dimensional parameters as we will discuss below. (For gravity, the result is the DeWitt metric [@DeWittmetric].) For both gravity and Yang-Mills theory it is possible to show that $K^{i}_{\alpha}\lbrack\varphi\rbrack$ can be viewed as components of a set of vector fields that form a Lie algebra and are Killing vectors for the field space metric $g_{ij}$. (See [@ParkerTomsbook] for details.)
The central part of the Vilkovisky approach is the choice of connection. One way to calculate the appropriate connection is by first considering a general displacement in the space of fields $d\varphi^i$. This will not be generated by a gauge transformation in general, but will be expressible as a linear combination $$\label{VD2.6}
d\varphi^i=\omega_{\parallel}^{i}+\omega_{\perp}^{i},$$ where $$\label{VD2.7}
\omega_{\parallel}^{i}=K^{i}_{\alpha} d\epsilon^\alpha,$$ and $\omega_{\perp}^{i}$ satisfies $$\label{VD2.8}
g_{ij}\omega_{\perp}^{i}\omega_{\parallel}^{j}=0\;.$$ To obtain $\omega_{\perp}^{i}$ we can define a projection operator $$\label{VD2.9}
P^{i}{}_{j}=\delta^{i}_{j}-K^{i}_{\alpha}\gamma^{\alpha\beta}K_{\beta j},$$ where $K_{\beta j}=g_{ji}K^{i}_{\beta}$ as usual, and $\gamma^{\alpha\beta}$ is the inverse of $$\label{VD2.10}
\gamma_{\alpha\beta}=K^{i}_{\alpha}g_{ij}K^{j}_{\beta}.$$ It is easy to verify that $$\label{VD2.11}
P^{i}{}_{j}K^{j}_{\alpha}=0,$$ and that $$\label{VD2.12}
P^{i}{}_{j}P^{j}{}_{k}=P^{i}{}_{k}.$$ Because of (\[VD2.11\]), $P^{i}{}_{j} $ has the property of projecting vectors perpendicular to the generators of gauge transformations. This results in the line element $$\begin{aligned}
ds^2&=&g_{ij}d\varphi^i d\varphi^j\nonumber\\
&=&g^{\perp}_{ij}\omega_{\perp}^{i}\omega_{\perp}^{j}+\gamma_{\alpha\beta}d\epsilon^\alpha d\epsilon^\beta\label{VD2.13}\end{aligned}$$ that exhibits the local product structure with the first term on the right hand side representing the line element on the space of orbits and the second term representing that on the gauge group. In (\[VD2.13\]) we have $$\label{VD2.14}
g^{\perp}_{ij}=P^{k}{}_{i}P^{l}{}_{j}g_{kl}$$ interpreted as the metric on the space of distinct gauge orbits.
Because it is the space of distinct gauge orbits that is integrated over in the Feynman functional integral, the natural choice of connection ${\bar{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}}$ is determined from the requirement that $$\label{VD2.15}
\bar{\nabla}_i g^{\perp}_{jk}=0=g^{\perp}_{jk,i}-\bar{\Gamma}^{l}_{ij}g^{\perp}_{lk} -\bar{\Gamma}^{l}_{ik}g^{\perp}_{jl}.$$ ($\bar{\nabla}_i$ denotes the covariant derivative with respect to the connection.) This leads to $$\label{VD2.16}
\bar{\Gamma}^{l}_{ij}g^{\perp}_{lk}=\frac{1}{2}\left(g^{\perp}_{jk,i}+g^{\perp}_{ki,j} -g^{\perp}_{ij,k}\right).$$ Normally we would introduce the inverse to $g^{\perp}_{lk}$ and multiply both sides of (\[VD2.16\]) by this inverse; however, $g^{\perp}_{lk}$ is not invertible on the full field space since $g^{\perp}_{ij}K^{j}_{\alpha}=0$. Because of this, ${\bar{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}}$ is only determined up to an arbitrary multiple of $K^{k}_{\alpha}$ that vanishes when contracted with $g^{\perp}_{lk}$. It can be shown that ${\bar{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}}$ takes the form $$\label{VD2.17}
{\bar{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}}={{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}}+T^{k}_{ij}+K^{k}_{\alpha}A^{\alpha}_{ij},$$ where ${{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}}$ is the Christoffel connection for the metric $g_{ij}$, $T^{k}_{ij}$ is a complicated expression that involves $g_{ij},\ K^{i}_{\alpha}$ and their first derivatives, and $A^{\alpha}_{ij}$ is completely arbitrary.
At this stage we note that the effective action can be computed in the loop expansion where in place of the normal derivatives that occur we use covariant ones. (That is, a covariant Taylor expansion of the classical action is used.) When this is done, it is possible to show that the terms arising from $A^{\alpha}_{ij}$ in (\[VD2.17\]) vanish as a consequence of gauge invariance; thus, the arbitrariness of the connection is not a problem. Only the Christoffel connection ${{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}}$ and the term $T^{k}_{ij}$ make a contribution to the result.
When we perform the integration over the space of fields, the natural measure follows formally from (\[VD2.13\]) as $$\label{VD2.18}
d\mu\lbrack\varphi\rbrack=\left(\prod_{i}\omega_{\perp}^{i}\right) \left(\prod_{\alpha}d\epsilon^\alpha\right)\left(\det g^{\perp}_{ij}\right)^{1/2}\left(\det\gamma_{\alpha\beta}\right)^{1/2}.$$ As a consequence of Killing’s equation and the anti-symmetric property of the structure constants it is possible to show that $\left(\det g^{\perp}_{ij}\right)^{1/2}$ and $ \left(\det\gamma_{\alpha\beta}\right)^{1/2}$ are both gauge invariant (independent of the gauge parameters $\epsilon^\alpha$). Thus, if we integrate any gauge invariant expression using the measure (\[VD2.18\]) the integration over the gauge group parameters $\epsilon^\alpha$ may be factored out leaving only an integration over the orbit space as required. (By orbit space we mean the full field space factored out by the group of gauge transformations.) Note however that the factor $ \left(\det\gamma_{\alpha\beta}\right)^{1/2}$ remains. This geometric observation [@EKTFP] is the basis of the usual Faddeev-Popov “ansatz” [@FaddeevPopov]. It is now possible show that we can take (with the integration over $\epsilon^\alpha$ dropped but $ \left(\det\gamma_{\alpha\beta}\right)^{1/2}$ kept) $$\label{VD2.19}
d\mu\lbrack\varphi\rbrack=\left(\prod_{i}d\varphi^{i}\right) \left(\det g^{\perp}_{ij}\right)^{1/2} \left(\det Q^{\alpha}{}_{\beta}\right)\delta\lbrack\chi^\alpha\rbrack,$$ since the space of orbits is also fixed by the gauge condition $\chi^\alpha=0$. This corresponds exactly to the usual Faddeev-Popov [@FaddeevPopov] construction.
It is now possible to prove three things about the effective action. The first is that if we define the standard functional integral expression, expressed in a suitably covariant formulation, it does not depend on the choice of field variables $\varphi^i $ that are chosen. The second is that the effective action is a gauge invariant functional of the background field. The third is that the effective action is not dependent on the choice made for the gauge condition. In proving this last property, the Vilkovisky-DeWitt connection (\[VD2.17\]) is essential, and in particular the role of $T^{k}_{ij}$ is crucial. This has been verified explicit calculations [@FradkinTseytlin; @BV; @HKLT].
The basic idea now is to pick a gauge choice, compute all the geometric arsenal described above, and calculate the effective action. Because we are guaranteed that the result does not depend on the choice of gauge condition we can make the calculations simpler by adopting a suitable gauge choice. This choice was called the Landau-DeWitt gauge by Fradkin and Tseytlin [@FradkinTseytlin] and is sometimes called the background field gauge. It begins by expressing the field $$\label{VD2.20}
\varphi^i={\bar{\varphi}}^i+\eta^i$$ where ${\bar{\varphi}}^i$ is the background field. The Landau-DeWitt gauge condition reads $$\label{VD2.21}
\chi_{\alpha}=K_{\alpha i}\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack\eta^i=0.$$
Because of the form taken by $T^{k}_{ij}$ it is possible to show that it makes no contribution to the effective action at one-loop order if the Landau-DeWitt gauge is used. Any other choice of gauge requires the inclusion of $T^{k}_{ij}$. This leads to considerable technical simplifications. Beyond one-loop order this is no longer the case in general. For certain classes of theories, including Yang-Mills theory but not gravity, it is possible to prove that $T^{k}_{ij}$ makes no contribution to the effective action to all orders in the loop expansion for the Landau-DeWitt gauge. Thus the correct gauge invariant and gauge condition independent effective action for Yang-Mills theory can be calculated from the usual formalism provided that we adopt only the Landau-DeWitt gauge; for any other choice of gauge we must use the full Vilkovisky-DeWitt expression [@FradkinTseytlin; @Rebhan; @ParkerTomsbook]. We will only use the Landau-DeWitt gauge condition here.
The aim of this paper is to study only quantum corrections to quantum gravity at one-loop order. This involves an expansion of the classical action in a covariant Taylor series to quadratic order in the quantum field $\eta^i$ defined in (\[VD2.20\]) followed by a Gaussian functional integral. The complication due to the presence of the $\delta$-function in the measure (\[VD2.19\]) can be dealt with by use of the familiar identity $$\label{VD2.22}
\delta\lbrack\chi^\alpha\rbrack=\lim_{\xi\rightarrow0}(4\pi i\xi)^{-1/2}\exp\left(\frac{i}{2\xi}\chi^\alpha\chi_\alpha\right)$$ suitably generalized to the case of functions. The result for the effective action to one-loop order may be taken as $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack&=&S\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack-\ln\det Q_{\alpha\beta}\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack\label{VD2.23}\\
&&+\frac{1}{2}\lim_{\xi\rightarrow0}\ln\det\left(\nabla^i\nabla_j S\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack + \frac{1}{2\xi}K^{i}_{\alpha}\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack K^{\alpha}_{j}\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack\right).\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ We work in the Landau-DeWitt gauge as discussed. Here, $$\label{VD2.24}
\nabla_i\nabla_j S\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack=S_{,ij}\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack - {\bar{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}}S_{,k}\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack$$ gives the covariant derivative computed using the connection (\[VD2.17\]). It should be clear why the arbitrary third term in (\[VD2.17\]) does not matter at one-loop order (since $K^{k}_{\alpha}S_{,k}=0$ is the expression of gauge invariance). It is not immediately obvious that the term $T^{k}_{ij}$ makes no contribution in the Landau-DeWitt gauge but it can be shown not to. (See the pedagogical treatment in [@ParkerTomsbook].) We may therefore replace ${\bar{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}}$ in (\[VD2.24\]) with the Christoffel connection ${{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}}$.
At this stage it should be clear why it is significant to know whether or not we are expanding about a background field that is the solution to the classical equations of motion. If we are, then $S_{,i}=0 $ and the terms in the effective action that arise from the connection vanish. The formalism reduces to the usual one. As we will see, we must not assume that this is the case in what follows. Another observation that can be made is that if the Christoffel connection vanishes, then by adopting the Landau-DeWitt gauge there is no distinction between covariant and ordinary derivatives, and the usual traditional effective action formalism can be used. (This occurs in the case where the metric $g_{ij}$ on the space of fields does not depend on the fields.)
Einstein-Maxwell theory {#EinMax}
=======================
The interest of the present paper is to study the one-loop quantization of Einstein-Maxwell theory as a simple model of a gauge theory coupled to gravity. The classical action functional may be chosen to be $$\label{VD3.1}
S=S_M+S_G,$$ where $$\label{VD3.2}
S_M=\frac{1}{4}\int d^nx|g(x)|^{1/2}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu},$$ is the Maxwell field action, and $$\label{VD3.3}
S_G=-\frac{2}{\kappa^2}\int d^nx |g(x)|^{1/2} (R-2\Lambda),$$ is the gravitational Einstein-Hilbert action with the inclusion of a cosmological constant $\Lambda$. We have defined $$\label{VD3.4}
{\kappa^2}=32\pi G,$$ with $G$ Newton’s gravitational constant, allowed the spacetime dimension to be $n$, and adopted the curvature conventions of [@MTW] but with a Riemannian (as opposed to a Lorentzian) metric chosen. There is no deep significance to be attached to this last choice; it merely avoids factors of $i$.
In Sec. \[VD\] condensed notation has been used with $\varphi^i$ standing for all of the fields. Although convenient for discussing basic formalism, for practical calculations normal notation must be resorted to. We will make the association $$\label{VD3.5}
\varphi^i=\left(g_{\mu\nu}(x),A_{\mu}(x)\right).$$ Here $A_{\mu}$ is the electromagnetic gauge field with the convention $$\label{VD3.6}
F_{\mu\nu}=\partial_{\mu}A_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}A_{\mu}.$$ The Vilkovisky-DeWitt formalism has been set up to be completely covariant. Any choice of field variables ($g^{\mu\nu},A^\mu,|g|^{1/4}g^{\mu\nu}$ etc.) may be made in place of (\[VD3.6\]) without affecting the results. We have merely adopted the simplest, and perhaps most natural, choice here.
The action (\[VD3.1\]) is invariant under combined spacetime coordinate changes and $U(1)$ gauge transformations. If we let $\delta\epsilon^\lambda$ be the infinitesimal parameters describing spacetime coordinate transformations, and $\delta\epsilon$ be the infinitesimal parameter for the $U(1)$ gauge transformation, then the fields (\[VD3.5\]) behave like $$\begin{aligned}
\delta g_{\mu\nu}&=&-\delta\epsilon^\lambda g_{\mu\nu,\lambda}-\delta\epsilon^{\lambda}{}_{,\mu}g_{\lambda\nu} -\delta\epsilon^{\lambda}{}_{,\nu}g_{\mu\lambda}\;,\label{VD3.7}\\
\delta A_\mu&=&-\delta\epsilon^\nu A_{\mu,\nu}-\delta\epsilon^{\nu}{}_{,\mu}A_\nu +\delta\epsilon_{,\mu}\;.\label{VD3.8}\end{aligned}$$ These last two results are represented by $\delta\varphi^i=K^{i}_{\alpha}\delta\epsilon^\alpha$ in condensed notation. (See (\[VD2.1\]).) We will make the condensed index association $\delta\epsilon^\alpha=(\delta\epsilon^\lambda(x),\delta\epsilon(x))$. The indices in (\[VD2.1\]) can be uncondensed by writing $$\begin{aligned}
\delta g_{\mu\nu}(x)&=&\int d^nx'\left\lbrace K^{g_{\mu\nu}(x)}{}_{\lambda}(x,x')\delta\epsilon^\lambda(x') +K^{g_{\mu\nu}(x)}(x,x')\delta\epsilon(x') \right\rbrace,\label{VD3.9}\\
\delta A_{\mu}(x)&=&\int d^nx'\left\lbrace K^{A_{\mu}(x)}{}_{\lambda}(x,x')\delta\epsilon^\lambda(x') +K^{A_{\mu}(x)}(x,x')\delta\epsilon(x') \right\rbrace.\label{VD3.10}\end{aligned}$$ Here we use the actual field as a component label as in [@Kunstatter87]. By comparing (\[VD3.9\]) and (\[VD3.10\]) with (\[VD3.7\]) and (\[VD3.8\]) we can read off $$\begin{aligned}
K^{g_{\mu\nu}(x)}{}_{\lambda}(x,x')&=&-g_{\mu\nu,\lambda}(x)\delta(x,x') -g_{\mu\lambda}(x)\partial_{\nu}\delta(x,x')-g_{\lambda\nu}(x)\partial_{\mu}\delta(x,x'), \label{VD3.11}\\
K^{g_{\mu\nu}(x)}(x,x')&=&0\label{VD3.12}\\
K^{A_{\mu}(x)}{}_{\lambda}(x,x')&=&-A_{\mu,\lambda}(x)\delta(x,x')-A_{\lambda}(x)\partial_{\mu}\delta(x,x'), \label{VD3.13}\\
K^{A_{\mu}(x)}(x,x')&=&\partial_{\mu}\delta(x,x'). \label{VD3.14}\end{aligned}$$ Here $\delta(x,x')$ is the symmetric Dirac $\delta$-distribution defined by $\int d^nx'\delta(x,x')F(x')=F(x)$ for scalar test function $F(x)$. $\delta(x,x')$ transforms like $|g(x')|^{1/2}$ at $x'$ and a scalar at $x$.
The natural line element for the space of fields is $$ds^2=\int d^nx d^nx'\left\lbrace g_{g_{\mu\nu}(x)g_{\lambda\sigma}(x')}dg_{\mu\nu}(x)dg_{\lambda\sigma}(x') +g_{A_{\mu}(x)A_{\nu}(x')}dA_{\mu}(x)dA_{\nu}(x')\right\rbrace\label{VD3.15}$$ where we choose $$g_{g_{\mu\nu}(x)g_{\lambda\sigma}(x')}=\frac{1}{2\kappa^2}|g(x)|^{1/2}\left(g^{\mu\lambda}g^{\nu\sigma} + g^{\mu\sigma}g^{\nu\lambda}-g^{\mu\nu}g^{\lambda\sigma}\right)\delta(x,x'),\label{VD3.16}$$ to be the DeWitt metric [@DeWittmetric], and $$\label{VD3.17}
g_{A_{\mu}(x)A_{\nu}(x')}=|g(x)|^{1/2}g^{\mu\nu}(x)\delta(x,x').$$ The factor of $\kappa^{-2}$ in (\[VD3.16\]) ensures that both terms in (\[VD3.15\]) have the same units and results in $ds^2$ in (\[VD3.15\]) having units of length squared.
Given the metric components in (\[VD3.16\]) and (\[VD3.17\]), the Christoffel connection can be computed. The non-zero components turn out to be $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma^{g_{\lambda\tau}(x)}_{g_{\mu\nu}(x')g_{\rho\sigma}(x'')}&=&\vphantom{|}\left\lbrack-\delta^{(\mu}_{(\lambda}g^{\nu)(\rho} \delta^{\sigma)}_{\tau)}+\frac{1}{4}g^{\mu\nu}\delta^{\rho}_{(\lambda}\delta^{\sigma}_{\tau)} \right.\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{-1cm} -\frac{1}{2(2-n)}\left\lbrace g_{\lambda\tau}g^{\mu(\rho}g^{\sigma)\nu} -\frac{1}{2}g_{\lambda\tau}g^{\mu\nu}g^{\rho\sigma}\right\rbrace\nonumber\\
&&\vphantom{|}\left.\hspace{-1cm}+ \frac{1}{4}g^{\rho\sigma}\delta^{\mu}_{(\lambda}\delta^{\nu}_{\tau)} \right\rbrack \delta(x'',x)\delta(x'',x')\label{VD3.18}\\
\Gamma^{g_{\mu\nu}(x)}_{A_{\lambda}(x')A_{\tau}(x'')}&=& \frac{1}{2}\delta^{(\lambda}_{\mu}\delta^{\tau)}_{\nu} \delta(x,x')\delta(x',x''),\label{VD3.19}\\
\Gamma^{A_{\mu}(x)}_{A_{\nu}(x')g_{\alpha\beta}(x'')} &=& \frac{1}{4}\left(\delta^{\nu}_{\mu}g^{\alpha\beta} -\delta^{\alpha}_{\mu}g^{\nu\beta} -\delta^{\beta}_{\mu}g^{\nu\alpha}\right)\delta(x,x')\delta(x,x'')\label{VD3.20}\\
&=&\Gamma^{A_{\mu}(x)}_{g_{\alpha\beta}(x'')A_{\nu}(x')}.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The round brackets around indices denote a symmetrization over the indices enclosed along with a factor of $1/2$. The Christoffel connection components in (\[VD3.18\]–\[VD3.20\]) will be used to compute the second term of (\[VD2.24\]).
At this stage we may choose a background. If we keep the background metric general then we would be repeating the monumental calculation of [@DeservanN2] using the Vilkovisky-DeWitt formalism. Although this would be interesting and challenging to do, we will focus instead on the quantum gravity corrections to the running value of the electric charge, or fine structure constant, as well as computing the pole terms of the Lee-Wick type. This means that we do not need to consider terms in the effective action that involve the curvature and we will choose the background spacetime to be flat. We therefore choose ${\bar{\varphi}}^i$ to be $$\label{VD3.21}
{\bar{\varphi}}^i=(\delta_{\mu\nu},\bar{A}_{\lambda}(x)),$$ where we keep the background gauge field $\bar{A}_{\lambda}(x)$ general. If we are only interested in the terms in the effective action that can affect the electric charge then we can take the background electromagnetic field $\bar{F}_{\mu\nu}$ to be constant as in our earlier work [@DJT1; @DJT2]; however, this would miss out any poles that involve derivatives of the electromagnetic field that could be of the Lee-Wick type. We do not make any assumptions about $\bar{A}_{\lambda}(x)$ at this stage. An important feature of the background is that it is not a solution to the classical Einstein-Maxwell equations, and therefore the inclusion of the connection term in (\[VD2.24\]) is crucial if the result for the effective action is to be gauge condition independent. We will illustrate that this is so by an explicit calculation showing how a gauge condition dependent result is obtained using the traditional effective action method.
The results for $S_{,i}\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack$ can be computed from appropriate functional derivatives of (\[VD3.1\]–\[VD3.3\]) with respect to $\varphi^i $ in (\[VD3.5\]) followed by setting $\varphi^i = {\bar{\varphi}}^i$ in (\[VD3.21\]). The results are $$\begin{aligned}
\left.\frac{\delta S}{\delta g_{\mu\nu}(x)}\right|_{{\bar{\varphi}}}&=&\frac{2}{\kappa^2}\Lambda\delta^{\mu\nu} +\frac{1}{8}\delta^{\mu\nu}\bar{F}_{\alpha\beta}\bar{F}^{\alpha\beta} -\frac{1}{2}\bar{F}^{\mu}{}_{\lambda}\bar{F}^{\nu\lambda},\label{VD3.22}\\
\left.\frac{\delta S}{\delta A_{\mu}(x)}\right|_{{\bar{\varphi}}}&=& \partial_{\nu}\bar{F}^{\mu\nu}.\label{VD3.23}\end{aligned}$$ The last result (\[VD3.23\]) vanishes if we restrict $\bar{F}_{\mu\nu}$ to be constant, so would not contribute to the charge renormalization, but can contribute to Lee-Wick type terms. The second and third terms of (\[VD3.22\]) are just those involved in the stress-energy-momentum tensor of the electromagnetic field.
It is worth explaining at this stage why we can concentrate on pole terms in the effective action that involve only the electromagnetic field to deduce the charge renormalization. The basic reason is the Ward-Takahashi identity that relates the charge and field renormalization factors. The calculation of Abbott [@Abbott] showed how this works within the background field method. Let $e_B$ and $e_R$ be the bare and renormalized charges respectively. Using dimensional regularization [@tHooft3; @tHooftRG] we have $$\label{VD3.24}
e_B=\ell^{n/2-2}Z_ee_R,$$ where $\ell$ is an arbitrary unit of length (the reciprocal of ‘t Hooft’s [@tHooftRG] unit of mass) and $Z_e$ is the charge renormalization factor. Similarly, let $\bar{A}_{\mu B}$ and $\bar{A}_{\mu R}$ be the bare and renormalized background gauge fields respectively. Then, $$\label{VD3.25}
\bar{A}_{\mu B}=\ell^{2-n/2}Z_A^{1/2}\bar{A}_{\mu R},$$ with $Z_A$ the field renormalization factor. A consequence of the gauge invariant background field method is $$\label{VD3.26}
e_B\bar{A}_{\mu B}=e_R\bar{A}_{\mu R}.$$ (Think of the gauge covariant derivative written in terms of the bare quantities in the bare classical action. This must be rewritten in terms of the renormalized ones in a gauge invariant way.) From (\[VD3.24\]–\[VD3.26\]) we find $$\label{VD3.27}
Z_eZ_A^{1/2}=1,$$ as the Ward-Takahashi identity tells us. The standard ‘t Hooft [@tHooftRG] approach to the renormalization group relates the running value of the charge to the pole terms in $Z_e$. This will be outlined in Sec. \[VD6\]. The identity (\[VD3.27\]) allows us to deduce the pole terms in $Z_e$ from those in $Z_A$, and $Z_A$ is determined by the renormalization of the background gauge field. It is for this reason that we can concentrate on the pole parts of the effective action that involve the background gauge field.
The calculation become simpler to deal with if we re-express the last two terms of the one-loop effective action (\[VD2.23\]) as functional integrals. The $\ln\det Q_{\alpha\beta}$ term can be expressed as an integration over ghost fields, whereas the last term can be written as an integration over the quantum field $\eta^i$ defined in (\[VD2.20\]). We will write $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_G&=&
\frac{1}{2} \ln\det\left\lbrace \nabla^i\nabla_j S\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack +\frac{1}{2\xi}K^{i}_{\alpha}\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack K^{\alpha}_{j}\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack\right\rbrace\nonumber\\
&=&-\ln\int\lbrack d\eta\rbrack\,e^{-S_q}\;,\label{VD3.28}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\label{VD3.29}
S_q=\frac{1}{2}\eta^i\eta^j\left(S_{,ij}-\Gamma^{k}_{ij}S_{,k} +\frac{1}{2\xi}K_{\alpha\,i}K^{\alpha}_{j}\right),$$ with the limit $\xi\rightarrow0$ understood to enforce the Landau-DeWitt gauge condition and all terms evaluated at the background field ${\bar{\varphi}}$ defined in (\[VD3.21\]). The ghost contribution is $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{GH}&=&-\ln\det Q_{\alpha\beta}\nonumber\\
&=&-\ln\int\lbrack d\bar{\eta}d\eta\rbrack e^{-\bar{\eta}_\alpha Q^{\alpha}{}_{\beta}\eta^\beta},\label{VD3.30}\end{aligned}$$ where $\bar{\eta}_\alpha$ and $\eta^\beta$ are anti-commuting ghost fields.
The aim now is to identify terms in the arguments of the exponentials of the functional integrals that depend on the background gauge field, treat these terms interactions, and expand in powers of the interactions up to a given order. Simple power counting shows that there will be poles that involve two, three, or four powers of the background electromagnetic field. The terms with three powers of the field would be expected to vanish because the classical theory is symmetric under $\bar{F}_{\mu\nu}\rightarrow-\bar{F}_{\mu\nu}$, and we will verify that this is the case below. We will first concentrate on the gravity and gauge field contribution in $\Gamma_G$ (\[VD3.28\],\[VD3.29\]) in the next section. The ghost contribution will be studied in the subsequent section.
Gravity and gauge field contribution {#VD4}
====================================
Expansion of the effective action {#effactgauge}
---------------------------------
In evaluating the result for $S_q$ in (\[VD3.29\]) it can be noted initially that the first term, $\frac{1}{2}\eta^i\eta^jS_{,ij}\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}\rbrack$ is just the quadratic term in the Taylor series expansion of $S\lbrack{\bar{\varphi}}+\eta\rbrack$ . This is the term (along with that from the gauge condition) that is present in the traditional effective action. The term that involves the connection is only present in the Vilkovisky-DeWitt approach. In order to trace the effect of including the connection, we will include a parameter $v$ in ${\bar{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}}$ that when set to zero gives us the traditional result, and when set to unity gives us the (correct) Vilkovisky-DeWitt result.
To deal with the gauge-fixing condition it can be noted first that the condensed index expression for the gauge-fixing condition $$\label{VD4.1}
S_{GF}=\frac{1}{4\xi}\eta^i\eta^jK_{\alpha i}K^{\alpha}_{j}=\frac{1}{4\xi}(\chi_\alpha)^2$$ where $\chi_\alpha$ is the Landau-DeWitt gauge condition (\[VD2.21\]). In our case there are two gauge conditions, one for the graviton field, and one for the electromagnetic field. With the gauge transformation generators given in (\[VD3.11\]–\[VD3.14\]) we find the Landau-DeWitt gauge conditions specified by $$\begin{aligned}
\chi_\lambda&=&\frac{2}{\kappa}(\partial^\mu h_{\mu\lambda}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_\lambda h)+\omega(\bar{A}_\lambda \partial^\mu a_\mu+a^\mu\bar{F}_{\mu\lambda}),\label{VD4.2}\\
\chi&=&-\partial^\mu a_\mu,\label{VD4.3}\end{aligned}$$ where we have set $$\label{VD4.4}
\eta^i=(\kappa h_{\mu\nu},a_\mu),$$ so that $$\begin{aligned}
g_{\mu\nu}&=&\delta_{\mu\nu}+\kappa h_{\mu\nu},\label{VD4.5}\\
A_\mu&=&\bar{A}_\mu+a_\mu,\label{VD4.6}\end{aligned}$$ and defined $$\label{VD4.6b}
h=h^{\mu}_{\mu}=\delta^{\mu\nu}h_{\mu\nu}.$$ The factor of $\kappa$ in (\[VD4.5\]) is a standard convenience that removes a factor of $\kappa^{-2}$ present in the Einstein-Hilbert action (\[VD3.3\]) from the quadratic part of the action that defines the propagators. The factor of $\omega $ in (\[VD4.3\]) is included in order to show the gauge condition dependence present in the traditional effective action. $\omega$ should be taken to be unity in the Vilkovisky-DeWitt result. By keeping $\omega $ present we can compare the use of a de Donder (or harmonic) gauge ($\omega = 0 $) with the Landau-DeWitt gauge ($\omega = 1 $).
One important comment is that the formalism of the Vilkovisky-DeWitt effective action ensures that the results are independent of the choice made for $\omega $; however, this will not be shown in the present calculation because we have restricted attention to the Landau-DeWitt gauge for expediency. If we wish to keep $\omega $ general, then the neglect of the terms in the connection denoted by $T^{k}_{ij}$ in (\[VD2.17\]) is not justified; it is the presence of such terms that ensures the result for general $\omega $ agrees with that for $\omega = 1$ in the Landau-DeWitt gauge. It should be possible to show this explicitly, although the calculations will be much more involved than those presented in the present paper and will be given elsewhere.
Another comment worth making is that we can use the gauge condition (\[VD4.3\]) to set the $\partial^\mu a_\mu $ term in (\[VD4.2\]) to zero. (This is true because the gauge conditions appear as $\delta $-functions in the functional integral before they are promoted to exponentials.) We will do this later because it simplifies the calculations, although we will keep it present for the moment. We have checked explicitly that the $\partial^\mu a_\mu $ term in (\[VD4.2\]) makes no contribution to the electromagnetic field renormalization to verify this formal conclusion.
Because we have two gauge conditions we will have two terms arising from uncondensing (\[VD4.1\]). We will call the gauge parameters $\xi $ and $\zeta $ and take $$\label{VD4.7}
S_{GF}=\frac{1}{4\xi}\int d^nx\chi_\lambda^2+\frac{1}{4\zeta}\int d^nx\chi^2.$$ The Landau-DeWitt gauge condition is specified by taking the $\xi\rightarrow0$ and $\zeta\rightarrow0$ limits. We will keep $\xi$ general to show the gauge condition dependence of the traditional background-field result, but take $\zeta\rightarrow0$ to simplify the expressions obtained.
After some calculation the result for $S_q$ in (\[VD3.29\]) can be written as $$\label{VD4.8}
S_q=S_0+S_1+S_2,$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
S_0&=&\int d^nx\left\lbrace-\frac{1}{2}h^{\mu\nu}\Box h_{\mu\nu}+\frac{1}{4}h\Box h+\left(\frac{1}{\kappa^2\xi}-1\right)\left(\partial^\mu h_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_\nu h \right)^2\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\qquad\qquad-\Lambda\left(h^{\mu\nu}h_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}h^2\right) \left\lbrack 1+\frac{v}{2}\left(\frac{n-4}{2-n}\right) \right\rbrack\right.\nonumber\\
&&\qquad\qquad\left.+\frac{1}{2}a_\mu\left(-\delta^{\mu\nu}\Box+\partial^\mu\partial^\nu\right)a_\nu +\frac{1}{4\zeta}\left(\partial^\mu a_\mu\right)^2 -\frac{v}{2}\Lambda\delta^{\mu\nu}a_\mu a_\nu\right\rbrace,\label{VD4.9}\\
S_1&=&\frac{\kappa}{2}\int d^nx\left({\bar{F}}^{\mu\nu}h\partial_\mu a_\nu-2 {\bar{F}}_{\alpha}{}^{\nu}h^{\mu\alpha}\partial_\mu a_\nu +2 {\bar{F}}_{\alpha}{}^{\nu}h^{\mu\alpha}\partial_\nu a_{\mu}\right)\nonumber\\ && -\frac{\kappa v}{4}\int d^nx\left( \delta^{\lambda}_{\sigma}\delta^{\mu\nu} -\delta^{\mu}_{\sigma}\delta^{\lambda\nu}-\delta^{\nu}_{\sigma}\delta^{\lambda\mu} \right)\partial_\tau{\bar{F}}^{\sigma\tau}h_{\mu\nu}a_\lambda\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\omega}{\kappa\xi}\int d^nx\left(\partial^\mu h_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_\nu h\right)\left(\bar{A}^\nu\partial^\lambda a_\lambda+a^\lambda{\bar{F}}_{\lambda}{}^{\nu}\right),\label{VD4.10}\\
S_2&=&\frac{\kappa^2}{4}\int d^nx{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}{\bar{F}}_{\alpha\beta}\left( 2\delta^{\mu\alpha}h^{\nu}_{\lambda}h^{\lambda\beta} +h^{\mu\alpha}h^{\nu\beta}-\delta^{\mu\alpha}hh^{\nu\beta}\right)\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{\kappa^2}{16}\left(1+\frac{v(n-4)}{4-2n}\right)\int d^nx {\bar{F}}_{\alpha\beta}{\bar{F}}^{\alpha\beta}\left(h^{\mu\nu}h_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}h^2\right) \nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\kappa^2 v}{4}\int d^nx \Big( -{\bar{F}}^{\mu}{}_{\gamma}{\bar{F}}^{\sigma\gamma}\delta^{\nu\lambda} + \frac{1}{4} {\bar{F}}^{\lambda}{}_{\gamma}{\bar{F}}^{\sigma\gamma}\delta^{\mu\nu} + \frac{1}{4}{\bar{F}}^{\mu}{}_{\gamma}{\bar{F}}^{\nu\gamma}\delta^{\lambda\sigma}-\frac{1}{2(2-n)} \delta^{\mu\lambda}\delta^{\sigma\nu}{\bar{F}}_{\alpha\beta}{\bar{F}}^{\alpha\beta}\nonumber\\
&& +\frac{1}{4(2-n)} \delta^{\mu\nu}\delta^{\lambda\sigma}{\bar{F}}_{\alpha\beta}{\bar{F}}^{\alpha\beta} \Big)h_{\mu\nu}h_{\lambda\sigma}-\frac{\kappa^2 v}{4}\int d^nx\left(\frac{1}{8}\delta^{\mu\nu}{\bar{F}}_{\alpha\beta}{\bar{F}}^{\alpha\beta}-\frac{1}{2}{\bar{F}}^{\mu}{}_{\lambda}{\bar{F}}^{\nu\lambda} \right)a_\mu a_\nu\nonumber\\
&& +\frac{\omega^2}{4\xi}\int d^nx{\bar{F}}^{\mu}{}_{\lambda}{\bar{F}}^{\nu\lambda}a_\mu a_\nu\label{VD4.11}\end{aligned}$$
In these expressions the subscript $0, 1, 2 $ on $S$ denotes the order in the background gauge field $\bar{A}_\mu$ and we have shown explicitly the Vilkovisky-DeWitt terms with the factor $v$ as described above. The traditional result is obtained using $v= 0$. The spacetime dimension $n$ has been kept general at this stage, although we will be interested ultimately in the limit $n\rightarrow4$. Because our concern here is only with pole terms in the effective action, it can be seen that as $n\rightarrow4$ all terms involving factors of $(n-4)$ , such as occur in (\[VD4.9\]) and (\[VD4.11\]), will not contribute. Another observation is that the Vilkovisky-DeWitt connection leads to a term in $S_0$ that acts like a photon mass if $\Lambda\ne0$.
The graviton and photon propagators follow from $S_0$ in the usual way. The terms in $S_1$ and $S_2$ will be treated as interactions. We can write the photon propagator as $$\label{VD4.12}
G_{\mu\nu}(x,x')={\int\frac{d^n{p}}{(2\pi)^n}}e^{ip\cdot(x-x')}G_{\mu\nu}(p),$$ and the graviton propagator as $$\label{VD4.13}
G_{\rho\sigma\lambda\tau}(x,x')={\int\frac{d^n{p}}{(2\pi)^n}}e^{ip\cdot(x-x')}G_{\rho\sigma\lambda\tau}(p).$$ Using the result for $S_0$ leads to $$\label{VD4.14}
G_{\mu\nu}(p)=\frac{\delta_{\mu\nu}}{p^2-v\Lambda}+(2\zeta-1)\frac{p_\mu p_\nu}{(p^2-v\Lambda)(p^2-2\zeta v\Lambda)}\;.$$ and, $$\label{VD4.15}
G_{\rho\sigma\lambda\tau}(p) =\frac{\delta_{\rho\lambda}\delta_{\sigma\tau}+\delta_{\rho\tau}\delta_{\sigma\lambda} -\frac{2}{n-2}\delta_{\rho\sigma}\delta_{\lambda\tau}}{2\left(p^2-2\lambda\right)}+\frac{1}{2}(\kappa^2\xi-1)\frac{\delta_{\rho\lambda}p_\sigma p_\tau+\delta_{\rho\tau}p_\sigma p_\lambda+\delta_{\sigma\lambda}p_\rho p_\tau+\delta_{\sigma\tau}p_\rho p_\lambda}{\left(p^2-2\lambda\right) \left(p^2-2\kappa^2\xi\lambda\right)},$$ where we have defined $$\label{VD4.16}
\lambda=\Lambda+v\Lambda\left(\frac{n-4}{4-2n}\right).$$ In our calculations of the pole terms, the Vilkovisky-DeWitt correction in (\[VD4.16\]) will make no contributions to the poles when $n\rightarrow4$, and we may set $\lambda\rightarrow\Lambda$ in this limit. This will not be true for the finite part of the effective action or in spacetimes of dimension other than four. (Of course the Vilkovisky-DeWitt correction enters the calculation in other places through the interaction terms in any case.)
As explained we will treat the terms $S_1+S_2$ as an interaction. Simple power counting shows that the divergent part of the effective action can involve ${\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}$ up to and including terms of fourth order. (In more than four spacetime dimensions, higher powers of ${\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}$ must be considered.) We can write $$\label{VD4.17}
\Gamma_G=\langle e^{-S_1-S_2}-1\rangle$$ where $\langle\cdots\rangle$ means to evaluate the enclosed expression using Wick’s theorem and the basic pairings $$\begin{aligned}
\langle a_\mu(x)a_\nu(x')\rangle&=&G_{\mu\nu}(x,x'),\label{VD4.18}\\
\langle h_{\rho\sigma}(x)h_{\lambda\tau}(x')\rangle&=&G_{\rho\sigma\lambda\tau}(x,x'),\label{VD4.19}\end{aligned}$$ If we drop terms of order ${\bar{F}}^5$ and higher, use of Wick’s theorem shows that $$\label{VD4.20}
\Gamma_G=\Gamma_{G2}+\Gamma_{G4}+\cdots,$$ where $ \Gamma_{Gk}$ is of order, ${\bar{F}}^k$. There is no cubic term in ${\bar{F}}$ present as claimed earlier because such terms can only arise from those in the expansion of $\Gamma_G $ that involve odd numbers of graviton and photon fields; these vanish upon use of Wick’s theorem. ([*e.g.*]{} $\langle S_1S_2\rangle=0=\langle S_1^3\rangle$.) We find $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{G2}&=&\langle S_2\rangle-\frac{1}{2}\langle S_1^2\rangle,\label{VD4.21}\\
\Gamma_{G4}&=&-\frac{1}{2}\langle S_2^2\rangle+\frac{1}{2}\langle S_1^2S_2\rangle-\frac{1}{24}\langle S_1^4\rangle.\label{VD4.21b}\end{aligned}$$ The (correct) Vilkovisky-DeWitt result is obtained by taking the parameters $v=1,\omega=1,\xi=0,\zeta=0$ in these expressions. We now examine these two terms separately, and then turn to the possible ghost contributions.
Evaluation of $\Gamma_{G2}$ {#G2}
---------------------------
We first of all use Wick’s theorem to evaluate both $\langle S_2\rangle$ and $\langle S_1^2\rangle$. This will give us the results in terms of the graviton and photon propagators. The momentum space representations (\[VD4.12\]–\[VD4.15\]) can be used and the resulting integrals evaluated using standard methods. (We give the basic results in the appendix.)
For $\langle S_2\rangle$ we find, after use of Wick’s theorem, $$\label{VD4.22}
\langle S_2\rangle=\langle S_{21}\rangle+\langle S_{22}\rangle,$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\langle S_{21}\rangle&=&\frac{\kappa^2}{4}\int d^nx\Big\lbrace(2-v)\Big({\bar{F}}^{\mu}{}_{\gamma}{\bar{F}}^{\beta\gamma}\delta^{\nu\alpha} -\frac{1}{2}\delta^{\mu\nu}{\bar{F}}^{\alpha}{}_{\gamma}{\bar{F}}^{\beta\gamma}\Big) +{\bar{F}}^{\mu\alpha}{\bar{F}}^{\nu\beta}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{60pt}+\frac{1}{4}(v-1){\bar{F}}^2\Big(\delta^{\mu\alpha}\delta^{\nu\beta} -\frac{1}{2}\delta^{\mu\nu}\delta^{\alpha\beta}\Big)\Big\rbrace G_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}(x,x),\label{VD4.23}\\
\langle S_{22}\rangle&=&\frac{\kappa^2}{4}\int d^nx\Big\lbrace \frac{v}{2}\Big({\bar{F}}^{\mu}{}_{\gamma}{\bar{F}}^{\nu\gamma}-\frac{1}{4}{\bar{F}}^2\delta^{\mu\nu}\Big) +\frac{\omega^2}{\kappa^2\xi}\,{\bar{F}}^{\mu}{}_{\gamma}{\bar{F}}^{\nu\gamma}\Big\rbrace G_{\mu\nu}(x,x). \label{VD4.24}\end{aligned}$$ We have abbreviated ${\bar{F}}^2={\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}{\bar{F}}^{\mu\nu}$ here and in the following. The two terms (\[VD4.23\]) and (\[VD4.24\]) involve only the coincidence limit of the Green functions and no derivatives of the electromagnetic field strength ${\bar{F}}$. Any pole terms will contribute to the charge renormalization.
We use dimensional regularization with only the logarithmic divergences present as described earlier. Because we are only interested in pole terms of the effective action coming from logarithmic divergences we can adopt the method described in the appendix. The results, after some calculation, turn out to be given by (where $L$ stands for the basic logarithmic divergence defined in (\[A11\],\[A13\])) $$\begin{aligned}
\langle S_{21}\rangle&=&\frac{3}{8}\kappa^2\Lambda(\kappa^4\xi^2+1)L\int d^4x{\bar{F}}^2,\label{VD4.25}\\
\langle S_{22}\rangle&=&\frac{\omega^2}{4\xi}v\Lambda L\int d^4x{\bar{F}}^2.\label{VD4.26}\end{aligned}$$ We have let $\zeta\rightarrow0 $ in (\[VD4.26\]). This is essential because we have dropped the $\partial^\lambda a_\lambda$ term in $S_1$ to shorten the expressions obtained and simplify the calculation and it would be inconsistent to retain $\zeta$. The first term (the one multiplied by $v$) of $\langle S_{22}\rangle$ in (\[VD4.24\]) does not contribute to the result since $G_{\mu\nu}(x,x)\propto\delta_{\mu\nu}$ and the contraction of this with the field strength vanishes. (This can be recognized as involving the trace of the stress-energy-momentum tensor for the electromagnetic field which vanishes for $n=4$.) The Vilkovisky-DeWitt parameter does not enter (\[VD4.25\]) although this was not obvious from (\[VD4.23\]). Combining the two results (\[VD4.25\]) and (\[VD4.26\]) results in $$\label{VD4.27}
\langle S_{2}\rangle=\frac{3}{8}\kappa^2\left(1+\kappa^4\xi^2+\frac{\omega^2 v }{2\kappa^2\xi}\right)\Lambda L\int d^4x{\bar{F}}^2,$$ as the relevant pole part. For the Vilkovisky-DeWitt result we take $\omega=v=1$ and try to let $\xi\rightarrow0$. However, there is a term in $1/\xi$ present that prohibits this limit to be taken completely. Because the Vilkovisky-DeWitt formalism ensures that $\xi\rightarrow0$ must exist and be finite, cancellation of all terms that are singular in this limit and that appear at intermediate stages of the calculation provides a useful check on the results.
In order to evaluate $\langle S_{1}^2\rangle$ (and the higher order terms in $\Gamma_{G4}$) it proves convenient to write $S_1$ in (\[VD4.10\]) as $$\label{VD4.28}
S_1=\int d^nx\left( P^{\alpha\beta\mu\nu}h_{\alpha\beta}\partial_\mu a_\nu+P^{\alpha\beta\lambda}h_{\alpha\beta}a_\lambda\right),$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
P^{\alpha\beta\mu\nu}&=&\frac{\kappa}{2}\left\lbrace \Big(1-\frac{\omega}{\kappa^2\xi}\Big)\left\lbrack {\bar{F}}^{\mu\nu}\delta^{\alpha\beta}-{\bar{F}}^{\beta\nu}\delta^{\mu\alpha} -{\bar{F}}^{\alpha\nu}\delta^{\mu\beta}\right\rbrack
+{\bar{F}}^{\beta\mu}\delta^{\nu\alpha} +{\bar{F}}^{\alpha\mu}\delta^{\nu\beta}\right\rbrace,\label{VD4.29}\\
P^{\alpha\beta\lambda}&=&\frac{\kappa v}{4}
\left( \delta^{\lambda\alpha}\partial_\tau{\bar{F}}^{\beta\tau} +\delta^{\lambda\beta}\partial_\tau{\bar{F}}^{\alpha\tau}\right)-\frac{\omega}{2\kappa\xi}(\partial^\alpha{\bar{F}}^{\lambda\beta} +\partial^\beta{\bar{F}}^{\lambda\alpha})\nonumber\\
&&\quad +\left(\frac{\omega}{2\kappa\xi}
-\frac{\kappa v}{4}\right)\delta^{\alpha\beta}\partial_\tau{\bar{F}}^{\lambda\tau}.\label{VD4.30}\end{aligned}$$
Wick’s theorem gives us $$\begin{aligned}
\langle S_1^2\rangle&=&\int d^nx\int d^nx'\Big\lbrace P^{\alpha\beta\mu\nu}(x)P^{\lambda\sigma\gamma\delta}(x') G_{\alpha\beta\lambda\sigma}(x,x') \partial_{\mu}\partial_{\gamma}^{\prime}G_{\nu\delta}(x,x')\nonumber\\
&&+2P^{\alpha\beta\mu\nu}(x)P^{\lambda\sigma\gamma}(x') G_{\alpha\beta\lambda\sigma}(x,x') \partial_{\mu}G_{\nu\gamma}(x,x')\nonumber\\
&&+P^{\alpha\beta\gamma}(x)P^{\lambda\sigma\delta}(x') G_{\alpha\beta\lambda\sigma}(x,x') G_{\nu\delta}(x,x')\Big\rbrace.\label{VD4.31}\end{aligned}$$ The products of Green functions may be evaluated using the momentum space representations and results of the Appendix. After considerable calculation it may be shown that $$\label{VD4.32}
\langle S_1^2\rangle=\kappa^2\alpha_1 L\int d^4x{\bar{F}}^2+\kappa^2\beta L\int d^4x\left(\partial^\mu{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}\right)^2,$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha_1&=&\frac{3\Lambda v\omega^2}{8\kappa^2\xi}-\frac{3}{4}\Lambda v\omega +\frac{3}{8}\Lambda v+\frac{3}{4}\Lambda\omega^2+\frac{3}{4}\Lambda\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{3}{8}\Lambda v\kappa^2\xi-\frac{3}{2}\Lambda\omega\kappa^2\xi+\frac{3}{4}\Lambda\kappa^4\xi^2,\label{VD4.33}\\
\beta&=&-\frac{1}{12}+\frac{2}{3}\omega+\frac{3}{16}v^2 +\frac{1}{4}v+\frac{1}{2}v\omega+\frac{1}{4}\kappa^2\xi\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{3}{16}v^2\kappa^2\xi-v\kappa^2\xi.\label{VD4.34}\end{aligned}$$ In writing down this expression we have chosen to write the term that involves derivatives of ${\bar{F}}$ as shown. In the calculation we also find a term ${\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}\Box{\bar{F}}^{\mu\nu}$ that when integrated by parts is equivalent to $-2(\partial^\mu{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu})^2$.
We can now find the complete pole part of the effective action that is quadratic in ${\bar{F}}$ and comes from the gauge field and graviton. (We still need to find the ghost contribution and we will do this in the next section.) From (\[VD4.21\],\[VD4.27\],\[VD4.32\]–\[VD4.34\]) we have $$\label{VD4.35}
\Gamma_{G2}=\kappa^2\alpha \Lambda L\int d^4x{\bar{F}}^2-\frac{1}{2}\kappa^2\beta L\int d^4x\left(\partial^\mu{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}\right)^2,$$ where $$\label{VD4.36}
\alpha=\frac{3}{8}v\omega-\frac{3}{16}v -\frac{3}{8}\omega^2-\frac{3}{16}v\kappa^2\xi +\frac{3}{4}\omega\kappa^2\xi,$$ and $\beta$ is given in (\[VD4.34\]).
There are several comments to be made at this stage. The first is that although terms that are singular as $\xi\rightarrow0$ occur at intermediate stages of the calculation (see (\[VD4.27\]) for example), all such terms cancel when we form the effective action as guaranteed by the general formalism. A second comment is that the coefficients of both terms in (\[VD4.35\]) depend on the choice of gauge condition parameters $\omega$ and $\xi$ even if we take the Vilkovisky-DeWitt parameter $v=0$ corresponding to the use of the standard background-field method. Unless special care is taken when using the traditional background-field method, or equivalently the naive Feynman rules, results will be obtained for the effective action that are gauge condition dependent. This is completely obscured in calculations that fix any of these parameters at the start for calculational convenience. A final comment is that if the cosmological constant vanishes then there is no contribution to the term in ${\bar{F}}^2$ that is responsible for the electromagnetic field, and hence the charge renormalization, in agreement with earlier results of [@Piet; @DJT1; @Ebertetal]. The result for $\Lambda\ne0$ was first given in [@DJT2].
Evaluation of $\Gamma_{G4}$ {#G4}
---------------------------
We begin with each of the three terms that comprise the contributions to $\Gamma_{G4}$. On dimensional grounds there can be no derivatives of the background electromagnetic field, so we may safely take ${\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}$ to be constant. This simplifies the calculation. There are two independent invariants that are gauge invariant and we take them to be $({\bar{F}}^2)^2$ and ${\bar{F}}^4$ where $$\begin{aligned}
{\bar{F}}^2&=&{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}{\bar{F}}^{\mu\nu},\label{G4.1a}\\
{\bar{F}}^4&=&{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}{\bar{F}}^{\nu\lambda}{\bar{F}}_{\lambda\sigma}{\bar{F}}^{\sigma\mu}.\label{G4.1b}\end{aligned}$$ We will write $$\label{G4.1}
\Gamma_{G4}=\kappa^4 L\int d^4x\left\lbrace A ({\bar{F}}^2)^2 + B{\bar{F}}^4\right\rbrace,$$ for some coefficients $A$ and $B$. Nether $A$ nor $B$ can depend on the cosmological constant (on dimensional grounds); thus, the result that we will obtain for the pole part of the effective action indicated in (\[G4.1\]) will apply equally well to Einstein-Maxwell theory without a cosmological constant.
We begin by noting that the term called $P^{\alpha\beta\lambda}$ in (\[VD4.28\],\[VD4.30\]) cannot contribute to the pole terms in (\[G4.1\]) as it vanishes when we set ${\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}$ to be constant. We can write $S_2$ in (\[VD4.11\]) in a convenient way as $$\label{G4.2}
S_2=\int d^nx\left( R^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}h_{\mu\nu}h_{\alpha\beta}+R^{\mu\nu}a_{\mu}a_{\nu}\right),$$ where $R^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}$ and $R^{\mu\nu}$ can be read off by comparison of (\[G4.2\]) with (\[VD4.11\]) and the results symmetrized in the obvious way. Both $R^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}$ and $R^{\mu\nu}$ may be taken to be constant for our purposes. Application of Wick’s theorem gives $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle (S_2)^2\right\rangle&=&2\int d^nx d^nx'\Big\lbrace R^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}R^{\rho\sigma\lambda\tau} G_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}(x,x')G_{\alpha\beta\lambda\tau}(x,x')\nonumber\\
&&\quad + R^{\mu\nu}R^{\rho\sigma} G_{\mu\rho}(x,x')G_{\nu\sigma}(x,x')\Big\rbrace.\label{G4.3}\end{aligned}$$ The products of Green functions are evaluated as described in the Appendix and the results are then contracted with $R^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}$ and $R^{\mu\nu}$ in (\[G4.3\]). The result takes the form on the right hand side of (\[G4.1\]) where $A=A_1$ and $B=B_1$ with $$\begin{aligned}
A_1&=&\frac{\omega^4}{192\kappa^4\xi^2}-\frac{7v\omega^2}{384\kappa^2\xi} +\frac{v}{32}-\frac{23 v^2}{1536}+\frac{1}{64},\label{G4.4}\\
B_1&=&\frac{7\omega^4}{96\kappa^4\xi^2}+\frac{7v\omega^2}{96\kappa^2\xi} -\frac{v}{8}+\frac{23 v^2}{384}+\frac{1}{32}.\label{G4.5}\end{aligned}$$
The next term of order ${\bar{F}}^4$ involves $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle (S_1)^2S_2\right\rangle&=&2\int d^nx d^nx' d^nx''P^{\alpha\beta\mu\nu}P^{\lambda\sigma\gamma\delta}\Big\lbrace R^{\epsilon\rho\theta\phi} \partial_\mu\partial_{\gamma}^{\prime} G_{\nu\delta}(x,x')G_{\alpha\beta\epsilon\rho}(x,x'') G_{\lambda\sigma\theta\phi}(x',x'')\nonumber\\
&&+R^{\epsilon\rho}G_{\alpha\beta\lambda\sigma}(x,x')\partial_{\mu}G_{\nu\epsilon}(x,x'')\partial_{\gamma}^{\prime}G_{\delta\rho}(x',x'')\Big\rbrace.\label{G4.6}\end{aligned}$$ The products of Green functions are evaluated as before, and we again find a result taking the form on the right hand side of (\[G4.1\]) where this time $A=A_2$ and $B=B_2$ with $$\begin{aligned}
A_2&=&\frac{\omega^4}{96\kappa^4\xi^2}-\frac{7v\omega^2}{384\kappa^2\xi}+ \frac{5\omega^2}{96\kappa^2\xi}-\frac{\omega^3}{48\kappa^2\xi} - \frac{23v\kappa^2\xi}{384}+\frac{5v\omega}{64}+\frac{3 v}{128}+\frac{5\omega^2}{192}+\frac{3\kappa^2\xi}{16}\nonumber\\
&&\quad-\frac{\omega\kappa^2\xi}{32} +\frac{v\kappa^4\xi^2}{48}-\frac{v\omega\kappa^2\xi}{24}+\frac{v\omega^2}{48} -\frac{3\omega}{16} +\frac{\kappa^4\xi^2}{64}+\frac{3}{64} ,\label{G4.7}\\
B_2&=&\frac{7\omega^4}{48\kappa^4\xi^2}+\frac{7v\omega^2}{96\kappa^2\xi}- \frac{\omega^2}{48\kappa^2\xi}-\frac{7\omega^3}{24\kappa^2\xi} + \frac{23v\kappa^2\xi}{96}-\frac{5v\omega}{16}-\frac{3 v}{32}+\frac{13\omega^2}{48}-\frac{3\kappa^2\xi}{8}\nonumber\\
&&\quad-\frac{\omega\kappa^2\xi}{4} -\frac{v\kappa^4\xi^2}{12}+\frac{v\omega\kappa^2\xi}{6}-\frac{v\omega^2}{12} +\frac{3\omega}{8} +\frac{\kappa^4\xi^2}{8}.\label{G4.8}\end{aligned}$$
The third and final piece of $\Gamma_{G4}$ involves $\langle (S_1)^4\rangle$. The Wick reduction leads to $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle (S_1)^4\right\rangle&=&3\int d^nxd^nx'd^nx''d^nx'''P^{\alpha\beta\mu\nu} P^{\lambda\sigma\rho\delta} P^{\theta\phi\psi\chi} P^{\kappa\tau\epsilon\iota} G_{\alpha\beta\lambda\sigma}(x,x') G_{\theta\phi\kappa\tau}(x'',x''')\nonumber\\
&&\times\left\lbrack \partial_\mu\partial_{\psi}^{\prime\prime}G_{\nu\chi}(x,x'') \partial_{\rho}^{\prime}\partial_{\epsilon}^{\prime\prime\prime}G_{\delta\iota}(x',x''') +\partial_\mu\partial_{\epsilon}^{\prime\prime\prime}G_{\nu\iota}(x,x''') \partial_{\rho}^{\prime}\partial_{\psi}^{\prime\prime}G_{\delta\chi}(x',x'')\right\rbrack.\label{G4.9a}\end{aligned}$$ Evaluating the products of Green functions leads to a result taking the form on the right hand side of (\[G4.1\]) where $A=A_3$ and $B=B_3$ with $$\begin{aligned}
A_3&=&\frac{\omega^4}{16\kappa^4\xi^2}+\frac{5\omega^2}{8\kappa^2\xi} -\frac{\omega^3}{4\kappa^2\xi} + \frac{3\omega^2}{8}
-\frac{\omega\kappa^2\xi}{4} +\frac{\kappa^4\xi^2}{16}-\frac{5\omega}{4}+\frac{5\kappa^2\xi}{8} +\frac{3}{16},\label{G4.9}\\
B_3&=&\frac{7\omega^4}{8\kappa^4\xi^2}-\frac{\omega^2}{4\kappa^2\xi} -\frac{7\omega^3}{2\kappa^2\xi} + \frac{21\omega^2}{4}
-\frac{7\omega\kappa^2\xi}{2} +\frac{7\kappa^4\xi^2}{8}+\frac{\omega}{2}-\frac{\kappa^2\xi}{4} +\frac{3}{8}.\label{G4.10}\end{aligned}$$
We have kept $\omega,\ v$ and $\xi$ present to demonstrate that individual terms are singular as $\xi\rightarrow0$, and that the results computed using the standard background-field method are gauge condition dependent. The net result for $\Gamma_{G4}$ follows as (\[G4.1\]) with $$\begin{aligned}
A&=&-\frac{1}{2}A_1+\frac{1}{2}A_2-\frac{1}{24}A_3\nonumber\\
&=&-\frac{\omega^2}{384}-\frac{\omega}{24}+\frac{1}{128}+\frac{13\kappa^2\xi}{192}-\frac{\omega\kappa^2\xi}{192}+\frac{\kappa^4\xi^2}{192}\nonumber\\
&&+v\left(\frac{\omega^2}{96}-\frac{23\kappa^2\xi}{768} +\frac{23v}{3072} +\frac{5\omega}{128}+\frac{\kappa^4\xi^2}{96}- \frac{\omega\kappa^2\xi}{48}-\frac{1}{256}\right),\label{G4.11}\\
B&=&-\frac{1}{2}B_1+\frac{1}{2}B_2-\frac{1}{24}B_3\nonumber\\
&=&-\frac{\omega^2}{12}+\frac{\omega}{6}-\frac{1}{32}-\frac{17\kappa^2\xi}{96} +\frac{\omega\kappa^2\xi}{48}+\frac{5\kappa^4\xi^2}{192}\nonumber\\
&&+v\left(-\frac{\omega^2}{24}+\frac{23\kappa^2\xi}{192}- \frac{23 v}{768} -\frac{5\omega}{32}-\frac{\kappa^4\xi^2}{24}+ \frac{\omega\kappa^2\xi}{12}+\frac{1}{64}\right).\label{G4.12}\end{aligned}$$ As with our earlier calculation, individual contributions to the effective action contain singular terms as $\xi\rightarrow0$; however, when all terms of the same order are combined all such singular behaviour cancels to leave a finite result as $\xi\rightarrow0$. We again see that if $v=0$, the traditional result for the effective action is gauge dependent. The correct, gauge condition independent result can be found from $\omega=v=1$ and $\xi=0$. There is still the ghost contribution to consider and this is the subject of the next section.
Ghost contribution {#VD5}
==================
Expansion of the effective action {#ghost1}
---------------------------------
We can evaluate the ghost contribution to the effective action in the same way as we did for the graviton and gauge fields. From (\[VD3.30\]) we identify the ghost action as $$\label{VD5.1}
S_{GH}=\bar{\eta}_\alpha Q^{\alpha}{}_{\beta}\eta^\beta,$$ with $ Q^{\alpha}{}_{\beta}$ given by (\[VD2.5\]). It can be noted that $$\label{VD5.2}
Q^{\alpha}{}_{\beta}\eta^\beta= \chi^{\alpha}{}_{,i}K^{i}_{\beta}\eta^\beta=\delta\chi^{\alpha},$$ where $\delta\chi^\alpha$ represents the change in the gauge condition under a gauge transformation with the infinitesimal gauge parameters $\delta\epsilon^\beta $ replaced with the anticommuting ghost field $\eta^\beta $. The background fields are held fixed when computing $ Q^{\alpha}{}_{\beta}$.
In our case we have the two gauge conditions (\[VD4.2\]) and (\[VD4.3\]). We need a vector ghost $\eta^\mu(x)$ and its antighost $\bar{\eta}_\mu(x)$ for gravity, and a scalar ghost $\eta (x)$ and its antighost $\bar{\eta}(x) $ for electromagnetism. The ghost action will be $$\label{VD5.3}
S_{GH}=\int d^nx\left(\bar{\eta}^\lambda\delta\chi_\lambda+\bar{\eta}\delta\chi\right).$$ Here, $\delta\chi_\lambda $ and $\delta\chi $ denote the changes in the gauge conditions (\[VD4.2\]) and (\[VD4.3\]) under a gauge transformation of the metric and electromagnetic field ((\[VD3.7\]) and (\[VD3.8\])) using (\[VD4.5\]) and (\[VD4.6\]) with the gauge parameters $\delta\epsilon^\lambda(x)\rightarrow\eta^\lambda (x) $ and $\delta\epsilon (x)\rightarrow\eta (x) $. Furthermore, because we are only working to one-loop order we can neglect all terms in $S_{GH}$ that involve the quantum fields $h_{\mu\nu} $ and $a_\mu $. (They would be important at higher loop orders.)
The result for $S_{GH}$ can be conveniently expressed as a sum of three terms, $$\label{VD5.4}
S_{GH}=S_{GH0}+S_{GH1}+S_{GH2},$$ with the subscript $0,1,2$ counting the power of the background gauge field that occurs just as we did earlier. We have $$\begin{aligned}
S_{GH0}&=&\int d^nx\left(-\frac{2}{\kappa^2}\bar{\eta}^\lambda\Box\eta_\lambda -\bar{\eta}\Box\eta\right),\label{VD5.5}\\
S_{GH1}&=&\int d^nx\vphantom{|}\left\lbrack\omega\bar{\eta}^\lambda{\bar{F}}_{\mu\lambda}\eta^{,\mu} +\bar{\eta}\left(\bar{A}_{\mu,\nu}+\bar{A}_{\nu,\mu}\right)\eta^{\nu,\mu}\right.\nonumber\\
&&\vphantom{|}\left.\quad + \bar{\eta} \bar{A}^{\mu}_{,\mu\nu}\eta^\nu +\bar{\eta}\bar{A}_\nu\Box\eta^\nu\right\rbrack,\label{VD5.6}\\
S_{GH2}&=&\omega \int d^nx\, \bar{\eta}^\lambda{\bar{F}}_{\mu\lambda} \left( -\bar{A}^{\mu}_{,\nu}\eta^\nu - \bar{A}_\nu \eta^{\nu,\mu}\right).\label{VD5.7}\end{aligned}$$
We can again treat the terms that involve the background gauge field $S_{GH1}$ and $S_{GH2}$ as interaction terms and in place of (\[VD4.17\]) have $$\label{VD5.8}
\Gamma_{GH}=-\langle e^{-S_{GH1}-S_{GH2}}-1\rangle,$$ with the overall minus sign due to the ghost statistics. We have the basic pairing relations $$\begin{aligned}
\langle\eta_{\mu}(x)\bar{\eta}_\nu(x')\rangle&=&\Delta_{\mu\nu}(x,x'),\label{VD5.9}\\
\langle\eta(x)\bar{\eta}(x')\rangle&=&\Delta(x,x'),\label{VD5.10}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\label{VD5.11}
\Delta_{\mu\nu}(x,x')=\frac{\kappa^2}{2}\delta_{\mu\nu}\Delta(x,x'),$$ and, $$\label{VD5.12}
-\Box\Delta(x,x')=\delta(x,x'),$$ follow from (\[VD5.5\]).
We find, up to fourth order in the background gauge field $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{GH}&=&-\langle S_{GH2}\rangle+\frac{1}{2}\langle (S_{GH1})^2\rangle+\frac{1}{2}\langle(S_{GH2})^2\rangle\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{1}{2}\langle(S_{GH1})^2S_{GH2}\rangle +\frac{1}{24}\langle(S_{GH1})^4\rangle.\label{VD5.13}\end{aligned}$$ Again, the potential cubic terms in the background gauge field do not contribute because they involve odd numbers of ghost fields and vanish by application of the Wick reduction.
Evaluation of $\Gamma_{GH2}$ {#ghost2}
----------------------------
It is convenient to use the gauge condition for the electromagnetic field to simplify $\chi_\lambda$ in (\[VD4.2\]). We can set the term in $\partial^\mu a_\mu$ in (\[VD4.2\]) to zero as before, and this simplifies the evaluation of the ghost contributions. We have checked this by not making this simplification and replacing the second term of (\[VD4.2\]) by $\omega'\bar{A}_\lambda\partial^\mu a_\mu+\omega a^\mu{\bar{F}}_{\mu\lambda}$. It can then be shown that $\omega'$ cancels out of $\Gamma_{G2}$ and therefore may be safely taken to vanish without any loss of generality.
We find from $S_{GH2}$ in (\[VD5.7\]) that $$\begin{aligned}
\langle S_{GH2}\rangle&=&\omega\int d^nx{\bar{F}}_{\mu\lambda}\left\lbrack \bar{A}^{\mu}_{,\nu} \Delta^{\nu\lambda}(x,x)+\bar{A}_\nu\left.\partial^\mu \Delta^{\nu \lambda}(x,x')\right|_{x'=x}\right\rbrack\nonumber\\
&=&0, \label{VD5.14}\end{aligned}$$ since the coincidence limit of the Green functions involve massless propagators that get regularized to zero in dimensional regularization.
For $\langle(S_{GH1})^2\rangle$ we find $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle (S_{GH1})^2 \right\rangle&=& -2\omega\int d^nxd^nx'\Big\lbrace \bar{A}_{\mu,\nu}(x')\partial^{\prime\mu}\Delta^{\nu\lambda}(x',x) +\bar{A}^{\mu}_{,\mu\nu}(x')\Delta^{\nu\lambda}(x',x)\nonumber\\
&&+\bar{A}_{\nu}(x')\Box^{\prime}\Delta^{\nu\lambda}(x',x) +\bar{A}_{\nu,\mu}(x')\partial^{\prime\mu}\Delta^{\nu\lambda}(x',x)\Big\rbrace{\bar{F}}_{\sigma\lambda}(x)\partial^\sigma \Delta(x,x'),\label{VD5.15a}\end{aligned}$$ after Wick reduction using the pairing relations (\[VD5.9\]–\[VD5.11\]) with the ghosts treated as anticommuting. Evaluating the products of Green functions as before followed by some integration by parts, results in $$\label{VD5.15}
\left\langle (S_{GH1})^2 \right\rangle=-\frac{1}{6}\kappa^2\omega L\int d^4x\left(\partial^\mu{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}\right)^2.$$ Although separate terms of (\[VD5.15a\]) are not gauge invariant, the net result is that all terms when combined lead to a gauge invariant answer. This is as it must be since the formalism guarantees that this is so. We therefore find $$\label{VD5.16}
\Gamma_{GH2}=-\frac{1}{12}\kappa^2\omega L\int d^4x \left(\partial^\mu{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}\right)^2.$$ This vanishes for ${\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}$ constant, so the ghosts make no contribution to the charge renormalization. They do however contribute to the pole part of the effective action for general background fields.
Evaluation of $\Gamma_{GH4}$ {#ghost4}
----------------------------
The Wick reduction of $\langle(S_{GH2})^2\rangle$ results in $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle(S_{GH2})^2\right\rangle&=&-\frac{\kappa^4\omega^2}{4}\int d^nxd^nx'{\bar{F}}_{\mu\lambda}(x){\bar{F}}_{\alpha}{}^{\nu}(x')\Big\lbrace \bar{A}^{\mu}{}_{,\nu}(x)\bar{A}^{\alpha,\lambda}(x')\Delta(x,x')\Delta(x',x)\nonumber\\
&&+\bar{A}^{\mu}{}_{,\nu}(x)\bar{A}^{\lambda}(x')\Delta(x,x') \partial^{\prime\alpha}\Delta(x',x) +\bar{A}_{\nu}(x)\bar{A}^{\alpha,\lambda}(x') \partial^{\mu}\Delta(x,x')\Delta(x',x)\nonumber\\
&& +\bar{A}_{\nu}(x)\bar{A}^{\lambda}(x') \partial^{\mu}\Delta(x,x')\partial^{\prime\alpha}\Delta(x',x)\Big\rbrace.\label{GH4.1}\end{aligned}$$ The calculations of the ghost contribution starts to become extremely messy if we keep the background gauge field $\bar{A}_\mu$ general. However we can simplify things enormously by noting that the final result must be expressible in terms of the two invariants $({\bar{F}}^2)^2$ and ${\bar{F}}^4$ as we had earlier in (\[G4.1\]). Because the result must be invariant under gauge transformations of the background field, we may simplify with the choice $$\label{GH4.2a}
\bar{A}_\mu(x)=-\frac{1}{2}{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}x^\nu,$$ so that $\partial_\mu\bar{A}_{\nu}=\frac{1}{2}{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}$ and $\partial^\mu\bar{A}_\mu=0$. In order to implement this it is easiest to assume that $\bar{F}_{\mu\nu}$ is constant, and integrate by parts so that all derivatives act on factors of $\bar{A}_\mu$. After some work it can be shown that $$\label{GH4.2}
\left\langle(S_{GH2})^2\right\rangle=-\frac{7\kappa^4\omega^2}{64}L\int d^4x{\bar{F}}^4.$$
For $\langle(S_{GH1})^2S_{GH2}\rangle$ we find, after Wick reduction and use of the pairings (\[VD5.9\]–\[VD5.11\]), $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle(S_{GH1})^2S_{GH2}\right\rangle&=&\frac{1}{2}\kappa^4\omega^2\int d^nxd^nx'd^nx''{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}(x)\partial^\mu\Delta(x,x')Y^{\lambda}(x')\Delta(x',x'')\nonumber\\
&&\times{\bar{F}}_{\beta\lambda}(x'') \left\lbrack\partial^{\prime\prime\nu}\bar{A}^{\beta}(x'')+ \bar{A}^{\nu}(x'')\partial^{\prime\prime\beta}\right\rbrack\Delta(x'',x) ,\label{GH4.3}\end{aligned}$$ where we have defined $$\label{GH4.4}
Y^\lambda(x)=\partial^\lambda\partial^\sigma\bar{A}_\sigma +\left(\partial^\lambda\bar{A}^\sigma +\partial^\sigma\bar{A}^\lambda\right)\partial_\sigma +\bar{A}^\lambda\Box.$$ The result in (\[GH4.3\]) can be evaluated as we described above for $\langle(S_{GH2})^2\rangle$ and the result turns out to be $$\label{GH4.5}
\left\langle(S_{GH1})^2S_{GH2}\right\rangle=\kappa^4\omega^2 L\int d^4x\left\lbrack \frac{1}{96}({\bar{F}}^2)^2-\frac{1}{48}{\bar{F}}^4\right\rbrack.$$
Finally we come to $\langle(S_{GH1})^4\rangle$ that proved to be the most lengthy to evaluate. The Wick reduction yields $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle(S_{GH1})^4\right\rangle&=&-3\kappa^4\omega^2\int d^nxd^nx'd^nx''d^nx''' {\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}(x){\bar{F}}_{\alpha\beta}(x') \partial^\mu\Delta(x,x'')\partial^{\prime\alpha}\Delta(x',x''') \nonumber\\
&&\quad\times Y^\beta(x'')\Delta(x'',x')Y^\nu(x''')\Delta(x''',x)\label{GH4.6}\\
&=&-\kappa^4\omega^2 L\int d^4x\left\lbrack\frac{1}{4}({\bar{F}}^2)^2+\frac{3}{16}{\bar{F}}^4 \right\rbrack,\end{aligned}$$ with the second equality following after some calculation.
We can now form the complete ghost contribution to the effective action that is quartic in the background gauge field from the last three terms of (\[VD5.13\]). The result is $$\label{GH4.8}
\Gamma_{GH4}=-\kappa^4\omega^2 L\int d^4x\left\lbrack\frac{1}{64}({\bar{F}}^2)^2+\frac{5}{96}{\bar{F}}^4 \right\rbrack.$$
Complete pole part of the effective action {#VD6}
==========================================
The behaviour of the coupling constants in quantum field theory at different energy, or length, scales is governed by the Callan-Symanzik [@Callan; @Symanzik], or renormalization group equations. We will use ‘t Hooft’s [@tHooftRG] approach as it is based on dimensional regularization.
We can now combine the results for the gauge and ghost fields found above to obtain the complete pole part of the effective action that involves terms only in the background electromagnetic field and deduce the necessary renormalization counterterms. From (\[VD4.35\]) and (\[VD5.16\]) we find the quadratic terms to be given by $$\label{6.1}
\Gamma_2=-\frac{\kappa^2\alpha\Lambda}{8\pi^2(n-4)} \int d^4x{\bar{F}}^2 +\frac{\kappa^2\bar{\beta}}{16\pi^2(n-4)} \int d^4x\left(\partial^\mu{\bar{F}}_{\mu\nu}\right)^2,$$ where $\alpha$ was given in (\[VD4.36\]) and $\bar{\beta}=\beta+\omega/6$ with $\beta$ given by (\[VD4.34\]). We have substituted for $L$ from (\[A13\]).
The quartic pole part of the effective action follows from (\[G4.1\]) and (\[GH4.8\]) as $$\label{6.2}
\Gamma_4=-\frac{\kappa^4}{8\pi^2(n-4)} \int d^4x\left\lbrack A_{tot}({\bar{F}}^2)^2 +B_{tot}{\bar{F}}^4\right\rbrack,$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
A_{tot}&=&A-\frac{\omega^2}{64},\label{6.3a}\\
B_{tot}&=&B-\frac{5\omega^2}{96},\label{6.3b}\end{aligned}$$ with $A$ and $B$ given by (\[G4.11\]) and (\[G4.12\]) respectively.
We summarize what would be obtained in various popular choices, along with the gauge condition independent result in Table \[table1\]. The final row of this table contains the gauge condition independent result. All of the results, including that which gives rise to the running value of the charge, are seen to be gauge condition dependent when calculated using traditional methods.
$\alpha$ $\bar{\beta}$ $A_{tot}$ $B_{tot}$
-------------------------------- ---------- --------------- ----------- -----------
$\omega=\xi=0,\ v=0$ 0 -1/12 1/128 -1/32
$\omega=0,\kappa^2\xi=1,\ v=0$ 0 1/6 31/384 -35/192
$\omega=1,\xi=0,\ v=0$ -3/8 3/4 -5/96 0
$\omega=\kappa^2\xi=1,\ v=0$ 3/8 1 1/64 -25/192
$v=\omega=1,\xi=0$ -3/16 27/16 1/1024 -163/768
: \[table1\]This shows the results for $\alpha$ and $\bar{\beta}$ in (\[6.1\]) and for $A_{tot}$ and $B_{tot}$ in (\[6.2\]) for popular choices of the parameters. The final row shows the correct gauge condition independent result found with $v=1,\ \omega=1$ and $\xi=0$. For all rows other than the final one we take $v=0$ corresponding to the traditional background-field expression and Feynman rules. Choosing $\omega=0$ is usually called the de Donder or harmonic gauge. The choice $\kappa^2\xi=1$ is usually called the Feynman gauge.
The renormalization of the background field and charge were given in (\[VD3.24\]–\[VD3.27\]). Using this in the bare Maxwell action (\[VD3.2\]) gives $$\label{RG1}
S_M=\frac{1}{4}Z_A\int d^4x{\bar{F}}^2.$$ Since this must absorb the pole coming from the quadratic part of $\Gamma_2$ above we find $$\label{RG2}
Z_A=1+\frac{\kappa^2\alpha\Lambda}{2\pi^2(n-4)}$$ to one-loop order. The standard ‘t Hooft [@tHooftRG] analysis applied to (\[VD3.24\]), starting from $\ell{de_B}/{d\ell}=0$ results in $$\label{RG3}
E\frac{de}{dE}=\frac{1}{2}(n-4)e+\frac{1}{2}\left( E\frac{d}{dE}\ln Z_A\right)e,$$ where we have dropped the subscript ‘$R$’ on the renormalized charge, and used the more conventional energy scale $E$ rather than the length scale $\ell$, with $E=1/\ell$. Because the renormalized charge cannot contain any pole terms the second term of (\[RG3\]) must be finite as $n\rightarrow4$, and we can identify the renormalization group $\beta$-function as $$\label{RG4}
\beta_e=\lim_{n\rightarrow4}\frac{1}{2}\left( E\frac{d}{dE}\ln Z_A\right).$$
We can write $$\label{RG5}
Z_A=1+\frac{{\mathfrak Z}_1}{(n-4)}++\frac{{\mathfrak Z}_2}{(n-4)^2}\cdots,$$ for some coefficients ${\mathfrak Z}_1,{\mathfrak Z}_1,\ldots$ that will in a general theory depend on $e,\kappa,\Lambda$. (In our case we have not obtained a dependence on $e$ because we have not coupled the Maxwell field to charged matter. Our analysis will be general here.) $\kappa$ and $\lambda$ will satisfy renormalization group equations of their own; however, the analysis that we have presented is not sufficient to determine this. From the Einstein-Hilbert action (\[VD3.3\]) we can write $$\begin{aligned}
\kappa_B&=&\ell^{(n-4)/2}(\kappa+\delta\kappa),\label{RG6}\\
\Lambda_B&=&\Lambda+\delta\Lambda,\label{RG7}\end{aligned}$$ with the counterterms $\delta\kappa$ and $\delta\Lambda$ expressed as a sum of pole terms in (\[RG5\]). It can be shown (see [@ParkerTomsbook] for example) $$\begin{aligned}
E\frac{d\kappa}{dE}&=&\frac{1}{2}(n-4)\kappa+\beta_\kappa,\label{RG8}\\
E\frac{d\Lambda}{dE}&=&\beta_\Lambda,\label{RG9}\end{aligned}$$ for renormalization group functions $\beta_\kappa$ and $\beta_\Lambda$.
To one-loop order, we find from (\[RG5\]) using (\[RG4\],\[RG8\]) and (\[RG9\]) $$\begin{aligned}
E\frac{d}{dE}\ln Z_A&=&\frac{1}{(n-4)}E\frac{d}{dE}{\mathfrak Z}_1+\cdots\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{1}{(n-4)}\left\lbrace \left(E\frac{de}{dE} \right)\frac{\partial}{\partial e} +\left(E\frac{d\kappa}{dE} \right)\frac{\partial}{\partial\kappa} + \left(E\frac{d\Lambda}{dE} \right)\frac{\partial}{\partial\Lambda} \right\rbrace{\mathfrak Z}_1+\cdots\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}e\frac{\partial}{\partial e}{\mathfrak Z}_1+ \frac{1}{2}\kappa\frac{\partial}{\partial\kappa}{\mathfrak Z}_1+\cdots\label{RG10}\end{aligned}$$ where in the last line we have dropped terms that vanish as $n\rightarrow4$. Comparison of (\[RG4\]) with (\[RG3\]) shows that (to one-loop order) $$\label{RG11}
\beta_e=\frac{1}{4}e^2\frac{\partial}{\partial e}{\mathfrak Z}_1+ \frac{1}{4}\kappa e\frac{\partial}{\partial \kappa}{\mathfrak Z}_1.$$The first term is that present in the absence of gravity which arises in standard Minkowski spacetime quantum field theory. The second term is a consequence of quantum gravity corrections that we will call $\beta_{grav}$. Using (\[RG2\]) for ${\mathfrak Z}_1$ we see that $$\label{RG12}
\beta_{grav}=\frac{\alpha}{4\pi^2}\kappa^2 e\Lambda.$$ The main calculations presented in this paper show that $\alpha=-3/16$. (See the final line of Table \[table1\].) This means that $\beta_{grav}$ has the opposite sign to the cosmological constant $\Lambda$. We can conclude that if $\Lambda>0$, as current observations favour [@Wmap], then $e$ is a monotonic decreasing function of $E$. Thus as $E\rightarrow\infty$, meaning that we look at the high energy (short distance) behaviour of the theory, the charge decreases. The quantum gravity correction tends to make the theory asymptotically free. This is also the conclusion found by Robinson and Wilczek [@RobWilczek] for $\Lambda=0$, but the scaling behaviour is very different here. Of course if we use the currently determined values for $\kappa$ and $\Lambda$ then the magnitude of $\beta_{grav}$ is exceptionally small, and the observability of the quantum gravity correction to the running charge is highly unlikely.
For a more realistic gauge theory, if we assume that the quantum gravity correction is the same form as that found in the Maxwell case, then the renormalization group equation for the gauge coupling constant $g$ would be expected to be of the form $$\label{RG13}
E\frac{dg}{dE}=ag^3+bg,$$ for calculable expressions $a$ and $b$. $a$ would be the result found in standard Minkowski spacetime calculations, and $b$ would be the correction due to quantum gravity. $b$ would depend on $\kappa^2\Lambda$. Conventionally $b=0$ and asymptotic freedom is determined by the sign of $a$; $a<0$ signals asymptotic freedom [@GrossandWilczek; @Politzer] (as in pure Yang-Mills theory, or Yang-Mills theory with not too many fermions) whereas $a>0$ signals the breakdown of a perturbative calculation (as in QED). This raises the intriguing possibility that there could be an ultraviolet fixed point $g=g_\star$ away from zero where $$\label{RG14}
g_\star^2=-b/a.$$ This obviously requires $b$ and $a$ to have opposite signs. If the calculation of the present paper applies to matter fields other than Maxwell, it suggests that since $b<0$ a fixed point $g_\star$ will exist if $a>0$. This corresponds to a theory that in the absence of gravity is not asymptotically free (eg. QED), but becomes so once gravity is quantized.
Discussion and conclusions {#VD7}
==========================
We have shown how the presence of a cosmological constant leads to a non-zero result for the renormalization group $\beta$-function and examined the consequences for the gauge coupling constant. We have also worked out the pole parts of the effective action that involve higher order curvature terms, including those of the Lee-Wick form. By performing the calculations in a sufficiently general way we were able to show conclusively that the traditional background-field result leads to gauge condition dependent results, even though the results are still gauge invariant. One way to ensure that gauge condition independence is maintained is to use the Vilkovisky-DeWitt formalism, as we did.
Notwithstanding our comments concerning the quadratic divergences made in the introduction, it is of interest to examine them more fully within the gauge condition independent formalism, and this is currently under investigation. We are also looking at the implications for other matter fields (see also [@RodSchustnew]) and will report on this elsewhere [@MackayToms]. The extension to higher dimensions with the possible lowering of the energy scale as discussed in [@Gogoladze] for the Robinson-Wilczek [@RobWilczek] calculation is of interest. It is also of direct interest to see how the gauge condition dependence cancels in a general gauge by inclusion of the term $T^{k}_{ij}$ in the connection, and this is currently under investigation.
Some of the more tedious calculations in this paper were done using Cadabra [@cadabra1; @cadabra2; @cadabra3]. I am very grateful to Kasper Peeters for his help in answering my questions about Cadabra.
Evaluation of integrals
=======================
We will give a brief outline of how we may evaluate the products of Green functions encountered in the calculation of the pole part of the effective action described in the main text. As an example, we will consider $$\label{A1}
I(x,x')=G_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}(x,x')\partial_{\mu_1}\cdots\partial_{\mu_r} G_{\lambda\sigma\rho\tau}(x,x')$$ where $r=0,1,2$ counts the number of derivatives. The first step is to use the Fourier expansion (\[VD4.13\]) to obtain, $$\label{A2}
I(x,x')=\int \frac{d^np}{(2\pi)^n}e^{ip\cdot(x-x')}I(p),$$ where $$\label{A3}
I(p)=\int\frac{d^nq}{(2\pi)^n}(iq_{\mu_1})\cdots(iq_{\mu_r}) G_{\lambda\sigma\rho\tau}(q) G_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}(p-q).$$ We can use the momentum space graviton propagator (\[VD4.15\]) for each of the two terms in (\[A3\]). We will end up with momentum integrals that involve factors of $q_\mu $ in the numerator and various denominators that involve $(q^2-2\lambda),\lbrack(p-q)^2-2\lambda\rbrack$ etc. At this stage the standard procedure is to introduce Feynman-Schwinger parameters [@Feynman49b] to combine the products of functions in the dominator into a single term, shift the momentum integration accordingly, compute the momentum integration, and finally evaluate the parameter integration. This process proves to be extremely complicated as the number of factors in the denominator increases when three and four Green functions are present. Although this, or some equivalent procedure, is necessary for obtaining the finite part of the effective action, a simpler process may be used to obtain the pole terms. This is because if we are only after the logarithmic divergences of the various integrals over momentum $q$ we only require terms in the integrand that behave like $q^{-4}$ for large $q$. We may therefore expand the momentum integrands in powers of $q^{-1}$ for large $q$ and extract the term that behaves like $q^{-4}$. For example, in (\[A3\]) we use the momentum space expressions for the propagators (\[VD4.15\]) and expand the product of the two Green functions in powers of $q^{-1}$ keeping the term of order $ q^{-4-r}$ (since there are $r$ factors of $q$ in the numerator). All of the resulting integrals are then of the form $$\label{A5}
I_{\mu_1\cdots\mu_{2s}}=\int\frac{d^nq}{(2\pi)^n}\frac{q_{\mu_1}\cdots q_{\mu_{2s}}}{(q^2)^{n/2+s}},$$ where $s=0,1,2,\ldots$. When the number of factors of $q_\mu$ in the numerator is odd we regularize the result to zero since the integrand is an odd function of $q$.
$I_{\mu_1\cdots\mu_{2s}}$ is a symmetric tensor, and we can write $$\label{A6}
I_{\mu_1\cdots\mu_{2s}}=f(n,s)\delta_{\mu_1\cdots\mu_{2s}}$$ for some function $f(n,s) $ with $\delta_{\mu_1\cdots\mu_{2s}}$ expressible as the sum of products of $s$ Kronecker deltas with all possible pairings of indices. For example, $$\label{A7}
\delta_{\mu_1\mu_2\mu_3\mu_4}=\delta_{\mu_1\mu_2}\delta_{\mu_3\mu_4} +\delta_{\mu_1\mu_3}\delta_{\mu_2\mu_4} +\delta_{\mu_1\mu_4}\delta_{\mu_2\mu_3}.$$ it is easy to see that $$\label{A8}
\delta^{\mu_1\mu_2}\delta_{\mu_1\cdots\mu_{2s}}=(n+2s-2)\delta_{\mu_3\cdots\mu_{2s}}.$$ From (\[A5\]), it is clear that $$\label{A9}
\delta^{\mu_1\mu_2}I_{\mu_1\cdots\mu_{2s}}=I_{\mu_3\cdots\mu_{2s}}.$$ Using (\[A6\]) and (\[A8\]) shows that $$\label{A10}
(n+2s-2)f(n,s)=f(n,s-1).$$ This allows us to relate all integrals of the form (\[A5\]) to the basic logarithmically divergent integral $$\label{A11}
L=\int\frac{d^nq}{(2\pi)^n}\frac{1}{(q^2)^{n/2}}.$$ If we are interested in the case, $n\rightarrow4$, then, $$\label{A12}
f(4,s)=\frac{L}{2^s(s+1)!}$$ and $$\label{A13}
L=-\frac{1}{8\pi^2(n-4)}.$$ Other spacetime dimensions are easily dealt with. For the quadratic part of the effective action we have checked that this procedure agrees with the method of combining denominators using Feynman-Schwinger parameters [@Feynman49b] and found the procedure just described much easier to implement.
Proceeding as described will yield a result for $I(p)$ that has the basic logarithmic pole in $L$ with various factors of Kronecker deltas and momenta $p_\mu$. When used back in expressions like (\[A2\]) the result is expressible as Dirac delta functions and derivatives of Dirac delta functions. Integration over the spacetime coordinates in the effective action removes the Dirac deltas and their derivatives and places the derivatives on the background gauge field. This is how all of the pole terms obtained in the present paper were evaluated. Although the calculations are tedious they are straightforward, and we omit all such technical details for brevity. Many of the calculations were done with or checked with Cadabra [@cadabra1; @cadabra2; @cadabra3].
[99]{}
G. ‘t Hooft and M. Veltman, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré A [**20**]{}, 69 (1974).
S. Deser and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**32**]{}, 245 (1974).
S. Deser and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Phys. Rev. D [**10**]{}, 401 (1974).
S. Deser and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Phys. Rev. D [**10**]{}, 410 (1974);
S. Deser, H. Tsao, and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Phys. Rev. D [**10**]{}, 3337 (1974).
J. F. Donoghue, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**72**]{}, 2996 (1994).
J. F. Donoghue, Phys. Rev. D [**50**]{}, 3874 (1994).
C. P. Burgess, Living Rev. Relativity [**7**]{}, 5 (2004); http://www.livingreviews.org/lrr-2004-5. S. P. Robinson and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**96**]{}, 231601 (2006).
I. Gogoladze and C. N. Cheung, Phys. Lett. B [**645**]{}, 451 (2007).
Q. Huang, JHEP [**03**]{}, 053 (2007).
N. Arkani-Hamed, L. Motl, A. Nicolis, and C. Vafa, JHEP [**06**]{}, 060 (2007); T. Banks, M. Johnson, and A. Shomer, JHEP [**09**]{}, 049 (2006).
T. Banks, M. Johnson, and A. Shomer, JHEP [**09**]{}, 049 (2006).
A. R. Pietrykowski, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**98**]{}, 061801 (2007).
D. J. Toms, Phys. Rev. D [**76**]{}, 045015 (2007).
G. ‘t Hooft and M. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B [**44**]{}, 189 (1972).
D. Ebert, J. Plefka, and A. Rodigast, Phys. Lett. B [**660**]{}, 579 (2008).
J. C. Taylor, Nucl. Phys. B [**33**]{}, 436 (1971).
A. A. Slavnov, Theor. Math. Phys. [**10**]{}, 99 (1972).
J. C. Ward, Phys. Rev. [**77**]{}, 2931 (1950).
Y. Takahashi, Nuovo Cimento [**6**]{}, 370 (1957).
Y. Tang and Y. Wu, arXiv:0807.0331v2 hep-th.
A. Rodigast and T. Schuster, arXiv:0908.2422v1 hep-th.
O. Zanusso, L. Zambelli, G. P. Vacca, and R. Percacci, arXiv:0904.0938 hep-th.
D. Ebert, J. Plefka, and A. Rodigast, JHEP [**02**]{}, 028 (2009).
T. D. Lee and G. C. Wick, Nucl. Phys. B [**9**]{}, 209 (1969).
T. D. Lee and G. C. Wick, Phys. Rev. D [**2**]{}, 1033 (1970).
F. Wu and M. Zhong, Phys. Lett. B [**659**]{}, 694 (2008).
F. Wu and M. Zhong, Phys. Rev. D [**78**]{}, 085010 (2008).
A. Rodigast and T. Schuster, Phys. Rev. D [**79**]{}, 125017 (2009).
E. Kiritsis and C. Kounnas, Nucl. Phys. B [**442**]{}, 472 (1995).
D. J. Toms, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**101**]{}, 131301 (2008).
G. A. Vilkovisky, Nucl. Phys. B [**234**]{}, 125 (1984).
G. A. Vilkovisky, in [*The Quantum Theory of Gravity*]{}, edited by S. M. Christensen (Adam Hilger, Bristol, 1984).
B. S. DeWitt, in [*Quantum Field Theory and Quantum Statistics, Volume 1*]{}, edited by I. A. Batalin, C. J. Isham, and G. A. Vilkovisky (Adam Hilger, Bristol, 1987).
B. S. DeWitt, [*The Dynamical Theory of Groups and Fields*]{} (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1965).
J. Honerkamp, Nucl. Phys. B [**48**]{}, 269 (1972).
G. ‘t Hooft, Acta Univ. Wratislav. [**38**]{} (1975).
B. S. DeWitt, in [*Quantum Gravity II*]{}, edited by C. J. Isham, R. Penrose, and D. W. Sciama (Oxford University Press, London, 1981).
D. G. Boulware, Phys. Rev. D [**23**]{}, 389 (1981).
L. Abbott, Nucl. Phys. B [**185**]{}, 189 (1981).
L. D. Faddeev and V. N. Popov, Phys. Lett. B [**25**]{}, 29 (1967).
L. Dolan and R. Jackiw, Phys. Rev. D [**9**]{}, 2904 (1974).
L. Dolan and R. Jackiw, Phys. Rev. D [**9**]{}, 3320 (1974).
S. Coleman and E. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D [**7**]{}, 1888 (1973).
N. K. Nielsen, Nucl. Phys. B [**101**]{}, 173 (1975).
L. Parker and D. J. Toms, [*Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime: Quantized Fields and Gravity*]{} (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009).
B. S. DeWitt, Phys. Rev. [**160**]{}, 1113 (1967).
P. Ellicott, G. Kunstatter, and D. J. Toms, Modern Phys. Lett. A [**4**]{}, 2397 (1989).
E. S. Fradkin and A. A. Tseytlin, Nucl. Phys. B [**234**]{}, 509 (1984).
A. O. Barvinsky and G. A. Vilkovisky, Phys. Reports [**119**]{}, 1 (1985).
S. R. Huggins, G. Kunstatter, H. P. Leivo, and D. J. Toms, Nucl. Phys. B [**301**]{}, 627 (1987).
A. Rebhan, Nucl. Phys. B [**288**]{}, 832 (1987).
C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne and J. A. Wheeler, [*Gravitation*]{} (W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1973).
G. Kunstatter, in [*Proc. NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Super Field Theories*]{}, ed. H. C. Lee (Plenum, New York, 1987).
G. ‘t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B [**61**]{}, 455 (1973).
C. G. Callan, Phys. Rev. D [**2**]{}, 1541 (1970).
K. Symanzik, Commun. Math. Phys. [**18**]{}, 227 (1970).
D. N. Spergel et al. \[WMAP Collaboration\], Astrophys. J. Suppl. [**170**]{}, 377 (2007) \[arXiv:astro-ph/0603449\].
D. Gross and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**30**]{}, 1343 (1973).
D. Politzer, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**30**]{}, 1346 (1973).
P. T. Mackay and D. J. Toms, paper in preparation.
K. Peeters, Computeralgebra Rundbrief [**41**]{}, 16 (2007).
K. Peeters, Introducing Cadabra: a symbolic computer algebra system for field theory problems, arXiv:hep-th/0701238v2.
K. Peeters, Comp. Phys. Commun. [**176**]{}, 550 (2007); arXiv:cs/0608005.
R. P. Feynman, Phys. Rev. [**76**]{}, 769 (1949).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: '[The scalar particle production through a scalar field non-minimally coupled with geometry is investigated in the context of a spatially homogeneous and isotropic universe. In this paper, in order to study the evolution of particle production over time in the case of analytical solutions, we focus on a simple Horndeski theory. We first suppose that the universe is dominated by a scalar field and [derive the energy conservation condition]{}. Then from the thermodynamic point of view, the macroscopic non-conservation of the scalar field energy-momentum tensor can be explained as an irreversible production of the scalar particles. Based on the explanation, [we obtain]{} a scalar particle production rate and the corresponding entropy. Finally, since the universe, in general, could be regarded as a closed system satisfying the laws of thermodynamics, [we naturally]{} impose some thermodynamic constraints [on it]{}. [The]{} thermodynamic properties of the universe can provide additional constraints on the simple Horndeski theory. ]{}'
author:
- 'Hao Yu$^a$[^1], Wen-Di Guo$^a$[^2], Ke Yang$^{b}$[^3], and Yu-Xiao Liu$^a$[^4]'
title: Scalar particle production in a simple Horndeski theory
---
Introduction
============
Exact tests of the equivalence principle have never ceased [@Damour:1996xt; @Gasperini:1988zf; @Bertolami:2007zm; @Schlamminger:2007ht; @Damour:2002nv] (refer to Ref. [@Will:2014kxa] for the latest review). Since there have always been researches and observations claiming that violation of the equivalence principle may be really reasonable [@Halprin:1995vg; @Adunas:2000zn; @Damour:2002nv; @Bertolami:2007zm], the modified gravity theories with violation of the equivalence principle are not only alive but also have attracted increasing attention. For example, in recent years, a kind of modified gravity theory taking into account non-minimal couplings between geometry and matter has become one of the mainstream modified gravity theories (a detailed introduction can be found in Ref. [@Harko:2014gwa]).
Early applications of the non-minimal couplings of matter with gravity were mainly to solve the cosmological constant problem [@Dolgov:2003fw; @Mukohyama:2003nw] and accelerated expansion of the universe [@Nojiri:2004bi; @Allemandi:2005qs]. Later, Bertolami and coworkers pointed out that if there is a non-minimal coupling of matter to a function of curvature, the trajectory of a test particle in gravitational field will be non-geodesic. The effect of the non-minimal coupling is equivalent to an extra force on the test particle [@Bertolami:2007gv]. In the same year, Faraoni studied the stability condition for the gravity theory [@Faraoni:2007sn]. Since then, related researches mainly focus on galactic rotation curves [@Sotiriou:2008it; @Bertolami:2009ic; @Harko:2010vs], accelerated expansion [@Bertolami:2010cw; @Bisabr:2012tg; @Harko:2014aja] and thermodynamics [@Wu:2012ia; @Sharif:2013tha; @Harko:2014pqa; @Momeni:2015fyt]. Recently, this kind of modified gravity theory was injected new vitality because of the researches on particle production [@Harko:2014pqa; @Harko:2015pma; @Singh:2015oiw] (we will come back to [this point]{} later).
The idea that elementary particles may be created during the evolution of the universe can be dated back to the middle of last century. In 1948, Bondi, Gold [@Bondi:1948qk] and Hoyle [@Hoyle:1948zz] suggested, independently, that the universe inevitably possesses a continuous particle production during the process of expansion, which is based on the hypothesis of Dirac [@Dirac:1937ti]. They found that the rate of particle production can hardly be observed directly in their models. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Parker did [a lot of work]{} on the mechanism of particle production from a microscopic point of view [@Parker:1968mv; @Parker:1969au; @Parker:1971pt]. [He]{} systematically studied the relation between elementary particles and gravitational field, and pointed out that the production of elementary particles mainly occurred at the early stage of the universe. During the same period, Tyron [@Tryon:1973xi] and Fomin [@Fomin:1973xi] also [independently]{} proposed an interesting approach to create universe or particles, in which our universe comes from a fluctuation of the vacuum. After that, most studies on particle production were related to the applications in cosmology [@Sexl:1969ix; @Zeldovich:1970si; @Fulling:1974pu; @Grib:1976pw; @Brout:1977ix; @Hu:1978zd; @Papastamatiou:1979rv].
By the mid-1980s, Prigogine et al., for the first time, considered the correlation between matter and entropy by incorporating the entropy of particle production into Einstein’s field equations [@Prigogine:1986zz; @Prigogine:1988zz; @Prigogine:1989zz]. Applying the result in conjunction with the second law of thermodynamics to cosmology, they found it could address the singularity problem of the universe through an irreversible particle production. Soon, Calv$\tilde{a}$o and collaborators indicated that as long as the specific entropy is not a constant, particles can also be annihilated while the universe satisfies the entropy increase principle [@Calvao:1991wg]. Since [particle production]{} behaves as a negative pressure term in Einstein’s field equations, some researchers also used particle production to generate inflation [@Ford:1986sy; @Traschen:1990sw; @Abramo:1996ip; @Lima:1995xz; @Gunzig:1997tk; @Peebles:1998qn; @Zimdahl:1999tn] and [to explain]{} current cosmic acceleration [@Steigman:2008bc; @Lima:2009ic; @Allahverdi:2010xz; @Jesus:2011ek; @Chakraborty:2014fia; @Nunes:2015rea].
Recently, particle production based on different mechanisms has entered a new development. In Refs. [@Harko:2014pqa; @Harko:2015pma], the authors considered a non-minimal coupling of matter with functions of curvature in the context of the universe. Combining with the thermodynamic properties of the universe, they defined a particle production rate and the corresponding entropy. Then, [the]{} particle production rate, production pressure and entropy can be given by abstract expressions with the matter Lagrangian and the functions of curvature. According to the second law of thermodynamics of the isolated system ($dS/dt>0$) and the common sense that a macroscopic isolated system always tends spontaneously to thermodynamic equilibrium ($d^2S/dt^2<0$), they briefly discussed how to use these requirements to restrict particle production.
In this paper, we follow Harko’s works and continue to study particle production in the context of the universe. Since it is not necessary to demand that the universe tends to equilibrium state at the early and middle stages, we modify the thermodynamic equilibrium condition $d^2S/dt^2<0$ (for all $t$) [@Callen:xx] to $d^2S/dt^2\rightarrow0$ (when $t\rightarrow\infty$). When the solution of the scale factor does not represent the late stage of the universe, the equilibrium condition can be ignored. We consider a specific matter (scalar field) coupling with geometry. The benefit and motivation are that one can obtain a non-conservative expression of the matter energy-momentum tensor directly from the equation of motion of the matter, and further study could be done in the case of analytical solutions. It also makes up for the shortcoming of previous works, in which it is inconvenient to study the evolution of the entropy at all stages of the universe.
To investigate particle production in the case of analytical solutions, we consider a simple Horndeski theory, which only contains second order derivatives in the equations of motion [@Horndeski:1974wa]. We hope that there will be some new constraints on the coupling coefficients in the simple Horndeski theory by studying the thermodynamic properties of the universe.
The organization of this paper is as follows. In Sec.2, a simple Horndeski theory as our major research object is introduced. In Sec.3, we calculate abstract [expression]{} of particle production rate from the point of view of thermodynamics. In Sec.4, we solve the equations of motion and constrain the coupling parameters with the laws of thermodynamics. In Sec.5, we briefly discuss the entropy of the apparent horizon. Conclusion and discussion [are]{} drawn in last section.
A simple Horndeski theory {#MainModel1}
=========================
We consider a spatially homogeneous and isotropic Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) metric, which is given by $$\begin{aligned}
ds^{2}=-dt^2+a^2(t)\gamma_{ij}dx^i dx^j.\label{metric}\end{aligned}$$ Here, $a(t)$ denotes a scale factor, which is a function of the cosmic time $t$, and $\gamma_{ij}$ is the metric of a locally homogeneous three-dimensional space with constant curvature $k$. For simplicity, we only discuss the case of $k=0$ in this paper.
According to Harko’s works [@Harko:2014pqa; @Harko:2015pma], particle production could be achieved through a non-minimal coupling between matter and geometry. As we know, the Horndeski theory is a theory of gravity non-minimally coupled to a scalar field [and it]{} also guarantees that equations of motion are second order [@Horndeski:1974wa]. In order to research particle production in the presence of analytical solutions, we consider a simple Horndeski theory. As a toy model, the action that should be as simple as possible and also representative. In a system of units with $8\pi G=c=1$, the action that we pick out from the whole action of the Horndeski theory has the form $$\begin{aligned}
\label{actionH}
S=\frac{1}{2}\int d^4x \sqrt {-g}\left[R+\lambda_1 G_{\mu\nu}\nabla^\mu\phi\nabla^\nu\phi+\lambda_2F(\phi)R\right]+\int d^4x \sqrt {-g}L_\phi,\label{action3}\end{aligned}$$ where $G_{\mu\nu}=R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu\nu}R$ is the Einstein tensor, $F(\phi)$ is an arbitrary function of $\phi$, $L_\phi=-\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2-V(\phi)$ is the Lagrangian density of the scalar field, [and $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ are real parameters]{}. For a cosmological model with the FRW metric (\[metric\]), the scalar field $\phi$ only depends on the cosmic time, so $L_\phi=\frac{1}{2}\dot{\phi}^2-V(\phi)$. In what follows, a dot over any quantity denotes a derivative with respect to the cosmic time. Note that we neglect other matter fields since they minimally couple to geometry. Though this assumption is not very realistic, it is helpful to simplify the issues that we will discuss and [to get]{} analytical solutions.
The energy-momentum tensor of the scalar field is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
T_{\mu\nu}\equiv-\frac{2}{\sqrt{-g}}\frac{\delta(\sqrt{-g}L_\phi)}{\delta g^{\mu\nu}}=\left(-\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2-V(\phi)\right)g_{\mu\nu}+\partial_\mu\phi
\partial_\nu\phi.\label{Tuv}\end{aligned}$$ Then, the energy density and pressure of the scalar field are given by
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{rho}
\rho_\phi&=&\frac{1}{2}\dot{\phi}^2+V(\phi),\\
\label{p}
p_\phi&=&\frac{1}{2}\dot{\phi}^2-V(\phi).\end{aligned}$$
The energy conservation law of the scalar field indicates that $T_{\mu\nu}$, in most cases, should satisfy the following relation: $$\begin{aligned}
\nabla^\mu T_{\mu0}=-\dot{\rho}_{\phi}-3H(p_{\phi}+\rho_{\phi})=
-\dot{\phi}\ddot{\phi}-\dot{V}(\phi)-3H\dot{\phi}^2=0.\label{equtinon25}\end{aligned}$$
The variations of the action (\[action3\]) with respect to $g_{\mu\nu}$ and $\phi$ lead to the following field equations
$$\begin{aligned}
&&R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}Rg_{\mu\nu}+\lambda_1\bigg\{-\frac{1}{2}R\nabla_\mu\phi\nabla_\nu\phi +2\nabla_\alpha\phi\nabla_{(\mu}\phi R^\alpha_{\nu)}-\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^2 G_{\mu\nu} -\Box\phi\nabla_\mu\nabla_\nu\phi\nonumber\\
&&+\nabla_\mu\nabla^\alpha\phi\nabla_\nu\nabla_\alpha\phi
+R_{\mu\alpha\nu\beta}\nabla^\alpha\phi\nabla^\beta\phi
+g_{\mu\nu}\Big[\frac{1}{2}(\Box\phi)^2-\frac{1}{2}\nabla^\alpha\nabla^\beta\phi\nabla_\alpha\nabla_\beta\phi
-\nabla_\alpha\phi\nabla_\beta\phi R^{\alpha\beta}\Big]
\bigg\}\nonumber\\
&&+\lambda_2\Big[R_{\mu\nu}F(\phi)-\frac{1}{2}R F(\phi)g_{\mu\nu}+
(g_{\mu\nu}\Box-\nabla_\mu\nabla_\nu)F(\phi)\Big]=T_{\mu\nu},\label{Eqofmotion111}\\
&&(1-3\lambda_1 H^2)\ddot\phi+3H\Big(1-\lambda_1 H^2-2\lambda_1\frac{\ddot a}{a}\Big)\dot\phi+V'(\phi)+6\lambda_2\Big(\frac{\ddot a}{a}+H^2\Big)F'(\phi)=0,\label{horndeskiscalar}\end{aligned}$$
\[horndeskiscalar11\]
where $H=\dot{a}(t)/a(t)$ is the Hubble parameter, $V'(\phi)\equiv\frac{dV(\phi)}{d\phi}=\frac{\dot{V}(\phi)}{\dot{\phi}}$, $F'(\phi)\equiv\frac{dF(\phi)}{d\phi}=\frac{\dot{F}(\phi)}{\dot{\phi}}$, and $\Box=g^{\mu\nu}\nabla_\mu\nabla_\nu$. Taking the relations $\dot{\phi}^2=\rho_{\phi}+p_{\phi}$ and $\dot{\phi}\ddot{\phi}=\frac{1}{2}(\dot{\rho}_{\phi}+\dot{p}_{\phi})$ into Eq. (\[horndeskiscalar\]), we have $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\rho}_{\phi}+3H(p_{\phi}+\rho_{\phi})&=&\frac{1}{1-\lambda_1 H^2-2\lambda_1 \frac{\ddot a}{a}}\Big[2\lambda_1(H^2-\frac{\ddot a}{a})\ddot\phi\dot\phi-\lambda_1 ( H^2+2\frac{\ddot a}{a} )\dot{V}(\phi) \nonumber\\
&-&6\lambda_2\Big(H^2+\frac{\ddot a}{a}\Big)\dot F(\phi)\Big].\label{hornconv}\end{aligned}$$ Note that Eq. (\[hornconv\]) can also be derived from Eq. (\[Eqofmotion111\]). But if we start from Eq. (\[Eqofmotion111\]), there will be a lot of trouble. In Refs. [@Harko:2014pqa; @Harko:2015pma; @Singh:2015oiw], there is no explicit equation corresponding to Eq. since the Lagrangian of the matter is abstract. To obtain the similar equation, one can only proceed from the gravitational field equations.
The energy conservation condition of the scalar field (which guarantees $\nabla^\mu T_{\mu0}=-\dot{\rho}_{\phi}-3H(p_{\phi}+\rho_{\phi})=0$) is given as $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_1(2 H^2-2 \frac{\ddot a}{a})\ddot\phi\dot\phi=\lambda_1( H^2+2 \frac{\ddot a}{a} )\dot{V}(\phi)+6\lambda_2\Big(H^2+\frac{\ddot a}{a}\Big)\dot F(\phi).\end{aligned}$$ When $\lambda_1=0$, the energy conservation condition is $6\lambda_2\Big(H^2+\frac{\ddot a}{a}\Big)\dot F(\phi)=0$. If $\dot F(\phi)=0$, there is only minimal coupling between the scalar field and geometry. In this case, the energy-momentum tensor of the scalar field naturally satisfies Eq. (\[equtinon25\]). If $\dot F(\phi)\neq0$, we need $H^2+\frac{\ddot a}{a}=0$, [for which]{} the solution of the scale factor is $a(t)= c_1 \sqrt{2 t-c_2}$, where $c_1$ and $c_2$ are constants. Similarly, when $\lambda_2=0$, to guarantee energy conservation of the scalar field, we need $(2 H^2-2 \frac{\ddot a}{a})\ddot\phi\dot\phi=( H^2+2 \frac{\ddot a}{a} )\dot{V}(\phi)$.
It is worth mentioning that since we have defined [the scalar]{} field energy-momentum tensor by Eq. (\[Tuv\]), in general, if there exists [a non-minimal]{} coupling between the scalar field and geometry, there must be energy exchange between the scalar field and “space-time" (energy exchange is certainly not equal to zero). But when the energy conservation condition is satisfied, apparently there is no energy flowing into or out of the scalar field. How do we explain this seemingly contradictory description? We can assume that as long as there exists [a non-minimal]{} coupling between the scalar filed and geometry, all energy of the scalar field (including kinetic energy and potential energy) can exchange with “space-time". In general, the overall exchange of energy is not equal to zero. However, when the evolutions of the scalar field and background space-time satisfy a particular condition, i.e., the energy conservation condition, the total amount of energy exchange exactly vanishes. The “space-time" can be considered as a medium, whose role is to achieve internal energy exchange between the potential energy and kinetic energy of the scalar field.
Particle production from the point of view of thermodynamics {#application}
============================================================
In this section, we study thermodynamic properties of an “open universe" in [a simple]{} Horndeski theory. Here, the “open universe" that we study is actually a closed universe according to the traditional sense of thermodynamics and we could assume that the boundary of the closed universe is the apparent horizon. The word “open" just means that the objects in an isolated system can exchange energy with the background space-time. Now we start from the point of view of thermodynamics and then define the scalar particle production rate.
For a homogeneous and isotropic universe which contains $N$ particles in a volume $V=a^3$ (we suppose the universe is a perfect fluid), the second law of thermodynamics requires [@Prigogine:1988zz] $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{dt}(\rho a^3)+p\frac{d}{dt}a^3=\frac{dQ}{dt}+\frac{p+\rho}{n}\frac{d}{dt}(n a^3).\label{secondlaw}\end{aligned}$$ Here, $n=N/V$ is the particle number density and $dQ/dt$ is the rate of heat transfer into or out of the universe. The parameter $p$ is the sum of pressure of all particles in the universe and $\rho$ is the corresponding energy density. Due to the cosmological principle, the universe is normally regarded as an adiabatic system, i.e, $dQ/dt=0$. Therefore, in the following we ignore heat transfer during the evolution of the universe. Note that “adiabatic system" is not incompatible with “open universe”. Here again, the “open" means the interaction between matter and background space-time, which leads to non-conservation of the matter but the whole energy of the universe should be conserved.
For further simplification, we assume that in such an adiabatic universe there exists a class of scalar [particles]{}, for example quintessence [@Caldwell:1997ii; @Peebles:2002gy; @Linder:2007wa], which almost has no interaction with other particles. We focus on this kind of scalar [particles]{} and ignore other [ones]{}. In addition, the bulk viscous pressure and viscous dissipation of the energy-momentum tensor of the scalar field are also neglected in our model. So, in a comoving reference frame the scalar field energy-momentum tensor can be given as $T_{\mu\nu}=(p_\phi+\rho_\phi)U_\mu U_\nu+p_\phi g_{\mu\nu}$, where $U_\mu$ is the four-velocity of a comoving observer satisfying $U_\mu U^\mu=-1$ and $\nabla_\nu U^\mu U_\mu=0$. We reformulate Eq. (\[secondlaw\]) in an equivalent form $$\begin{aligned}
\dot\rho_\phi+3H(\rho_\phi+p_\phi)=\frac{p_\phi+\rho_\phi}{n}(\dot n+3Hn).\label{secondlaw2}\end{aligned}$$ When the total number of salar particles is a constant, i.e., $\dot n+3Hn=0$, energy conservation holds for the scalar field. If $\dot n+3Hn\neq0$, from the point of view of thermodynamics the total number of the scalar particles is not conserved. [In other]{} words, there exists scalar particle production or annihilation. Comparing this equation with Eq. (\[hornconv\]), in the presence of coupling between geometry and scalar field, the non-conservation of energy of the scalar field can be explained as scalar particle production or annihilation.
We define a scalar particle production rate $\Gamma_\phi$ ($\Gamma_\phi<0$ [means annihilation]{}) as [@Harko:2014pqa; @Harko:2015pma] $$\begin{aligned}
\dot n+3Hn=\Gamma_\phi n.\label{productionrate0}\end{aligned}$$ For the simple Horndeski theory, the scalar particle production rate is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{gammaH}
\Gamma_\phi=\frac{1}{1\!-\!\lambda_1 H^2\!-\!2 \frac{\lambda_1\ddot a}{a}}\bigg[2\lambda_1 (H^2\!-\!\frac{\ddot a}{a})\frac{\ddot\phi}{\dot\phi}\!-\!\lambda_1\Big(H^2\!+\!\frac{2\ddot a}{a}\Big)\frac{\dot{V}(\phi)}{\dot\phi^2}\!-\!6\lambda_2\Big(H^2\!+\!\frac{\ddot a}{a}\Big)\frac{\dot F(\phi)}{\dot\phi^2}\bigg].\label{productionrate3}\end{aligned}$$ Giving any solution of Eq. (\[horndeskiscalar11\]), we can get the evolution of $\Gamma_\phi$ over the cosmic time.
Then, we need to calculate the entropy of the scalar particles. We ignore the entropy of the spcae-time and the apparent horizon. [So the]{} total entropy of the universe is just relevant to the scalar particles. The differential expression of the total entropy consists of two parts: $$\begin{aligned}
dS_{in}=dS_{f}+dS_{c},\end{aligned}$$ where $dS_{f}$ represents entropy flow and $dS_{c}$ is entropy production. For a stable thermodynamic system without particle production, if it has no energy exchange with outside, we have $dS_{f}=0$, $dS_{c}=0$ and, therefore, $dS_{in}=0$. For the [system we study]{}, since it could be regarded as an isolated system, only $dS_{f}$ vanishes. So the total entropy can be expressed as [@Prigogine:1988zz; @Prigogine:1989zz; @Harko:2014pqa; @Harko:2015pma] (we suppose [that]{} the specific entropy of the scalar particle is [a constant]{}) $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ds1}
\frac{dS_{in}}{dt}=\frac{S_{in}}{n_{\phi}}(\dot n_{\phi} +3 H n_{\phi})=\Gamma_\phi S_{in},\end{aligned}$$ where $n_{\phi}$ is the particle number density of the scalar [particles]{}. With any given $\Gamma_\phi$, $S_{in}$ can be expressed as a function of [the]{} cosmic time.
Thermodynamic constraints on the simple Horndeski theory
========================================================
In this section, we need to solve the field equations analytically and re-express the scalar particle production rate and the corresponding entropy as functions of the cosmic time. Utilizing the constraints from the laws of thermodynamics we get new constraints on the parameters of the simple Horndeski theory.
Let us retrospect Eq. (\[horndeskiscalar11\]), which can be rewritten as
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{2}\dot\phi^2+V(\phi)&=&-3H^2+\lambda_1\bigg\{ \frac{3}{2}H^2\dot\phi^2-\ddot\phi^2+\ddot\phi\Big(3H\dot\phi+\ddot\phi\Big)-
\Big[\frac{1}{2}\Big(3H\dot\phi+\ddot\phi\Big)^2-\frac{3\ddot a}{a}\dot\phi^2\nonumber\\
&-&\frac{1}{2}\Big(3H^2\dot\phi^2+\ddot\phi^2\Big)
\Big]\bigg\}+\lambda_2\Big[3\frac{\ddot a}{a}F(\phi)-3\Big(H^2+\frac{\ddot a}{a}\Big)F(\phi)+3H\dot F(\phi)\Big],\\
\frac{1}{2}\dot\phi^2-V(\phi)&=&H^2+2\frac{\ddot a}{a}+\lambda_1\bigg\{ \frac{3}{2}H^2\dot\phi^2+2\frac{\ddot a}{a}\dot\phi^2-H\dot\phi\Big(3H\dot\phi+\ddot\phi\Big)+
\Big[\frac{1}{2}\Big(3H\dot\phi+\ddot\phi\Big)^2-\frac{3\ddot a}{a}\dot\phi^2\nonumber\\
&-&\frac{1}{2}\Big(3H^2\dot\phi^2+\ddot\phi^2\Big)\Big]\bigg\}-\lambda_2\Big[\Big(2H^2+\frac{\ddot a}{a}\Big)F(\phi)-3\Big(H^2+\frac{\ddot a}{a}\Big)F(\phi)+\ddot F(\phi)\nonumber\\
&+&2H \dot F(\phi)\Big],\\
V'(\phi)&=&-(1-3\lambda_1 H^2)\ddot\phi-3H\Big(1-\lambda_1 H^2-2\lambda_1\frac{\ddot a}{a}\Big)\dot\phi-6\lambda_2\Big(\frac{\ddot a}{a}+H^2\Big)F'(\phi).\end{aligned}$$
\[motion4\]
Since the universe has different equations of state in different epochs, we prefer to choose three extreme cases (dust, radiation, and vacuum energy) to solve our field equations. However, if the scale factor is given in advance, it [might]{} be difficult to obtain [solutions]{} of [other]{} variables. To make the discussion more abundant if there exist other special analytical solutions, we will also study them.
$\lambda_1=0$ and $\lambda_2\neq0$ {#A}
----------------------------------
### $a(t)\propto e^{h t}$
Let us first study the case $\lambda_1=0$ and $\lambda_2\neq0$. For the stage of inflation or the epoch when the universe is dominated by the vacuum energy, the scale factor grows exponentially with time, i.e., $a(t)\propto e^{h t}$ ($h>0$ is a constant). In this situation we find that the solutions of other variables are trivial:
$$\begin{aligned}
a(t)&\propto& e^{ht},\\
V(\phi)&=&c_1,\\
F(\phi)&=&c_2,\\
\phi(t)&=&c_3,\end{aligned}$$
where $c_i$ ($i=1,2,3$) are constants. [ The action (\[actionH\]) degenerates into the case of minimal coupling gravity and the corresponding scalar particle production rate $\Gamma_{\phi}$ is naturally equal to 0. ]{}
### $a(t)\propto t^{n}$ ($t\neq3/4$)
For the dust universe and radiation universe, since their scale factors are all polynomials, we can suppose $a(t)\propto t^n$ ($n=2/3$ indicates dust [and $n=1/2$ radiation]{}) to solve them simultaneously. As [for other values]{} of $n$, we discuss some special cases.
We first consider $a(t)\propto t^n$ ($n>0$ and $n\neq3/4$), which results in the following solutions
$$\begin{aligned}
a(t)&\propto& t^{n},\\
V(\phi(t))&=&(3n^2-n)(b_1 \lambda _2+1) \Big(e^{\pm\frac{\sqrt{2} \left(b_2-\phi(t)\right)}{\sqrt{-n \left(b_1 \lambda _2+1\right)}}}\Big)=
-\frac{n(3n-1)(b_1 \lambda_2+1)}{t^2},\\
F(\phi(t))&=&b_1,\\
\phi(t)&=&b_2\pm\sqrt{-2n(b_1 \lambda_2+1)}\log t,\end{aligned}$$
where $b_1$ and $b_2$ are constants and $b_1 \lambda_2+1<0$. Since the solution of $F(\phi)$ is a constant, no matter what value $n$ takes, there is no coupling between the scalar field and geometry, which leads to $\Gamma_{\phi}=0$.
### $a(t)\propto t^{3/4}$
When we solve the field equations with $a(t)\propto t^{n}$, we find that $a(t)\propto t^{3/4}$ is a special case. [The $V(\phi)$, $\phi(t)$ and $F(\phi)$]{} just need to satisfy two equations:
\[53\] $$\begin{aligned}
V(\phi(t))&=&\frac{9(-3+\lambda_2(-3F(\phi)+4t\dot F(\phi)))}{16t^2}-\frac12\dot\phi(t)^2,\\
-4t^2\dot\phi(t)^2&=&6+6\lambda_2F(\phi)+\lambda_2 t(4t\ddot F(\phi)-3\dot F(\phi)).\end{aligned}$$
With any given $F(\phi)$, we can obtain $\phi(t)$ and $V(\phi)$ from Eq. (\[53\]). If $F(\phi)$ is not [a constant function]{}, there may exist non-zero particle production rate. [For the sake of simplicity,]{} we take $F(\phi)=c_1 t+c_2$ [and then obtain the following solution]{}
\[eq54\] $$\begin{aligned}
a(t)&\propto& t^{3/4},\\
V(\phi(t))&=&-\frac{15 \big[\lambda _2 (c_2-c_1 t )+1\big]}{16 t^2},\\
F(\phi)&=&c_1 t+c_2,\\
\phi(t)&=&\!\pm\!\sqrt{6 c_2 \lambda _2\!+\!6} \arctan\left(\frac{\sqrt{\!-\!\lambda _2 (2 c_2\!+\!c_1 t )\!-\!2}}{\sqrt{2 c_2 \lambda _2\!+\!2}}\right)\!\mp\!\sqrt{\!-\!3\lambda _2(2 c_2\!+\!c_1 t)\!-\!6},\end{aligned}$$
where $2 c_2 \lambda _2+2>0$ and $c_1\lambda_2 <0$. The range of [ the parameter]{} $t$ is $t>\frac{2 c_2 \lambda _2+2}{- c_1\lambda_2}>0$. Taking these solutions into the expression of $\Gamma_{\phi}$, we have a non-zero particle production rate: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{gammar}
\Gamma_{\phi}=\frac{3 c_1 \lambda _2}{\lambda _2 (2 c_2+ c_1t)+2}>0.\end{aligned}$$
Note that for an adiabatic process in a closed thermodynamic system, the irreversible particle production described by Eq. (\[secondlaw\]) can be rewritten as an effective conservation equation: $$\begin{aligned}
\dot\rho_\phi+3H(\rho_\phi+p_\phi+\overline{p}_\phi)=0.\end{aligned}$$ Here, we define a new thermodynamic quantity $\overline{p}_\phi$, which denotes the production pressure of the scalar particles. Considering solutions (\[eq54\]), $\overline{p}_\phi$ is given as $$\begin{aligned}
\overline{p}_\phi=-\frac{\Gamma_{\phi}(p_{\phi}+\rho_{\phi})}{3H}=\frac{c_1 \lambda_2}{t}<0.\end{aligned}$$ In fact, in some literatures about particle production, the negative production pressure could be used to explain the accelerated expansion of the universe (see early discussions in Refs. [@Prigogine:1989zz; @Calvao:1991wg; @Lima:1992np]). Through a simple calculation, the total pressure of the scalar particles is given by $$\begin{aligned}
p_\phi+\overline{p}_\phi=\frac{32t^3 c_1 \lambda_2+30t^2(1+(c_2-c_1t)\lambda_2)-
\frac{3(4+(4c_2+c_1t)\lambda_2)^2}{2+(2c_2+c_1t)\lambda_2}}{32 t^4}.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, as long as the parameters are appropriate, the total pressure can be negative and lead to an accelerated expansion.
Now we calculate the total entropy $S_{in}$ (inside of the apparent horizon) of the system and study [ its evolution]{}. Plugging [ the particle]{} production rate (\[gammar\]) into Eq. (\[ds1\]), the total entropy can be rewritten as $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dS_{in}}{S_{in}}= \frac{3 c_1 \lambda _2}{\lambda _2 (2 c_2+ c_1t)+2} dt.\end{aligned}$$ Then we have $$\begin{aligned}
S_{in}(t)&=&S_{in}(t_0) \exp\Big[\int_{t_0}^{t} \frac{3 c_1 \lambda _2}{\lambda _2 (2 c_2+ c_1t)+2} dt\Big]\\
&=&S_{in}(t_0) \Big[\frac{\lambda _2 (2 c_2+c_1t)+2}{\lambda _2 (2 c_2+c_1t_0)+2}\Big]^3,\label{entropy}\end{aligned}$$ where $S_{in}(t_0)$ is the total entropy at time $t_0$.
The second law of thermodynamics states that in a closed thermodynamic system every real process must lead to [ increase of the entropy]{} of the system. In this model with geometry coupling to a scalar field, the space-time background could be considered as a source of energy. From the scalar field point of view, the energy is not conserved. A practical observable effect is the change of the particle number density, which should satisfy [the principle of entropy increase]{}. In consideration of the second law of thermodynamics, the total entropy $S_{in}(t)$ needs to satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dS_{in}(t)}{dt}=S_{in}(t_0) \frac{3 \lambda _2 c_1 [\lambda _2 (2 c_2+c_1 t )+2]^2}{[\lambda _2 (2 c_2+c_1 t_0 )+2]^3}\geq0.\end{aligned}$$ Because the total entropy of the system is always non-negative at any time, we have $S_{in}(t_0)>0$. The above constraint condition is equivalent to $$\begin{aligned}
\label{cons1}
\frac{c_1 \lambda _2 }{\lambda _2 (2 c_2+c_1 t_0 )+2}\geq0.\end{aligned}$$ In fact, we have already given this constraint under Eq. (\[eq54\]), which means that the constraint from the second law of thermodynamics on the coupling parameter $\lambda_2$ is not more stringent than the constraint from the [ solution (\[eq54\]) itself]{}.
Moreover, for a closed thermodynamic system, the thermodynamic state tends, inevitably, toward macroscopic equilibrium. In other words, all the macroscopic variables of a closed thermodynamic system always spontaneously approach to constants as time goes on, which implies that there is another constraint on the total entropy $S_{in}(t)$, i.e., $\ddot S_{in}(t\rightarrow \infty)\rightarrow0$.[^5] In this cosmological model ($a(t)\propto t^{3/4}$), this requirement for the total entropy is $$\begin{aligned}
\ddot S_{in}(t\rightarrow \infty)=\lim_{t \to \infty}S_{in}(t_0) \frac{6 \lambda _2^2 c_1^2 [\lambda _2 (2 c_2+c_1 t )+2]}{[\lambda _2 (2 c_2+c_1 t_0)+2]^3}\rightarrow0.\end{aligned}$$ Obviously, to meet the requirement, we need $\lambda _2=0$ or $c_1=0$. [ Both conditions]{} result in $\Gamma_\phi=0$ and the minimal coupling between the scalar field and curvature. However, if the scale factor ($a(t)\propto t^{3/4}$) does not correspond to the late of the universe, this requirement can be discarded. As we know, it is a generally received opinion that the late universe will be dominated by vacuum energy and the scale factor will grow exponentially over time. For this solution of the scale factor, we can ignore the requirement $\ddot S_{in}(t\rightarrow \infty)\rightarrow0$ and deem that the only constraint on the coupling parameter $\lambda_2$ is (\[cons1\]), which, unfortunately, does not provide more [ constraints]{} than that from [ the solution (\[eq54\]) itself.]{}
$\lambda_1\neq0$ and $\lambda_2=0$ {#B}
----------------------------------
### $a(t)\propto e^{h t}$
For $\lambda_2=0$ and $\lambda_1\neq0$, if the scale factor $a(t)$ takes [ the]{} exponential form $a(t)\propto e^{h t}$ and $h$ satisfies $h^2=\frac{1}{3\lambda_1}$, there exists [ a trivial analytical solution]{}
$$\begin{aligned}
a(t)&\propto& e^{\sqrt{\frac{1}{3\lambda_1}}t},\\
V(\phi)&=&-\frac{3}{\lambda_1},\\
\phi(t)&=&c_1e^{\sqrt{\frac{1}{\lambda_1}}t}+c_2,\end{aligned}$$
where $c_1$ and $c_2$ are arbitrary constants and $\lambda_1>0$. Substituting the solutions back into Eq. (\[hornconv\]), the energy conservation condition of the scalar field is always tenable, which provides no additional constraint on the coupling parameter $\lambda_1$.
### $a(t)\propto t$
We consider another case that the scale factor is proportional to $t^n$. In this case, we just find [ an analytical solution:]{}
\[solution\_a\_t\] $$\begin{aligned}
a(t)&\propto& t,\\
V(\phi(t))&=&\frac{-6\lambda_1+e^{\frac{t^2}{2\lambda_1}}(t^2+3\lambda_1)
\Big(\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}]-c_1\Big)}{2\lambda_1t^2},\\
\phi(t)&=&\pm\frac1{\lambda_1}\int \sqrt{e^{\frac{t^2}{2\lambda_1}}\lambda_1\Big(c_1-\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}]\Big)} dt,\end{aligned}$$
where $c_1$ is a constant, and $\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}]$ is an incomplete Gamma function. To guarantee that $\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}]$ is a real number, we set the parameter $\lambda_1$ to be positive. Note that $\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}]$ is always positive and decreases monotonically from $t=0$ ($\Gamma [0,0]\rightarrow +\infty$) to $t=\infty$ ($\Gamma [0,+\infty]\rightarrow 0$). When $t$ is small enough, the solution of the scalar field will be an imaginary number. [Therefore, the]{} value of $c_1$ could be treated as a truncation parameter, which determines the minimum value of [the time]{} $t$. When $t$ goes over the bound, the solution of the scalar field is meaningless.
Taking the [ solution (\[solution\_a\_t\])]{} into Eq. (\[productionrate3\]), we have $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{\phi}&=&\frac{3 \lambda_1 e^{-\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}}}{t^3 \big(c_1-\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda _1}] \big)}+\frac{3 \lambda_1}{t^3}+\frac{3}{2 t}.\label{productionrate33}\end{aligned}$$ If $\lambda_1>0$ and $t$ is lager than its minimum value, $\Gamma_{\phi}$ is always positive. [ The total entropy $S_{in}$ is calculated as]{} $$\begin{aligned}
S_{in}(t)=S_{in}(0) \exp\Bigg[\int_{t_0}^{t}\Bigg( \frac{3 \lambda_1 e^{-\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}}}{t^3 \big(c_1-\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}] \big)}+\frac{3 \lambda_1}{t^3}+\frac{3}{2 t}\Bigg) dt\Bigg],\end{aligned}$$ which should satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
\label{cons2}
\frac{dS_{in}(t)}{dt}&=&S_{in}(t)\Bigg[\frac{3 \lambda_1 e^{-\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}}}{t^3 \big(c_1-\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}] \big)}+\frac{3 \lambda_1}{t^3}+\frac{3}{2 t}\Bigg]\nonumber\\
&=& S_{in}(t)\Gamma_{\phi}\geq0.\end{aligned}$$ Because $S_{in}(t)$ is always larger than zero, the above constraint condition is equivalent to $\Gamma_{\phi}\geq0$. From Eq. (\[cons2\]) we can draw a conclusion that as long as the total entropy and particle production rate satisfy relation (\[ds1\]), the constraint on the system from the second law of thermodynamics is equivalent to requiring the particle production rate to be greater than zero, i.e., particles can only be generated.
If the system achieves stability in the form of $a(t)=t$, the second derivative of the entropy $S_{in}(t)$ with respect to the time $t$ needs to satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
\ddot S_{in}(t\rightarrow \infty)&=&\lim_{t \to \infty}S_{in}(t)(\Gamma_{\phi}^2+\dot{\Gamma}_{\phi})\nonumber\\
&=&\lim_{t \to \infty}S_{in}(t_0)\exp\Big[\int_{t_0}^{t}\Gamma_{\phi}dt\Big](\Gamma_{\phi}^2+\dot{\Gamma}_{\phi})
\rightarrow0.\end{aligned}$$ We briefly explain that the above requirement is always satisfied for any given $c_1$ and $\lambda_1$. [ First of all, $S_{in}(t_0)$ can be ignored since it is just a constant. Secondly,]{} through a simple calculation we can find that when $t\rightarrow \infty$, the numerator and denominator of $\Gamma_{\phi}^2+\dot{\Gamma}_{\phi}$ are all infinite quantities. But according to L’Hospital law we could tell that $\Gamma_{\phi}^2+\dot{\Gamma}_{\phi}\rightarrow0$ as $t\rightarrow\infty$. At last, the slightly more complex problem is to prove that $(\Gamma_{\phi}^2+\dot{\Gamma}_{\phi})\exp\Big[\int_{t_0}^{\infty}\Gamma_{\phi}dt\Big]$ tends to 0 when $t\rightarrow\infty$. Reviewing Eq. (\[productionrate33\]), we can use a special function to replace $\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda _1}]$ and then prove it. Since $\Gamma_{\phi}$ is always positive, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\exp\Big[\int_{t_0}^{\infty}\Gamma_{\phi}dt\Big]&=&\exp\Big[\int_{t_0}^{\infty}\Bigg(\frac{3 \lambda_1 e^{-\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}}}{t^3 \big(c_1-\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda _1}] \big)}+\frac{3 \lambda_1}{t^3}+\frac{3}{2 t}\Bigg)dt\Big]\nonumber\\
&<&\exp\Big[\int_{t_0}^{t_1}\frac{3 \lambda_1 e^{-\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}}}{t^3 \big(c_1-\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda _1}] \big)}dt
+\int_{t_1}^{\infty}\frac{3 \lambda_1 e^{-\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda_1}}}{t^3 \big(c_1-\frac{1}{t^2} \big)}dt\nonumber\\
&+&\int_{t_0}^{\infty}\Bigg(\frac{3 \lambda_1}{t^3}+\frac{3}{2 t}\Bigg)dt\Big].\end{aligned}$$ For any given $\lambda_1$ there always exists a finite $t_1$, which guarantees $\Gamma [0,\frac{t^2}{2 \lambda _1}]<\frac{1}{t^2}<c_1$ when $t>t_1$. [ It can be shown]{} that the above integral result is equivalent to $C(t_1,t_0) \exp[\int_{t_0}^{\infty}\frac{3}{2 t}dt]$, where $C(t_1,t_0)$ is a constant. Although the integral $\exp[\int_{t_0}^{\infty}\frac{3}{2 t}dt]$ is divergent, using L’Hospital law again one can prove [ that]{} $(\Gamma_{\phi}^2+\dot{\Gamma}_{\phi})\exp\Big[\int_{t_0}^{\infty}\Gamma_{\phi}dt\Big]$ is not divergent and [ goes to zero]{} as $t\rightarrow\infty$.
Comparing the former case ($\lambda_1=0$, $\lambda_2\neq0$ and $a(t)\propto t^{3/4}$) with this case, we find that the second law of thermodynamics is always satisfied in these two cases. The requirement for the stability of the system either results in $\Gamma_{\phi}=0$ ($\lambda_1=0$, $\lambda_2\neq0$ and $a(t)\propto t^{3/4}$) or cannot provide new constraints ($\lambda_1\neq0$, $\lambda_2=0$ and $a(t)\propto t$), which are not the results [we expect.]{}
$\lambda_1\neq0$ and $\lambda_2\neq0$ {#C}
-------------------------------------
### $a(t)\propto e^{h t}$
When $\lambda_2\neq0$, $\lambda_1\neq0$ and $a(t)\propto e^{ht}$, the [solution of Eq. (\[motion4\]) is]{} given as
$$\begin{aligned}
a(t)&\propto& e^{\frac{2}{3}\sqrt{\frac{1}{\lambda_1}}t},\\
\phi(t)&=&b t,\\
V(\phi(t))&=&\frac{b^2}2-\frac{12+2b\sqrt{\lambda_1}}{9\lambda_1}\phi=
\frac{b^2}2-\frac{{12b}+2b^2\sqrt{\lambda_1}}{9\lambda_1}t,\\
F(\phi(t))&=&\frac{b\sqrt{\lambda_1}}{6\lambda_2}\phi=\frac{b^2\sqrt{\lambda_1}}{6\lambda_2}t,\end{aligned}$$
\[solution1\]
where $\lambda_1>0$. The scalar particle production rate is $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{\phi}&=&\frac{16}{9} \sqrt{\frac{1}{\lambda_1}}>0.\label{productionrate44}\end{aligned}$$ Note that $\Gamma_{\phi}$ is a constant and it is only related to [the]{} coupling parameter $\lambda_1$. For this solution the total entropy of the system is given by $$\begin{aligned}
S_{in}(t)=S_{in}(t_0) \exp\left(\frac{16}{9} \sqrt{\frac{1}{\lambda_1}}t\right)>0,\end{aligned}$$ which leads to [ $$\begin{aligned}
\ddot S_{in}(t\rightarrow \infty)
%&=&\lim_{t \to \infty}S_{in}(t)(\Gamma_{\phi}^2+\dot{\Gamma}_{\phi})\nonumber\\
&=&\lim_{t \to \infty}S_{in}(t_0)\frac{256}{81\lambda_1} \exp\left(\frac{16}{9} \sqrt{\frac{1}{\lambda_1}}t\right)\rightarrow\infty.\end{aligned}$$ ]{} The result is usually unacceptable. In summary, the thermodynamic requirements do not provide extra constraints for the coupling parameters.
### $a(t)\propto t^{3/4}$
For the stage that the expansion of the universe is dominated by the dust or radiation, we set $a(t)\propto t^n$. We just find [the following analytical solution:]{}
$$\begin{aligned}
a(t)&\propto& t^{\frac{3}{4}},\\
\phi(t)&=&p t^{\frac{19}{8}}+q,\\
V(\phi(t))&=&\frac{9 \lambda_2}{32}t^{-\frac{9}{8}} \left[(q-\sqrt{47} d) \sin \bigg(\frac{\sqrt{47}}{8} \log (t)\bigg)+(d+\sqrt{47} q) \cos \bigg(\frac{\sqrt{47}}{8} \log (t)\bigg)\right]\nonumber\\
&+&\frac{207}{544} \lambda _1 p^2 t^{3/4}-\frac{15}{14} p^2 t^{11/4},\\
F(\phi(t))&=&t^{\frac{7}{8}}\left[d \cos \bigg(\frac{\sqrt{47} }{8} \log (t)\bigg)+q \sin \bigg(\frac{\sqrt{47}}{8} \log (t)\bigg)\right]-\frac{1}{\lambda_2}+\frac{27 \lambda _1 p^2 t^{11/4}}{68 \lambda _2}\nonumber\\
&-&\frac{4 p^2 t^{19/4}}{63 \lambda _2},\end{aligned}$$
\[solution2\]
where $p$, $q$ and $d$ are constants. For simplicity, we only consider the case with $q=d=0$, which leads $\Gamma_{\phi}$ to be independent of $\lambda_2$, but it is enough to illustrate the problems. The scalar particle production rate $\Gamma_{\phi}$ and the total entropy $S_{in}$ of the system are quite simple: $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{\phi}&=&\frac{19}{28 t}+\frac{621 \lambda _1}{2176 t^3},\label{gamma3}\\
S_{in}(t)&=&S_{in}(t_0) t^{\frac{19}{28}} e^{-\frac{621 \lambda _1}{4352 t^2}}.\end{aligned}$$ The second law of thermodynamics requires $\Gamma_{\phi}>0$, which means $\lambda_1>0$. Since this requirement for $\lambda_1$ is not necessary in the original equation and solution, we do obtain a new restraint on [ the]{} coupling parameters by considering thermodynamic properties of the system.
The second derivative of $S_{in}$ with respect to $t$ is $$\begin{aligned}
\ddot S_{in}(t)=- S_{in}(t_0)\frac{9 e^{-\frac{621 \lambda _1}{4352 t^2}} \Big[5622784 t^4+11109 \lambda _1 (1088 t^2-189 \lambda _1)\Big]}{232013824 t^{149/28}}.\end{aligned}$$ It can be shown that when the time $t$ tends to infinity, $\ddot S_{in}(t)$ will approach to zero.
### $a(t)\propto t^{n}$ $(n\neq3/4)$
As for other cases ($a(t)\propto t^{n}$ and $n\neq3/4$), it is very difficult to solve Eq. (\[motion4\]) analytically. To study the scale factor taking the forms of $a(t)\propto t^{\frac{1}{2}}$ and $a(t)\propto t^{\frac{2}{3}}$, there are two possible ways: numerical or approximate solutions. Here, we choose the later way.
When $a(t)\propto t^{\frac{1}{2}}$, we can simplify Eq. (\[motion4\]) before taking the approximation. We find that if $\phi(t)$ and $V(\phi)$ satisfy, respectively, the following relations:
$$\begin{aligned}
\dot{\phi}(t)&=&\sqrt{\frac{-2 \lambda_2 t \big[2 t \ddot{f}(t)+\dot{f}(t)\big]-4 \lambda_2 f(t)-4}{4 t^2-3 \lambda_1}},\\
V(\phi)&=&-\frac{6 + 6 \lambda_2 \big[f(t)-2t\dot{f}(t)\big]+(4t^2+9\lambda_1)\dot{f}(t)^2}{8 t^2},\end{aligned}$$
[then]{} the three equations in (\[motion4\]) can be reduced to a higher-order equation of $f(t)$: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq533}
16 \lambda _1 \lambda _2 t^5 f^{(3)}(t)-12 \lambda _1^2 \lambda _2 t^3 f^{(3)}(t)-32 \lambda _1 \lambda _2 t^4 \ddot{f}(t)-32 \lambda _2 t^5 \dot{f}(t)+36 \lambda _1 \lambda _2 t^3 \dot{f}(t)\nonumber\\
-21 \lambda _1^2 \lambda _2 t \dot{f}(t)-72 \lambda _1 \lambda _2 t^2 f(t)+30 \lambda _1^2 \lambda _2 f(t)+30 \lambda _1^2-72 \lambda _1 t^2=0.\end{aligned}$$ If this higher-order equation has an analytical solution, the whole equations (\[motion4\]) will have analytical solutions. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to find an analytical solution for this equation. The approximation we take depends on the values of the parameters $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$. First, we suppose that the coupling parameters $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ are all small quantities, so we may ignore [the]{} second and higher order small quantities in Eq. (\[eq533\]), which results in the following approximation equation: $$\begin{aligned}
-32 \lambda _2 t^5 \dot{f}(t)-72 \lambda _1 t^2=0.\end{aligned}$$ Our approximate solutions are given as
$$\begin{aligned}
a(t)&\propto& t^{\frac{1}{2}},\\
\dot{\phi}(t)&=&\sqrt{\frac{-4 t^2 \left(c_1 \lambda _2+1\right)-27 \lambda _1}{4 t^4-3 \lambda _1 t^2}},\\
V(\phi(t))&=&\frac{-32 t^4 \left(c_1 \lambda _2+1\right)+108 \lambda _1 t^2 \left(2 c_1 \lambda _2+1\right)+1377 \lambda _1^2}{32 t^4 \left(4 t^2-3 \lambda _1\right)},\\
F(\phi(t))&=&\frac{9 \lambda _1}{8 \lambda _2 t^2}+c_1,\end{aligned}$$
where $c_1$ is a constant. To guarantee that the range of time $t$ is as large as possible, we need $c_1 \lambda _2+1<0$. The corresponding particle production rate and entropy are given as $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{\phi}&=&-\frac{9 \lambda _1 \left(4 t^2-3 \lambda _1\right) \left(4 t^2 \left(c_1 \lambda _2+1\right)+51 \lambda _1\right)}{8 t^3 \left(\lambda _1+4 t^2\right) \left(4 t^2 \left(c_1 \lambda _2+1\right)+27 \lambda _1\right)},\\
S_{in}(t)&=&S_{in}(t_0)\exp \Bigg[\frac{9}{8} \lambda _1 \bigg(\frac{8 \left(c_1 \lambda _2-50\right) \log \left(\lambda _1+4 t^2\right)}{\lambda _1 \left(c_1 \lambda _2-26\right)}-\frac{16 \left(2 c_1 \lambda _2+155\right) \log (t)}{81 \lambda _1}\\
&+&\frac{16 \left(c_1 \lambda _2+1\right) \left(c_1 \lambda _2+10\right) \log \left(4 t^2 \left(c_1 \lambda _2+1\right)+27 \lambda _1\right)}{81 \lambda _1 \left(c_1 \lambda _2-26\right)}-\frac{17}{6 t^2}
\bigg)\Bigg].\end{aligned}$$ Again we require $\Gamma_{\phi}>0$ and $\ddot{S}_{in}(t\rightarrow\infty)\rightarrow0$, which leads to $\lambda_1<0$.
As for the case of $a(t)\propto t^{\frac{2}{3}}$, by applying the similar approximate treatment, the result is similar, so we do not repeat it here.
Entropy of the apparent horizon
===============================
Now, we briefly discuss the entropy of the apparent horizon of the universe, which can always be given by the radius of the apparent horizon [@Pavon:2012qn; @Mimoso:2013zhp; @Easson:2010av; @Bardeen:1973gs; @Hawking:1974sw; @Bekenstein:1973ur; @Gibbons:1977mu; @Wald:1993nt; @Brustein:2007jj]: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{entropyofH}
S_h(t)=\frac{\pi}{G_{eff}H^2},\end{aligned}$$ where $G_{eff}$ is an effective Newtonian constant. The radius of the apparent horizon is $r_h=H^{-1}$ for the FRW universe with $k=0$ [@Bak:1999hd]. One can simply regard $S_h(t)\propto\frac{1}{H^2}$ in modified gravity theories. Apparently, when $a(t)\propto e^{ht}$, $S_h(t)$ is a constant satisfying the thermodynamic constraints $\dot S_h(t)\geq0$ and $\ddot S_h(t\rightarrow\infty)\rightarrow0$. Unfortunately, as we discussed earlier, when $a(t)\propto e^{ht}$, the entropy generated by particle production, usually, does not meet the same requirements $\dot S_{in}(t)\geq0$ and $\ddot S_{in}(t\rightarrow\infty)\rightarrow0$ (at least in our simple Horndeski theory). Therefore, the sum of the entropy $S_{sum}=S_{in}+S_h$ cannot satisfy all thermodynamic constraints. Since the scale factor in the late universe is likely to grow exponentially, it is best not to ignore the second requirement. So the result is that $\Gamma_{\phi}=0$, i.e., all the coupling parameters must be zero.
In the case of $a(t)\propto t^n$, we have $S_h(t)=\pi t^2/n^2$, which guarantees that $\dot S_h(t)\geq0$ but not $\ddot S_h(t\rightarrow\infty)\rightarrow0$. Obviously, the sum of the entropy also cannot satisfy $\ddot S_{sum}(t\rightarrow\infty)\rightarrow0$. As we mentioned earlier that for the case $a(t)\propto t^n$, since it is not the ultimate evolution of the universe, the second requirement can be relaxed.
Conclusion and discussion {#Conclusion}
=========================
In the present paper we continued to study particle production [based on the]{} works [@Harko:2014pqa; @Harko:2015pma]. For this purpose, we need to study a theory with non-minimal coupling between matter and space-time. Since Horndeski theory contains couplings of scalar field with space-time and also guarantees that the field equations are second order, we considered a simple Horndeski theory as our main research object.
First, by defining the scalar field energy-momentum tensor with Eq. (\[Tuv\]), we obtained the energy conservation relation (\[hornconv\]) between the scalar field and geometry. We found that the great advantage of considering a specific action of matter is that we can derive Eq. (\[horndeskiscalar\]) directly from the equation of motion of the matter, which could avoid complex calculations when the Einstein’s field equations is cumbersome. Following Harko’s method [@Harko:2014pqa; @Harko:2015pma], we applied the non-conservation of the scalar field energy-momentum tensor to an open thermodynamic system and obtained abstract expressions of particle production rate and the corresponding entropy.
Then, we solved the field equations of the simple Horndeski theory analytically in the context of the universe. The solutions were divided into two categories by the form of scale factor: $a(t)\propto e^{ht}$ and $a(t)\propto t^n$. When the coupling parameters $\lambda_1\neq0$ and $\lambda_2\neq0$, we hypothesized that $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ are all small quantities and got some approximate solutions. With these solutions, we obtained expressions of entropy evolving with time $t$. Since the open cosmological systems we studied are thermodynamic systems, one can naturally put forward two requirements on the entropy of system: $\dot S_{in}(t)\geq0$ and $\ddot S_{in}(t\rightarrow\infty)\rightarrow0$. The first requirement is equivalent to $\Gamma_{\phi}\geq0$, i.e., particles can only be generated. The second requirement $\ddot S_{in}(t\rightarrow\infty)\rightarrow0$ is looser than the constraint $\ddot S_{in}<0$ [@Callen:xx; @Mimoso:2013zhp; @Harko:2014pqa; @Harko:2015pma].
With the help of thermodynamic properties of the system, we hope to give some new constraints on the coupling parameters $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ in the simple Horndeski theory. Unfortunately, most of our results, for example the case of $\lambda_1=0$, $\lambda_2\neq0$ and $a(t)\propto t^{3/4}$, show that thermodynamic laws cannot provide more constraints than that from the solutions themselves. And the cases which give new constraints on the coupling parameters (for example the case of $\lambda_1\neq0$, $\lambda_2\neq0$ and $a(t)\propto t^{\frac{1}{2}}$) can only limit the sign of them and provide no more specific details. The reason may be that the range of the parameter $t$ is always $(0,\infty)$. If the range of time can be more specific, especially for the case $a(t)\propto t^n$, perhaps the results will be more stringent.
It is worth mentioning that the requirement $\ddot S_{in}(t\rightarrow\infty)\rightarrow0$ (and also $\ddot S_{in}<0$) may be improper when the form of $a(t)$ does not represent the late universe, so this requirement is always negligible unless we really know the final evolution of the universe. But the first requirement $\dot S_{in}(t)\geq0$ is true in any case. Fortunately, sometimes even if we only consider $\dot S_{in}(t)\geq0$, it could give some new constraints on the coupling parameters (see the example of $\lambda_1\neq0$, $\lambda_2\neq0$ and $a(t)\propto t^{\frac{1}{2}}$).
Finally, we briefly discussed the entropy of the apparent horizon. Since Eq. (\[entropyofH\]) is too rough, it is not much helpful in our research. In the presence of the coupling of geometry with matter, it is reasonable that the entropy of the apparent horizon is related to the coupling parameters. If so, Eq. (\[entropyofH\]) should be recalculated. The new formula of the entropy is promising to provide more constrains and our follow-up work will put this as a priority. What is more, if the background space-time itself has entropy, it is also necessary to consider the entropy of the space-time in the sum of the entropy, which is also worthy of our continued researches.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants No. 11522541 and No. 11375075), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. lzujbky-2017-it68 and No. lzujbky-2015-jl01). H. Yu was supported by the scholarship granted by the Chinese Scholarship Council (CSC).
[10]{}
M. Gasperini, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 38**]{} (1988) 2635.
T. Damour, [*Class. Quant. Grav.*]{} [**13**]{} (1996) A33 \[[[gr-qc/9606080]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9606080)\].
T. Damour, F. Piazza, and G. Veneziano, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 66**]{} (2002) 046007 \[[[hep-th/0205111]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0205111)\].
O. Bertolami, F. Gil Pedro, and M. Le Delliou, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 654**]{} (2007) 165 \[[[astro-ph/0703462]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0703462)\].
S. Schlamminger, K.-Y. Choi, T. A. Wagner, J. H. Gundlach, and E. G. Adelberger, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**100**]{} (2008) 041101 \[[[arXiv:0712.0607]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/0712.0607)\].
C. M. Will, [*Living Rev. Rel.*]{} [**17**]{} (2014) 4 \[[[arXiv:1403.7377]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.7377)\].
A. Halprin, C. N. Leung, and J. T. Pantaleone, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 53**]{} (1996) 5365 \[[[hep-ph/9512220]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9512220)\].
G. Z. Adunas, E. Rodriguez-Milla, and D. V. Ahluwalia, [*Gen. Rel. Grav.*]{} [**33**]{} (2001) 183 \[[[gr-qc/0006022]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0006022)\].
T. Harko and F. S. N. Lobo, [*Galaxies*]{} [**2**]{} (2014) 410 \[[[arXiv:1407.2013]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.2013)\].
A. D. Dolgov and M. Kawasaki, \[[[astro-ph/0307442]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0307442)\].
S. Mukohyama and L. Randall, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**92**]{} (2004) 211302 \[[[hep-th/0306108]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0306108)\].
S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 599**]{} (2004) 137 \[[[astro-ph/0403622]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0403622)\].
G. Allemandi, A. Borowiec, M. Francaviglia, and S. D. Odintsov, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 72**]{} (2005) 063505 \[[[gr-qc/0504057]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0504057)\].
O. Bertolami, C. G. Boehmer, T. Harko, and F. S. N. Lobo, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 75**]{} (2007) 104016 \[[[arXiv:0704.1733]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.1733)\].
V. Faraoni, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 76**]{} (2007) 127501 \[[[arXiv:0710.1291]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/0710.1291)\].
T. P. Sotiriou and V. Faraoni, [*Class. Quant. Grav.*]{} [**25**]{} (2008) 205002 \[[[arXiv:0805.1249]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/0805.1249)\].
O. Bertolami and J. Paramos, [*JCAP*]{} [**1003**]{} (2010) 009 \[[[arXiv:0906.4757]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/0906.4757)\].
T. Harko, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 81**]{} (2010) 084050 \[[[arXiv:1004.0576]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.0576)\].
O. Bertolami, P. Frazao, and J. Paramos, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 81**]{} (2010) 104046 \[[[arXiv:1003.0850]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.0850)\].
Y. Bisabr, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 86**]{} (2012) 044025 \[[[arXiv:1205.0328]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.0328)\].
T. Harko, F. S. N. Lobo, G. Otalora, and E. N. Saridakis, [*JCAP*]{} [**1412**]{} (2014) 021 \[[[arXiv:1405.0519]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.0519)\].
Y. B. Wu, Y. Y. Zhao, R. G. Cai, J. B. Lu, J. W. Lu, and X. J. Gao, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 717**]{} (2012) 323.
M. Sharif and M. Zubair, [*JCAP*]{} [**1311**]{} (2013) 042.
T. Harko, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 90**]{} (2014) 044067 \[[[arXiv:1408.3465]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.3465)\].
D. Momeni, P. H. R. S. Moraes, and R. Myrzakulov, [*Astrophys. Space Sci.*]{} [**361**]{} (2016) 228 \[[[arXiv:1512.04755]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1512.04755)\].
T. Harko, F. S. N. Lobo, J. P. Mimoso, and D. Pav車n, [*Eur. Phys. J.*]{} [**C 75**]{} (2015) 386 \[[[arXiv:1508.02511]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1508.02511)\].
V. Singh and C. P. Singh, [*Int. J. Theor. Phys.*]{} [**55**]{} (2016) 1257.
H. Bondi and T. Gold, [*Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.*]{} [**108**]{} (1948) 252.
F. Hoyle, [*Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.*]{} [**108**]{} (1948) 372.
P. A. M. Dirac, [*Nature*]{} [**139**]{} (1937) 323.
L. Parker, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**21**]{} (1968) 562.
L. Parker, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**183**]{} (1969) 1057.
L. Parker, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 3**]{} (1971) 346, Erratum: \[[*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 3**]{} (1971) 2546\].
E. P. Tryon, [*Nature*]{} [**246**]{} (1973) 396.
P.I. Fomin, Report No. ITF-73-137, Kiev, 1973 (unpublished); [*Dokl. Akad. Nauk. Ukr. SSR*]{} [**A 9**]{} (1975) 831.
R. U. Sexl and H. K. Urbantke, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**179**]{} (11969) 1247.
Y. B. Zeldovich, [*Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.*]{} [**12**]{} (1970) 443.
S. A. Fulling, L. Parker, and B. L. Hu, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 10**]{} (1974) 3905.
A. A. Grib, S. G. Mamaev, and V. M. Mostepanenko, [*Gen. Rel. Grav.*]{} [**7**]{} (1976) 535.
R. Brout, F. Englert, and E. Gunzig, [*Annals Phys.*]{} [**115**]{} (1978) 78.
B. L. Hu and L. Parker, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 17**]{} (1978) 933, Erratum: \[[*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 17**]{} (1978) 3292\].
N. J. Papastamatiou and L. Parker, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 19**]{} (1979) 2283.
I. Prigogine and J. Geheniau, [*Proc. Nati. Acad. Sci.*]{} [**83**]{} (1986) 6245.
I. Prigogine, J. Geheniau, E. Gunzig, and P. Nardone, [*Proc. Nati. Acad. Sci.*]{} [**85**]{} (1988) 7428.
I. Prigogine, J. Geheniau, E. Gunzig, and P. Nardone, [*Gen. Rel. Grav.*]{} [**21**]{} (1989) 767.
M. O. Calvao, J. A. S. Lima, and I. Waga, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**A 162**]{} (1992) 223.
L. H. Ford, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 35**]{} (1987) 2955.
J. H. Traschen and R. H. Brandenberger, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 42**]{} (1990) 2491.
L. R. W. Abramo and J. A. S. Lima, [*Class. Quant. Grav.*]{} [**13**]{} (1996) 2953 \[[[gr-qc/9606064]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9606064)\].
J. A. S. Lima, A. S. M. Germano, and L. R. W. Abramo, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 53**]{} (1996) 4287 \[[[gr-qc/9511006]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9511006)\].
E. Gunzig, R. Maartens, and A. V. Nesteruk, [*Class. Quant. Grav.*]{} [**15**]{} (1998) 923 \[[[astro-ph/9703137]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9703137)\].
P. J. E. Peebles and A. Vilenkin, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 59**]{} (1999) 063505 \[[[astro-ph/9810509]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9810509)\].
W. Zimdahl, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 61**]{} (2000) 083511 \[[[astro-ph/9910483]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9910483)\].
R. Allahverdi, R. Brandenberger, F. Y. Cyr-Racine, and A. Mazumdar, [*Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.*]{} [**60**]{} (2010) 27 \[[[arXiv:1001.2600]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1001.2600)\].
J. F. Jesus, F. A. Oliveira, S. Basilakos, and J. A. S. Lima, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 84**]{} (2011) 063511 \[[[arXiv:1105.1027]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.1027)\].
G. Steigman, R. C. Santos, and J. A. S. Lima, [*JCAP*]{} [**0906**]{} (2009) 033 \[[[arXiv:0812.3912]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/0812.3912)\].
J. A. S. Lima, J. F. Jesus, and F. A. Oliveira, [*JCAP*]{} [**1011**]{} (2010) 027 \[[[arXiv:0911.5727]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.5727 )\].
S. Chakraborty, S. Pan, and S. Saha, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 738**]{} (2014) 424 \[[[arXiv:1411.0941]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.0941 )\].
R. C. Nunes and D. Pav車n, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 91**]{} (2015) 063526 \[[[arXiv:1503.04113]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1503.04113 )\].
H. Callen, [*John Wiley, New York,*]{} (1960)
G. W. Horndeski, [*Int. J. Theor. Phys.*]{} [**10**]{} (1974) 363.
R. R. Caldwell, R. Dave, and P. J. Steinhardt, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**80**]{} (1998) 1582 \[[[astro-ph/9708069]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9708069)\].
P. J. E. Peebles and B. Ratra, [*Rev. Mod. Phys.*]{} [**75**]{} (2003) 559 \[[[astro-ph/0207347]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0207347)\].
E. V. Linder, [*Gen. Rel. Grav.*]{} [**40**]{} (2008) 329 \[[[arXiv:0704.2064]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.2064)\].
J. A. S. Lima and A. S. M. Germano, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**A 170**]{} (1992) 373.
J. P. Mimoso and D. Pav車n, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 87**]{} (2013) 047302. \[[[arXiv:1302.1972]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.1972)\].
D. Pavon and N. Radicella, [*Gen. Rel. Grav.*]{} [**45**]{} (2013) 63 \[[[arXiv:1209.3004]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.3004)\].
D. A. Easson, P. H. Frampton, and G. F. Smoot, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B 696**]{} (2011) 273 \[[[arXiv:1002.4278]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.4278)\].
J. M. Bardeen, B. Carter, and S. W. Hawking, [*Commun. Math. Phys.*]{} [**31**]{} (1973) 161.
S. W. Hawking, [*Commun. Math. Phys.*]{} [**43**]{} (1975) 199, Erratum: \[[*Commun. Math. Phys.*]{} [**46**]{} (1976) 206\].
J. D. Bekenstein, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 7**]{} (1973) 2333.
G. W. Gibbons and S. W. Hawking, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 15**]{} (1977) 2738.
R. M. Wald, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 48**]{} (1993) 3427 \[[[gr-qc/9307038]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9307038)\].
R. Brustein, D. Gorbonos, and M. Hadad, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D 79**]{} (2009) 044025 \[[[arXiv:0712.3206]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/0712.3206)\].
D. Bak and S. J. Rey, [*Class. Quant. Grav.*]{} [**17**]{} (2000) 83 \[[[hep-th/9902173]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9902173)\].
[^1]: [email protected]
[^2]: [email protected]
[^3]: [email protected]
[^4]: [email protected], corresponding author
[^5]: Here, we do not take the constraint $\ddot S_{in}<0$, which has been used in most of similar works [@Callen:xx; @Mimoso:2013zhp; @Harko:2014pqa; @Harko:2015pma]. Since the constraint $\ddot S_{in}<0$ for a closed thermodynamic system is only imposed on the last stage of the evolution, we hold the opinion that $\ddot S_{in}>0$ for small value of $t$ is reasonable (our constraint is more relaxed). If the scale factor corresponds to early or middle universe, such a constraint $\ddot S_{in}<0$ (also $\ddot S_{in}(t\rightarrow \infty)\rightarrow0$) may be needless.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Based on the IR-improved bulk holographic AdS/QCD model which provides a consistent prediction for the mass spectra of resonance scalar, pseudoscalar, vector and axial vector mesons, we investigate its finite temperature behavior. By analyzing the spectral function of mesons and fitting it with a Breit-Wigner form, we perform an analysis for the critical temperature of mesons. The back-reaction effects of bulk vacuum are considered, the thermal mass spectral function of resonance mesons is calculated based on the back-reaction improved action. A reasonable melting temperature is found to be $T_c \simeq 150 \pm 7$ MeV, which is consistent with the recent results from lattice QCD simulations.'
author:
- 'Ling-Xiao Cui'
- Zhen Fang
- 'Yue-Liang Wu'
title: 'Thermal Spectral Function and Deconfinement Temperature in Bulk Holographic AdS/QCD with Back Reaction of Bulk Vacuum'
---
Introduction {#Chap:Intro}
============
The property of asymptotic freedom of quantum chromodynamics (QCD)[@AF] and the treatment of non-perturbative QCD have led to the QCD string approach, which has eventually initiated the motivation of string theory. with the development of string theory, it further motivated the advent of the AdS/CFT conjecture [@Maldacena:1997re; @Gubser:1998bc; @Witten:1998qj; @Polchinski:2001tt], which provides an alternative tool to access the gloomy non-perturbative region of QCD, that is so-called holographic QCD or AdS/QCD model based on the AdS/CFT. These models are not perfect with some problems in its deep root of AdS/CFT as QCD is not a conformal field theory at low energy. There are different holographic QCD models due to different realizations and objectives. It has mainly been divided into two classes, namely top-down model and bottom-up model. The top-down models are directly constructed from string theory, the popular ones like D3/D7, D4/D6 and D4/D8 model [@top; @down; @1; @top; @down; @2; @top; @down; @3]. while bottom-up models such as hard-wall model [@hard; @wall] and soft-wall model [@soft; @wall] are constructed according to properties of QCD itself from which the corresponding bulk gravity is determined. In the hard-wall model, a sharp cutoff of the fifth dimension which corresponds to the inverse of the QCD scale $\Lambda$ is given to realize the QCD confinement. It contains chiral symmetry breaking but fails to give a correct Regge behaviour for the mass spectra of hadrons. To remedy this problem, in the soft-wall model, a dilaton term is put into the bulk action to replace the sharp IR cutoff of the hard-wall model. However, the resulting model cannot realize chiral symmetry breaking phenomenon consistently. Several models have been constructed to incorporate these QCD behaviors[@quartic; @term; @Sui:2009xe; @Sui:2010ay; @Cui:2013xva; @Li:2012ay; @z; @bulk; @mass2; @z; @bulk; @mass3; @BT1; @BT2; @BT3], these models have made numerical predictions for the mass spectra of light mesons, such as scalar, pseudoscalar, vector and axial-vector mesons. Especially, in the recent paper[@Cui:2013xva], we have constructed an alternative model in which the metric remains conformal invariance and satisfying Einstein equation, while the bulk mass and bulk coupling of the quartic scalar interaction have a bulk coordinate z-dependence, so that the ultraviolet (UV) behavior of the model corresponds to AdS/CFT, while the infrared (IR) behavior is required from low energy QCD features which are compatible with the leading chiral dynamic model of spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking[@Nambu:1960xd; @DW]. As a consequence, we have arrived at a more consistent model with better predictions for the mass spectra of both ground and resonance states of scalar, pseudoscalar, vector and axial-vector mesons.
The finite temperature effects of holographic QCD has attracted lots of attention. The finite temperature effects in hard-wall AdS/QCD were studied in [@hardwall_T]. In [@Fujita:2009wc; @Fujita:2009ca; @Miranda:2009uw; @Colangelo:2009ra], the thermal spectrum of glueballs or mesons in the soft-wall AdS/QCD model was investigated. In [@Grigoryan:2010pj], a soft-wall model for charmonium was built. The deconfinement temperature of soft-wall AdS/QCD models was calculated in [@Herzog:2006ra] and found to be $T_c\approx191{\;\text{MeV}}$. In Ref.[@Scalar; @glueball; @glueball_1; @glueball_2], the scalar glueball and light mesons spectral have been analyzed in the soft-wall AdS/QCD model and the critical temperature at which the meson states dissociation was found to be about $40-60{\;\text{MeV}}$. Such a low temperature is far from the deconfinement transition. It indicates that the meson states dissociation occurs in the confined QCD phase and it is inconsistent with the real QCD. To remedy this problem, we have investigated in [@Cui:2011ag; @Cui:2013zha] the finite temperature effects for the metric IR-improved soft wall AdS/QCD models [@Sui:2009xe]. The critical temperature of meson dissociation was found to be around $200{\;\text{MeV}}$. Where the metric is modified at IR region, so the Hawking temperature of the black hole is not exactly defined as it dose not satisfy Einstein equation. Thus it is interesting to analyze the critical temperature of the bulk holographic AdS/QCD model built recently in[@Cui:2013xva], where the model incorporates both chiral symmetry breaking and linear confinement with the better predictions on the mass spectra of meson states.
The paper is organized as follows: In Sec.\[Chap:Model\], by briefly reviewing the IR-improved bulk holographic AdS/QCD model constructed recently in[@Cui:2013xva] , we extent it to an action with finite temperature. In Sec.\[Chap:thermal spectral\], we analyze the thermal spectral function and carry out calculations for the meson thermal mass spectra. The corresponding melting temperature is obtained. In Sec.\[Chap:back-reaction\], the back-reaction effort of bulk vacuum is considered to yield an improved metric of background gravity, the thermal mass spectra are investigated in detail based on the back-reaction improved action. A reasonable melting temperature is obtained. Our conclusions and remarks are presented in the final section.
IR-Improved Bulk Holographic AdS/QCD Model with Finite Temperature {#Chap:Model}
==================================================================
In this section, we will investigate the finite temperature behavior of the IR-improved bulk holographic AdS/QCD model[@Cui:2013xva]. Here the AdS black hole is chosen as the background to describe temperature in boundary theory, $$ds^{2}=\frac{R^{2}}{z^{2}}\left(f(z)dt^{2}-d\vec{x}^{2}-\frac{dz^{2}}{f(z)}\right),\label{metric}$$ with $$f\left(z\right)=1-\frac{z^4}{z_h^4},
\label{AdS black hole}$$ where $z_h$ is the location of the outer horizon of the black-hole. We will set the AdS radius as unity in this paper for the boundary theories. The Hawking temperature which corresponds to the temperature in boundary theory is defined as follow: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{hawking T}
T_{H}=\frac{1}{4\pi}\left|\frac{df}{dz}\right|_{z\rightarrow z_{h}}=\frac{1}{\pi z_{h}}\end{aligned}$$
The action with finite temperature is based on the IR-improved bulk holographic AdS/QCD model[@Cui:2013xva]. $$S=\int d^{5}x\,\sqrt{g}e^{-\Phi(z)}\,{\rm {Tr}}\left[|DX|^{2}-m_{X}^{2} |X|^{2}-\lambda_X |X|^{4}-\frac{1}{4g_{5}^2}(F_{L}^2+F_{R}^2)\right],\label{action}$$ with $D^MX={\partial}^MX-i A_L^MX+i X A_R^M$, $A_{L,R}^M=A_{L,R}^{M~a}t^a$ and ${\rm{Tr}}[t^at^b]=\delta^{ab}/2$. The gauge coupling $g_5$ is fixed to be $g_5^2 = 12\pi^2/N_c$ with $N_c$ the color number [@hard; @wall]. The complex bulk field $X$ will be written into the scalar and pseudoscalar mesons, the combination of chiral gauge fields $A_L$ and $A_R$ will be identified to the vector and axial-vector mesons. The dilaton field, the bulk scalar mass and quartic interaction coupling have been shown to be reasonable to take the following IR-modified forms[@Cui:2013xva]: $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi(z) &=& \mu_g^2z^2-\frac{\lambda_g^4\mu_g^4z^4}{(1+\mu_g^2z^2)^3}. \\
m_{X}^2(z) &=& -3-\frac{\lambda_1^2\mu_g^2z^2+\lambda_2^4\mu_g^4z^4}{1+\mu_g^2z^2} + \tilde{m}^2_X(z) \\
\lambda_X(z) &=& \frac{\mu _g^2 z^2}{1+\mu _g^2 z^2}\lambda\\end{aligned}$$ with $\lambda_1=\lambda_2 = \sqrt{2}$. The expectation value of bulk scalar field $X$ has a z-dependent form for two flavor case: $$\label{VEV}
{\left\langle X\right\rangle}=\frac{1}{2}v(z)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right)$$ The bulk vecuum expectation value (bVEV) $v(z)$ with proper IR and UV boundary conditions has been taken the following simple form [@Cui:2013xva]: $$\label{bVEV}
v(z)=\frac{A z+B z^3}{1+C z^2}.$$ with $$\label{ABC}
A=m_q\zeta,\quad B=\frac{\sigma}{\zeta}+m_q\zeta C,\quad C=\mu_c^2/\zeta$$ and the coupling constant $\lambda$ is related to the vacuum expectation value via the equation of motion $$\begin{aligned}
v_q\equiv \sqrt{\frac{(2\mu_g)^2}{\lambda} } = \frac{B}{C} = \frac{\sigma }{\mu_c^2} + m_q \zeta \end{aligned}$$
The involving five parameters have been fixed from the low energy parameters of mesons[@Cui:2013xva] and their values are represented in Table \[Table:parameter\] .
$\lambda_g$ $m_q$(MeV) $\sigma^{\frac{1}{3}}$(MeV) $\mu_g$(MeV) $\mu_c$(MeV)
------------- ------------ ----------------------------- -------------- --------------
1.7 3.52 290 473 375
: The values of five parameters[]{data-label="Table:parameter"}
Thermal Spectral Function {#Chap:thermal spectral}
=========================
The bulk scalar field can be decomposed as $X(x,z)\equiv(v(z)/2+S(x,z))e^{2i\pi(x,z)}$, where $S(x,z)$ is the scalar meson field and $\pi(x,z)=\pi^a(x,z)t^a$ the pseudo-scalar field. The chiral gauge fields can be combined into vector field $V^a_M$ and axial-vector field $A^a_M$ as $$\label{combine}
V^a_M\equiv\frac{1}{2}(A^a_{L,M}+A^a_{R,M})\qquad \textrm{and} \qquad A^a_M\equiv\frac{1}{2}(A^a_{L,M}-A^a_{R,M}).$$ The equations of motion for the meson fields are given as follows in momentum space by performing the Fourier transformation. $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:eomV}
\textrm{V}&:&
V_x''(z)+\left(\frac{a'(z)}{a(z)}+\frac{f'(z)}{f(z)}-\Phi'(z)\right)V_x'(z)+\frac{\omega^2 V_x(z)}{f^2(z)}=0,\\
\label{eq:eomAV}
\textrm{AV}&:&
A_x''(z)+\left(\frac{a'(z)}{a(z)}+\frac{f'(z)}{f(z)}-\Phi'(z)\right)A_x'(z)+\frac{\omega^2 A_x(z)}{f^2(z)}+g_5^2\frac{v^2(z)}{z^2f(z)}A_x(z)=0\\
\textrm{S}&:&
S''(z)+S'(z) \left(\frac{3
a'(z)}{a(z)}+\frac{f'(z)}{f(z)}-\Phi '(z)\right)\nonumber
\\ && \qquad\qquad\qquad +S(z)\left(\frac{\omega^2}{f(z)^2}-\frac{a(z)^2 m_X^2(z)}{f(z)}-\frac{3\lambda_X(z)a(z)^2 v(z)^2}{2f(z)}\right)=0,\\
\label{eq:eomPST}
\textrm{PS}&:&
\pi''(z)+\pi'(z) \left(\frac{3 a'(z)}{a(z)}+\frac{f'(z)}{f(z)}+\frac{2
v'(z)}{v(z)}-\Phi '(z)\right)
+\frac{\omega ^2 \pi(z)}{f(z)^2}=0,\end{aligned}$$ Note that with the temperature increaseing, the horizon of black hole $z_{h}$ moves from infinity to boundary side. Thus the solutions of equations of motion will drop into black hole before they vanish, so that one cannot use the method of finding eigenmodes. Alternatively, we shall consider spectral function which is the imaginary part of the retarded Green’s function. In the above equations, we have put three-momentum to zero:$\overrightarrow{p}=0$, which leads the retarded Green’s function to be simplified as: $G^R_{tt}=0$, $G^R_{xx}=G^R_{yy}=G^R_{zz}\equiv G^R(\omega)$. For equation of pseudo-scalar field, we have ignored the mixing between axial-vector field and pseudo-scalar field for a simple consideration as it will not affect the finite temperature behavior discussed in[@Cui:2013zha].
Let us first check the boundary behavior of the solution. Near the UV boundary, one can extract the asymptotic solutions for above four equations Eq.(\[eq:eomV\]-\[eq:eomPST\]). For convenience, we replace the radial coordinate $z$ by the dimensionless variable $u$ with $u=z/z_h$. The two linear independent solutions are found to be:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{asym solu}
\textrm{V} &:&
V_1\to uY_1\left(uz_h\omega\right),\quad V_2\to uJ_1\left(uz_h\omega\right)\\
\textrm{AV} &:&
A_1\to uY_1\left(uz_h\sqrt{\omega^2-4A^2\pi^2}\right),\quad A_2\to uJ_1\left(uz_h\sqrt{\omega^2-4A^2\pi^2}\right)\\
\textrm{S} &:&
S _1\to u^2
J_1\left(uz_h\sqrt{2\mu_g^2+\omega^2}\right),
\quad
S _2\to u^2
Y_1\left(uz_h\sqrt{2\mu_g^2+\omega^2}\right)
\\
\textrm{PS} &:&
\pi _1\to u
J_1\left(\frac{u \omega }{z_{h}}\right),
\quad
\pi _2\to u
Y_1\left(\frac{u \omega }{z_{h}}\right)\end{aligned}$$
Here $J_1$ and $Y_1$ are the first-kind Bessel function and second-kind Bessel function respectively. As discussed in [@retarded; @green], in the Minkowski space-time, the choice of in-falling boundary condition at the horizon selects the retarded Green’s function: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{infalling}
K_{-}\to(1-u)^{-i\frac{z_{h}\omega}{4}}\end{aligned}$$
The solutions of equations of motion can be expressed by the combination of the two independent asymptotic solutions: $K_1 = (V_1,\; A_1\; S_1,\; \pi_1)$ and $K_2 = (V_2,\; A_2\; S_2,\; \pi_2)$ $$\begin{aligned}
\label{solution}
K(u)=A(\omega,q)K_{1}(\omega,q,u)+B(\omega,q)K_{2}(\omega,q,u)\longrightarrow(1-u)^{-i\frac{z_{h}\omega}{4}}\end{aligned}$$ where the coefficients $A(\omega,q)$ and $B(\omega,q)$ are fixed by the IR in-falling boundary condition at the horizon. The retarded Green’s function can be obtained from the dual bulk fields. As an illustration, for scalar fields, one writes the on shell action which reduces to surface terms: $$S=\int\frac{d^{4}p}{\left(2\pi\right)^{4}}\left.e^{-\Phi(z)}f(z)a(z)^{\frac{3}{2}}S(p,z)\partial_{z}S(p,z)\right|_{z=0}^{z=z_{h}},\label{surface}$$ Following the prescription in [@retarded; @green], after substitute Eq.(\[solution\]) into surface terms of the on shell action, one can find that the spectral function which is related to the imaginary part of two point retarded Green’s function is proportional to the imaginary part of $B(\omega,q)/A(\omega,q)$. $$\begin{aligned}
\rho(\omega,q)=-\frac{1}{\pi}\mathrm{Im}\, G(\omega,q)\,\theta(\omega^{2}-q^{2})\varpropto\mathrm{Im}\,\frac{B(\omega,q)}{A(\omega,q)},\end{aligned}$$
The numerical results of spectral function for scalar, pseudo-scalar, vector and axial-vector mesons are shown in Fig.\[Fig of spectral\].
![The results of spectral function for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right). []{data-label="Fig of spectral"}](s.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"} ![The results of spectral function for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right). []{data-label="Fig of spectral"}](ps.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"} ![The results of spectral function for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right). []{data-label="Fig of spectral"}](v.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"} ![The results of spectral function for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right). []{data-label="Fig of spectral"}](av.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"}
It can be seen from the results that in low temperature region the peaks which correspond to the poles of the Green’s function represent resonance mesons with their masses coinciding to the ones given at zero temperature[@Cui:2013xva]. As the temperature increases, the meson states become unstable. It can be seen from the peaks which are shifted towards smaller values and the widths which become broader. Quantitatively, we can get more information by fitting the spectral function with a Breit-Wigner form: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{BWform}
\frac{a \omega^b}{(\omega^2-m^2)^2+\Gamma^2} + P(\omega^2).\end{aligned}$$ where $m$ and $\Gamma$ are the location and width of the peak respectively. $P(\omega^2)$ is representing a continuum which is taken the form $P(\omega^2)=c_1+c_2\omega^2+c_3(\omega^4)$ The melting temperature or the critical temperature can be defined from the Breit-Wigner form. That is, if the width of the peak is larger than its height, we can say that no peak can be distinguished anymore. The condition is shown as follow: $$\label{critical temperature}
h=\frac{a \omega^b}{(\omega^2-m^2)^2+\Gamma^2}\bigg|_{\omega\to m},\qquad h<\Gamma \; .$$ Note that this definition of critical temperature is vague and subjective. In this paper, we will give the range of critical temperature by the condition: $\Gamma/2<h<\Gamma$. The range of critical temperatures of scalar, pseudo-scalar, vector and axial-vector mesons are shown in Table.\[Table:tc\].
Meson Scalar Pseudo-Scalar Vector Axial-Vector
------------ --------- --------------- --------- --------------
$T_c$(MeV) 133-136 135-140 136-140 143-146
: The critical temperatures of scalar, pseudo-scalar, vector and axial-vector mesons[]{data-label="Table:tc"}
The results of melting temperature imply that the mesonic quasiparticle state is dissolved around $T_c=140{\;\text{MeV}}$ in above considerations. It is noted that the bulk coordinate $z$ plays the role of the running energy scale in boundary theory. As the Hawking temperature increases to around $T_c\simeq140{\;\text{MeV}}$, the allowed value for $z$ is given by $0<z<1/(\pi T)\simeq 1/439 {\;\text{MeV}}^{-1}$. Such a small value of z will cause the bVEV $v(z)$ with $m_q\simeq 0$ approaches to zero as the power $z^3$ for the condensation $\sigma$. It can be understood that the vanishing bVEV $v(z)$ which corresponds to the chiral condensation plays an important role in the dissolving of mesonic bound state. It can be deduced that these critical behaviors could be the sign of chiral symmetry restoration.
From the Breit-Wigner form, we can determine quantitatively the relation between the mass of mesons and the temperature. The results are shown in Fig.\[Fig:mass shift\].
![The relation between the location of the first peak and the temperature for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right). []{data-label="Fig:mass shift"}](ms_s.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"} ![The relation between the location of the first peak and the temperature for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right). []{data-label="Fig:mass shift"}](ms_ps.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"} ![The relation between the location of the first peak and the temperature for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right). []{data-label="Fig:mass shift"}](ms_v.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"} ![The relation between the location of the first peak and the temperature for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right). []{data-label="Fig:mass shift"}](ms_av.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"}
It can be seen explicitly that as temperature increases the masses of mesons decrease linearly in low temperature region ($40\sim100{\;\text{MeV}}$). Note that around critical temperature $140{\;\text{MeV}}$, the spectral function becomes so flat that the numerical fitting has a big ambiguity. It is believed that the mass of scalar and pseudo-scalar mesons will increase slightly around critical temperature, though we can not see here for the large ambiguity. While for vector and axial-vector, the decreasing of mass in medium agrees with other analysis [@dsmofv1; @dsmofv2; @dsmofv3]. The more precise way to study the dependences of temperature is to calculate the quasinormal modes of mesons. We leave it for future study.
back-reaction effects of bulk vacuum {#Chap:back-reaction}
====================================
In this section, we will investigate the back-reaction effects of bulk vacuum which includes the quark mass and condensate. In [@xie:2006gt], a fully back-reacted holographic QCD has been constructed. It was found that the back reaction has only small effects on meson spectra. It is interesting to check its influence on the mass spectra with finite temperature. Let us begin with the following 5-dimensional action, $$\label{back reaction action}
S=\int d^5 x \sqrt{\hat{g}} \left( -\hat{R} + {\rm{Tr}}\left[|DX|^{2}+V(X)\right]\right),$$ For simplicity we do not take the dilaton field into account in the action. $\hat{R}$ is the five dimensional Ricci scalar. $X$ is the bulk scalar field in Eq.(\[action\]) with the bulk vacuum expectation form $X=\frac{1}{2}v(z)\textbf{1}_2$. The bVEV $v(z)$ relates to quark mass and condensates in Eq.(\[bVEV\]) and Eq.(\[ABC\]). After taking the trace, the action is rewritten as follow: $$\label{back reaction action}
S=\int d^5 x \sqrt{\hat{g}} \left( -\hat{R} + \frac{1}{2}\partial_Mv\partial^Mv+V(v)\right),$$ with $V(v)=\textrm{Tr}\left[V(X)\right]$. To obtain the black hole solution, we consider the deformed AdSBH background, $$ds^{2}=\frac{e^{2A(z)}}{z^{2}}\left(f(z)dt^{2}-d\vec{x}^{2}-\frac{dz^{2}}{f(z)}\right).\label{metric}$$ The equations of motion are $$\begin{aligned}
{1\over 2} \hat{g}_{MN} \left(-\hat{R}+ \frac{1}{2}\partial_{P} v \partial^{P}
v + V(v)\right) +\hat{R}_{MN} -\frac{1}{2}\partial_{M} v \partial_{N}
v &=&0 \\
\frac{\partial V(v)}{\partial v}-\frac{1}{\sqrt{\hat{g}}} \partial_M\left( \sqrt{\hat{g}} \hat{g}^{MN} \partial_Nv\right) &=&0\end{aligned}$$
The $(t,t)$,$(x_1,x_1)$ and $(z,z)$ components of the gravitational field equations are respectively: $$\begin{aligned}
A^{''}+A^{'}\left(\frac{f^{'}}{2f}-\frac{2}{z}\right)+A^{'2}+\frac{2}{z^2}+\frac{v^{'2}}{12}-\frac{f^{'}}{2zf}
-\frac{e^{2A}V(v)}{6z^2f} &=& 0 \label{eq1}\\
f^{''}+f^{'}\left(6A^{'}-\frac{6}{z}\right)+f\left(6A^{''}+6A^{'2}+\frac{1}{2}v^{'2}+\frac{12}{z^2}-
\frac{12A^{'}}{z}\right) -\frac{e^{2A}V(v)}{z^2}&=&0 \label{eq2}\\
A^{'2}+A^{'}\left(\frac{f^{'}}{4f}-\frac{2}{z}\right)+\left(\frac{1}{z^2}-\frac{e^{2A}V(v)+3zf^{'}}
{12z^2f}-\frac{v^{'2}}{24}\right) &=&0 \label{eq3}\end{aligned}$$ From Eq.(\[eq2\]) and Eq.(\[eq3\]), we can obtain the equation of the warped factor $$\label{warp factor}
A^{''}-A^{'2}+\frac{2}{z}A^{'}+\frac{1}{6}v^{'2}=0$$ This equation cannot be analytically solved with the bVEV $v(z)$ given in Eq.(\[bVEV\]). We then numerically solve $A(z)$ by using the UV boundary condition $A(0)=0$ and its derivative vanishes for a general situation.
While from Eq.(\[eq1\]) and Eq.(\[eq2\]), one can analytically solve $f(z)$ as: $$\label{f}
f(z)=C_1+C_2\int_0^ze^{-3A(z)}z^3dz$$ where $C_1$ and $C_2$ are integral constants. Near the boundary $z\rightarrow0$, we require the metric to be asymptotic to $AdS_5$: $$\label{BC0}
f(0)=1$$ Near the horizon $z=z_h$, we require $$\label{BC1}
f(z_h)=0$$ Solution of $f(z)$ can be expressed as $$\label{solution of f}
f(z)=1-\frac{\int^z_0 x^3 e^{-3A(x)}dx}{\int^{z_h}_0 x^3 e^{-3A(x)}dx}$$ One can expand $f(z)$ at the UV boundary with requiring $A(0)=0$, $$f(z\to 0)=1-\frac{z^4}{4 \int_0^{z_h} e^{-3A(t)}t^3dt}+\cdots$$ Comparing with AdS black-hole solution, it can be seen that the correction of back-reaction contributes to the higher order terms of $f(z)$. The numerical results of $A(z)$ and $f(z)$ are presented in Fig.\[Fig Az\].
![The numerical solution for $A(z)$ (left side) and $f(z)$ with horizon $z_h$=5 (right side). []{data-label="Fig Az"}](az.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"} ![The numerical solution for $A(z)$ (left side) and $f(z)$ with horizon $z_h$=5 (right side). []{data-label="Fig Az"}](fz.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"}
It is easy to obtain the Hawking temperature, $$\label{hawking T}
T_H=-\frac{1}{4\pi}\frac{\partial f}{\partial z}\bigg|_{z\to z_h}=\frac{z_h^3 e^{-3 A(z_h)}}{4
\pi \int_0^{z_h} e^{-3 A(x)} x^3 dx}$$ We plot the temperature $T_H$ v.s. horizon $z_h$ in Fig.\[Fig Th\]. The monotonous behavior indicates that such a black hole solution is stable.
With the above analysis, we are now in the position to investigate the finite temperature behavior of mesons after considering the back-reaction effects of bulk vacuum. The action has the same form as Eq.(\[action\]) except for the background metric, which has been replaced by the back-reaction improved one $\hat{g}$: $$S=\int d^{5}x\,\sqrt{\hat{g}}e^{-\Phi(z)}\,{\rm {Tr}}\left[|DX|^{2}-m_{X}^{2} |X|^{2}-\lambda_X |X|^{4}-\frac{1}{4g_{5}^2}(F_{L}^2+F_{R}^2)\right],\label{action41}$$
![The relation between temperature $T_H$ and horizon $z_h$[]{data-label="Fig Th"}](th.pdf){width="70mm"}
Making a similar calculation as the one in section \[Chap:thermal spectral\], we can obtain the mesons’ thermal spectral function with back-reaction improved gravity background. The numerical results are shown in Fig.\[mass spectral br\]. It can be seen that in low temperature region the locations of the peaks are nearly the same as the ones without back-reaction effects in section \[Chap:thermal spectral\]. Such phenomena agree well with the conclusion in [@xie:2006gt]. It is found that the warped factor $A(z)$ shown in Fig.\[Fig Az\] can well be fitted by a simple form $A(z)=-k^2 z^2$ with $k$ around $k\simeq 30{\;\text{MeV}}$.
It is noticed that in zero temperature region $f(z)=1$ and the back-reaction correction of quark mass and condensate provides very little effects on mass spectra. While in high temperature region, it is seen that the melting temperatures have increased about $10{\;\text{MeV}}$. By fitting the spectral function with the Breit-Wigner form in Eq.(\[BWform\]), we can obtain the critical temperature with including the back-reaction effects of bulk vacuum. The results are presented in Table.\[Table:tc with br\]
![The results of spectral function for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right) with back-reaction effects. []{data-label="mass spectral br"}](br_s.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"} ![The results of spectral function for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right) with back-reaction effects. []{data-label="mass spectral br"}](br_ps.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"} ![The results of spectral function for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right) with back-reaction effects. []{data-label="mass spectral br"}](br_v.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"} ![The results of spectral function for scalar meson (top, left), pseudo-scalar meson (top,right), vector meson(bottom, left) and axial-vector meson(bottom, right) with back-reaction effects. []{data-label="mass spectral br"}](br_av.pdf "fig:"){width="64mm"}
Meson Scalar Pseudo-Scalar Vector Axial-Vector
------------ --------- --------------- --------- --------------
$T_c$(MeV) 142-147 143-148 148-152 151-157
: The critical temperatures of scalar, pseudo-scalar, vector and axial-vector mesons with back-reaction effects[]{data-label="Table:tc with br"}
It should be pointed out that in the above calculation the dilaton field in the action Eq.(\[back reaction action\]) is still taken as a background field. The back reaction effects of bulk vacuum which includes quark mass and quark condensate have increased the melting temperature to be around $$T_c \simeq 150\pm 7 {\;\text{MeV}}$$ Such a result is consistent with the ones yielded from lattice QCD simulations. In [@lattice1], the chiral and deconfinement critical temperatures were found to be $147{\;\text{MeV}}\sim 157{\;\text{MeV}}$. In [@lattice2], the chiral transition temperature of two massless flavors was shown to be $T_c = 154\pm9{\;\text{MeV}}$. For physics masses of three flavor quarks, the chiral transition temperature was found to be $T_c = 155(1)(8)$ MeV[@lattice3].
Conclusions and Remarks {#Chap:Sum}
=======================
We have investigated the finite temperature behavior of IR-improved bulk holographic AdS/QCD model built recently in[@Cui:2013xva]. The spectral function of mesons has been analyzed following the prescription in [@retarded; @green]. By fitting the spectral function with a Breit-Wigner form, the critical temperature of mesons is found to be around $140{\;\text{MeV}}$. It has been noticed that in low temperature region, the peaks which correspond to the poles of the Green’s function are consistent with the masses calculated in zero temperature case [@Cui:2013xva]. We would like to point out that there exists the vagueness of the critical temperature criterion. In obtaining the critical temperature, we have to take a range of the melting temperature with the condition between the hight ($h$) and width ($\Gamma$) of peak that: $\Gamma/2<h<\Gamma$. In this paper, we have considered the back-reaction effects of bulk vacuum and yielded an improved metric of background gravity. The mesons’ thermal mass spectral function has been calculated based on the back-reaction improved action, which can lead the critical temperature to be increased about $10$ MeV. A reasonable melting temperature has been found to be $T_c \simeq 150\pm 7$ MeV, which is consistent with the recent results obtained from lattice QCD simulations.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
This work is supported in part by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grants No.10975170, No.10905084, No.10821504; and the Project of Knowledge Innovation Program (PKIP) of the Chinese Academy of Science.\
[99]{}
D. J. Gross and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**30**]{}, 1343 (1973);\
H. D. Politzer, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**30**]{}, 1346 (1973).
J. M. Maldacena, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. [**2**]{}, 231 (1998) \[hep-th/9711200\]. S. S. Gubser, I. R. Klebanov and A. M. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. B [**428**]{}, 105 (1998) \[hep-th/9802109\]. E. Witten, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. [**2**]{}, 253 (1998) \[hep-th/9802150\]. J. Polchinski and M. J. Strassler, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**88**]{}, 031601 (2002) \[hep-th/0109174\]. M. Kruczenski, D. Mateos, R. C. Myers and D. J. Winters, JHEP [**0405**]{}, 041 (2004) \[hep-th/0311270\].
T. Sakai and S. Sugimoto, Prog. Theor. Phys. [**113**]{}, 843 (2005) \[hep-th/0412141\].
T. Sakai and S. Sugimoto, Prog. Theor. Phys. [**114**]{}, 1083 (2005) \[hep-th/0507073\]. J. Erlich, E. Katz, D. T. Son and M. A. Stephanov, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**95**]{}, 261602 (2005) \[hep-ph/0501128\]. A. Karch, E. Katz, D. T. Son and M. A. Stephanov, Phys. Rev. D [**74**]{}, 015005 (2006) \[hep-ph/0602229\]. P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio, F. Giannuzzi, F. Jugeau and S. Nicotri, Phys. Rev. D [**78**]{}, 055009 (2008) \[arXiv:0807.1054 \[hep-ph\]\]. T. Gherghetta, J. I. Kapusta and T. M. Kelley, Phys. Rev. D [**79**]{}, 076003 (2009) \[arXiv:0902.1998 \[hep-ph\]\].
Y. Q. Sui, Y. L. Wu, Z. F. Xie and Y. B. Yang, Phys. Rev. D [**81**]{}, 014024 (2010) \[arXiv:0909.3887 \[hep-ph\]\].
Y. Q. Sui, Y. L. Wu and Y. B. Yang, Phys. Rev. D [**83**]{}, 065030 (2011) \[arXiv:1012.3518 \[hep-ph\]\].
L. -X. Cui, Z. Fang and Y. -L. Wu, arXiv:1310.6487 \[hep-ph\]. A. Vega and I. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. D [**82**]{}, 115023 (2010) \[arXiv:1005.3000 \[hep-ph\]\]. A. Vega and I. Schmidt, Phys.Rev. D84 (2011) 017701 \[e-Print: arXiv:1104.4365 \]
D. Li, M. Huang and Q. -S. Yan, arXiv:1206.2824 \[hep-th\]. S. J. Brodsky and G. F. de Teramond, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**96**]{} (2006) 201601 \[arXiv:hep-ph/0602252\]. S. J. Brodsky and G. F. de Teramond, Phys. Rev. D [**77**]{}, 056007 (2008) \[arXiv:0707.3859 \[hep-ph\]\]. S. J. Brodsky and G. F. de Teramond, arXiv:0909.3899 \[hep-ph\]; G. F. de Teramond and S. J. Brodsky, arXiv:0909.3900 \[hep-ph\] and references therein.
Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**4**]{} (1960) 380.
Y. B. Dai and Y. L. Wu, Eur. Phys. J. C [**39**]{} (2005) S1 \[arXiv:hep-ph/0304075\].
K. Ghoroku, M. Yahiro, Phys. Rev. [**D73**]{}, 125010 (2006). \[hep-ph/0512289\].
M. Fujita, K. Fukushima, T. Misumi and M. Murata, Phys. Rev. D [**80**]{}, 035001 (2009) \[arXiv:0903.2316 \[hep-ph\]\]. M. Fujita, T. Kikuchi, K. Fukushima, T. Misumi and M. Murata, Phys. Rev. D [**81**]{}, 065024 (2010) \[arXiv:0911.2298 \[hep-ph\]\]. A. S. Miranda, C. A. Ballon Bayona, H. Boschi-Filho and N. R. F. Braga, JHEP [**0911**]{}, 119 (2009) \[arXiv:0909.1790 \[hep-th\]\]. P. Colangelo, F. Giannuzzi and S. Nicotri, Phys. Rev. D [**80**]{}, 094019 (2009) \[arXiv:0909.1534 \[hep-ph\]\]. H. R. Grigoryan, P. M. Hohler and M. A. Stephanov, Phys. Rev. D [**82**]{}, 026005 (2010) \[arXiv:1003.1138 \[hep-ph\]\].
C. P. Herzog, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**98**]{}, 091601 (2007) \[hep-th/0608151\].
A. S. Miranda, C. A. Ballon Bayona, H. Boschi-Filho and N. R. F. Braga, JHEP [**0911**]{}, 119 (2009) \[arXiv:0909.1790 \[hep-th\]\].
P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio, F. Jugeau, S. Nicotri, Phys. Lett. [**B652**]{}, 73-78 (2007). \[hep-ph/0703316\].
P. Colangelo, F. Giannuzzi, S. Nicotri, Phys. Rev. [**D80**]{}, 094019 (2009). \[arXiv:0909.1534 \[hep-ph\]\].
L. -X. Cui, S. Takeuchi and Y. -L. Wu, JHEP [**1204**]{}, 144 (2012) \[arXiv:1112.5923 \[hep-ph\]\].
L. -X. Cui and Y. -L. Wu, Mod. Phys. Lett. A, Vol. 28, No. [**34**]{}, 1350132 (2013) \[arXiv:1302.4828 \[hep-ph\]\]. D. T. Son and A. O. Starinets, JHEP [**0209**]{}, 042 (2002) \[hep-th/0205051\].
E. Santini, M. D. Cozma, A. Faessler, C. Fuchs, M. I. Krivoruchenko and B. Martemyanov, Phys. Rev. C [**78**]{}, 034910 (2008) \[arXiv:0804.3702 \[nucl-th\]\]. M. Post, S. Leupold and U. Mosel, Nucl. Phys. A [**741**]{}, 81 (2004) \[nucl-th/0309085\]. A. K. Dutt-Mazumder, R. Hofmann and M. Pospelov, Phys. Rev. C [**63**]{}, 015204 (2001) \[hep-ph/0005100\]. J. P. Shock, F. Wu, Y. -L. Wu and Z. -F. Xie, JHEP [**0703**]{}, 064 (2007) \[hep-ph/0611227\]. S. Borsanyi [*et al.*]{} \[Wuppertal-Budapest Collaboration\], JHEP [**1009**]{}, 073 (2010) \[arXiv:1005.3508 \[hep-lat\]\].
A. Bazavov, T. Bhattacharya, M. Cheng, C. DeTar, H. T. Ding, S. Gottlieb, R. Gupta and P. Hegde [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. D [**85**]{}, 054503 (2012) \[arXiv:1111.1710 \[hep-lat\]\]. T. Bhattacharya, M. I. Buchoff, N. H. Christ, H. -T. Ding, R. Gupta, C. Jung, F. Karsch, Z. J. Lin, R.D. Mawhinney, G. McGlynn [*et al.*]{}, e-Print: arXiv:1402.5175 \[hep-lat\]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We report [*in situ*]{} neutron background measurements at the Kuo-Sheng Reactor Neutrino Laboratory (KSNL) by a hybrid neutron detector (HND) with a data size of 33.8 days under identical shielding configurations as during the neutrino physics data taking. The HND consists of BC-501A liquid and BC-702 phosphor powder scintillation neutron detectors, which is sensitive to both fast and thermal neutrons, respectively. Neutron-induced events for the two channels are identified and differentiated by pulse shape analysis, such that background of both are simultaneously measured. The fast neutron fluxes are derived by an iterative unfolding algorithm. Neutron induced background in the germanium detector under the same fluxes, both due to cosmic-rays and ambient radioactivity, are derived and compared with the measurements. The results are valuable to background understanding of the neutrino data at the KSNL. In particular, neutron-induced background events due to ambient radioactivity as well as from reactor operation are negligible compared to intrinsic cosmogenic activity and ambient $\gamma$-activity. The detector concept and analysis procedures are applicable to neutron background characterization in similar rare-event experiments.'
author:
- 'A. Sonay'
- 'M. Deniz'
- 'H. T. Wong'
- 'M. Agartioglu'
- 'G. Asryan'
- 'J. H. Chen'
- 'S. Kerman'
- 'H. B. Li'
- 'J. Li'
- 'F. K. Lin'
- 'S. T. Lin'
- 'B. Sevda'
- 'V. Sharma'
- 'L. Singh'
- 'M. K. Singh'
- 'V. Singh'
- 'A. K. Soma'
- 'S. W. Yang'
- 'Q. Yue'
- 'I. O. Y[i]{}ld[i]{}r[i]{}m'
- 'M. Zeyrek'
title: 'Neutron background measurements with a hybrid neutron detector at the Kuo-Sheng Reactor Neutrino Laboratory'
---
Introduction
============
The TEXONO Collaboration [@huni] is pursuing experimental investigation of neutrino physics [@hbli_prl; @texononue; @jwchen; @hjphys], as well as weakly interacting massive particle (WIMP) dark matter [@stlin09], axions [@chang07] and other physics searches beyond-standard-model (BSM) [@texononsi] at the Kuo-Sheng Reactor Neutrino Laboratory (KSNL). Quantitative understanding of neutron-induced background and nature of their sources is crucial to these studies.
We report in this article [*in situ*]{} measurement of thermal ($n_\text{thermal}$) and fast ($n_\text{fast}$) neutron background at KSNL under identical shielding configurations as during the various physics data taking. A custom-built hybrid neutron detector (HND), whose characteristics and performances were reported earlier in our previous publication [@nd_tech], are used for these measurements.
The paper is structured as follows. Highlights of the laboratory KSNL are presented in Section \[sect::ksnl\]. The unique merits of the HND, its features and the associated pulse shape discrimination (PSD) techniques are summarized in Section \[sect::HND\]. Data taking at the KSNL is discussed in Section \[sect::daq\]. Derivation of the internal contamination of HND are discussed in Section \[sect::intcontam\]. Results on the measured neutron-induced background in HND, the calculated neutron fluxes as well as the projected background to high-purity germanium detectors (HPGe) at the same location are presented in Section \[sect::nbkg\].
The Kuo-Sheng Reactor Neutrino Laboratory {#sect::ksnl}
=========================================
The Reactor Neutrino Facility KSNL [@huni; @hbli_prl; @texononue] is located at a distance of 28 m from the core \#1 of the Kuo-Sheng Nuclear Power Station at the northern shore of Taiwan. The site is at the ground floor of the reactor building at a depth of 10 m below ground level, with an overburden of about 30 meter-water-equivalence (mwe). The nominal thermal power output is 2.9 GW supplying a $\bar{\nu}_e$-flux of about $6.4 \times 10^{12} ~ {\rm cm^{-2} s^{-1}}$. A schematic view is depicted in Figure \[fig::ksnlsite\]a.
[**(a)**]{}\
![ (a) Schematic side view, not drawn to scale, of the Kuo-Sheng Nuclear Power Station Reactor Building, indicating the experimental site. The reactor core-detector distance is about 28 m. (b) Schematic layout of the general purpose inner target volume, passive shielding and cosmic-ray veto panels. []{data-label="fig::ksnlsite"}](KSNL-Schematics.pdf "fig:"){width="8.0cm"}\
[**(b)**]{}\
![ (a) Schematic side view, not drawn to scale, of the Kuo-Sheng Nuclear Power Station Reactor Building, indicating the experimental site. The reactor core-detector distance is about 28 m. (b) Schematic layout of the general purpose inner target volume, passive shielding and cosmic-ray veto panels. []{data-label="fig::ksnlsite"}](KSNL-Shielding.pdf "fig:"){width="8.0cm"}
A multi-purpose “inner target” detector volume of 100 cm$\times$80 cm$\times$75 cm is enclosed by 4$\pi$ passive shielding materials which have a total weight of about 50 tons. The shielding provides attenuation to the ambient neutron and gamma background, and consists of, from inside out, 5 cm of OFHC copper, 25 cm of boron-loaded polyethylene, 5 cm of steel, 15 cm of lead, and cosmic-ray veto scintillator panels. The schematic layout of the shielding structure is shown in Figure \[fig::ksnlsite\]b. Different detectors are placed in the inner volume for the different scientific programs.
The primary cosmic-ray hadronic components are greatly attenuated by matter (nuclear interaction length of rock is about 38 cm). Their fluxes at a shallow depth of $\sim$30 mwe are therefore negligible. The neutron background are mostly due to: (i) cosmic-ray muon-induced interactions [@mu-induced-bkg] and (ii) ambient radioactivity followed by $( \alpha , {\rm n} )$ processes from the materials in the vicinity of the detectors. The neutron fluxes and their spectra, therefore, depend on the details of the experimental hardware and shielding configurations, in addition to the depth. Neutron background measurements at shallow depth sites have been made [@nbkg-shallow]. The typical levels for neutrons fluxes above keV are ${\rm \mathcal{O}( 10^{-4},~10^{-3},~ 10^{-5} )~ cm^{-2} s^{-1}}$ for the unshielded, lead-shielded and moderator-shielded configurations, respectively.
The KSNL shielding structures as shown in Figure \[fig::ksnlsite\]b can attenuate thermal and 1 MeV neutrons by factors of $\ll$$10^{-6}$ and $\sim$$10^{-4}$, respectively, according to the simulation studies. Therefore the ambient unshielded neutron fluxes are not of relevance to the physics background. Their direct measurements would be challenging due to the dominating $\gamma$-background. The background neutrons are cosmic-ray induced or originated from radioactivity of hardware components in vicinity of the detectors. Measurements of these are the themes of this work, and will be discussed in details in the subsequent Sections.
Hybrid neutron detector {#sect::HND}
=======================
The design, characteristics and performance of the HND adopted in this measurement were described in detail in our previous publication [@nd_tech]. The HND is a novel detector concept initiated by this work and was custom-built for [*this*]{} particular purpose of [*in situ*]{} neutron background measurements at a localized volume at KSNL.
The HND has unique features not provided by conventional neutron detectors. It can perform simultaneous measurement of both thermal and fast neutron fluxes, in which the neutron induced events are identified by PSD, thereby greatly suppressing the much larger $\gamma$-rays background. The compact dimensions allows sampling of the fluxes in a relatively localized volume and under exact shielding configurations $-$ matching well with the size (${\rm \mathcal{O}( 100 )~cm^3}$) of HPGe detectors. Commonly-used detectors like the Bonner multi-spheres array spectrometer [@bonnersphere] would occupy too much volume to match the space constraints. Undoped liquid scintillators [@undoped-liqscin] are sensitive to fast neutrons but not thermal ones. Doped liquid scintillators are sensitive to both thermal and fast neutrons. Those with signatures $^{6}$Li(n,$\alpha$)$^3$H [@Li6LiqScin] or $^{10}$B(n,$\alpha$)$^7$Li [@B10LiqScin] can be made compact. However, the $\alpha$- and proton-recoils that characterize thermal and fast neutrons, respectively, are not distinguishable by PSD. The thermal neutron signatures as low-energy peaks can be easily contaminated by $\gamma$-background. Long-term stability on the performance of the doped scintillators may also pose technical problems. Stability has been achieved in Gd-doped liquid scintillators [@liqscin-Gd]. The high-energy (n,$\gamma$) signatures for thermal neutrons are distinctive. They have been used in low-level neutron background measurements at underground laboratories to sensitivities as low as $\mathcal{O}( 10^{-9} ) ~{\rm cm^{-2} s^{-1}}$. However, capturing the $\gamma$-rays would require a detector volume much larger than that allowed by this application.
The HND is constructed with two different target materials$-$ a Bicron BC-501A liquid scintillator with a 0.113 liter cell volume and a BC-702 scintillator of thickness 0.6 cm enriched with 95% $^6$Li as fine ZnS(Ag) phosphor powder $-$ to be read out by a 5.1 cm diameter photomultiplier (PMT) at the same time. A schematic drawing of HND is shown in Figure \[fig::HND\]. As depicted in Figure \[fig::ksnl\_in\], the HND was installed at the same location as the various HPGe inside the well of an NaI(Tl) anti-Compton detector and kept under the same shielding configurations and data taking conditions. The measured ambient neutron flux is therefore the same as what the HPGe were exposed to in the physics data taking.
![ Schematic diagram of the HND. []{data-label="fig::HND"}](hnd_diagram){width="8.5cm"}
![ Schematic view of experimental setup inside the 50 ton shielding structure (not shown). Signals are brought to the DAQ system via cables of 7.3 m in length. []{data-label="fig::ksnl_in"}](schem_lab.pdf){width="9cm"}
Different particles produce different pulse shapes with the HND [@nd_tech]. The normalized reference pulses of $\alpha$, $n_{\rm fast}$, $n_{\rm thermal}$ and $\gamma$ are shown in Figure \[fig::pulse\_shape\]. In Ref. [@nd_tech], two independent PSD techniques were developed, which are based on the parameter of $t_{PSD}$, derived from the ratio of partial ($Q_{p}$) to total ($Q_{t}$) integration of the pulses, and based on the $B/A$ ratio of individual pulses given as
$$\begin{aligned}
t_{PSD} &=& \frac{Q_{p}}{Q_{t}} = \frac{I[(t_{20}+50 ns):
(t_{20}+150 ns)]}{I[(t_{20}) : (t_{20}+150 ns)]} \nonumber \\
L &=& A\times(e^{-\theta(t-t_{0})}-e^{-\lambda_{s}(t-t_{0})}) \nonumber \\
&+& B\times(e^{-\theta(t-t_{0})}-e^{-\lambda_{l}(t-t_{0})})~,
\label{eq::psd}\end{aligned}$$
where $I$ denotes integration of the pulse area and $t_{20}$ represents the time where the pulses reach 20% of the amplitude. Here $L$ represents the pulse shape, $A$ and $B$ are the normalization constants, $t_{0}$ is reference time and $\theta$, $\lambda_{s}$, and $\lambda_{\ell}$ represent decay constants. Different particles are identified by different $B/A$ ratios for a specific scintillator.
For this study, a reference pulse is constructed by the superposition of large number of $\gamma$-ray pulses collected from the $^{60}$Co radioactive source. The parameters of decay constants $\theta$, $\lambda_{s}$, $\lambda_{\ell}$ and reference time $t_{0}$ are obtained from the fitting of the $\gamma$ reference pulse. The pulse shape is then parameterized as, $$\begin{aligned}
L &=& A\times\left[(e^{-(t-0.52)/226.6}-e^{-(t-0.52)/17.23}) \right.\nonumber \\
&+& \left.0.115\times(e^{-(t-0.52)/226.6}-1)\right]~,
\label{eq::BA}\end{aligned}$$ where $t$ is in nanosecond (ns), and $A$ is the only free normalization parameter that remains to be determined [@nd_tech]. Individual pulses are fitted with the function given in Eq. \[eq::BA\] in order to identify $\gamma$ against neutron events.
The $^{241}$AmBe($\alpha$,n) and $^{60}$Co $\gamma-$sources are used as reference for the $t_{PSD}$ and $B/A$ PSD techniques, respectively. Adopting the PSD parameters given in Eq. \[eq::psd\] and Eq. \[eq::BA\], three spectral bands corresponding to $\gamma$, fast and slow neutron components of the events can be observed, as depicted in Figure \[fig::psd\_ksnl\].
![ Reference pulse shapes for $\gamma$-, $n_{\rm fast}$-, and $n_{\rm thermal}$-induced events from the HND, from which PSD techniques are devised to differentiate them. Pulse shapes of fast neutrons and alpha-particles are very close and in practice not distinguishable. []{data-label="fig::pulse_shape"}](pulse_shape.pdf){width="8.5cm"}
[**(a)**]{}\
![ PSD techniques devised to differentiate $\gamma$- $n_{\rm fast}$- and $n_{\rm thermal}$-induced events, based on (a) $t_{PSD}$, and (b) $B/A$ ratio developed in Ref. [@nd_tech]. []{data-label="fig::psd_ksnl"}](psd.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(b)**]{}\
![ PSD techniques devised to differentiate $\gamma$- $n_{\rm fast}$- and $n_{\rm thermal}$-induced events, based on (a) $t_{PSD}$, and (b) $B/A$ ratio developed in Ref. [@nd_tech]. []{data-label="fig::psd_ksnl"}](psd21.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}
Data taking at Kuo-Sheng neutrino laboratory {#sect::daq}
============================================
Several HPGe-based measurements [@hbli_prl; @jwchen; @stlin09; @hjphys; @chang07; @texononsi] have been carried out at KSNL. The external dimensions of the HND were selected to resemble those of HPGe. Data were taken at KSNL with the HND placed at the same location as the HPGe [@huni] under identical active and passive shielding configurations, as depicted in Figure \[fig::ksnl\_in\]. The plastic scintillator panels function as cosmic-ray veto (CR) while the well-shaped NaI(Tl) serves as an anti-Compton (AC) veto detector, and in its cavity the HND (HPGe in early experiments) was placed. The HND+NaI(Tl) detectors were further shielded by oxygen-free high-conductivity (OFHC) copper and placed inside a sealed volume with nitrogen gas flow as a purge of the radioactive radon gas. The setup was installed inside a 50 ton shielding structure [@huni] consisting of, from inside out, OFHC copper, boron-loaded polyethylene, lead and CR panels, for suppression of ambient $\gamma$ and neutron background, and for tagging cosmic-ray induced events.
![Schematic block diagram of the data acquisition system.[]{data-label="fig::daq"}](schem_daq.pdf){width="8cm"}
The schematic block diagram for the data acquisition (DAQ) system is given in Figure \[fig::daq\]. The HND signals higher than the discriminator threshold provides the triggers. Signals from other detector components were recorded to be used for the suppression of AC and CR events in subsequent offline analysis. The HND signals were processed by two fast timing amplifiers [@tamp] at different gains and recorded by 8-bit flash-analog-to-digital converters [@fadc] at 1 GHz sampling rate. Data taking period lasted more than a month and a total of 33.8 live-time days of data were collected for subsequent analysis.
The goal of offline analysis is to categorize the events and determine their respective energy spectra. After standard filtering of events due to electronic noise and other spurious non-physical triggers, the physical events are identified as $ \gamma , n_{\rm fast}, n_{\rm thermal} $ from the reference pulse shape information as in Figure \[fig::psd\_ksnl\]. The origins of these events are derived from the AC and CR detectors according to four categories: $\rm{ CR^{\pm} \otimes AC^{\pm}}$ where +(-) denotes coincidence (anti-coincidence) of the CR or AC with HND. In particular, the $\rm{ CR^{+} \otimes AC^{-}}$ tag selects CR neutron-induced events, the $\rm{ CR^{-} \otimes AC^{+}}$ tag is rich in ambient $\gamma$-induced AC events, while $\rm{ CR^{-} \otimes AC^{-}}$ is the condition for selecting neutrino- or WIMP-induced candidate events uncorrelated with both CR and AC systems.
![ A typical double-pulse event in CR$^{-}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{-}$ channel.[]{data-label="fig::double_pulse"}](double_pulse.pdf){width="8.5cm"}
Internal contamination of neutron detector {#sect::intcontam}
==========================================
The measurement of intrinsic radiopurity of the HND is essential for determining the ambient neutron background, especially those in $\rm{ CR^{-} \otimes AC^{-}}$. Nuclear $\alpha$-decays from the $\u238$ and $\th232$ series can mimic neutron-induced nuclear recoil signatures, and hence their contributions must be determined.
The PSD characteristics of $\alpha$-events as well as the unique time correlations of two decay sequences (DS) provide powerful means to measure contaminations of the $\th232$ and $\u238$ series, from which the $\alpha$-background can be evaluated, assuming secular equilibrium.
The related DS are [@tori]:
Within the $\th232$ series, there is 64% branching ratio for $^{212}$Bi to decay via a $\beta$-$\alpha$ cascade $-$ $$\begin{aligned}
^{212}\rm{Bi} ~ & \rightarrow & ~ ^{212}\rm{Po} ~ + ~ \bar{\nu_e} ~ +
~ e^- ~ + ~ \gamma 's ~ \\
(Q&=&2.25~\rm{MeV} ~ ; ~\halflife =60.6~min) \\
^{212}\rm{Po} ~ & \rightarrow & ~ ^{208}\rm{Pb}~ + ~ \alpha ~
(Q=8.95~\rm{MeV} ~ ; ~ \halflife =0.30~ \mu s)\end{aligned}$$
Within the $\u238$ series, there is $\alpha$-$\alpha$ cascade from $^{222}$Rn $-$ $$\begin{aligned}
^{222}\rm{Rn} ~ & \rightarrow & ~ ^{218}\rm{Po} ~ + ~ \alpha ~
(Q=5.59~\rm{MeV} ~ ; ~ \halflife = 3.82~d ) \\
^{218}\rm{Po} ~ & \rightarrow & ~ ^{214}\rm{Pb}~ + ~ \alpha ~
(Q=6.12~\rm{MeV} ~ ; ~ \halflife =3.10~min )\end{aligned}$$
Typical example of a double pulse event is displayed in Figure \[fig::double\_pulse\], interpreted as a $\beta - \alpha$ cascade based on PSD. A collection of the delayed pulses in similar cascades provide the $\alpha$ reference pulse shape as shown in Figure \[fig::pulse\_shape\]. The $n_{\rm fast}$/$\gamma$ events are distinguishable while $n_{\rm fast}$/$\alpha$ events are not distinguishable in an event-by-event basis since the differences in their pulse shapes are smaller than electronic fluctuations. The $\alpha$-events of DS$_2$ are mono-energetic and well-separated in time, and were used to confirm consistency with the resolution and quenching functions adopted in analysis.
The delay-time ($\Delta$t) distributions for the correlated-events from DS$_{1,2}$ are shown in Figure \[delaytime\](a) and Figure \[delaytime\](b), respectively. Results of best-fit parameters to exponential decay functions are displayed in Table \[tab::dsselect\].
[**(a)**]{}\
![ Distribution for (a) $\beta$-$\alpha$ events from $^{212}$Bi$\rightarrow^{212}$Po$\rightarrow^{208}$Pb in $DS_1$, (b) $\alpha$-$\alpha$ events from $^{222}$Rn$\rightarrow^{218}$Po$\rightarrow^{214}$Pb in $DS_{2}$. []{data-label="delaytime"}](beta_alpha_decay.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(b)**]{}\
![ Distribution for (a) $\beta$-$\alpha$ events from $^{212}$Bi$\rightarrow^{212}$Po$\rightarrow^{208}$Pb in $DS_1$, (b) $\alpha$-$\alpha$ events from $^{222}$Rn$\rightarrow^{218}$Po$\rightarrow^{214}$Pb in $DS_{2}$. []{data-label="delaytime"}](alpha_alpha_decay.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}
----------------------- --------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
DS$_1$ DS$_2$
Series ${}^{232}$Th ${}^{238}$U
Signatures $\beta$-$\alpha$ $\alpha$-$\alpha$
Decays $\rm{^{212}Bi \rightarrow ^{212}Po }$ $\rm{^{222}Rn \rightarrow ^{218}Po}$
$\rm{~~~~~~~ \rightarrow ^{208}Pb}$ $\rm{~~~~~~~ \rightarrow ^{214}Pb}$
$\rm{\chi^2 / n.d.f}$ 4.7/16 9.0/17
Half-Life
Nominal 299 ns 3.10 min
Measured 302 $\pm$ 27 ns 3.14 $\pm$ 0.39 min
366.20 $\pm$ 26.94 292.50 $\pm$ 15.43
0.140 $\pm$ 0.010 0.110 $\pm$ 0.006
2.21 $\pm$ 0.16 0.89 $\pm$ 0.048
----------------------- --------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
: \[tab::dsselect\] Summary of measured values and inferred radioactivity levels of the two cascade sequences.
The measured event rate of the decay sequences of DS$_{1,2}$ can be used for the estimation of contamination levels of their long-lived parent isotopes of $\th232$ and $\u238$ in the detector. Simulated $\alpha$ energy spectra of $\th232$ and $\u238$ series, convoluted with detector resolution and quenching effects are depicted in Figure \[fig::parent\_alpha\_sim\].
![ Simulated $\alpha$ energy spectrum of $\th232$ and $\u238$ decay chains including detector resolution and quenching effects [@nd_tech]. Normalization is fixed by the measured cascade sequences of Table \[tab::dsselect\]. []{data-label="fig::parent_alpha_sim"}](rdecay_sim.pdf){width="8.5cm"}
The measured half-lives are consistent with nominal values. The measured event rates can be translated to the radioactivity and contamination levels of their long-lived parent isotopes of $\th232$ and $\u238$ in the detector, assuming secular equilibrium. Simulated $\alpha$ energy spectra of $\th232$ and $\u238$ parent isotopes convoluted with detector resolution and quenching effects are depicted in Figure \[fig::parent\_alpha\_sim\].
Neutron background {#sect::nbkg}
==================
Thermal neutron background
--------------------------
Thermal neutrons are those with kinetic energy below 1 eV and in thermal equilibrium with the ambient surroundings. Their energy distribution is described by the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution with a most probable energy of $E_{th} \sim {\rm 0.02~eV}$, which corresponds to a velocity of $v_{th} \sim {\rm 2200 ~ m s^{-1}}$.
The scintillator BC-702 used for thermal neutron measurements does not provide energy information of the incident neutron. Calculation of the thermal neutron flux is performed assuming Maxwell-Boltzmann distributions.
For a neutron flux $\phi_n (E)$ with interaction cross-section $\sigma(E)$ in the detector, the count rate in the detector is given by: $$R_{th} ~ = ~ N ~ \int ~ \sigma(E) ~ \phi_n (E)dE ~,$$ where [*[N]{}*]{} is the total number of target nuclei in the detector. The thermal neutron captured by $^6{\rm Li}$ in HND $$n ~ + ~ ^6 Li ~ \rightarrow ~ ^3 H + \alpha$$ is inversely proportional to the neutron velocity $v(E)$, such that $$\sigma(E) ~ = ~ \sigma_{th} ~ \frac{v_{th}}{v(E)} ~,$$ where $\sigma_{th} = 940~{\rm b}$. An isotropic and homogeneous flux distribution can be described by $$\phi(E) ~ = ~ v(E) ~ \rho_n (E) ~,$$ where $\rho_n (E)$ is the neutron number density at energy $E$ in the detector volume. The count rate can therefore be expressed as $$R_{th} ~ = ~ N ~ \sigma_{th} ~ v_{th} ~ \langle \rho_n \rangle ~~,$$ where $\langle \rho_n \rangle$ is the energy-averaged thermal neutron number density. The average neutron velocity is given by $$\langle v \rangle ~ = ~
\frac{\int v(E)~ \rho_n (E)~ dE}{\int \rho_n (E)~ dE}
=\frac{\Phi}{\langle \rho_n \rangle} ~,$$ where $\Phi$ is the total flux. Accordingly, the rate becomes $$R_{th} ~ = ~ N ~ \sigma_{th} ~ \frac{v_{th}}{\langle v \rangle} ~ \Phi ~.$$
[**(a)**]{}\
![Event selection criteria for (a) cosmic-ray CR$^{+}$, and (b) anti-Compton AC$^{-}$ events, showing most thermal neutrons are with CR$^{-}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{-}$ tag.[]{data-label="fig::CRT_ACT"}](tdc.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(b)**]{}\
![Event selection criteria for (a) cosmic-ray CR$^{+}$, and (b) anti-Compton AC$^{-}$ events, showing most thermal neutrons are with CR$^{-}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{-}$ tag.[]{data-label="fig::CRT_ACT"}](acv.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}
Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution for thermal neutrons gives rise to the relation $$\frac{\langle v \rangle}{ v_{th} } ~ = ~
\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}} ~~.$$
Accordingly, the total neutron flux is related to the measured count rate as $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi_n ~ = ~
\frac{ 2 R_{th} }{N \sigma_{th} \sqrt{\pi} } .\end{aligned}$$
The measured thermal neutron rate at KSNL with HND BC-702 is
$$\begin{aligned}
R_{th} = (4.15 \pm 0.12) \times 10^{-4} ~ {\rm counts ~ s^{-1}}~~.\end{aligned}$$
With a total number of $N = 1.41 \times 10^{22}$ $^{6}$Li atoms in BC-702 [@birk; @bicron], the corresponding total thermal neutron flux is $$\Phi_n = (3.54 \pm 0.10) \times 10 ^{-5} ~ {\rm cm^{-2}~s^{-1}} ~~.$$
The majority of the thermal neutron events are with CR$^{-}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{-}$ tag uncorrelated with the other detector systems, as depicted in Figure \[fig::CRT\_ACT\]. The time difference between these events with the previous CR$^+$ tag is displayed in Figure \[fig::time\_corr\], in which accidental coincidence from random trigger events are superimposed. An excess is observed with a correlation time scale of about 200 $\mu$s, indicating that part (20%) of thermal neutron capture events can be matched to the thermalization of specific cosmic-ray events. The time scale corresponds to that necessary for the cosmic-induced high-energy neutrons to lose their energy, get thermalized and diffuse into the localized BC-702 volume. Similar distribution profiles were measured and compared with simulations with gadolinium-loaded liquid scintillator at a shallow depth [@Dt-mu-ncap].
![ The time difference between CR$^{-}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{-}$ thermal neutron and the previous cosmic-ray events. Comparison with random trigger events up to $\sim$400 $\mu$s indicate that about 20% of thermal neutrons can be matched to their parent cosmic-ray events. []{data-label="fig::time_corr"}](tc.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
Measured nuclear recoil spectra; Evaluated fast neutron flux; Projected HPGe background
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[**(a)**]{}\
![ The sample of CR$^{+}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{-}$ – (a) HND nuclear recoil energy spectrum, (b) unfolded neutron flux with $\pm 1\sigma$ error as shadow area, (c) the comparison of HPGe data and predicted Ge-recoil spectrum from simulations with the measured neutron fluxes. Extrapolated spectra of (b) and (c) at low energy, as fixed by neutron flux models of Figure \[fig::neut\_fluxes\] derived from equilibrium yield of $^{70}$Ge(n,$\gamma$)$^{71}$Ge, are corrections to the effects due to finite HND threshold of ${\rm 150~keV_{ee}}$. []{data-label="fig::tv_rec"}](tv_recoil_spec.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(b)**]{}\
![ The sample of CR$^{+}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{-}$ – (a) HND nuclear recoil energy spectrum, (b) unfolded neutron flux with $\pm 1\sigma$ error as shadow area, (c) the comparison of HPGe data and predicted Ge-recoil spectrum from simulations with the measured neutron fluxes. Extrapolated spectra of (b) and (c) at low energy, as fixed by neutron flux models of Figure \[fig::neut\_fluxes\] derived from equilibrium yield of $^{70}$Ge(n,$\gamma$)$^{71}$Ge, are corrections to the effects due to finite HND threshold of ${\rm 150~keV_{ee}}$. []{data-label="fig::tv_rec"}](tv_flux.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(c)**]{}\
![ The sample of CR$^{+}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{-}$ – (a) HND nuclear recoil energy spectrum, (b) unfolded neutron flux with $\pm 1\sigma$ error as shadow area, (c) the comparison of HPGe data and predicted Ge-recoil spectrum from simulations with the measured neutron fluxes. Extrapolated spectra of (b) and (c) at low energy, as fixed by neutron flux models of Figure \[fig::neut\_fluxes\] derived from equilibrium yield of $^{70}$Ge(n,$\gamma$)$^{71}$Ge, are corrections to the effects due to finite HND threshold of ${\rm 150~keV_{ee}}$. []{data-label="fig::tv_rec"}](TV.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}
[**(a)**]{}\
![The sample of CR$^{+}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{+}$ – (a) HND nuclear recoil energy spectrum, (b) unfolded neutron flux with $\pm 1\sigma$ error as shadow area, (c) the comparison of HPGe data and predicted Ge-recoil spectrum from simulations with the measured neutron fluxes. Extrapolated spectra of (b) and (c) at low energy, as fixed by neutron flux models of Figure \[fig::neut\_fluxes\] derived from equilibrium yield of $^{70}$Ge(n,$\gamma$)$^{71}$Ge, are corrections to the effects due to finite HND threshold of ${\rm 150~keV_{ee}}$. []{data-label="fig::tt_rec"}](tt_recoil_spec.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(b)**]{}\
![The sample of CR$^{+}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{+}$ – (a) HND nuclear recoil energy spectrum, (b) unfolded neutron flux with $\pm 1\sigma$ error as shadow area, (c) the comparison of HPGe data and predicted Ge-recoil spectrum from simulations with the measured neutron fluxes. Extrapolated spectra of (b) and (c) at low energy, as fixed by neutron flux models of Figure \[fig::neut\_fluxes\] derived from equilibrium yield of $^{70}$Ge(n,$\gamma$)$^{71}$Ge, are corrections to the effects due to finite HND threshold of ${\rm 150~keV_{ee}}$. []{data-label="fig::tt_rec"}](tt_flux.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(c)**]{}\
![The sample of CR$^{+}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{+}$ – (a) HND nuclear recoil energy spectrum, (b) unfolded neutron flux with $\pm 1\sigma$ error as shadow area, (c) the comparison of HPGe data and predicted Ge-recoil spectrum from simulations with the measured neutron fluxes. Extrapolated spectra of (b) and (c) at low energy, as fixed by neutron flux models of Figure \[fig::neut\_fluxes\] derived from equilibrium yield of $^{70}$Ge(n,$\gamma$)$^{71}$Ge, are corrections to the effects due to finite HND threshold of ${\rm 150~keV_{ee}}$. []{data-label="fig::tt_rec"}](TT.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}
[**(a)**]{}\
![The sample of CR$^{-}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{+}$ – (a) HND nuclear recoil energy spectrum, (b) unfolded neutron flux with $\pm 1\sigma$ error as shadow area, (c) the comparison of HPGe data and predicted Ge-recoil spectrum from simulations with the measured neutron fluxes. []{data-label="fig::vt_rec"}](vt_recoil_spec.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(b)**]{}\
![The sample of CR$^{-}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{+}$ – (a) HND nuclear recoil energy spectrum, (b) unfolded neutron flux with $\pm 1\sigma$ error as shadow area, (c) the comparison of HPGe data and predicted Ge-recoil spectrum from simulations with the measured neutron fluxes. []{data-label="fig::vt_rec"}](vt_flux.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(c)**]{}\
![The sample of CR$^{-}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{+}$ – (a) HND nuclear recoil energy spectrum, (b) unfolded neutron flux with $\pm 1\sigma$ error as shadow area, (c) the comparison of HPGe data and predicted Ge-recoil spectrum from simulations with the measured neutron fluxes. []{data-label="fig::vt_rec"}](VT.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}
[**(a)**]{}\
![The sample of CR$^{-}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{-}$ – (a) energy spectra for HND nuclear recoil-like events, together with the measured $\alpha-$ background from $\th232$ and $\u238$ decay series and the 68% C.L. upper bound of neutron-induced nuclear recoils, from which the upper bounds of (b) unfolded neutron spectrum and (c) predicted Ge-recoil background in HPGe can be derived and compared with measured data. []{data-label="fig::vv_rec"}](vv_meas_res.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(b)**]{}\
![The sample of CR$^{-}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{-}$ – (a) energy spectra for HND nuclear recoil-like events, together with the measured $\alpha-$ background from $\th232$ and $\u238$ decay series and the 68% C.L. upper bound of neutron-induced nuclear recoils, from which the upper bounds of (b) unfolded neutron spectrum and (c) predicted Ge-recoil background in HPGe can be derived and compared with measured data. []{data-label="fig::vv_rec"}](vv_flux.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(c)**]{}\
![The sample of CR$^{-}$ $\otimes$ AC$^{-}$ – (a) energy spectra for HND nuclear recoil-like events, together with the measured $\alpha-$ background from $\th232$ and $\u238$ decay series and the 68% C.L. upper bound of neutron-induced nuclear recoils, from which the upper bounds of (b) unfolded neutron spectrum and (c) predicted Ge-recoil background in HPGe can be derived and compared with measured data. []{data-label="fig::vv_rec"}](VV.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}
Once the HND spectra are measured, unfolding algorithms as discussed in Ref. [@nd_tech], followed by a Friedman smoothing algorithm [@friedman], are applied to produce the corresponding fast neutron spectra. The expected nuclear recoil background in HPGe detectors at the same location and shielding configurations are then evaluated with full GEANT simulation [@geant] and compared with 173.5-kg-days of data taken under identical passive and active shielding configurations with an n-type point-contact germanium detector [@qfge]. Standard quenching function of Ge [@qfge] are used to convert nuclear recoil energy in keV$_{\rm nr}$ into the observable energy in electron-equivalence unit keV$_{\rm ee}$.
Results with ${\rm CR^+ \otimes AC^-}$ samples are displayed in Figure \[fig::tv\_rec\], in which (a) is the recoil spectrum from the HND liquid scintillator, (b) is the evaluated neutron spectrum and (c) is the projected Ge recoil spectrum from the same neutron background. The fast neutron spectrum has a threshold at ${\rm 700~keV_{nr}}$ due to HND response. The threshold effects give rise to a change of slope of the Ge-recoil spectrum at ${\rm 4~keV_{\rm ee}}$, below which the predicted spectrum is less than the measured one. This excesses can be corrected for with an extrapolation to the neutron flux, the procedures and details of which are described in Section \[sect::nbkg\]-C.
The same analysis procedures are applied to the $\rm{ CR^+ \otimes AC^+}$ samples, and the results presented in Figure \[fig::tt\_rec\] follow the same convention. There exists a finite residual spectrum after the Ge-recoils are accounted for, as depicted in Figure \[fig::tt\_rec\]c. The residual events are due to Compton scattering of cosmic-ray induced high energy ambient $\gamma$-rays, characterized by a flat spectrum and consistent with simulations. The two peaks corresponds to copper K$_{\alpha}$ and K$_{\beta}$ X-ray emission lines produced by the interactions of cosmic-ray muons with the copper support materials in the vicinity of the active Ge crystal.
Similarly, the results of the cosmic-ray anti-coincidence samples with $\rm{ CR^- \otimes AC^+}$ and $\rm{ CR^- \otimes AC^-}$ tags are displayed in Figure \[fig::vt\_rec\] and Figure \[fig::vv\_rec\], respectively. It can be seen from Figure \[fig::vt\_rec\](c) and Figure \[fig::vv\_rec\](c), in both cases that neutron-induced Ge-recoil events, which are unrelated to cosmic-rays only constitute a minor component relative to that due to ambient $\gamma$-radioactivity. The $\rm{ CR^- \otimes AC^-}$ events are uncorrelated with CR and AC detectors and represent the physics candidate samples for the studies of neutrino and dark matter. The measured “recoil-like” spectrum can completely be explained by internal $\alpha$-contaminations as discussed in Section \[sect::intcontam\], such that only upper bounds for HND and HPGe as well as fast neutron spectra can be derived. The upper limits of these spectra at 68% C.L. are displayed in Figure \[fig::vv\_rec\]. The peaks in both Figure \[fig::vt\_rec\](c) and Figure \[fig::vv\_rec\](c) are due to X-rays emissions following electron capture (EC) by the unstable isotopes, which are produced by cosmogenic activation of long-lived isotopes inside the HPGe target.
Complete Neutron Spectrum
-------------------------
Combining both the measured thermal and fast neutron fluxes and spectra, and adopting the neutron slowing-down theory [@okay], which is described by a $1/E$ behavior of the epithermal region in between, the complete neutron spectrum at KSNL can be modeled using information of the [*in situ*]{} measurements of neutron capture rates.
[**(a)**]{}\
![ Time variation of characteristic K X-ray lines of (a) $^{71}$Ge and $^{68}$Ge, and (b) $^{68}$Ga. Exponential best-fits are superimposed. []{data-label="fig::decay_cosmogenic"}](ge68-71_hl.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}\
[**(b)**]{}\
![ Time variation of characteristic K X-ray lines of (a) $^{71}$Ge and $^{68}$Ge, and (b) $^{68}$Ga. Exponential best-fits are superimposed. []{data-label="fig::decay_cosmogenic"}](ga68_hl.pdf "fig:"){width="8.5cm"}
![ Neutron spectrum model at the target region of KSNL. The total thermal and fast neutron components are based on measurements and analysis reported in this article. The epithermal component is from interpolation. The cut-off at $\sim$5 MeV is a consequence of the lack of event statistics below $\mathcal{O}( 10^{-2} )~{\rm kg^{-1} keV^{-1} day^{-1}}$ above a few ${\rm MeV_{ee}}$. []{data-label="fig::neut_fluxes"}](all_flux.pdf){width="8.5cm"}
Figure \[fig::decay\_cosmogenic\]a and Figure \[fig::decay\_cosmogenic\]b show the variations over the whole data taking period (347 days) of the X-ray peaks at 10.37 keV$_{ee}$ and 9.66 keV$_{ee}$, respectively, following EC of $^{71}$Ge+$^{68}$Ge and $^{68}$Ga. These isotopes are primarily produced by neutron capture channels $^{70}$Ge(n,$\gamma$)$^{71}$Ge followed by EC in ${\rm ^{71}Ge(e^-,\nu_e)^{71}Ga}$ and $^{70}$Ge(n,3n)$^{68}$Ge followed by ${\rm ^{68}Ge(e^-,\nu_e)^{68}Ga}$ and ${\rm ^{68}Ga(e^-,\nu_e)^{68}Zn}$.
------------------------------------------------------------------ --------- -------------------- --------------------------------
Channel (K X-ray Lines) Rate
Measurements Nominal Measured (${\rm kg^{-1}~day^{-1}}$)
$^{71}$Ge from Transient 10.37 keV$_{ee}$ 11.43 10.63 $\pm$ 1.08 2.70 $\pm$ 0.90
$^{68}$Ge from Transient 10.37 keV$_{ee}$ 270.95 275.76 $\pm$ 9.01 23.9 $\pm$ 6.4
$^{68}$Ge from Transient 9.66 keV$_{ee}$ 270.95 246.74 $\pm$ 46.16 2.2 $\pm$ 0.6
Equilibrium 9.66 keV$_{ee}$ 0.05 $\pm$ 0.29
=\[$^{70}$Ge(n,3n)$^{68}$Ge\] $<$ 0.34 (68% C.L.)
Equilibrium 10.37 keV$_{ee}$
=\[$^{70}$Ge(n,$\gamma$)$^{71}$Ge+$^{70}$Ge(n,3n)$^{68}$Ge\] 12.40 $\pm$ 3.70
Simulated Predictions ($\rm{kg^{-1} \times day^{-1}}$) $^{70}$Ge(n,$\gamma$)$^{71}$Ge
n$_{thermal}$ 8.05 $\pm$ 0.23
n$_{epithermal}$ 2.18 $\pm$ 0.67
n$_{fast}$ 3.67 $\pm$ 1.50
Total 13.90 $\pm$ 1.65
------------------------------------------------------------------ --------- -------------------- --------------------------------
The decreasing intensities with time are consequences of less [*in situ*]{} cosmogenic activation compared to the pre-installation activities. The measured lifetimes are consistent with nominal values and the equilibrium levels displayed in Table \[tab::estrate\], on the other hand, provide information on the [*in situ*]{} neutron capture rates of $^{70}$Ge, and hence the neutron fluxes. It can be seen from Figure \[fig::decay\_cosmogenic\]b that the equilibrium yield of the 9.66 keV$_{ee}$ line and hence [*in situ*]{} production of $^{70}$Ge(n,3n)$^{68}$Ge are consistent with zero. Accordingly, the equilibrium yield of the 10.37 keV$_{ee}$ line is due exclusively to [*in situ*]{} production of $^{70}$Ge(n,$\gamma$)$^{71}$Ge. This measured rate is used to fix the normalization of the epithermal neutron component.
![ Measured CR$^-$ $\otimes$ AC$^-$ spectrum with HPGe at KSNL. The various contributions to the $^{71}$Ge, $^{68}$Ge characteristic K X-ray, L X-ray lines and the $^{68}$Ga K X-ray line, based on predictions using the measured equilibrium neutron capture rates, are superimposed. []{data-label="fig::ge_rdecay"}](ge_rdecay.pdf){width="8.5cm"}
------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Neutrons Measured Fluxes
$\Phi_n$ ${\rm (cm^{-2} s^{-1})}$
Thermal $-$ $0.02~{\rm eV}-1.00~{\rm eV}$
${\rm CR^{+} \otimes AC^{-}}$ $(2.68 \pm 0.28) \times 10^{-6}$
${\rm CR^{+} \otimes AC^{+}}$ $(3.00 \pm 0.29) \times 10^{-6}$
${\rm CR^{-} \otimes AC^{+}}$ $(9.33 \pm 1.65) \times 10^{-7}$
${\rm CR^{-} \otimes AC^{-}}$ $(2.87 \pm 0.09) \times 10^{-5}$
Epithermal $\rm{\lbrace}$
Fast $-$ $0.70~{\rm MeV}-4.00~{\rm MeV}$
${\rm CR^{+} \otimes AC^{-}}$ $(2.35 \pm 1.60) \times 10^{-4}$
${\rm CR^{+} \otimes AC^{+}}$ $(4.53 \pm 2.29) \times 10^{-4}$
${\rm CR^{-} \otimes AC^{+}}$ $(1.49 \pm 5.75) \times 10^{-6}$
${\rm CR^{-} \otimes AC^{-}}$ $< 3.22 \times 10^{-6}$
------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
: \[tab::summary\] Summary of flux measurements of different categories of neutrons.
The complete neutron background spectrum at KSNL is displayed in Figure \[fig::neut\_fluxes\]. The capture rates of $^{70}$Ge(n,3n)$^{68}$Ge and $^{70}$Ge(n,$\gamma$)$^{71}$Ge due to the thermal, epithermal and fast neutron components evaluated by full GEANT simulations [@geant] are listed in Table \[tab::estrate\], the sum of which is in excellent agreement with the measured rates. The consistency is illustrated in the measured CR$^-$ $\otimes$ AC$^-$ HPGe spectra of Figure \[fig::ge\_rdecay\] in which the different components of the Ge K X-ray lines are shown. Their total fluxes under different tags are given in Table \[tab::summary\]. The high-energy cut-off at $\sim$5 MeV in Figure \[fig::neut\_fluxes\] is a consequence of the lack of event statistics below $\mathcal{O}( 10^{-2} )~{\rm kg^{-1} keV^{-1} day^{-1}}$ for proton recoils at energy above few ${\rm MeV_{ee}}$. This, however, would not affect background studies and understanding of the HPGe experiments at KSNL, since the background is dominated by the lower energy background neutron which has much higher intensity.
Once the complete neutron background is modeled, the cut-off effects of the fast neutron spectra around 700 keV in Figure \[fig::tv\_rec\](b) and Figure \[fig::tt\_rec\](b) due to the HND threshold at 150 keV$_{ee}$ can be corrected by extrapolation to lower energy. The corrected Ge-recoil spectra with the additional neutrons taken into account are displayed in Figure \[fig::tv\_rec\](c) and Figure \[fig::tt\_rec\](c). The corrected CR$^+$ $\otimes$ AC$^-$ Ge-recoil spectrum provides $>$99% match to the measured data, confirming the expected physical picture where CR$^+$ $\otimes$ AC$^-$ samples are dominated by nuclear recoil events due to interactions of cosmic-ray induced fast neutrons. Similarly, the corrected CR$^+$ $\otimes$ AC$^+$ Ge-recoil spectrum has the expected exponential decrease with energy. Once accounted for, the residual cosmic-induced $\gamma$-background is flat down to sub-keV, also expected from Compton scattering of high energy $\gamma$-rays. The consistencies of these independent measurements serve as non-trivial cross-checks on the validity of neutron flux measurements as well as the experimental approaches and analysis procedures reported in this work.
Summary and Prospects
=====================
We report in this article [*in situ*]{} measurements of neutron-induced background at KSNL with a HND under identical active and passive shielding configurations during the neutrino physics measurements. The different components of neutron fluxes thus derived are summarized in Table \[tab::summary\], and the neutron spectrum is depicted in Figure \[fig::neut\_fluxes\]. The derived neutron spectrum provides excellent agreement with the cosmic-ray neutron-induced Ge-recoil spectra as shown in Figure \[fig::tv\_rec\](c) and Figure \[fig::tt\_rec\](c), thereby providing strong support to the validity of the results as well as the experimental approaches and analysis procedures.
It was demonstrated that elastic nuclear recoil events due to cosmic-ray induced high energy neutrons contribute almost exclusively to the $\rm{ CR^{+} \otimes AC^{-}}$ channel below 12 keV$_{ee}$, and are major components of the $\rm{ CR^{+} \otimes AC^{+}}$ channel, dominating over $\gamma$-induced background below 4 keV$_{ee}$. On the other hand, contributions of cosmic-uncorrelated neutrons to the background are minor in $\rm{ CR^{-} \otimes AC^{+}}$ and unobservable in $\rm{ CR^{-} \otimes AC^{-}}$. In particular, the dominant background to the studies of neutrinos, WIMP dark matter and axions with $\rm{ CR^{-} \otimes AC^{-}}$ selection at KSNL are ambient $\gamma$-radioactivity and intrinsic cosmogenic activation. Contributions of neutrons from ambient radioactivity and reactor operation are negligible, a feature consistent with expectations from full GEANT simulations. The HND detector concept and analysis procedures can be applicable to characterize neutron background in other rare-event experiments, in both surface and underground laboratories. In particular, the equilibrium levels of the X-ray peaks in HPGe detectors can be used to measure [*in situ*]{} background neutron fluxes. This technique can be extended to other Ge-based underground WIMP-search experiments[@cogent; @cdex; @cdms].
Acknowledgments
===============
This work is supported by Contract No. 114F374 under Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK), the Academia Sinica Principal Investigator Award, Contract No. 104-2112-M-001-038-MY3 from the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan and Contract No. 2017-ECP2 from the National Center of Theoretical Sciences, Taiwan. M.K. Singh thanks the University Grants Commission (UGC), Govt. of India, for the funding through UGC D.S. Kothari Postdoctoral Fellowship (DSKPDF) scheme (No. F. 4- 2/2006 (BSR)/PH/15-16/0098).
[99]{}
H.T. Wong, [arXiv: 1608.00306](https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.00306), The Universe Vol. 3, No.4, 22-37 (2015).
H.B. Li, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. Lett. [**90**]{}, 131802 (2003)](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.131802); H.T. Wong, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D. [**75**]{}, 012001 (2007)](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.75.012001).
M. Deniz, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D [**81**]{}, 072001 (2010)](http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.81.072001).
J.W. Chen, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D [**90**]{}, 011301(R) (2014)](https://arxiv.org/abs/1405.7168).
H.T. Wong *et al.*, [J.Phys.Conf.Ser.39:266-268,2006](https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0511001); S. Kerman, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D [**93**]{}, 113006 (2016)](https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.08786).
S.T. Lin, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D [**79**]{}, 061101(R) (2009)](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.79.061101); H.B. Li, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. Lett. [**110**]{}, 261301 (2013)](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.261301).
H.M. Chang, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D [**75**]{}, 052004 (2007)](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.75.052004).
M. Deniz, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D [**82**]{}, 033004 (2010)](http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.82.033004); S.Bilmis, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D [**85**]{}, 073011 (2012)](http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.85.073011); S. Bilmis, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D [**92**]{}, 033009 (2015)](http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.033009); M. Deniz, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D [**95**]{}, 033008 (2017)](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.033008); B. Sevda, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D [**96**]{}, 035017 (2017)](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.96.035017).
M.K. Singh *et. al.*, [Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A [**868**]{}, 109 (2017)](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2017.06.052).
D.M. Mei and A. Hime, [Phys. Rev. [**D 73**]{}, 053004 (2006)](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.73.053004).
A. Da Silva,*et al.*, [Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A [**354**]{}, 553 (1995)](https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-9002(94)01049-8).
M. Awschalom and R.S. Sanna, [Radiat. Prot. Dosim. [**10**]{}, 89 (1985)](http://inspirehep.net/record/195764/files/fermilab-tm-1209.PDF).
C. Zhang, *et al.*, [Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A [**729**]{}, 138 (2013)](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2013.07.012).
C.D. Bass, *et al.*, [Appl. Radiat. Isot. [**77**]{}, (2013) 130 (2013)](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2013.03.053).
S.C. Wang, *et al.*, [Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A [**432**]{}, 111 (1999)](https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00350-2).
Q. Du *et. al.*, [Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A [**889**]{}, 105 (2018)](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2018.01.098), and references therein.
Canberra 2111 timing amplifier, data sheet available at [<http://phy.fiu.edu/pub/TWiki/MAST_Diagnostic/Equipment_Amplifier.pdf>](http://phy.fiu.edu/pub/TWiki/MAST_Diagnostic/Equipment_Amplifier.pdf).
National instruments, PXI-5154 FADC , data sheet available at [<http://www.ni.com/pdf/manuals/376291b.pdf>](http://www.ni.com/pdf/manuals/376291b.pdf).
S.Y.F. Chu, L.P. Ekstrom and R.B. Firestone, The Lund/LBNL Nuclear Data Search, [<http://nucleardata.nuclear.lu.se/toi/>](http://nucleardata.nuclear.lu.se/toi/).
J.B. Birks, “The theory and practice of scintillation counting”, Pergamon Press (1964).
BC-702 data sheet available at, [<https://www.crystals.saint-gobain.com/sites/imdf.crystals.com/files/documents/sgc-bc702-data-sheet_70148.pdf>](https://www.crystals.saint-gobain.com/sites/imdf.crystals.com/files/documents/sgc-bc702-data-sheet_70148.pdf);
BC501-A data sheet available at, [<https://www.crystals.saint-gobain.com/sites/imdf.crystals.com/files/documents/sgc-bc501-501a-519-data-sheet_69711.pdf>](https://www.crystals.saint-gobain.com/sites/imdf.crystals.com/files/documents/sgc-bc501-501a-519-data-sheet_69711.pdf).
Q. Du, *et al.*, [Astropart. Phys. [**102**]{}, 12 (2018)](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.astropartphys.2018.04.005).
J. H. Friedman, [California LCS Technical Report No. 5 SLAC PUB-3477, (1974)](http://www.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-wrap/getdoc/slac-pub-3477.pdf).
GEANT4 Collaboration - S. Agostinelli, *et. al.* [Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A [**506**]{}, 250-303 (2003) SLAC-PUB-9350, FERMILAB-PUB-03-339](http://inspirehep.net/record/593382?ln=en).
A.K. Soma *et al.*, [Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A [**836**]{}, 67-82 (2016)](https://arxiv.org/abs/1411.4802).
Y. Oka, “Nuclear Reactor Design”, [Springer, [**Pg. 52**]{}, (2010)](http://www.springer.com/gp/book/9784431548973); J.R. Lamarsh, “Introduction to Nuclear Reactor Theory” Addison-Wesley, (1966).
C.E. Aalseth, *et al.*, [Phys. Rev. D, [**88**]{}, 012002 (2013)](https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.88.012002).
L.T. Yang *et. al.*, [Chin. Phys. C [**42**]{}, 23002 (2018)](https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.06650); H. Jiang *et. al.*, [arXiv:1802.09016 (2018)](https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.09016).
R. Agnese *et. al.*, [Phys.Rev. D [**97**]{}, no.2, 022002 (2018)](http://inspirehep.net/record/1608856); R. Agnese *et. al.*, [Phys. Rev. Lett. [**120**]{}, 061802 (2018)](https://journals.aps.org/prl/references/10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.061802).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
Consider the following inductively defined set. Given a collection $U$ of unit magnitude complex numbers, and a set initially containing just $0$ and $1$, through each point in the set, draw lines whose angles with the real axis are in $U$. Add every intersection of such lines to the set. Upon taking the closure, we obtain $R(U)$. We investigated for which $U$, $R(U)$ is a ring.
Our main result holds for when $1 \in U$ and ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} \ge 4$. If $P$ is the set of real numbers in $R(U)$ generated in the second step of the construction, then $R(U)$ equals the module over $\Z[P]$ generated by the set of points made in the first step of the construction. This lets us show that whenever the pairwise products of points made in the first step remain inside $R(U)$, it is closed under multiplication, and is thus a ring.
author:
- 'Jackson Bahr, Arielle Roth'
title: 'Subrings of $\mathbb{C}$ Generated by Angles'
---
Introduction {#s:1}
============
Suppose we are given a collection $U$ of unit length elements of $\C$. If we have some collection of points in $\C$, we can draw lines through each of them with every angle in $U$ (with respect to the real axis). In this way we can construct intersections of lines and repeat the process. Specifically, if we start with $0$ and $1$ in the complex plane and continue this construction forever until it is completed, when is the resulting collection of points a subring of the complex numbers?
Note that even though we are drawing lines, only the intersection points are considered to be constructed. In [@buhler], Buhler et al. motivated this construction with a discussion of origami where two folds can intersect to create a reference point.
Let $p,q,\alpha,\beta \in \C$ with ${\left\lvert\alpha\right\rvert} = {\left\lvert\beta\right\rvert} = 1$. Define $L_{\alpha}(p)$ to be the line through $p$ with angle $\alpha$. In other words, $L_{\alpha}(p) \coloneqq p + \R\alpha$. Define $I_{\alpha, \beta}(p, q) \coloneqq L_{\alpha}(p) \cap L_{\beta}(q)$ when $\alpha \neq \pm \beta$ so that an intersection exists.
Let $U$ be a set of unit magnitude complex numbers. Set $S_0 = \{0, 1\}$. For each $n \in \N$, set $$S_{n+1} = \{I_{\alpha, \beta}(p, q) \mid \alpha, \beta \in U\text{, } p,q \in S_n \text{, and }\alpha \neq \pm\beta\}.$$ We then define $R(U) = \bigcup_{n \in \N} S_n$.
$T = \{z \in \C \mid {\left\lvertz\right\rvert} = 1\}$ which is viewed as a group under complex multiplication. $T/\{\pm1\}$ will be used for the collection of angles, since $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are considered equivalent iff $\alpha = \pm \beta$. Unless otherwise specified, $U \subseteq T/\{\pm 1\}$.
Given $U \subseteq T/\{\pm 1\}$, we define all elements $z \in R(U)$ of the form $I_{\alpha, \beta}(0,1)$ to be elementary monomials, i.e., length 1 monomials.
Next, if $m$ is a length $k$ monomial, then $I_{\alpha, \beta}(0, m) \in R(U)$ is a length $k+1$ monomial. In this way we inductively define monomials.
\[formula\] We can calculate $I_{\alpha,\beta}(p,q)$ as follows for $p,q \in \C$ and $\alpha \neq \beta \in T/\{\pm 1\}$. $$I_{\alpha,\beta}(p,q) = \frac{[\alpha,p]}{[\alpha,\beta]}\beta + \frac{[\beta,q]}{[\beta, \alpha]}\alpha$$ where $[x,y] = x \bar{y} - y \bar{x}$ and $\bar{z}$ is the complex conjugate of $z$.
We list some properties of $I_{\alpha,\beta}(p,q)$ below for $w \in T/\{\pm 1\}$ and $r \in \R$.
(Symmetry)
: $I_{u,v}(p,q) = I_{v,u}(q,p)$
(Reduction)
: $I_{u,v}(p,q) = I_{u,v}(p,0) + I_{v,u}(q,0)$
(Linearity)
: $I_{u,v}(rp+q,0) = rI_{u,v}(p,0) + I_{u,v}(q,0)$
(Rotation)
: For $w \in T/\{\pm 1\}$, $wI_{u,v}(p,q) = I_{wu,wv}(wp,wq)$.
\[group\] Let ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} \ge 3$ with $1 \in U$. Then, $R(U)$ is closed under addition and additive inverses.
\[monomialdecomp\] Let ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} \ge 3$. $R(U)$ is the collection of integer linear combinations of monomials.
Since whenever ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} \ge 3$, $R(U)$ is a group under addition, we need only check closure under multiplication to ensure that $R(U)$ is a ring.
The authors of [@buhler] then studied the case when $U$ is a group. Specifically, they took the set of unit magnitude complex numbers $T$ (i.e., the unit circle) and considered it to be a group under complex multiplication. Then they took the quotient of $T$ by $\{-1, +1\}$. The result can be viewed as the top half of the unit circle. By convention, whenever we use $U$, we will refer to $U \subseteq T/\{\pm 1\}$ where the elements are viewed as complex numbers.
\[groupring\] Let $U$ be a subgroup of $T/\{-1, +1\}$ with ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} \ge 3$. Then, $R(U)$ is a ring.
In their paper, Buhler et al. observed that $R(U)$ maybe be a ring even when $U$ is not a group. They left the question of what properties $U$ must satisfy exactly for $R(U)$ to be a group open.
Three Angles {#s:2}
============
In order to understand $R(U)$, first we looked at ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} = 3$ with $0 \in \arg(U)$. We found that $R(U)$ has the structure of a lattice and can be understood in terms of one of the elementary monomials.
Let $U = \{1, u, v\}$. We claim that $R(U)$ is a lattice in $\C$ with the form $R(U) = \Z + I_{u,v}(0,1) \Z$.
Set $x = I_{u,v}(0,1)$. From Lemma \[group\], we know that $R(U)$ is a subgroup of $\C$ with addition. Since $1 \in R(U)$ and $x \in R(U)$, we clearly see that $R(U) \supseteq \Z + x\Z$.
We will prove the other containment with induction. We know that $S_1 = \{x, 1-x, 0, 1\} \subseteq \Z + x \Z$. Let $p, q \in S_n$, which is assumed to be in $\Z + x \Z$. Let $\alpha, \beta \in U$.
We claim that $z = I_{\alpha,\beta}(p,q) \in \Z + x \Z$. Since $I_{\alpha,\beta}(p,q) = I_{\alpha,\beta}(p, 0) + I_{\beta, \alpha}(q, 0)$, it suffices to prove that $I_{\alpha,\beta}(a+bx, 0) \in Z + x \Z$. Further note that $$\begin{aligned}
I_{\alpha,\beta}(a+bx,0) &= I_{\alpha,\beta}(a,0) + I_{\alpha,\beta}(bx,0)
\\
&= aI_{\alpha,\beta}(1,0) + I_{\alpha,\beta}(bx,0).
\end{aligned}$$ by linearity.
$I_{\alpha, \beta}(1,0) \in S_1$, so $I_{\alpha, \beta}(1,0) = 1$, $0$, $x$, or $1-x$. There are only four choices since if one of the angles is $0$ radians, the resulting point is $0$ or $1$. If $\alpha,\beta \neq 1$, then there are two choices left, $\alpha = u, \beta = v$ or $\alpha = v, \beta = u$. One of these yields the point $x$ and the other yields (by the parallelogram law) $1-x$. Thus $I_{\alpha, \beta}(a,0) \in \Z + x\Z$.
Next, note that $I_{\alpha,\beta}(bx,0) = bI_{\alpha,\beta}(x,0)$. Thus it suffices to prove that $I_{\alpha,\beta}(x,0) \in \Z + x\Z$. We have 6 cases.
($u,v$)
: Since $x = ru$ for some $r \in \R$, $I_{u,v}(x,0) = rI_{u,v}(u,0) = 0 \in \Z + x\Z$.
($v,u$)
: $I_{v,u}(x,0)$ is the projection of $x$ on to the line $ru$ in the direction of $v$, but $x \in \R u$, so $I_{v,u}(x,0) = x$.
($u,1$)
: $I_{u,1}(x,0)$ is the projection of $x$ on to the real axis in the direction of $u$. It is easy to see that this must be $0$, since the line from $0$ (which is on the real axis) extending in the $u$ direction intersects $x$.
($v,1$)
: $I_{v,1}(x,0) = 1$, for a similar reason. The line extending from $1$ (which is on the real axis) in the $v$ direction intersects $x$.
($1,u$)
: $I_{1,u}(x,0)$ is the line crossing through $x+s$ and $ru$ for $s,r \in \R$, but since $x \in \R u$, this intersection is clearly at $x$.
($1,v$)
: $I_{1,v}(x,0)$ is at $x-1$ which is demonstrated by the fact that $I_{1,v}(x,0) + I_{v,1}(x,0) = x$ and $I_{v,1}(x,0) = 1$.
All of these points line in $\Z + x\Z$, so we have shown that $R(U)$ for ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}}=3$ is of the form $\Z + x\Z$ where $x = I_{u,v}(0,1)$.
Given $U = \{1, u, v\}$, if we find $u', v'$ such that $I_{u',v'}(0,1) = m + I_{u,v}(0,1)$ for $m \in \Z$ and set $U' = \{1, u', v'\}$, by the above structural result $R(U) = R(U')$.
Theorem \[samelattice\] expands on this remark and show exactly when $U$ and $U'$ of size three generate the same lattice.
\[samelattice\] Let $I_{u,v}(0,1) = x$ and let $I_{u',v'}(0,1) = y$. Let $x = a+bi$ and $y = c+di$. Set $U = \{1,u,v\}$ and $U' = \{1, u',v'\}$. We claim that $R(U) = R(U')$ if and only if $b = \pm d$ and $a \mp c \in \Z$.
$\Z + x\Z = \Z + y\Z$ means that $\{m + n x \mid m,n \in\Z\} = \{p + q y \mid p,q \in \Z\}$. For arbitrarily $m,n \in \Z$, $m + nx \in \{p + qy \mid p,q \in \Z\}$ holds iff $nx \in \Z + y\Z$, which is equivalent to $na+nbi = p + qc + qdi$ for some $p, q \in \Z$.
In order for this to hold, the imaginary parts must equal: $nbi = qdi$ (for any $n$, there is some $q$). Thus $d \mid b$ (using $n = 1$). We can make the same argument swapping $x$ and $y$, which tells us that $b \mid d$, so $b = \pm d$ and thus $n = \pm q$.
Also, the real parts must be equal: $na - qc = p$ (for any $n$ there are such $p,q$). Above we determined that $n = \pm q$, so $n(a \mp c) = p$. Such a $p$ exists for any $n$, so $a \mp c \in \Z$. We showed that if $\Z + x\Z = \Z + y\Z$, then $b = \pm d$ and $a \mp c \in \Z$.
Now, if we assume that $b = \pm d$ and $a \mp c \in \Z$, then for any $\Z + x\Z = m + na + nbi$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
m + na + nbi &= m + n(k \pm c) + n(\pm d)i
\\
&= (m+nk) \pm nc \pm ndi \in \Z + y\Z.
\end{aligned}$$ This shows that $\Z + x\Z \subseteq \Z + y\Z$. Likewise, $\Z + y\Z \subseteq \Z + x\Z$.
Since $R(U) = \Z + x\Z$ and $R(U') = \Z + y\Z$, we have that $R(U) = R(U')$ if and only if $b = \pm d$ and $a \mp c \in \Z$, so $\Z + x\Z = \Z + y\Z$.
Now that we understand what form $R(U)$ has for ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} = 3$ with $0 \in \arg(U)$, we can easily show exactly when $R(U)$ is a ring. The only point that gives any difficulty is $x$, one of the two elementary monomials off of the real line. If we can square this point and the result lies in $R(U)$, then $R(U) = \Z + x\Z$ must be closed under multiplication.
Now we characterize all $U$ with $0 \in \arg(U)$ and ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} = 3$ such that $R(U)$ is a ring.
\[quadint\] Let $U = \{1, u,v\}$ and let $I_{u,v}(0,1) = x$. $R(U)$ is a ring if and only if $x$ is a (non-real) quadratic integer, i.e., $x$ is the root of some monic integer quadratic polynomial.
First we will prove that if $x$ is a quadratic integer, then $R(U)$ is a ring. Note that $R(U) = \Z + x\Z$ where $x = I_{u,v}(0,1)$. Since $R(U)$ is already a group, we need to show closure under multiplication. We write $(a+bx)(c+dx) = ac + (bc+ad)x + bdx^2$. Since $x$ is a quadratic integer, $x^2 = \lambda x + \mu$ for some $\lambda, \mu \in \Z$. Then, $$\begin{aligned}
(a+bx)(c+dx) &= ac + (bc+ad)x + bd(\lambda x + \mu)
\\
&= (ac + bd\mu) + (bc+ad+bd\lambda)x
\end{aligned}$$ so in fact $R(U)$ is closed under multiplication.
Now assume that $R(U)$ is closed under multiplication. Then $(a+bx)(c+dx) \in \Z + x\Z$, but we can expand this: $$\begin{aligned}
(a+bx)(c+dx) = ac + (bc + ad)x + bd x^2 \in \Z + x\Z
\end{aligned}$$
Since $ac + (bc+ad)x \in \Z + x\Z$, we know that $bd x^2 \in \Z + x\Z$ for every $b,d \in \Z$. In particular, this holds for $b = d = 1$, so $x^2 \in \Z + x\Z$. In other words, $x$ must be a quadratic integer. Also, if $x \in \R$, then our $R(U)$ is degenerate, so we need $x \notin \R$.
We can compute the intersection point $x$ in terms of $\arg(u)$ and $\arg(v)$ and rephrase Theorem \[quadint\].
Let $\arg(U) = \{0, \theta, \phi\}$ with $\phi < \theta$. Then $R(U)$ is a ring if and only if $$\frac{\tan \theta}{\tan \theta - \tan \phi} + \frac{\tan \phi \tan \theta}{\tan \theta - \tan \phi}i$$ is a quadratic integer.
We can see from the following figure that $$(1+w) \tan \phi = h = w \tan \theta$$ so $w = \frac{\tan \phi}{\tan \theta - \tan \phi}$.
\[fig1\]
Immediately, we see also that $h = \frac{\tan \phi \tan \theta}{\tan \theta - \tan \phi}$. Thus, $$x = \frac{\tan \theta}{\tan \theta - \tan \phi} + \frac{\tan \phi \tan \theta}{\tan \theta - \tan \phi}$$
In [@nedrenco], Nedrenco independently characterized $R(U)$ where ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} = 3$, describing $R(U) = \Z + x\Z$ and generalized to when $0 \notin \arg(U)$. In the same paper, Nedrenco also noted that $R(U)$ is dense when ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} = 4$. We present what we found independently.
Four or More Angles {#s:3}
===================
Since we understood $R(U)$ for ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} = 3$ in terms of an elementary monomial, we wish to understand $R(U)$ for ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} \ge 4$ in terms of elementary monomials. Because $R(U)$ is now dense in the complex plane, we cannot hope for an integral basis. By linearity if we have some $p \in \R \cap R(U)$, then $I_{\alpha, \beta}(0, p) = pI_{\alpha, \beta}(0,1)$. This means we can scale points. This motivates our interest in “projections” on to the real axis.
Let $U = \{1, u, v, w\}$ with $\arg(u) < \arg(v) < \arg(w) < \pi$. There are at most eight length-two monomials on the real axis. There are at most five length-two monomials constructed from elementary monomials of the form $I_{\alpha, \beta}(0,1)$ with $\arg(\alpha) < \arg(\beta)$. They are $0, 1, x, 1/x, x/(x-1)$ where $x = I_{v, 1}(I_{u, w}(0, 1), 0)$.
With the exception of 0 and 1, the only way to construct a length-two monomial on the real axis is to intersect a line through an elementary monomial and the line passing through 0 and 1. For any given elementary monomial, there are already two lines passing through the point: one passes through 0 and one passes through 1. Thus there can be at most 6 extra length-two monomials on the real axis, at most three of which created from $z_1, z_2, z_3$ in the form described in the claim, and at most three of which created from $1-z_1, 1-z_2, 1-z_3$ which are of the opposite form.
\[fig2\]
Note that $p_1 = 1 - p_4$, $p_2 = 1 - p_5$, and $p_3 = 1 - p_6$. As proof, we calculate $$\begin{aligned}
I_{1, \alpha}(0, I_{\beta, \gamma}(0, 1)) &= I_{1, \alpha}(0, 1 - I_{\gamma, \beta}(0, 1))
\\
&= I_{1, \alpha}(0, 1) - I_{1, \alpha}(0, I_{\gamma, \beta}(0, 1))
\\
&= 1 - I_{1, \alpha}(0, I_{\gamma, \beta}(0, 1))
\end{aligned}$$
Now we will show that the projections have the described form. Set $x = p_1$. Note that the triangle $0-p_1-z_1$ is similar to the triangle $0-1-z_2$, so $\frac{p_1}{1} = \frac{z_1}{z_2}$. Also, the triangle $0-1-z_1$ is similar to the triangle $0-p_2-z_2$, so $\frac{1}{p_2} = \frac{z_1}{z_2}$. Thus, $p_2 = 1/x$.
\[fig3\]
Next, the triangle $0-p_1 - z_1$ is similar to the triangle $p_3 - 0 - z_3$, so $\frac{{\left\lvertz_1\right\rvert}}{{\left\lvertz_3-p_3\right\rvert}} = \frac{{\left\lvertp_1\right\rvert}}{{\left\lvertp_3\right\rvert}}$. Also, the triangle $0-1-z_1$ is similar to the triangle $p_3-1-z_3$, so $\frac{{\left\lvertz_1\right\rvert}}{{\left\lvertz_3-p_3\right\rvert}} = \frac{1}{{\left\lvert1-p_3\right\rvert}}$. We conclude $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{{\left\lvertx\right\rvert}}{{\left\lvertp_3\right\rvert}} &= \frac{1}{{\left\lvert1-p_3\right\rvert}}
\\
{\left\lvertp_3-1\right\rvert}{\left\lvertx\right\rvert} &= {\left\lvertp_3\right\rvert}
\\
{\left\lvertp_3\right\rvert} &= {\left\lvert\frac{x}{x-1}\right\rvert}
\end{aligned}$$
To remove the absolute value signs, we note that since $\arg(z_3) > \arg(z_1)$, the line through $z_3$ with angle $\arg(z_1)$ must intersect the negative real axis, so $p_3 < 0$. Furthermore, since $x < 1$, $\frac{x}{x-1} < 0$, so we deduce that $p_3 = x/(x-1)$.
Now that we understand a small amount of $\R \cap R(U)$, we can quickly construct an entire ring inside $\R \cap R(U)$ with the scaling mentioned earlier. Later we will show that what we construct next is exactly $\R \cap R(U)$
\[projconstruct\] Let $0 \in \arg(U)$ with ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} \ge 4$. Let $P$ be the set of length-two monomials on the real axis. For any $x \in R(U)$ and any $p \in P$, $px \in R(U)$. As a result, the ring $\Z[P]$ is constructible, i.e., $\Z[P] \subseteq R(U)$.
Let $p$ be a projection. Since $R(U)$ is the collection of finite linear combinations of monomials, it suffices to construct $pm$ for a given monomial $m$, since if we have $x \in R(U)$, we can simply represent $x = \sum_{i=1}^{n} c_i m_i$ for $c_i \in \Z$ and then write $px = \sum_{i=1}^{n} c_i (pm_i)$.
The proof that $pm \in R(U)$ follows from linearity. Formally, we rely on induction.
Base Case:
: The length of $m$ is one, so $m = I_{\alpha, \beta}(0,1)$ for some $\alpha, \beta \in U$. Then, $pm = I_{\alpha, \beta}(0,p)$ by linearity, which is in $R(U)$ since $p \in R(U)$.
Inductive Step:
: Suppose every length $n-1$ monomial satisfies the claim. Let $m$ be of length $n$. Then, $m = I_{\alpha, \beta}(0, q)$ for some length $n-1$ monomial $q$. By linearity, $pm = I_{\alpha, \beta}(0, pq)$ which is constructible since $pq \in R(U)$ by the inductive hypothesis.
Thus every monomial can be arbitrarily multiplied by projections, so in fact everything in $R(U)$ can be arbitrarily multiplied by projections. In particular, so can the projections themselves. This means that arbitrary powers of projections are in $R(U)$. Furthermore, since $R(U)$ is a group under addition, $\Z[P] \subseteq R(U)$.
Since the above result does not rely on the previous two results, this holds even when ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} > 4$.
Our current goal is to characterize all monomials in terms of $\Z[P]$ and elementary monomials. By Theorem \[monomialdecomp\], if the monomials have a nice enough form, we will be able to understand all of $R(U)$. Characterizing all monomials starts with the length two monomials. First, however, we need a quick lemma.
Let $0,\alpha,\beta \in \arg(U)$. Let $p, q \in R(U)$, and let $x = I_{\alpha, \beta}(p,q)$ and $y = I_{\beta, \alpha}(p,q)$. Then, $x = p+q-y$.
Since the lines from $x$ to $q$ and from $p$ to $y$ are parallel, and also the lines from $x$ to $p$ and from $q$ to $y$ are parallel, this forms a parallelogram. It is clear that $0$, $x-q$, $p-q$, and $y-q$ form a parallelogram and that $x-q + y-q = p-q$, so $x+y-q = p$.
\[fig4\]
Let ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} \ge 4$ and let $0 \in \arg(U)$. Let $P$ be the set of projections from the elementary monomials to the real axis along angles in $U$. Every length two monomial is a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials.
Let $z = I_{\alpha, \beta}(0,1)$ for some $\alpha,\beta \in U$ and let our length two monomial $m = I_{\gamma, \delta}(0,z)$. We will prove that $m$ is a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials by cases.
($\delta = 1$):
: Note that $$I_{\gamma,0}(0,z) + I_{0,\gamma}(0,z) = z,$$ so $I_{\gamma, \delta}(0,z) = z - I_{0, \gamma}(0,z)$. Since $I_{0, \gamma}(0,z) \in P$, $m$ is a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials.
($\delta = \alpha$):
: Since the line through $z = I_{\alpha, \beta}(0,1)$ with angle $\arg(\alpha)$ passes through the origin, $m = I_{\gamma, \alpha}(0, z) = 0$. This is trivially a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials.
($\delta = \beta$):
: Since the line through $z = I_{\alpha, \beta}(0,1)$ with angle $\arg(\beta)$ passes through $1$, $m = I_{\gamma, \beta}(0,z) = I_{\gamma, \beta}(0,1)$, which is an elementary monomial.
($\delta \in U \setminus\{1,\alpha,\beta\}$):
: Let $p = I_{0, \gamma}(0, z)$ be the projection from $z$ to the real axis in the direction of $\gamma$. Note that $I_{\gamma, \delta}(0, p) = p I_{\gamma, \delta}(0,1)$ by linearity.
Set $x = I_{\gamma, \delta}(0, p)$. We that $x + z - p = m$, and since $x = p I_{\gamma, \delta}(0,1)$, this is enough to prove that $m$ is a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials. Restated, the claim is that $$\begin{aligned}
I_{\gamma, \delta}(0, I_{0, \gamma}(0,z)) + z - I_{0,\gamma}(0,z) = I_{\gamma, \delta}(0, z)
\end{aligned}$$ To prove this, we will show that $I_{\gamma, \delta}(x,z) = m$. This follows by the fact that $x \in \R \gamma$, so the line through $x$ with angle $\arg{\delta}$ also passes through 0 and thus $I_{\gamma, \delta}(x,z) = I_{\gamma, \delta}(0,z) = m$.
Furthermore, $I_{\delta, \gamma}(x,z) = p$. To see this, first note that $I_{\gamma, 0}(z, 0) = p$. Also, $I_{\delta, 0}(x, 0) = p$, because $$\begin{aligned}
I_{\delta, 0}(x,0) &= I_{\delta, 0}(I_{\gamma, \delta}(0, p), 0)
\end{aligned}$$ and both $x$ and $p$ lie along the same line through $p$ with angle $\arg(\delta)$ (by construction of $x$).
This means that $x$ and $z$ lie on opposite corners of a parallelogram which has a corner at $p$ through the real axis and another corner through $m$. Thus, $0$, $(x-p)$, $(z-p)$, and $(m-p)$ form the corners of a parallelogram and $(x-p) + (z-p) = m-p$ so $x+z-p = m$, concluding the proof.
Since in all cases $m$ is a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials, we know that every length two monomial is of this form.
Now that we understand length two monomials, we can apply induction to characterize all monomials, and thus all of $R(U)$.
Let $0 \in \arg(U)$. Let $P$ be the set of projections of elementary monomials along lines with angles from $\arg(U)$ on to the real axis. Then, every monomial in $R(U)$ is a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials. Indeed, $R(U)$ is the set of $\Z[P]$-linear combinations of elementary monomials.
We will prove this by induction on the length of the monomial. Length one monomials are already elementary and length two monomials follow from the above theorem. Let $m$ be length $n$ and suppose that all length $n-1$ monomials are of this form. Then, $$\begin{aligned}
m &= I_{\alpha, \beta}(0, m')
\\
&= I_{\alpha, \beta}(0, \sum_{i=1}^{k} c_i z_i)
\\
&= \sum_{i=1}^{k} c_i I_{\alpha, \beta}(0, z_i)
\\
&= \sum_{i=1}^k \left(c_i \sum_{j=1}^{\ell} d_i x_i\right)
\end{aligned}$$ using linearity and the fact that all length two monomials are of this form. The $c_i$ and $d_i$ are in $\Z[P]$ and the $x_i$ and $z_i$ are elementary monomials. After simplification, it is easy to see that $m$ is in fact a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials.
Since everything in $R(U)$ is an integer linear combination of monomials, everything in $R(U)$ is a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials.
Furthermore, since $\Z[P]$ is constructible by Proposition \[projconstruct\], and $p R(U) \subseteq R(U)$ for all $p \in P$, we can construct every $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials. Thus, $R(U)$ equals the set of $\Z[P]$-linear combinations of elementary monomials.
We can alternatively say that $R(U)$ is a $\Z[P]$-module in $\C$ generated by the elementary monomials.
As in the three-angle case, understanding the structure of $R(U)$ led us to understand when $R(U)$ is a ring in terms of products of elementary monomials. In fact Theorem \[quadint\] could probably be seen as a special case of the following theorem.
\[bigresult\] Let $U$ with ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} \ge 4$ and $0 \in \arg(U)$ and let $P$ represent the collection of projections. $R(U)$ is a ring if and only if every pairwise product of elementary monomials is a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials.
First note that $R(U)$ equals the collection of $\Z[P]$-linear combinations of elementary monomials. We that the $\Z[P]$-linear combinations of elementary monomials are closed under multiplication if and only if every pairwise product of elementary monomials is a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials.
Assume that every pairwise product of elementary monomials is as above. Then, for any $x, y \in R(U)$, we write $x = \sum_{i=1}^{n} c_i x_i$ and $y = \sum_{j=1}^{m} d_j y_j$ for $c_i,d_j \in \Z[P]$ and $x_i,y_j$ elementary monomials.
Then, $xy = \sum_{i,j} c_i d_j x_i y_j$. Since $x_i y_j$ is a $\Z[P]$-linear combination of elementary monomials, so is $xy$. Thus $R(U)$ is a ring.
Now, suppose that $R(U)$ is a ring. It must be closed under multiplication, so the pairwise product of elementary monomials must be in $R(U)$, but $R(U)$ is the $\Z[P]$-linear combinations of elementary monomials, so the claim holds.
Since we have at least one projection $p \in (0,1)$, we can construct points close to zero. Because elements of $R(U)$ scaled by $p$ are still in $R(U)$ and $R(U)$ is a group, it is actually dense in $\C$ as we will prove below.
\[density\] If $1 \in U$ and ${{\left\lvertU\right\rvert}} \ge 4$, then $R(U)$ is dense in $\C$.
Since $R(U)$ is the set of $\Z[P]$-linear combinations of elementary monomials, if $z$ is a non-real elementary monomial and $p \in \Z[P] \cap (0,1)$, we can construct $p^n$ and $p^n z$ which go to zero from, two different directions.
Let $\ep > 0$ and let $x \in \C$. Since $R(U)$ is a group under addition, we can construct $a p^{N_1} + b p^{N_2} z$ for all $N_1, N_2 \in \N$.
Since $p \in (0,1)$, we can find $N_2$ such that ${\left\lvert\Im(z) p^{N_2}\right\rvert} < \ep/2$. To simplify the following expression, write $\theta = \Im(z) p^{N_2}$. Then there exists a unique $b \in \Z$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
b-1 \le \frac{\Im(x)}{\theta} \le b
\end{aligned}$$ So we can show that $$\begin{aligned}
{\left\lvertb \Im(z) p^{N_2}i - \Im(x)i\right\rvert} = {\left\lvertb\theta - \Im(x)\right\rvert} \le \ep/2
\end{aligned}$$
Likewise we can find $a, N_1$ such that ${\left\lverta p^{N_1} - \left(\Re(x) - b p^{N_2} \Re(p)\right)\right\rvert} < \ep/2$. Once we have such $a \in \Z$ and $N_1 \in \N$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\left\lverta p^{N_1} + b p^{N_2} z - x\right\rvert} &= {\left\lverta p^{N_1} + b p^{N_2} \Re(z) - \Re(x) + b p^{N_2} \Im(z)i - \Im(x)i\right\rvert}
\\
&\le {\left\lverta p^{N_1} + b p^{N_2} \Re(z) - \Re(x)\right\rvert} + {\left\lvertb p^{N_2} \Im(z) - \Im(x)\right\rvert}
\\
&< \ep
\end{aligned}$$
Since $a p^{N_1} + bp^{N_2}z \in R(U)$, and this holds for any $x \in \C$ and for every $\ep > 0$, we can always find a point in $R(U)$ arbitrarily close to any point of $\C$. Thus, $R(U)$ is dense in $\C$.
Some $U$ for Which $R(U)$ Is a Ring {#s:4}
===================================
Now we can use Theorem \[bigresult\] to prove that $R(U)$ is a ring for a particular example of $U$.
Let $U = \{1, e^{i\pi/6}, e^{i\pi/3}, e^{i\pi/2}\}$. $R(U)$ is a ring.
It suffices to show that all products of elementary monomials are $\Z[P]$-linear combinations of elementary monomials. Our elementary monomials are $0, 1, z_1, z_2, z_3, 1-z_1, 1-z_2, 1-z_3$, where $$\begin{aligned}
z_1 &= \frac{2\sqrt{3}}{3} e^{i\pi/6}
\\
z_2 &= \sqrt{3} e^{i\pi/6}
\\
z_3 &= 2 e^{i\pi/3}
\end{aligned}$$
First we calculate the projections and get $2/3, 3/2, -2$. Note that $\Z[2/3, 3/2, -2] = \Z[2/3,3/2] = \Z[1/3,1/2] = \Z[1/6]$.
We calculate all pairwise products of $z_1, z_2, z_3$, since calculating more would be redundant, as the others are either $0$, $1$, or an integer linear combination of $\{1, z_1, z_2, z_3\}$. $$\begin{aligned}
z_1^2 &= \frac{4}{3} e^{i\pi/3} = \frac{2}{3} z_3
\\
z_1 z_2 &= 2 e^{i\pi/3} = z_3
\\
z_1 z_3 &= \frac{4}{\sqrt{3}} e^{i\pi/2} = \frac{4i}{\sqrt{3}} = 4(z_1-1)
\\
z_2^2 &= z_1^2 \frac{z_2^2}{z_1^2} = \frac{9}{4} \cdot \frac{2}{3} z_3 = \frac{3}{2} z_3
\\
z_2 z_3 &= \frac{z_2}{z_1} z_1 z_3 = 6(z_1 - 1)
\\
z_3^2 &= z_1 z_2 z_3 = 6(z_1^2 - z_1) = 4z_3 - 6z_1
\end{aligned}$$
These are all in $R(U)$, so $R(U)$ is closed under multiplication and is a ring.
We suspected that perhaps any subset $U$ of a finite group containing a generator for that finite group would result in a ring. The following example shows that this cannot be necessary.
Let $U = \{1, e^{i\pi/6}, e^{i\pi/4}, e^{i\pi/3}\}$. $R(U)$ is a ring.
As above, it suffices to show that the products of all elementary monomials are $\Z[P]$-linear combinations of elementary monomials. We go by the convention that $z_1 = I_{e^{i\pi/6}, e^{i\pi/2}}(0, 1)$, $z_2 = I_{e^{i\pi/6}, e^{i\pi/3}}(0, 1)$, and $z_3 = I_{e^{i\pi/3}, e^{i\pi/2}}(0, 1)$ and that $p_1, p_2, p_3$ are projections from $z_1, z_2, z_3$ to the real axis.
We calculated $$\begin{aligned}
z_1 z_2 &= p_3(1- z_3)
\\
z_1 z_3 &= -p_1 z_2 - (p_2 p_3)z_3 + 2 p_3
\\
z_2 z_3 &= -p_3 z_2 - (p_2 p_3)z_3 + 2 p_2 p_3
\\
z_1^2 &= p_1 p_3(1-z_3)
\\
z_2^2 &= p_2 p_3 (1-z_3)
\\
z_3^2 &= -6z_2 - 3p_2p_3 z_3 + 3p_3
\end{aligned}$$
We then suspected that any subset of a finite group might result in a ring. Our next result shows this too cannot be necessary.
Let $U = \{1, e^{i}, e^{2i}, e^{3i}\}$. $R(U)$ is a ring.
This example is a special case of Theorem \[4theta\].
We strongly suspect that $R(\{1, e^{i\pi/5}, e^{i\pi/4}, e^{i\pi/3}\})$ is not a ring, so we suspect that it is not sufficient for $U$ to just be a subset of a finite group.
\[4theta\] Let $U = \{1, \alpha, \alpha^2, \alpha^3\}$. $R(U)$ is a ring.
Set $z_1 = I_{\alpha, \alpha^3}(0,1)$, $z_2 = I_{\alpha, \alpha^2}(0,1)$, and $z_3 = I_{\alpha^2, \alpha^3}(0,1)$. Since the only elementary monomials are $0,1,z_1, z_2, z_3, 1-z_1, 1-z_2, 1-z_3$, it suffices to check pairwise products of $\{z_1, z_2, z_3\}$.
Set $p_1 = I_{1, \alpha^2}(0,z_1)$, $p_2 = I_{1, \alpha^3}(0, z_2)$, and $p_3 = I_{1, \alpha}(0, z_3)$. Then $\Z[P] = \Z[p_1, p_2, p_3]$, since the other projections are 0, 1, $1-p_1$, $1-p_2$, and $1-p_2$.
First we claim that $z_1 z_2 = z_3$. We will prove this by calculation. $$\begin{aligned}
z_1 z_2 &= \frac{[1,\alpha^3]}{[\alpha, \alpha^3]} \frac{[1, \alpha^2]}{[\alpha, \alpha^2]} \alpha^2
\\
&= \frac{e^{-3i\theta} - e^{3i\theta}}{e^{-2i\theta} - e^{2i\theta}} \frac{e^{-2i\theta} - e^{2i\theta}}{e^{-i\theta} - e^{i\theta}}
\\
&= \frac{[1,\alpha^3]}{[\alpha, \alpha^2]}\alpha^2 = \frac{[1,\alpha^3]}{[\alpha^2,\alpha^3]} \alpha^2
\\
&= z_3
\end{aligned}$$
Next we claim that $z_1/z_2 = p_1$ and $z_2 / z_1 = p_2$. These can also be calculated but a geometrical figure makes it clear.
The first claim follows from the fact that the triangles $0 - p_1 - z_1$ and $0 - 1 - z_2$ are similar. The second claim follows from the similarity of the triangles $0 - 1 - z_1$ and $0 - p_2 - z_2$.
\[fig5\]
So far we can construct the following pairwise products of elementary monomials. $$\begin{aligned}
z_1^2 &= z_1 z_2 \frac{z_1}{z_2} = p_1 z_3
\\
z_1 z_2 &= z_3
\\
z_2^2 &= p_2^2 p_1 z_3 = p_2 z_3
\end{aligned}$$ We need only construct $z_3^2$ and $z_2 z_3$ since $z_1 z_3 = p_1 z_2 z_3$.
First we show $z_3^2 = p_3^2(z_3 - z_2)$ algebraically. We calculated $z_3^2$ using the formula given in Proposition \[formula\] and obtained $$\begin{aligned}
z_3^2 = 1 + 2 \alpha^2 + 3 \alpha^4 + 2 \alpha^6 + \alpha^8
\end{aligned}$$ which is exactly what we found by calculating $p_3^2 (z_3 - z_2)$, so the two must be equal.
Likewise, we calculated $z_2 z_3$ to be $$\begin{aligned}
z_2 z_3 = 1 + 2 \alpha^2 + 2 \alpha^4 + \alpha^6
\end{aligned}$$ which precisely equals $p_3 (1- z_3)$.
Thus all 6 pairwise products of $\{z_1, z_2, z_3\}$ are $\Z[P]$-linear combinations of elementary monomials, so $R(U)$ is a ring.
This characterization of $R(U)$ makes finding examples of rings $R(U)$ a matter of verifying that finitely many products are contained in $R(U)$. However, finding counterexamples is more difficult. Some $U$ that are difficult to work with, like $\{1, e^{i}, e^{2i}, e^{3i}\}$, yield rings. Other $U$ that are nicer to work with, such as $\{1, e^{i\pi/5}, e^{i\pi/4}, e^{i\pi/3}\}$ are suspected to not yield rings.
Open Questions {#s:5}
==============
Some open questions we considered in research are posed below.
1. How does $1 \notin U$ affect our current results? Can we still express $R(U)$ as a module over some ring generated by elementary monomials?
2. When exactly are the products of elementary monomials $\Z[P]$-linear combinations of elementary monomials?
3. Is $R(\{1, e^{i\pi/5}, e^{i\pi/4}, e^{i\pi/3}\})$ a ring?
4. What subrings of $\C$ are of the form $R(U)$ for some $U$?
5. Given $p \in \C$, for which $U$ is $p \in R(U)$?
6. We can write $I_{u,v}(p,q) = \frac{[u,p]}{[u,v]}v + \frac{[v,q]}{[v,u]}u$ where $[x,y] = x \bar{y} - y \bar{x}$. Note that $[x,y]$ is an alternating bilinear map. If $V$ is some vector space equipped with $[\cdot, \cdot]$, an alternating bilinear map into $\R$ and we have some $S \subseteq V$ of allowable “angles”, we can define $I : S^2 \times V^2 \to V$ via $$\begin{aligned}
I_{u,v}(p,q) = \frac{[u,p]}{[u,v]}v + \frac{[v,q]}{[v,u]}u\end{aligned}$$ Do similar results hold for this generalization? Perhaps we could require $V$ to be a normed vector space and say that $S$ is the sphere of radius one.
[9]{} Joe Buhler, Steve Butler, Warwick de Launey and Ron Graham, ’Origami rings’, *Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society* **92** (June 2012), 299-311. D. Nedrenco, ’On origami rings’, arXiv:1502.07995 (Feburary 2015).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Superpixel is widely used in image processing. And among the methods for superpixel generation, clustering-based methods have a high speed and a good performance at the same time. However, most clustering-based superpixel methods are sensitive to noise. To solve these problems, in this paper, we first analyze the features of noise. Then according to the statistical features of noise, we propose a novel centroid updating approach to enhance the robustness of the clustering-based superpixel methods. Besides, we propose a novel superpixel based edge detection method. The experiments on BSD500 dataset show that our approach can significantly enhance the performance of clustering-based superpixel methods in noisy environment. Moreover, we also show that our proposed edge detection method outperforms other classical methods.'
address: |
$^{\star}$ China University of Geosciences, School of Automation, Wuhan, China\
$^{\dagger}$ City University of Hong Kong, Department of Electrical Engineering, Kowloon, Hong Kong\
$^{\ddagger}$ Tongji University, Department of Computer Science and Technology, Shanghai, China
bibliography:
- 'mybibfile.bib'
title: ' A novel centroid update approach for clustering-based superpixel method and superpixel-based edge detection '
---
Clustering-based superpixel methods, edge detection, noise-resistance, superpixel segmentation.
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
In 2003, Ren *et al*. [@ren2003learning] first proposed the concept of superpixel, which refers to a series of regions consists of pixels with adjacent positions and similar color, brightness and texture features. These regions can retain the effective information like the boundary information of objects in the image [@fslic; @ICIP; @accw]. Different from pixel, superpixel can reduce the size of the object to be processed and the complexity of the subsequent processing to a great extent [@fslic; @ICIP; @accw]. Due to these advantages, superpixel methods are usually used as a preprocessing step for many tasks [@fslic; @ICIP; @accw; @achanta2017superpixels].
For the past years, many superpixel methods have been proposed. A good superpixel method should meet many needs like compactness, boundary adherence, computational complexity, controllable superpixel number [@fslic; @achanta2012slic]. Each kind of superpixel method has its own advantages and defects [@fslic; @jampani2018superpixel]. Among them, clustering-based methods are widely used for image segmentation tasks [@fslic; @guo2018fuzzy]. Through the clustering process, the number and the compactness of superpixels can be controlled [@stutz2018superpixels]. Simple linear iterative clustering (SLIC) is one of the most commonly used clustering-based methods, which adopts a local K-means clustering method to cluster pixels based on the color and spatial distance [@achanta2012slic]. Linear spectral clustering (LSC) is another well-known clustering-based method [@li2015superpixel]. Different to the five-dimensional space used in SLIC, it takes a ten-dimensional space and gets a better boundary recall rate than SLIC. Recently, an improved SLIC called simple non-iterative clustering (SNIC) has been developed [@achanta2017superpixels]. Compared to SLIC and LSC, SNIC do not need iterations, so it has higher computational and memory efficiency. However, above clustering-based methods are all sensitive to noise [@fslic]. When the noise exists, they can not maintain the performance as they work in non-noise situation [@fslic].
To solve the above problems of clustering-based superpixel methods, in this paper, we first analyze the features of noise. Then according to the statistical features of noise, we propose a novel centroid updating approach to enhance the clustering-based superpixel methods. Moreover, we propose a superpixel based edge detection algorithm (SBED), which can gain edge of image by detecting edges of superpixels. The contribution of this paper can be concluded as follows,
- We analyze the reason why clustering-based superpixel methods don’t work well in noisy environment.
- According to the features of noise, we propose a novel centroid update approach for clustering-based superpixel methods to reduce the impact of noise.
- Based on superpixel segmentation, we propose a new edge detection method.
Methods {#sec:format}
=======
A novel centroid update approach
--------------------------------
When noise exists, value of pixel tends to be singular in the image. While the cluster centroid usually takes the mean value of all pixels with corresponding label, the impact of noise will be accumulated in the cluster centroid. Hence noise will affect the cluster centroid, and as we know, the cluster centroid plays an important role in the process of clustering.
Take SLIC for example, as shown in the Fig. \[fig1\], in the early stage of iterative clustering in noise-free environment, the segmentation result has some false boundaries. Generally, the error will reduce and converge with the increase of iteration times. But in noisy environment, the existence of noise will lead to a worse false segmentation, and the false segmentation will then lead to more errors on the clustering centroids as a positive feedback. As Fig. \[fig1\] shows, in noisy environment, the difference of cluster centroids becomes ambiguity, and cluster centroids can’t capture the features of the expected object but the mixed region caused by error segmentation. Finally, it will results in a poor segmentation.
Distribution of most noise follows or approximates to the Gaussian distribution as follows: $$Noise_{(z)} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\delta }exp[\frac{-(z - u)^{2}}{2\delta ^{2}}],
\label{eq1}$$ where $z$ is the value of the pixel in an image, $u$ denotes the average or expected value of $z$, and $\delta$ denotes the standard deviation of $z$.
As Eq. (\[eq1\]) shows, the value of $Noise_{(z)}$ is distributed on both sides of $u$. Hence, most denoising methods take the neighbors of the pixel to eliminate the impact of noise, such as the works in [@buades2005non; @zhang2014new], they deal with the noisy pixel by taking the mean value of pixels within a square selected window centered at the current pixel.
Considering the statistical features of noise and inspired by these denoising methods, we propose a novel centroid update approach and apply it to the clustering-based superpixel methods. For an image with size $M \times N$ and desired number of superpixels $k$, $Centroid_i$ can be computed as follows: $$\begin{split}
Centroid_i = \mathbf{[C_{i,1}, \cdots , C_{i,m}, C_{i,m + 1}, \cdots , C_{i,n}] }^\mathrm{T},\\
C_{i,a} = \frac{\sum_{p_{x, y} \in S_{i}}q_{x, y}}{\left | S_i \right |},\ (a = 1, \cdots , m),\\
C_{i,b} = \frac{\sum_{p_{x, y} \in B_{i}}q_{x, y}}{\left | B_i \right |},\ (b = m+1, \cdots , n),
\end{split}
\label{eq2}$$ where $C_{i, a}$ represents the spatial part (spatial centroid) of the mixed centroid $Centroid_i$, $C_{i, b}$ is the color centroid, and $S_i$ represents the region of the $i$th superpixel, $\left | S_i \right |$ is the number of pixels within $S_i$, $q_{x, y}$ is the current coordinate value of pixel $p_{x, y}$. Because the spatial centroid is not affected by noise, here we still use all the pixels within the current superpixel to calculate it. Different to the spatial space, the color space will be strongly affected by noise. So when calculate the color centroid $C_{i, b}$ of the $i$th superpixel, instead of using all pixels in a superpixel, we use a square block $B_i$ centered at $C_{i, a}$ with an adaptive size $\sqrt{\frac{M \times N}{k \times 2}}$ to select the pixels and calculate it, here $B_i$ owns approximately half of the pixels within the $i$th superpixel. There are two advantages to do like this: (1) it can reduce the effect of noise on the clustering centroids by taking the mean value of pixels within the square block; (2) it also avoids the error caused by false segmentation, most pixels within $B_i$ used to compute the color centroid can capture the features of the expected object instead of the mixed region caused by error segmentation.
An overview of our approach is shown in Fig. \[fig2\]. And the approach can be used for clustering-based superpixel methods. Here for convenience we call our approach Centroid-*X*, $X$ indicates a specific clustering-based superpixel method, for example, Centroid-SLIC means that the SLIC method is enhanced by our Centroid-*X* approach.
Our proposed superpixel based edge detection
--------------------------------------------
Superpixels can well preserve the boundary of the object, so we can detect the edge of the image based on the edges of superpixels. And here, we use the relationship between superpixels to determine which edges should be reserved and which should be removed.
For a neighboring superpixel pair: superpixel $i$ and superpixel $j$, the distance $D_{ij}$ between them is defined as follow: $$\centering
\begin{split}
& D_{i,j} = \left | \bar{L}_i - \bar{L}_j \right | + \left | \bar{A}_i - \bar{A}_j \right | + \left | \bar{B}_i - \bar{B}_j \right |,\\
& \bar{L}_i = \sum_{c \in S_i}\frac{l_c}{\left |S_i \right |},\ \bar{A}_i = \sum_{c \in S_i}\frac{a_c}{\left |S_i \right |}, \ \bar{B}_i = \sum_{c \in S_i}\frac{b_c}{\left |S_i \right |},\\
\end{split}
\label{eq3}$$ where $l_c$, $a_c$ and $b_c$ is the value of pixel in CIELAB space.
Then we compute the adjacent matrix $\emph{\textbf{A}}$ of superpixels ($\emph{\textbf{A}}$ is the upper triangular matrix). The $i$th row of $\emph{\textbf{A}}$ consists of the distance between the $i$th superpixel and its neighbors. And for $\emph{\textbf{A}}$, its mean value $\hat{a}$ is the mean of its non-zero elements. If $A_{i,j} < \hat{a}$, the edge between $S_i$ and $S_j$ should be removed, otherwise it should be reserved.
Finally, we use the gradient of superpixel to further detect the edge point. The whole procedure of SBED is presented in Algorithm \[alg:B\].
Image $\emph{\textbf{I}}$, number of superpixels $k$ Edge matrix $\emph{\textbf{E}}$
$E_{i, j} = 0$; [**end if**]{}
$E_{i, j} = G_{i,j}$; [**end if**]{}
**return** $\emph{\textbf{E}}$;
Experiments
===========
In this section, we apply our Centroid-*X* on three common used clustering-based superpixel methods: SLIC, LSC, and SNIC. We compare the performance of the original method and the enhanced method using our approach on the Berkeley benchmark (BSD500) [@arbelaez2010contour] with three kinds of environment: noise-free, Gaussian noise (zero mean with standard deviation (std) range \[0.1,0.2\]), and salt and pepper noise (noise density range \[0.1, 0.2\]). All the work is run on a personal computer with Windows 10, Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 2.2 GHz 6 cores CPU, and 8 GB RAM [^1].
Evaluation metrics and parameter settings
-----------------------------------------
We select one standard metric for compactness and two standard metrics for boundary adherence: compactness metric (CO) [@schick2014evaluation], boundary recall rate (BR) [@levinshtein2009turbopixels], and under segmentation error (UE) [@veksler2010superpixels]. Higher BR and lower UE mean a more accurate segmentation, and higher CO means a better compactness of superpixels.
In the experiments, the parameters settings between $X$ and Centroid-*X* are the same. To keep the fairness, the compactness coefficient are all setting to the same level (SLIC and SNIC take compactness coefficient 30, LSC uses ratio 0.3).
Results and analysis
--------------------
Fig. \[fig3\] shows the BR, UE, and CO curves of all methods in noise-free environment. By comparing them, we can find that $X$ (SLIC, LSC, SNIC) obtains better BR than Centroid-*X*, but the enhanced one obtains better CO, and the UE between them is basically the same. Fig. \[fig4\] shows their running time, except SNIC, the speed between SLIC and Centroid-SLIC and the speed between LSC and Centroid-LSC have little difference. Because SNIC takes a non-iterative clustering and its main computation focuses on the centroid update, hence Centroid-*X* affect the computation of SNIC more than SLIC and LSC. Generally speaking, the difference between $X$ and Centroid-*X* is not significant in noise-free environment.
Fig. \[fig6\] shows the comparison of $X$ and Centroid-*X* in Gaussian noise environment. We can see that Centroid-SLIC and Centroid-SNIC obtain much better BR, UE and CO than SLIC and SNIC. Although LSC obtains better BR than Centroid-LSC, but its UE and CO are significantly worse than Centroid-LSC. In Fig .\[fig5\], we can see that the performance of LSC in Gaussian noise environment are quite bad (like over-segmentation), so do SLIC and SNIC, while their corresponding Centroid-*X* can still maintain the approximate performance like in noise-free environment.
Fig. \[fig7\] shows the performance of $X$ and Centroid-*X* in Salt and Pepper noise environment. By observing Fig. \[fig5\], we can find that the number of the output superpixels of SLIC and LSC falls sharply (like under-segmentation) in Salt and Pepper noise environment than noise-free environment. But Centroid-SLIC and Centroid-LSC can still maintain comparable number of output superpixels. Although CO of Centroid-*X* is slightly weaker than $X$, Centroid-*X* still obtains much better BR and UE, which illustrates that even in Salt and Pepper noise environment, Centroid-*X* can still get a robust performance like in noise-free environment.
Application
===========
Here, we apply Centroid-SLIC into our SBED to generate superpixel, and we compare SBED with classical edge detection methods like Sobel [@kanopoulos1988design] and Canny [@canny1986computational]. We take PSNR [@hore2010image] and SSIM [@wang2004image] as evaluation metrics like [@he2019novel] on BSD500. Here we set $G_{low} = 0.1*\max(G)$, and $G_{high} = 0.8*\max(G)$. For Sobel and Canny, we set threshold as 0.1.
Table \[Tab1\] shows that our method gets better PSNR and SSIM than Sobel and Canny. And Fig. \[fig8\] shows that our method can better obtain the edge of image in both noise-free and noisy environment.
Conclusion
==========
In this paper, we propose a novel centroid updating approach to enhance the clustering-based superpixel methods and a superpixel based edge detection method. Experiments illustrate that our proposed methods can get a much better performance in noisy environment compared state-of-the-art methods.
[^1]: Data and codes for our proposed centroid update approach and SBED are published on https://github.com/ProfHubert/ICASSP.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Using long exposures taken in the V and I bands with a 4096$\times$4096 pixel CCD array at the prime focus of the Canada-France-Hawaii telescope, we have confirmed the discovery by Sackett et al. (1994) of a flat, faint luminous halo around the edge-on Sc galaxy NGC$\thinspace$5907. This halo is redder than the disk. Its nature is still an observational challenge. We suggest however that its color can only be accounted for by stars less massive than 0.8$\thinspace$[M$_{\odot}$]{}. Their total mass in NGC$\thinspace$5907 is very uncertain, but it might possibly account for the excess dynamical mass in this galaxy. Alternatively their distribution might trace the dark potential without contributing significantly to the mass. We give upper limits to the extinction by an hypothetical dust in the halo.'
author:
- 'J. Lequeux'
- 'B. Fort'
- 'M. Dantel-Fort'
- 'J.-C. Cuillandre'
- 'Y. Mellier'
date: 'Received April 1996 / Accepted June 1996'
title: 'V- and I-band observations of the halo of NGC$\thinspace$5907[^1]'
---
\[\]
Introduction
============
The presence of dark matter in spiral galaxies has long been inferred from their flat rotation curves. Amongst the possible candidates for this dark matter, low-mass stars and brown dwarfs are seriously considered. While brown dwarfs are almost invisible optically, there is a chance that the most massive amongst the low-mass stars can be detected directly. Recently, Sackett [et al. ]{}(1994), hereafter SMHB, have found that the edge-on Sc galaxy NGC$\thinspace$5907, which has the usual problem of dark matter (Sancisi & van Albada 1987; Barnaby & Thronson 1994, hereafter BT), is surrounded by a faint luminous halo. This halo might be rather flat since it was detected only to 6$\thinspace$kpc from the plane of the galaxy. Very recently, James & Casali (1996), hereafter JC, have reported a surface brightness gradient perpendicular to the disk of the galaxy in the J and K bands. We discuss here the results of very deep exposures of NGC$\thinspace$5907 in the V and I bands at the prime focus of the Canada-France-Hawaii telescope (CFHT) with the wide-field camera MOCAM. Section 2 describes these observations and their reduction, Section 3 presents the results and Section 4 is a discussion. Another product of our observations is an upper limit to the amount of dust around NGC$\thinspace$5907, presented in the Appendix.
Observations and reductions
===========================
The observations were made with MOCAM, a mosaic of four 2048$\times$2048 pixel anti-blooming CCDs at the prime focus of the CFHT, with a field of view of 14$\arcmin$$\times$14$\arcmin$ at a scale of 0$''\!\!.$206 per pixel (Cuillandre et al. 1996). 5$\times$30-m V frames and 9$\times$20-m I$_{\rm Cousins}$ frames were obtained in good photometric conditions, totalling exposure times of 2$\thinspace$h$\thinspace$30$\thinspace$m and 3$\thinspace$h respectively. The frames were taken with slight shifts with respect to each other to allow elimination of the spurious events during the reduction of the data through a median stacking of the images. The image quality is better than 1$\arcsec$ for the final V frame and 0$''\!\!.$9 for the final I frame. The flat-field applied to each frame was built from the combination of all empty fields frames taken with MOCAM during the same new-moon period as our observations (about 15 I and 15 V frames). The instrument set-up was not modified during the whole period. The same part of the calibration field SA$\thinspace$110 (Landolt 1992) was first observed on each of the four CCDs, then the whole field on the full camera, giving an internal check of the quality of the reference stars: the photometric error is of the order of 0.03 mag. in each band. Each CCD is different because the gain of the amplifier in the reading chain varies slightly from chip to chip. A small correction was secured by measuring the sky background on the edges of each CCD and by multiplying each CCD frame by a factor such that all these sky backgrounds are at the same level. The sky level measured after reduction was 21.50$\thinspace$mag.$\thinspace$arcsec$^{-2}$ in V and 19.23$\thinspace$mag.$\thinspace$arcsec$^{-2}$ in I, in excellent agreement with the mean values for photometric nights at Mauna Kea, respectively 21.5 and 19.2.
Several difficulties arise when one wants to reach levels of the order of 10$^{-3}$ of the sky background. One is visible on fig.1: the background is not fully uniform up to 3 times this level at large scales, in a way not reproducible from frame to frame. This is due to non-uniform scattered light in the camera, the telescope and the dome. No correction is possible without a dedicated effort to get a low instrumental scattered-light level as in coronagraphs. This effect is the ultimate limitation of our observations. In this respect this situation is similar to that in the observations of Morrison et al. (1994), hereafter MBH.
The second effect is the existence of faint extended wings in the Point Spread Function (PSF), presumably resulting from reflections between the CCD and the dewar window, and from scattering on the optical surfaces. This effect is a serious limitation and we have studied it in details. We built the PSFs in V and I to a radius of 16$''\!$ where levels of 10$^{-7}$ of the central pixel are reached, using a procedure similar to that described by MBH, Sect. 3.3.4. Both PSFs exhibit approximate circular symmetry. Their central parts are very well approximated by gaussians and their faint wings have a power-law shape.
We now discuss the different steps of data processing. A faint halo similar to that measured by SMHB is visible on our frames, especially the I one (fig. 1). The first step is to assess the reality of this halo, which a priori might be due to diffused light. A simple way to check this is to convolve the image with the full PSF, to convolve it also with the gaussian central part of the PSF only, and to interpret the differences between these two convolved images: this gives a very good approximation of the diffused light level. We have checked in this way that long-range contamination by light diffused from the body of the galaxy is actually negligible, as claimed by MBH. In order to avoid contamination by the scattered light around individual stars and galaxies in the field, we have numerically masked their surroundings wherever the level of scattered light estimated from the PSF is larger than 2 times the r.m.s. deviation of the (unfiltered) background. The result is illustrated on fig. 1, where the masked parts of the field appear blank. This procedure also eliminates the bright parts of the galaxy: photometry of these parts is done from the unmasked image.
After eliminating the masked parts and the remaining faint stars and galaxies, we have averaged the surface brightness in rectangles parallel to the major axis of NGC$\thinspace$5907. The position of the major axis has been determined from an elliptical fit of the galaxy at relatively low brightness levels, and the galaxy image has been rotated so that its major axis is the y axis (fig. 1). The long side of the rectangles (along the y axis) measures 373$\thinspace$pixels$\thinspace$=$\thinspace$1.2$\arcmin$= $\thinspace$4.1$\thinspace$kpc and has the same length as in SMHB in order to ease the comparison with their work (we use the same distance of 11$\thinspace$Mpc to the galaxy). The length of the short side of the rectangles varies according to the distance to the major axis (see fig. 2).
Results
=======
Figure 2 presents the surface brightness profiles of NGC$\thinspace$5907 for some of the cuts defined in the previous section. As explained previously the limitation is the large-scale systematic residual flat-field variations in the background which has to be extrapolated under the galaxy image. The profiles are not completely symmetric with respect to the major axis, perhaps due to a warp and to the fact that the galaxy is not strictly edge-on but has an inclination of $\approx$ 87$^{\circ}$.
Figure 3 shows the V$-$I profile perpendicular to the plane of the galaxy, averaged over the three central cuts. The central dust band appears clearly through its redder color. Aside from this band, the disk has V$-$I $\approx$ 1.0, a normal color for undisturbed spirals (de Jong & van der Kruit 1994), and by comparison with SMHB V$-$R = 0.65 and R$-$I = 0.35. V$-$I becomes bluer by $\approx$ 0.2 mag. towards the edges as observed in many spirals by Peletier et al. (1995). However V$-$I becomes redder at increasing distances from the plane to reach V$-$I $\approx$ 1.35 at about 4.5$\thinspace$kpc. It seems to increase even further at higher z, but the data become unreliable there. This is true all along the disk of NGC$\thinspace$5907. At z = 4.5$\thinspace$kpc we obtain by comparison with SMHB V$-$R $\approx$ 1.2 and R$-$I $\approx$ 0.1. We have checked by binning our original data to the larger pixel size of SMHB and reprocessing the images that the measurements of surface brightness in the region of interest are essentially unaffected by the sampling.
Discussion
==========
Our data clearly confirm the existence of a faint light emission at large distances from the disk of NGC$\thinspace$5907, first reported by SMHB. Is it due to a luminous halo? To check this point we have built models of the light distribution in NGC$\thinspace$5907 based on previous work, mainly by van der Kruit & Searle (1982), BT, MBH and Fuchs (1995). The comparison with our observations confirms the finding of SMHB: it is impossible to account for the light emission above z $\approx$ 3.3$\thinspace$kpc without adding a halo emission. But the emission might also be possibly due to a faint extension of the bulge if its ellipticity increases with radius (note that the distinction between bulge and halo then becomes semantic). Another possibility is that the galaxy presents a very large-scale warp parallel to the plane of the sky. However such a warp is expected to have a color V$-$I $\approx$ 0.8 as the outer disk, rather than being redder than the disk. Thus we believe that the halo emission is real and is redder than the unabsorbed parts of the disk.
A gradient in surface brightness corresponding to the luminous halo has been found independently by JC in the J and the K band within 3.2 $\leq |z| \leq$ 6.9$\thinspace$kpc above the center of the galaxy. Their method does not yield a value for the surface brightness, but they obtain a color J$-$K$\thinspace$=$\thinspace$1.3$\thinspace\pm$0.3 in this region from a comparison between the gradient in J and in K. However our observation shows a strong color gradient in V$-$I. If such a gradient also exists in J$-$K, this may affect their determination of the color. Assuming that the light is pure halo light and that it is not affected by interstellar reddening (see appendix), it is possible to derive some conclusions about the stellar population which is presumably responsible for the emission.
i\) Any stellar population of any age $\leq$ 1.5 10$^{10}$yr with a “normal” initial mass function (hence dominated by giants) has J$-$K $\leq$ 1.0, a value only reached for old populations with solar or super-solar metallicities (Buzzoni 1989). The same is true for isolated main-sequence stars (Kirkpatrick [et al. ]{}1993, Allard & Hauschildt 1995: fig. 13). As a high metallicity is unlikely for halo stars, we conclude that the determination of J$-$K of JC may have problems due to the probable color gradient (see above).
ii\) The V$-$I color of the halo may be appreciably redder than the value of $\approx$ 1.35 we measure at 4.5$\thinspace$kpc. We have hints for redder colors at larger distances, and the measurements at 4.5$\thinspace$kpc may still be contaminated by a warp in the disk. Taking the measured color at face value, it is similar to that of metal-rich elliptical galaxies (see e.g. Poulain & Nieto 1994). A high metallicity being unlikely for a halo, the stellar population is rather dominated by stars with mass lower than 0.8 [M$_{\odot}$]{}, implying a cut-off in the initial mass function since all stars with such masses are still on the main sequence whatever their ages. We already found a similar result for the outer bulge of NGC$\thinspace$7814 (Lequeux [et al. ]{}1995). The visible luminosity and color of such a population is dominated by the most massive stars. For a given color, their mass and luminosity depend much of their metallicity. For a typical 1/100 solar halo metallicity, a V$-$I of 1.35 corresponds to 12 Gyr-old stars of 0.15 [M$_{\odot}$]{}with M$_{\rm I}$ $\approx$ 10 (G. Chabrier, private communication). $\mu_{\rm I}
\approx$ 26$\thinspace$mag.$\thinspace$arcsec$^{-2}$ corresponds to 2.5 10$^{7}\thinspace$[M$_{\odot}$]{}$\thinspace$kpc$^{-2}$ if only these stars are present. This is considerably lower than the 4 10$^{8}\thinspace$[M$_{\odot}$]{}$\thinspace$kpc$^{-2}$ required for the minimum spherical massive halo solution of BT. But this is a strict lower limit, and one could easily reconcile the masses by adding lower-mass stars which contribute little to the luminosity. Alternatively, the faint luminous halo could just be a natural dynamical signature of the existence of a dark halo of different nature as suggested by Fuchs (1995). Another possibility is that the faint light corresponds to a flattened extension of the bulge with a de Vaucouleurs r$^{1/4}$ law which would fit well the outer profiles of fig. 2. Unfortunately our measurements at large galactocentric radii are of insufficient quality to check this.
An interesting problem is the origin of the truncated mass function of the very red stars. No dynamical process at the scale of galaxies can sort out stars by mass, because the corresponding relaxation times are much longer than the age of the Universe. Consequently the stars must have been formed with their present mass function.
Conclusions
===========
We have confirmed the detection by Sackett et al. (1994) of a faint luminous halo around NGC$\thinspace$5907. This halo is very red and can only contain stars definitely less massive that the limit for the mass of 15 Gyr-old main-sequence stars, about 0.8 [M$_{\odot}$]{}. The actual value of their mass is unfortunately very dependent on their metallicity. It is not impossible, as suggested by SMHB, that such stars account for the missing mass in NGC$\thinspace$5907. But the visible halo could also trace the dark matter of a halo of different nature (Fuchs 1995). The truncated mass function of these stars must be the outcome of star formation itself. This is reminiscent of the problem of cooling flows around massive galaxies in clusters, which if they really exist can only form low-mass stars. It could be related to the formation of the bulge, as perhaps in NGC 7814 (Lequeux [et al. ]{}1995).
The present results are preliminary and must be confirmed by observations using special procedures for reducing the effect of the scattered light at very faint surface brightness levels.\
[**Appendix: determination of extinction.**]{} We used the algorithm SExtractor (Bertin & Arnouts 1996) to separate background galaxies from stars in both I and V frames, and measured the V$-$I color of galaxies in the same way as described in Lequeux [et al. ]{}(1995). We then averaged the colors on 1$'$ wide strips parallel to the major axis of NGC$\thinspace$5907. The r.m.s. error on the averaged colors, due to the intrinsic color dispersion of the galaxies, is about 0.025 mag. The galaxies in the central strip are redder as expected, by 0.09 mag., a 2.8$\sigma$ effect. Those in the next strip centered on the right side (see fig. 2) are marginally redder by 0.07 mag., at 2.5$\sigma$, possibly indicating dust in a warp. All the other strips have the same average V$-$I within the uncertainties, showing that there is no significant extinction gradient in the observed part of the halo of NGC$\thinspace$5907. It is clear that the V$-$I color excess in the optical halo cannot be greater than 0.1 mag. at most, so that it can be neglected.
Allard F., Hauschildt P.H. 1995, ApJ 445, 433
Barnaby D., Thronson H.A. Jr. 1994, AJ 107, 1717 (BT)
Bertin E., Arnouts S. 1996, A&AS in press
Buzzoni A., 1989, ApJS 71, 817
Cuillandre, J.-C., Mellier, Y., Dupin, J.-P., Tilloles, P., Murowinski, R., Crampton, D., Wooff, R., Luppino, G.A., 1996, PASP, submitted
de Jong R.S., van der Kruit P.C. 1994, A&AS 106, 451
Fuchs B. 1995, A&A 303, L13
James P., Casali M. 1996, Spectrum (Newsletters of the Royal Observatories) Nr 9, March 1996, 14 (JC)
Kirkpatrick J.D., Kelly D.M., Rieke G.H., Liebert J., Allard F., Wehrse R. 1993 ApJ 402, 643
Landolt A.U. 1992, AJ 104, 340
Lequeux J., Dantel-Fort M., Fort B. 1995, A&A 296, L13
Morrison H.L., Boroson T.A., Harding P. 1994, AJ 108, 1191 (MBH)
Peletier R.F., Valentijn E.A., Moorwood A.F.M., Freudling W. 1995, A&AS 108, 621
Poulain P., Nieto J.L. 1994, A&AS 103, 573
Sackett P.D., Morrison H.L., Harding P., Boroson T.A. 1994, Nature 370, 441 (SMHB)
Sancisi R., van Albada T.S. 1987, in IAU Symposium 117, eds. Kormendy J. & Knapp G.R., Reidel, Dordrecht, p. 67
van der Kruit P.C., Searle L. 1982, A&A 110, 61
[^1]: Based on data obtained with the CFHT in Hawaii
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We calculate the frequency-dependent equilibrium noise of a mesoscopic capacitor in time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT). The capacitor is modeled as a single-level quantum dot with on-site Coulomb interaction and tunnel coupling to a nearby reservoir. The noise spectra are derived from linear-response conductances via the fluctuation-dissipation theorem. Thereby, we analyze the performance of a recently derived exchange-correlation potential with time-nonlocal density dependence in the finite-frequency linear-response regime. We compare our TDDFT noise spectra with real-time perturbation theory and find excellent agreement for noise frequencies below the reservoir temperature.'
address:
- '$^1$ Department of Microtechnology and Nanoscience (MC2), Chalmers University of Technology, SE-41258 G[ö]{}teborg, Sweden'
- '$^2$ Institute for Theory of Statistical Physics, RWTH Aachen, D-52056 Aachen, Germany'
- '$^3$ Peter-Grünberg Institut and Institute for Advanced Simulation, Forschungszentrum Jülich, D-52425 Jülich, Germany'
author:
- 'Niklas Dittmann$^{1,2,3}$, Janine Splettstoesser$^{1}$ and Nicole Helbig$^{3}$'
title: 'Equilibrium finite-frequency noise of an interacting mesoscopic capacitor studied in time-dependent density functional theory'
---
Introduction
============
The presence of thermal and quantum fluctuations in mesoscopic conductors results in noise, even if the mean current through a sample vanishes [@Blanter00; @Clerk10]. The noise spectrum gives insight into temporal correlations between fluctuation events. Measured in equilibrium[^1], it reveals dissipative properties of a system, i.e. the real part of the finite-frequency linear-response conductance, by means of the fluctuation-dissipation theorem [@Callen51].
In this paper, we present the calculation of equilibrium finite-frequency noise spectra in time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) [@MarquesMaitraNogueiraGrossRubio12; @Ullrich11; @Maitra16]. In TDDFT, the dynamics of an interacting quantum system is simulated by a non-interacting Kohn-Sham (KS) system [@Runge84], which leads to cost-efficient numerics even for complex systems. The KS potential, which consists of the external potential of the interacting system, modified by the Hartree (H) and the exchange-correlation (XC) contributions, is chosen such that the KS and the interacting systems share the same time-dependent electronic density. The H potential accounts for electrostatics, while all further many-body effects are included in the universal XC potential. The development and characterization of approximations for the latter is among the central challenges for TDDFT, and also a focus of this work.
As an instructive system with experimental relevance [@Feve07], we analyze an interacting mesoscopic capacitor. For this system, the finite-frequency noise has been studied theoretically, e.g. [@Buettiker92; @Rothstein09; @Gabdank11], and in experiment [@Parmentier12]. We model the interacting mesoscopic capacitor by a single-level quantum dot with on-site Coulomb interaction and tunnel coupling to an adjacent reservoir, see Fig. \[fig\_HXC\] (a). Based on this model, we recently developed a non-adiabatic, i.e. time nonlocal, XC potential for TDDFT simulations of single-electron tunneling devices [@Dittmann17]. The XC potential was derived by expressing the dynamics of both the system, and its KS counterpart, in terms of time-dependent Markovian[^2] Master equations. It thereby includes information on the dynamics of electron tunneling. In Ref. [@Dittmann17], we applied the non-adiabatic XC potential to describe the operation mode of a mesoscopic capacitor as a single-electron source, i.e. its non-linear response to a time-periodic gate voltage. A key finding was that a related *adiabatic* XC potential leads to electron dynamics on time scales which correspond to non-interacting electrons, while our *non-adiabatic* XC potential describes electron dynamics on the respective time scales for interacting electrons. Remarkably, our non-adiabatic XC potential thereby only depends on the time-local density of the quantum dot and its first time derivative.
In the present paper, we add an analysis of finite-frequency linear-response physics to our previous discussion. For this purpose, we derive finite-frequency conductances of the system at hand with TDDFT. We then consider the real parts of the obtained conductances, which we express as equilibrium noise by means of the fluctuation-dissipation theorem. To test the performance of our non-adiabatic XC potential over a broad frequency range, we compare our results with noise spectra derived with perturbation theory.
The paper is structured as follows: We define our model for the interacting mesoscopic capacitor in Sec. \[sec\_model\] and its KS counterpart in Sec. \[sec\_modelKS\], where we also review the non-adiabatic XC potential from Ref. [@Dittmann17]. The calculation of equilibrium noise in TDDFT is described in Sec. \[sec\_calc\]. In Sec. \[sec\_discussion\] we present TDDFT noise spectra, before we conclude our work in Sec. \[sec\_conclusion\].
![(a) Energy diagram of a single-level quantum dot with tunnel coupling, $\Gamma$, to a reservoir; (b) non-adiabatic HXC potential, $\epsilon_{\mathrm{HXC}}^{(\mathrm{M})}$, see Ref. [@Dittmann17], for $U=16\Gamma$, $T=2\Gamma$; dotted line marks the line cut shown on the r.h.s.[]{data-label="fig_HXC"}](figure1.pdf){width="0.98\columnwidth"}
The interacting mesoscopic capacitor {#sec_model}
====================================
We model the mesoscopic capacitor by a quantum dot with a single energy level, which is tunnel coupled to a nearby reservoir, see Fig. \[fig\_HXC\] (a). Therefore, the dot can be either empty, singly or doubly occupied. The energy level, $\epsilon(t)=-\alpha V_\mathrm{g}(t)$, is assumed to depend linearly on the gate voltage, $V_\mathrm{g}(t)$, with $\alpha > 0$. All energies are defined with respect to the Fermi energy and $e,\hbar$ and $k_\mathrm{B}$ are set to one. We consider strong Coulomb repulsion between electrons occupying the quantum dot, by taking into account a charging energy $U$ in the case of double occupation. In addition, we assume the electrons in the reservoir to be non-interacting, set the electrochemical potential to zero, and denote the reservoir temperature by $T$. The resulting Hamiltonian reads $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq_hamiltonian}
H &= \sum_\sigma \epsilon(t) d_\sigma^\dagger d_\sigma + U d_\uparrow^\dagger d_\uparrow d_\downarrow^\dagger d_\downarrow +
\sum_{k,\sigma} \epsilon_k c_{k\sigma}^\dagger c_{k\sigma} + \left(\gamma \sum_{k,\sigma} c_{k\sigma} d_{\sigma}^\dagger + \mathrm{h.\,c.}\right),\end{aligned}$$ where $d^{(\dagger)}_\sigma$ denote the annihilation (creation) operators for quantum-dot states with spin index $\sigma ={} \uparrow,\downarrow$ and $c^{(\dagger)}_{k\sigma}$ denote the annihilation (creation) operators for reservoir states with spin $\sigma$ and momentum $k$. We assume spin-degeneracy and consider a single energy band, $\epsilon_k$, and an energy-independent tunnel coupling, $\gamma$. Besides that, we define $\Gamma = 2\pi |\gamma|^2 \nu_0$ as the tunnel-coupling strength, where $\nu_0$ denotes the density-of-states (DOS) at the Fermi energy. The density on the quantum dot is given by $n(t) = \sum_\sigma \expval{d^\dagger_\sigma d_\sigma}(t)$, and the current into the quantum dot reads $I(t)=-\dot{n}(t)$ due to charge conservation.
Representation by a non-interacting system {#sec_modelKS}
==========================================
We now describe the interacting mesoscopic capacitor defined in Eq. by a non-interacting KS system, assuming non-interacting $v$-representability [@MarquesMaitraNogueiraGrossRubio12; @Ullrich11; @Maitra16]. The H and XC potentials are taken into account via a combined shift of the quantum-dot’s energy level by the amount $\epsilon_\mathrm{HXC}[n](t)$, which we call the HXC potential of our model system. By furthermore setting the on-site interaction in Eq. to zero, we obtain the KS Hamiltonian, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq_hamiltonianKS}
H_\mathrm{KS} &= \sum_\sigma \epsilon_\mathrm{KS}[n](t) d_\sigma^\dagger d_\sigma +
\sum_{k,\sigma} \epsilon_k c_{k\sigma}^\dagger c_{k\sigma} + \left(\gamma \sum_{k,\sigma} c_{k\sigma} d_{\sigma}^\dagger + \mathrm{h.\,c.}\right),\end{aligned}$$ with the KS energy level, $\epsilon_\mathrm{KS}[n](t) = \epsilon(t) + \epsilon_\mathrm{HXC}[n](t)$, and where a general functional dependence on the density is denoted by square brackets, $[n]$. For the HXC potential in Eq. , we analyze the non-adiabatic approximation derived in Ref. [@Dittmann17], $\epsilon_\mathrm{HXC}^{\mathrm{(M)}}(n(t),\dot{n}(t))(t)$, and its adiabatic counterpart, $\epsilon_\mathrm{HXC}^{\mathrm{(A)}}(n(t))(t)$, see also Ref. [@Stefanucci11]. The two approximations read $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{aligned}
\label{eq_hxcMA}
\epsilon_\mathrm{HXC}^{\mathrm{(M)}}(n(t),\dot{n}(t))(t) &= \frac{1}{\beta} \log \left(C(n(t),\dot{n}(t))\right)
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$ and $\epsilon_\mathrm{HXC}^{\mathrm{(A)}}(n(t))(t) = \epsilon_\mathrm{HXC}^{\mathrm{(M)}}(n(t),0)(t)$, with the inverse temperature, $\beta = 1/T$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{C(n,\dot{n})} &= \frac{\dot{n} + e^{U\beta}\left(\dot{n}+2\Gamma (n-1)\right)}{2 e^{U\beta}(\dot{n}+\Gamma(n-2))}\Bigg(1 -
\Bigg(1-\frac{4e^{U\beta}\left((\dot{n}+\Gamma n)^2-2\Gamma (\dot{n}+\Gamma n)\right)}{\left(\dot{n} +e^{U\beta}\left(\dot{n}+2\Gamma (n-1)\right)\right)^2}\Bigg)^{\frac{1}{2}}\Bigg).\end{aligned}$$ The adiabatic HXC potential is presented in the line cut in Fig. \[fig\_HXC\] (b), where we observe a smeared-out step in the potential at single occupation of the quantum dot [@Stefanucci11; @Evers11]. This step is known in TDDFT and DFT as the derivative discontinuity [@Perdew82], which is, e.g., relevant for a proper description of Coulomb-blockade physics in a non-interacting Kohn-Sham system [@Evers11; @Kurth10]. The density plot in Fig. \[fig\_HXC\] (b), showing the non-adiabatic HXC potential, reveals that a non-zero time derivative of the density shifts this step to a different position. The physical interpretation of this shift is explained in detail in Ref. [@Dittmann17]: its magnitude is linked to the difference of relaxation times of the interacting and the non-interacting system. The accomplishment of this dynamical step is an improved description of the relaxation dynamics of the *interacting* mesoscopic capacitor by the *non-interacting* KS system. This is not achieved by considering the adiabatic HXC potential only, where relaxation occurs on a time scale which is characteristic for a non-interacting mesoscopic capacitor [@Dittmann17].
Equilibrium finite-frequency noise in TDDFT {#sec_calc}
===========================================
Within TDDFT, we calculate the equilibrium finite-frequency noise, $S(\omega)$, of the interacting mesoscopic capacitor, which we define as the Fourier transform of the symmetric current-current fluctuations, $S(t-t') = \expval{I(t)I(t')+I(t')I(t)}$. In this work, we extract the noise spectrum from the linear-response conductance $G(\omega) = \left.\frac{\partial I(\omega)}{\partial \epsilon(\omega)}\right|_\mathrm{eq}$, where the subscript denotes evaluation at the equilibrium density, $n_\mathrm{eq}$. This is possible due to the fluctuation-dissipation theorem, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq_fdt}
S(\omega) &= 2 \omega \coth\left(\frac{\beta\omega}{2}\right)\Re G(\omega),\end{aligned}$$ which explicitly links the dissipative part of the conductance to the equilibrium noise [@Blanter00]. To obtain $G(\omega)$ in TDDFT, we first calculate the conductance in the KS system, which is defined as $G_\mathrm{KS}(\omega) = \left.\frac{\partial I(\omega)}{\partial \epsilon_\mathrm{KS}[n](\omega)}\right|_\mathrm{eq}$. The latter depends on the position of the KS energy level, $\epsilon_\mathrm{KS}[n_\mathrm{eq}]$, and is derived exactly, because the KS system is non-interacting, see e.g. the result in Ref. [@Jauho94]. The density $n_\mathrm{eq}$ is calculated self-consistently from the exact KS expression for the quantum-dot’s equilibrium density, $n_\mathrm{eq} = \frac{\Gamma}{\pi} \int dq \frac{ d_q}{\left(\epsilon_\mathrm{KS}[n_\mathrm{eq}]-q\right)^2+\Gamma^2/4}$, with the Fermi function, $d_q = 1/(1+e^{\beta q})$. In TDDFT linear-response theory, the KS conductance is related to the conductance of the interacting system by a Dyson equation. This leads to $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq_Gdyson}
G(\omega) &= \frac{\omega G_\mathrm{KS}(\omega)}{\omega+i f_\mathrm{HXC}(n_\mathrm{eq},\omega)G_\mathrm{KS}(\omega)},\end{aligned}$$ with the frequency-dependent HXC kernel, $f_\mathrm{HXC}(n_\mathrm{eq},\omega)$, defined as the Fourier transform of $f_\mathrm{HXC}(n_\mathrm{eq},t-t') = \left.\frac{\delta \epsilon_\mathrm{HXC}[n](t)}{\delta n(t')}\right|_\mathrm{eq}$, see e.g. [@MarquesMaitraNogueiraGrossRubio12; @Ullrich11; @Maitra16].
![ Coefficients of the HXC kernels in Eq. for on-site interaction $U = 2\Gamma,4\Gamma,6\Gamma,8\Gamma$ (lower to upper lines) and $T=2\Gamma$. Thanks to the characteristic time scale $\tau_\mathrm{ch}$ (defined in the main text), the peak heights are identical for both coefficients, while differences appear for $n_\mathrm{eq} \rightarrow 0$ and $n_\mathrm{eq} \rightarrow 2$. []{data-label="fig_fHXC"}](figure2.pdf){width="0.75\columnwidth"}
The HXC kernels related to our specific approximations in Eqs. read $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{aligned}
\label{eq_fhxc}
f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(\mathrm{M})}(n_\mathrm{eq},\omega) &= f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(0)}(n_\mathrm{eq}) - i \omega \tau_\mathrm{ch} f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(1)}(n_\mathrm{eq})
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$ and $f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(\mathrm{A})}(n_\mathrm{eq}) = f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(\mathrm{M})}(n_\mathrm{eq},0)$, with $f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(0)}(n_\mathrm{eq}) = \frac{\partial \epsilon^{(\mathrm{M})}_\mathrm{HXC}(n,\dot{n})}{\partial n}\Big|_\mathrm{eq}$ and $f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(1)}(n_\mathrm{eq}) = \tau_\mathrm{ch}^{-1}\frac{\partial \epsilon^{(\mathrm{M})}_\mathrm{HXC}(n,\dot{n})}{\partial \dot{n}}\Big|_\mathrm{eq}$. Here, we introduce a characteristic time scale, $\tau_\mathrm{ch}$, which for our approximations is convenient to define as $\tau_\mathrm{ch} = \frac{1}{\Gamma} - \frac{1}{\Gamma_\mathrm{c}}$, with the charge relaxation rate at the electron-hole symmetric point, $\Gamma_\mathrm{c} = \Gamma\cdot \left(1+d_{-U/2}-d_{U/2}\right)$. The scale $\tau_\mathrm{ch}$, which also quantifies the dynamical step visible in Fig. \[fig\_HXC\] (b) [@Dittmann17], is thus given by the difference between the charge relaxation times of the non-interacting and the interacting system. Fig. \[fig\_fHXC\] shows that both real coefficients, which appear on the r.h.s. in Eq. , develop a peak at single occupation for increasing on-site interaction $U$. Therefore, the frequency dependence of $f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(\mathrm{M})}$ adds a linear and imaginary contribution to the peak of the frequency-independent HXC kernel, $f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(\mathrm{A})}$.
TDDFT noise spectra of the interacting mesoscopic capacitor {#sec_discussion}
===========================================================
![Equilibrium noise spectra for two temperatures, $T=2\Gamma$ (left) and $T=5\Gamma$ (right); Shown are the uncorrected noise spectra of the KS systems (purple dashed-dotted lines), and the corrected noise spectra (Eq. ), using the HXC kernels $f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(\mathrm{A})}$ (blue dotted lines) and $f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(\mathrm{M})}$ (red dashed lines). Further parameters are $\epsilon = -8 \Gamma, U = 16 \Gamma$. The black solid lines are shown for reference and present results obtained with perturbation theory [@Braun06; @Droste15]. []{data-label="fig_noise"}](figure3.pdf){width="0.98\columnwidth"}
Equilibrium noise spectra of the interacting mesoscopic capacitor, using Eq. , are plotted in Fig. \[fig\_noise\] for two different temperatures (left and right). As a reference, the black solid lines present the result of an analytic calculation based on perturbation theory, see e.g. Refs. [@Braun06; @Droste15]. This method applies an expansion in the tunnel coupling. For our system, the noise derived with perturbation theory features smeared-out steps at noise frequencies which equal the absolute value of $\epsilon$ or $\epsilon+U$. Besides that, the noise tends to zero in the zero-frequency limit. The single step for the parameters in Fig. \[fig\_noise\] is readily visible in the left plot by the black solid line, and strongly smeared-out in the right plot due to the increased temperature. In both plots in Fig. \[fig\_noise\], three TDDFT curves are shown, which respectively correspond to the noise in the KS system, obtained from $G_\mathrm{KS}(\omega)$, and the noise calculated from the corrected conductances, see Eq. , using the two HXC kernels defined in Eq. . For both temperatures, the noise calculated in the KS system (dashed-dotted lines) deviates strongly from the reference noise, as it is expected for the unphysical KS system. For the chosen parameters, the KS energy level is positioned at the Fermi energy, and the smeared-out step in the noise spectrum is thus removed in the KS system. The dotted lines show noise spectra, which are derived from conductances, corrected with the HXC kernel of the *adiabatic* HXC potential. Here, the discrepancy with the perturbative result is reduced for very low frequencies. From Eq. and Fig. \[fig\_fHXC\] we estimate, that the frequency independent HXC kernel, $f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(\mathrm{A})}$, is reasonable for $\omega \ll 1/\tau_\mathrm{ch}$, i.e. where the frequency-dependent part of $f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(\mathrm{M})}$ is small. On the contrary, the kernel of the *non-adiabatic* HXC potential significantly improves the TDDFT result in the low and medium frequency regime (dashed lines). The agreement with the reference noise is excellent for frequencies $\omega \lesssim T$, i.e. for thermal noise, as it is visible in both plots in Fig. \[fig\_noise\]. We emphasize that already the linear frequency dependence of the associated HXC kernel, $f_\mathrm{HXC}^{(\mathrm{M})}$, is sufficient for the observed improvement. The failure for frequencies $\omega > T$ has its root in the derivation of the related HXC potential, which was based on a Markov approximation [@Dittmann17].
Conclusion {#sec_conclusion}
==========
We calculated noise spectra of an interacting mesoscopic capacitor in TDDFT using a recently developed non-adiabatic approximation for the HXC potential [@Dittmann17]. Thereby, we extended the discussion of our previous work to linear-response physics and found an HXC kernel with linear frequency dependence. The derived TDDFT noise agrees well with reference data from perturbation theory for thermal noise frequencies, $\omega \lesssim T$. Support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft via RTG1995 (ND, JS) and an Emmy-Noether grant (NH), as well as from the Knut and Alice Wallenberg foundation and the Swedish VR (JS), is gratefully acknowledged.
[10]{} url \#1[[\#1]{}]{}urlprefix\[2\]\[\][[\#2](#2)]{} Blanter Y and Büttiker M 2000 [*Phys. Rep.*]{} [**336**]{} 1–166
Clerk A A, Devoret M H, Girvin S M, Marquardt F and Schoelkopf R J 2010 [ *Rev. Mod. Phys.*]{} [**82**]{}(2) 1155–1208
Parmentier F D, Bocquillon E, Berroir J M, Glattli D C, Pla çais B, Fève G, Albert M, Flindt C and Büttiker M 2012 [*Phys. Rev. B*]{} [**85**]{}(16) 165438
Ubbelohde N, Fricke C, Flindt C, Hohls F and Haug R J 2012 [*Nat. Comm.*]{} [**3**]{} 612
Callen H B and Welton T A 1951 [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**83**]{}(1) 34–40
2012 [*Fundamentals of Time-Dependent Density Functional Theory*]{} vol 827 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg)
2011 [*Time-Dependent Density-Functional Theory: Concepts and Applications*]{} (Oxford University Press)
Maitra N T 2016 [*J. Chem. Phys.*]{} [**144**]{} 220901
Runge E and Gross E K U 1984 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**52**]{}(12) 997–1000
F[è]{}ve G, Mah[é]{} A, Berroir J M, Kontos T, Pla[ç]{}ais B, Glattli D C, Cavanna A, Etienne B and Jin Y 2007 [*Science*]{} [**316**]{} 1169–1172
Büttiker M 1992 [*Phys. Rev. B*]{} [**46**]{}(19) 12485–12507
Rothstein E A, Entin-Wohlman O and Aharony A 2009 [*Phys. Rev. B*]{} [ **79**]{}(7) 075307
Gabdank N, Rothstein E A, Entin-Wohlman O and Aharony A 2011 [*Phys. Rev. B*]{} [**84**]{}(23) 235435
Dittmann N, Splettstoesser J and Helbig N 2017 [*Preprint*]{} arxiv:1706.04547
Stefanucci G and Kurth S 2011 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**107**]{}(21) 216401
Evers F and Schmitteckert P 2011 [*Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.*]{} [**13**]{}(32) 14417–14420
Perdew J P, Parr R G, Levy M and Balduz J L 1982 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [ **49**]{}(23) 1691–1694
Kurth S, Stefanucci G, Khosravi E, Verdozzi C and Gross E K U 2010 [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**104**]{}(23) 236801
Jauho A P, Wingreen N S and Meir Y 1994 [*Phys. Rev. B*]{} [**50**]{}(8) 5528–5544
Braun M, König J and Martinek J 2006 [*Phys. Rev. B*]{} [**74**]{}(7) 075328
Droste S, Splettstoesser J and Governale M 2015 [*Phys. Rev. B*]{} [ **91**]{}(12) 125401
[^1]: For systems which are out of equilibrium, the noise includes information which is not accessible by conductance measurements alone, see e.g. the experiments reported in Refs. [@Parmentier12; @Ubbelohde12].
[^2]: The Markov approximation neglects memory in the reservoir. The latter becomes relevant for dynamics on time scales smaller than the reservoir memory time, which is given by the inverse of the reservoir temperature $T$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
****
Kenta Ishimoto and Michio Yamada\
*Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502 Japan*\
(Dated: July 29, 2011)
We reconsider fluid dynamics for a self-propulsive swimmer in Stokes flow. With an exact definition of deformation of a swimmer, a proof is given to Purcell’s scallop theorem including the body rotation. The breakdown of the theorem due to a finite Stokes number is discussed by using a perturbation expansion method and it is found that the breakdown generally occurs at the first order of the Stokes number. In addition, employing the Purcell’s “scallop” model, we show that the theorem holds up to a higher order if the strokes of the swimmer has some symmetry.\
Introduction {#Introduction}
============
Fluid dynamics of locomotion of microorganisms such as bacteria and planktons has been studied for more than half a century ([@Lighthill1975],[@Taylor1951]) and is still a hot topic in physics, mathematics and biology [@Lauga2009]. As a milestone to discuss the locomotion of such microswimmers, there exists a well-known theorem called *Purcell’s scallop theorem* [@Purcell1977], which asserts that a microorganism with a [*reciprocal*]{} stroke in Stokes fluid cannot travel at all in one period of its motion. The proof of the theorem given in Purcell’s famous lecture [@Purcell1977] was only schematic. Although the theorem were repeatedly discussed by many researchers ([@Chambrion2010],[@Childress1981],[@DeSimore2008],[@Koiler1996],[@Shapere1989]) , the definition of the deformation of the swimmer appears not to have been paid much attention. Shapere and Wilczek [@Shapere1989] first established a theoretical formalism for a swimmer in viscous fluid in terms of gauge structure, and gave a proof for the scallop theorem. However, their theoretical framework based on gauge fields was conceptual and did not provide operational formulae for the locomotion of the swimmer. Yariv [@Yariv2006] improved their framework in order that we can calculate kinematic properties like velocity of the swimmer from its surface deformation from the fluid dynamical point of view. However, the scallop theorem was not completely proved in his paper, because according to his definition of the deformation of the body the rotation and the surface deformation of the swimmer are not uniquely identified as was pointed out by Yariv [@Yariv2006] himself. Also Childress and Dudley [@Childress2004] states
> “As far as we know there has been no rigorous proof of this theorem based upon the mechanics of a Navier-Stokes fluid and free-swimming body”
on the present status of the scallop theorem.
In the scallop theorem, on the other hand, the inertia of the fluid and the body are totally neglected. The scallop theorem and its breakdown have been recently looked back again [@Lauga2011], and Childress & Dudley [@Childress2004] discussed the possibility of sudden breakdown of the theorem at a nonzero critical Reynolds number. The breakdown of the theorem may also arise from multiple degrees of freedom of deformation and from fluid properties such as rheology [@Lauga2009b] and inertia [@Childress2004],[@Lauga2007]. The breakdown due to a finite mass of the swimmer, i.e. a finite [*Stokes number*]{}, was first discussed by Gonzalez-Rodriguez and Lauga [@Gonzalez2009]. They provided general differential equations that govern locomotion of such a dense swimmer, and suggested that the scallop theorem does not hold at an arbitrary nonzero Stokes number. However, the definition of the deformation of a swimmer is not uniquely defined there, either.
Here, in this paper, we make clear the definition of the deformation of a swimmer, and give a rigorous proof for the scallop theorem including rotation together with translation. We then provide a perturbational argument on the breakdown of the scallop theorem by a finite inertial effect of a swimmer based on the equations of motion of both the fluid and the swimmer. Also with the Purcell’s scallop model, we consider a higher order breakdown of the scallop theorem under some assumptions on a symmetry of the stroke of the swimmer. For discussion of these problems we develop a theoretical framework to describe the motion of microorganisms, introducing a virtual swimmer, which undergoes the same surface deformation as the real swimmer but without ambient fluid, to define rigorously the rotation and the deformation of the real swimmer. We call the coordinates attached to the virtual swimmer the *vacuum coordinates*, and the coordinates to the real swimmer the *body coordinates*. The transformation from the former to the latter defines the rotation (i.e. the gauge) of the swimmer.
Some remarks should be made on physical situations of a finite Stokes number. As far as we consider typical microswimmers such as bacteria and mammalian sperms, the Reynolds number is small enough for the Stokes equation to be available. In reality, bodies of the microswimmers are usually a little heavier than the surrounding fluid. Among these microorganisms, relatively larger members like *Volvox* and *Paramecium* may have nonnegligible Stokes numbers, $R_S \sim 1$, and smaller Reynolds numbers, $Re\sim 10^{-2}$ and $Re\sim 10^{-1}$ for each sample organism. A tiny bug in air may be another example for this situation because the averaged density of such a bug is much larger than that of the air.
Here, in this paper, we consider the locomotion of the microorganisms which have a small but finite Stokes number in the fluid governed by the steady Stokes equation. Of course gravity effects on these swimmers become significant at high Stokes numbers, but in this paper we do not pay much attention to the gravity effects to keep the model as simple as possible. This paper consists of 5 sections. Section 1 is the introduction, and in section 2 we discuss a theoretical framework for a swimmer immersed in Stokes fluid and give an equation that governs the locomotion of the swimmer. In section 3 we restate the scallop theorem and give a complete proof to the theorem. In section 4, a perturbational discussion of the breakdown of the scallop theorem due to a finite Stokes number is made for a swimmer without rotation. In section 5 we consider the breakdown of the scallop theorem under the assumption of a symmetry of the stroke using the Purcell’s scallop model [@Becker2003]. Summary and conclusion are given in section 6.
Formulation
===========
In this section we set up formulae for velocity and angular velocity of a self-propulsive swimmer in fluid. To discuss the motion of the swimmer, we first define a [*virtual swimmer*]{}, which deforms its body in exactly the same way as the real swimmer except that the virtual swimmer has no surrounding fluid, and thus experiences no external forces. The virtual swimmer therefore conserves the total momentum and the total angular momentum both of which we assume to be zero. We further assume that at the initial time the virtual swimmer exactly coincides with the real swimmer, and therefore both their centers of mass locate at the same position, and their orientations are the same. We attach an inertial coordinates, which we call the *vacuum coordinates*, to this virtual swimmer with its origin located at the center of mass of the virtual swimmer. The virtual swimmer has exactly the same shape as the real swimmer at the same time, and thus the latter is obtained by an affine transformation from the former. We also define the *body coordinates* attached to the real swimmer as the coordinates obtained by the same affine transformation from the vacuum coordinates. Thus the origin of the body coordinates is located at the center of mass of the real swimmer. We denote the orthonormal basis of the vacuum coordinates by $\bm{e}_i$($i=1,2,3$), which is independent of time (Fig. \[scallop2\]). The motion of the virtual swimmer is described in Lagrangian coordinates where a position of a Lagrangian particle of the virtual swimmer, $\bm{f}(\bm{a},t)=\sum_if_i(\bm{a},t)\bm{e}_i$, is regarded as a function of the Lagrangian coordinates $\bm{a}=(a_1, a_2, a_3)$ and time $t$ with $\bm{f}(\bm{a},0)=\bm{a}$ .
We now define the surface deformation velocity $\bm{u}'$ of the virtual swimmer as $\bm{u}'= \sum_i \frac{\partial f_i}{\partial t}(\bm{a},t)\bm{e}_i$, where $\bm{a}$ is assumed to be on the surface of the swimmer. The real swimmer, however, not only deforms but also translates and rotates under the action of the external force from the surrounding fluid. The translation velocity $\bm{U}$ is defined as $\bm{U}=d\bm{X}/dt$ where $\bm{X}(t)$ is the center of mass of the real swimmer. The position of the Lagrangian particle of the [*real*]{} swimmer $\tilde{\bm{f}}(\bm{a},t)$ with respect to the center of mass of the real swimmer is then obtained as $\tilde{\bm{f}}(\bm{a},t)=\bm{R}(t)\bm{f}(\bm{a},t)$, where $\bm{R}(t)$ is a rotation matrix in $SO(3)$ and $\bm{R}(0)=\bm{1}$, because the real and virtual swimmers have exactly the same shape. The unit vectors of the body coordinates $\tilde{\bm{e}}_i
(i=1,2,3)$ is then obtained as $\tilde{\bm{e}}_i(t)=\bm{R}(t)\bm{e}_i$.
The total surface velocity $\bm{u}$ of the real swimmer is $$\bm{u}= \bm{U}+\cfrac{\partial \tilde{\bm{f}}}{\partial t}={\bm{U}}+
\sum_{i=1}^3\tilde{f}_i\cfrac{d \tilde{\bm{e}}_i}{dt}+\sum_{i=1}^3
\cfrac{\partial \tilde{f}_i}{\partial t}\tilde{\bm{e}}_i
=\bm{U}+\bm{\Omega}(t)\times\tilde{\bm{f}}+\tilde{\bm{u}}'
\label{eq6},$$ where we have written $\tilde{\bm{f}}$ as $\tilde{\bm{f}}=\sum_i \tilde{f}_i \tilde{\bm{e}}_i$, and used the fact that $f_i(\bm{a},t)=\tilde{f}_i(\bm{a},t)$ and $\dot{\tilde{\bm{e}}}_i= \bm{\Omega}\times \tilde{\bm{e}}_i$. The last term $\tilde{\bm{u}}'$ means the surface deformation velocity of the real swimmer defined as $\tilde{\bm{u}}'=\sum_i \frac{\partial \tilde{f}_i}{\partial t} \tilde{\bm{e}}_i$ which is equal to $\bm{R}\bm{u}'$. The rotational angular velocity vector $\bm{\Omega}(t)$ is defined together with two skew symmetric matrices $\bm{A}(t), \bm{B}(t)$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\cfrac{d\bm{R}(t)}{dt}&=& \bm{B}(t)\bm{R}(t)=\bm{R}(t)\bm{A}(t)=
\bm{\Omega}\times\bm{R}(t), \label{eq7}\\
\Omega_i(t)&=&-\epsilon_{ijk}B_{jk}(t), \label{eq24}\end{aligned}$$ where the Einstein convention for repeated indices is employed. The angular velocity vector $\bm{\Omega}(t)$ can also be written as $\bm{\Omega}(t)=(1/2)\sum_i \tilde{\bm{e}}_i\times \dot{\tilde{\bm{e}}}_i$.
{width="7cm"}
The governing equation of the fluid surrounding the real swimmer is the incompressible Navier-Stokes equation. The equation for fluid velocity $\bm{v}=\bm{v}(\bm{x},t)$ is written in a non-dimensional form as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\nabla\cdot\bm{\sigma} &=R_\omega\cfrac{\partial\bm{v}}{\partial
t}+Re\left(\bm{v}\cdot\nabla\right)\bm{v}
\label{eq1}
\\
\nabla\cdot\bm{v}&=0
\label{eq3}\end{aligned}$$ and the stress tensor $\bm{\sigma}$ is given by $$\bm{\sigma}=-p\textbf{1}+\left(\nabla\bm{v}+(\nabla\bm{v})^{\text{T}}\right)
\label{eq2}.$$ The non-dimensional parameters of the equation, $Re$ and $R_\omega$, are the Reynolds number $Re=\rho VL/\mu$ and the oscillatory Reynolds number $R_\omega=\rho L^2\omega/\mu$, the latter of which corresponds to the product of the Reynolds number and the Strouhal number $St=L\omega/V$, where $L$, $V$ and $\omega$ are respectively the characteristic scales of length, velocity and frequency ($d/dt$) of the fluid motion, with the density $\rho$ and the viscosity $\mu$ of the fluid being assumed constant in this paper. The boundary condition for $\bm{v}$ at the body surface of the real swimmer is that $\bm{v}$ coincides with the total surface velocity $\bm{u}$ of the real swimmer, while $\bm{v}\rightarrow 0$ at infinity.
From Newton’s equation of motion for the real swimmer, we obtain the following equation in the non-dimensional form, $$R_S
\cfrac{d}{dt}
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U} \\
\bm{I}\bm{\Omega}
\end{pmatrix}
=
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{F} \\
\bm{T}
\end{pmatrix}
\label{eq4},$$ where $\bm{I}$ is the inertial momentum tensor of the real swimmer. The non-dimensional number $R_S$, the Stokes number, is represented as $R_S=\rho_ML^2\omega/\mu$ where $\rho_M$ is the mean density of the swimmer. The force $\bm{F}$ and the torque $\bm{T}$ acting on the real swimmer also non-dimensionalized like $\bm{F}^*=\mu LV \bm{F}$ using the Stokes law of resistance, where the asterisk denotes the dimensional quantity. This non-dimensionalization is effective in a situation without other external forces such as gravity and electromagnetic forces.
Hereafter, we assume that the non-dimensional parameters $Re$， $R_\omega$，$R_S$ satisfy the inequality, $Re, R_\omega \ll R_S \ll 1$. In this section we consider the motion of the swimmer in the fluid with $Re=R_\omega=0$. We will derive equations for the velocity $\bm{U}$ and the angular velocity $\bm{\Omega}$. When the fluid obeys the steady Stokes equation, Lorentz’ reciprocal theorem [@Lorentz1906] gives $$\int_SdS\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\sigma}\hat{\bm{u}}=\int_SdS\bm{n}\cdot\hat{\bm{\sigma}}\bm{u},
\label{eq8}$$ where $S$ denotes the surface of the real swimmer, and the symbol “hat” indicates quantities of another solution of the Stokes equations with the same boundary shape $S$ and the vector $\bm{n}$ denotes the unit normal vector to the surface. For the solution $\hat{\bm{u}}$ we take a solution satisfying the boundary condition, $$\hat{\bm{u}}=\hat{\bm{U}}+\hat{\bm{\Omega}}\times\tilde{\bm{f}} \label{total surface velocity}$$ at the surface $S$ of the swimmer [@Stone1996]. With linearity of the Stokes equation, the stress tensor is given by $$\hat{\bm{\sigma}}=\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_T\hat{\bm{U}}+\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_R\hat{\bm{\Omega}}
\label{eq9},$$ where $\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_T$ and $\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_R$ are third rank tensors [@Happel1965] which depend upon the direction of the body coordinates $\tilde{\bm{e}}_i$. Substituting equations (\[total surface velocity\]) and (\[eq9\]) into (\[eq8\]) we have $$\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{F}\\
\bm{T}
\end{pmatrix}
\cdot
\begin{pmatrix}
\hat{\bm{U}} \\
\hat{\bm{\Omega}}
\end{pmatrix}=
\int_SdS
\begin{pmatrix}
(\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_T)^{\textrm{T}}\bm{u} \\
(\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_R)^{\textrm{T}}\bm{u}
\end{pmatrix}
\cdot
\begin{pmatrix}
\hat{\bm{U}} \\
\hat{\bm{\Omega}}
\end{pmatrix}
\label{eq10},$$ where the superscript $\text{T}$ denotes the transpose of a matrix. Here $\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_T$ and $\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_R$ denote the second rank tensors $n_i\tilde{\Sigma}_{Tijk}$ and $n_i\tilde{\Sigma}_{Rijk}$ respectively. Using the $6\times6$ symmetric resistive matrix [^1] $$\tilde{\mathsf{K}}=
\begin{pmatrix}
\tilde{\bm{K}}_T, & \tilde{\bm{K}}_C^{\text{T}} \\
\tilde{\bm{K}}_C, & \tilde{\bm{K}}_R
\end{pmatrix}
=\int_SdS
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_T, &\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_R\\
\tilde{\bm{f}}\times(\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_T),& \tilde{\bm{f}}\times(\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_R)
\end{pmatrix}
\label{eq11}$$ and arbitrariness of $\hat{\bm{U}}$ and $\hat{\bm{\Omega}}$, we obtain
$$\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{F} \\
\bm{T}
\end{pmatrix}
=
\tilde{\mathsf{K}}
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U}\\
\bm{\Omega}
\end{pmatrix}+
\int_SdS
\begin{pmatrix}
(\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_T)^{\textrm{T}}\tilde{\bm{u}}' \\
(\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_R)^{\textrm{T}}\tilde{\bm{u}}'
\end{pmatrix}
\label{eq13}.$$
With Newton’s equation of motion (\[eq4\]), we obtain the desired equation: $$\begin{aligned}
R_S\cfrac{d}{dt}
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U} \\
\bm{I}\bm{\Omega}
\end{pmatrix}
&=&
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{F}_{TR}\\
\bm{T}_{TR}
\end{pmatrix}
+
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{F}_D\\
\bm{T}_D
\end{pmatrix} \label{EOM}
\\
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{F}_{TR}\\
\bm{T}_{TR}
\end{pmatrix}
&=&
\tilde{\mathsf{K}}
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U}\\
\bm{\Omega}
\end{pmatrix}
\\
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{F}_D\\
\bm{T}_D
\end{pmatrix}
&=&
\int_SdS
\begin{pmatrix}
(\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_T)^{\textrm{T}}\tilde{\bm{u}}' \\
(\bm{n}\cdot\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_R)^{\textrm{T}}\tilde{\bm{u}}'
\end{pmatrix}.
\label{eq14}\end{aligned}$$
The force $\bm{F}_{TR}$ and the torque $\bm{T}_{TR}$ are the external force and the torque from the fluid, arising from the translation and rotation of the real swimmer, while the force $\bm{F}_D$ and the torque $\bm{T}_D$ arise from the surface deformation of the swimmer. We remark that the right hand side of equation (\[EOM\]) represents the total force and torque exerting on the real swimmer, and therefore when we take into account the gravity and the buoyancy effects, we only need to add the gravity and the buoyancy forces to $\bm{F}$ and their torques to $\bm{T}$, respectively.
We should note that both the third rank tensors, $\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_T$ and $\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_R$, and the resistive matrix $\tilde{\mathsf{K}}$ of the real swimmer depend only on the surface shape of the real swimmer $\tilde{\bm{f}}(t)$.
As we are considering the scallop theorem which is concerned with the motion of the swimmer due to its surface deformation defined by using the virtual swimmer, it is convenient to describe the problem in terms of quantities of the virtual swimmer in the vacuum coordinates. We then have the following equations; $$R_S\cfrac{d}{dt}
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U} \\
\bm{R}\bm{I}^{V}\bm{R}^{-1}\bm{\Omega}
\end{pmatrix}
=
\mathsf{R}\mathsf{K}\mathsf{R}^{-1}
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U}\\
\bm{\Omega}
\end{pmatrix}+
\mathsf{R}
\int_SdS
\begin{pmatrix}
(\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\Sigma}_T)^{\textrm{T}}\bm{u}' \\
(\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\Sigma}_R)^{\textrm{T}}\bm{u}'
\end{pmatrix},
\label{eq17}$$ where the $6\times6$ matrix $\mathsf{R}$ is defined as $$\mathsf{R}=
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{R} & 0 \\
0 & \bm{R}
\end{pmatrix},
\label{eq18}$$ and $\bm{I}^V$ is the inertial momentum tensor of the virtual swimmer. When the deformation velocity of the virtual swimmer is given, this equation together with (\[eq7\]) determines the rotation matrix $\bm{R}(t)$ and the translational velocity $\bm{U}(t)$.
The proof of the scallop theorem
================================
In this section we give a proof of the scallop theorem using equations (\[eq7\]) and (\[eq17\]) in the case of the vanishing Stokes number, $R_S=0$.
We consider the case where the shape of the virtual swimmer deforms in a [*reciprocal*]{} manner, i.e. the shape once deformed retraces back to the initial shape. The mathematical definition of the reciprocal motion is that for the surface deformation of the [*virtual*]{} swimmer, which starts at $t=0$ and ends at $t=T$, there exists a continuous function $g(t)$ such that $\bm{f}(t)=\bm{Q}(t)\bm{f}(g(t))$ and $g(0)=g(T)=0$ where $\bm{Q}(t)\in SO(3)$ is a three dimensional rotation matrix, allowing the possibility that the swimmer takes different directions at time $t$ and $g(t)$. We assume that $g(t)$ is smooth except at a finite number of points, and then intervals of integration over the time $t$ we have in the following in this paper should be divided into those in which $g(t)$ remains smooth. In this case, we can prove that $\bm{Q}(t)=\bm{1}$ as below.
The total angular momentum of the virtual swimmer always vanishes, and therefore $$\bm{0}=\int \rho_m \bm{f}(\bm{a},t)\times\cfrac{\partial \bm{f}}{\partial t}(\bm{a},t) d\bm{a}=\int \rho_m{\bm{Q}}\bm{f}(\bm{a},g(t))\times\cfrac{\partial{\bm{Q}} \bm{f}(\bm{a},g(t))}{\partial t} d\bm{a}.
\label{eq19-2}$$ Noting that $$\cfrac{\partial{\bm{Q}} \bm{f}(\bm{a},g(t))}
{\partial t}=\bm{\Omega}^Q\times \bm{f}(\bm{a},t)+\cfrac{dg}{dt}{\bm{Q}}\cfrac{\partial\bm{f}}{\partial t}(\bm{a},g(t)),
\label{eq19-3}$$ where the angular velocity vector $\bm{\Omega}^{Q}$ is defined as $$\frac{d\bm{Q}}{dt}=\bm{\Omega}^Q\times\bm{Q} \label{definition of Q},
\qquad \Omega_i^Q=-\epsilon_{ijk}\left(\frac{d\bm{Q}}{dt}\bm{Q}^{-1}\right)_{jk},$$ and $\rho_m=\rho_m(\bm{a})$ is the density of the swimmer, we find the contribution from the second term of equation (\[eq19-3\]) to (\[eq19-2\]) vanishes as $$\int \rho_m{\bm{Q}(t)}\bm{f}(\bm{a},g(t))\times
\cfrac{dg}{dt}{\bm{Q}}\cfrac{\partial\bm{f}}{\partial t}(\bm{a},g(t))\,d\bm{a}
=
\cfrac{dg}{dt}{\bm{Q}(t)}\int \rho_m\bm{f}(\bm{a},g(t))\times
\cfrac{\partial\bm{f}}{\partial t}(\bm{a},g(t))\,d\bm{a}
=0$$ due to the vanishing initial angular momentum conserved. Then the equation (\[eq19-3\]) gives $$\int\rho_m \bm{f}(\bm{a},t)\times \left(\bm{\Omega}^Q(t)\times \bm{f}(\bm{a},t)
\right)\,d\bm{a}=\bm{I}^V(t){\bm{\Omega}^Q}(t)=0 \label{eq19-4}.$$ For a general 3-dimensional swimmer, $\bm{I}^V$ is not degenerated and we have $\bm{\Omega}^Q(t)=0$. Then equation (\[definition of Q\]) with $\bm{Q}(0)=1$ gives $\bm{Q}(t)=\bm{1}$.
*The scallop theorem* asserts that the position and the direction of the real swimmer at the final time $t=T$ coincide with the initial position and direction if the motion of the swimmer is reciprocal, the surrounding fluid obeys the steady Stokes equation, and the Stokes number of the swimmer vanishes. In this case, the equation (\[eq17\]) is reduced to $$\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U}\\
\bm{\Omega}
\end{pmatrix}
=-
\mathsf{R}\mathsf{M}
\int_SdS
\begin{pmatrix}
(\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\Sigma}_T)^{\textrm{T}}\bm{u}' \\
(\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\Sigma}_R)^{\textrm{T}}\bm{u}'
\end{pmatrix}
\label{eq19},$$ where the $6\times 6$ matrix $\mathsf{M}$, the mobility matrix, is the inverse of the resistive matrix $\mathsf{K}$.
Denoting $t'=g(t)$ for short, the equation (\[eq19\]) is reduced to $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U}(t) \\
\bm{\Omega}(t)
\end{pmatrix}
&=-\mathsf{R}(t)\mathsf{M}(t)
\begin{pmatrix}
\int_{S(t)}dS (\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\Sigma}_T)^{\textrm{T}}(t)\cdot(\partial
f_i/\partial t)\bm{e}_i \\
\int_{S(t)}dS (\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\Sigma}_R)^{\textrm{T}}(t)\cdot(\partial
f_i/\partial t)\bm{e}_i
\end{pmatrix}
\label{eq20}\\
&=-\mathsf{R}(t)\mathsf{M}(t')
\begin{pmatrix}
\int_{S(t')}dS (\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\Sigma}_T)^{\textrm{T}}(t')\cdot(\partial
f_i/\partial t')\bm{e}_i \\
\int_{S(t')}dS (\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\Sigma}_R)^{\textrm{T}}(t')\cdot(\partial
f_i/\partial t')\bm{e}_i
\end{pmatrix}\cfrac{dt'}{dt}
\label{eq21}\\
&=\mathsf{R}(t)\mathsf{R}^{-1}(t')
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U}(t') \\
\bm{\Omega}(t')
\end{pmatrix}\cfrac{dt'}{dt}
\label{eq22},\end{aligned}$$ where we have used the fact that $\mathsf{M}(t)=\mathsf{M}(t')$, $S(t)=S(t')$, $\bm{\Sigma}_T(t)=\bm{\Sigma}_T(t')$ and $\bm{\Sigma}_R(t)=\bm{\Sigma}_R(t')$, which holds because $\bm{f}(\bm{a},t)=\bm{f}(\bm{a},t')$. Especially from this equation, we obtain $$\bm{R}^{-1}(t)\bm{\Omega}(t)=\bm{R}^{-1}(t')\bm{\Omega}(t')\frac{dt'}{dt} .\label{RinverseOmega}$$
Using equations (\[eq7\]) and (\[eq24\]) we obtain $${A}_{ij}(t)=R_{il}^{-1}B_{lk}R_{kj}=-\epsilon_{lkp}R_{li}R_{kj}\Omega_p ,\label{nanashi2}$$ and from the definition of the determinant of the matrix $\bm{R}$ we have $$\epsilon_{lkp}R_{li}R_{kj}R_{pq}=|\bm{R}|\epsilon_{ijq}
\label{eq27},$$ which leads to $$\epsilon_{lkr}R_{li}R_{kj}=\epsilon_{ijq}R_{rq}
=\epsilon_{ijq}(\bm{R}^{-1})_{qr} \label{nanashi}$$ by the use of $|\bm{R}|=1$ and the multiplication of $R_{rq}$ to equation (\[eq27\]). Substituting equation (\[nanashi\]) into equation (\[nanashi2\]), we have $${A}_{ij}(t)=-\epsilon_{ijk}(\bm{R}^{-1}(t) \bm{\Omega}(t))_k ,
\label{eq25}$$ which together with (\[RinverseOmega\]) gives $$\bm{A}(t)=\bm{A}(t')\cfrac{dt'}{dt}. \label{daiji}$$ The rotation matrix $\bm{R}(t)$ satisfies $$\frac{d\bm{R}(t)}{dt}=\bm{R}(t)\bm{A}(t). \label{R(t)},$$ and $\bm{R}(g(t))$ is also the solution of (\[R(t)\]), because $$\frac{d \bm{R}(g(t))}{dt}= \frac{dg(t)}{dt} \frac{d \bm{R}}{dt}(g(t))
=\frac{dg(t)}{dt} \bm{R}(g(t))\bm{A}(g(t))=\bm{R}(g(t))\bm{A}(t)$$ and $\bm{R}(g(0))=\bm{R}(0)=\bm{1}$. Therefore $\bm{R}(g(t))=\bm{R}(t)$, and thus $\bm{R}(g(T))=\bm{R}(0)=\bm{1}$[^2].
Using this relation in equation (\[eq22\]), we have $\bm{U}(t)=\bm{U}(t')dt'/dt$ which implies $$\frac{d \bm{X}(g)}{dt}=\frac{dg(t)}{dt}\frac{d \bm{X}}{dt}(g(t))=
\frac{dg(t)}{dt}\bm{U}(g(t))=\bm{U}(t).$$ Together with $\bm{X}(g(0))=\bm{X}(0)$, this means that $\bm{X}(g(t))=\bm{X}(t)$ and thus $\bm{X}(T)=\bm{X}(g(T))=\bm{X}(0)=\bm{0}$, which completes the proof of the scallop theorem.
Breakdown of the scallop theorem due to a finite mass of the swimmer
====================================================================
Let us discuss the breakdown of the scallop theorem by a nonzero Stokes number. Assuming that the swimmer moves in the fluid with $Re=R_\omega=0$, and the Stokes number is a small but nonzero constant, we employ $R_S$-expansion as $\bm{R},\bm{X},\bm{\Omega}$ and $\bm{U}$: $$\begin{aligned}
\bm{R}&=\bm{R}_0(1+R_S\bm{R}_1+\cdots) \\
\bm{X}&=\bm{X}^{(0)}+R_S\bm{X}^{(1)}+R_S^2\bm{X}^{(2)}+\cdots \\
\bm{\Omega}&=\bm{\Omega}^{(0)}+R_S\bm{\Omega}^{(1)}+R_S^2\bm{\Omega}^{(2)}+\cdots \\
\bm{U}&=\bm{U}^{(0)}+R_S\bm{U}^{(1)}+R_S^2\bm{U}^{(2)}+\cdots.\end{aligned}$$ At the first order of the Stokes number, substitution of these expansions into (\[eq7\]) and (\[eq17\]) gives $$\bm{\Omega}^{(1)}\times\bm{R}_0=\bm{R}_0\cfrac{d\bm{R}_1}{dt}
\label{eq30_2}.$$ and $$\cfrac{d}{dt}
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U}^{(0)}\\
\bm{R}_0\bm{I}\bm{R}_0^{-1}\cdot\bm{\Omega}^{(0)}
\end{pmatrix}
=\mathsf{R}_0(\mathsf{R}_1\mathsf{K}-\mathsf{K}\mathsf{R}_1)\mathsf{R}_0^{-1}
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U}^{(0)}\\
\bm{\Omega}^{(0)}
\end{pmatrix}
+\mathsf{R}_0\mathsf{K}\mathsf{R}_0^{-1}
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{U}^{(1)}\\
\bm{\Omega}^{(1)}
\end{pmatrix}
\label{eq30_1} ,$$ where the matrices $\mathsf{R}_0$ and $\mathsf{R}_1$ are $6\times6$ matrices defined as $$\mathsf{R}_0=
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{R}_0 & 0 \\
0 & \bm{R}_0
\end{pmatrix},
\qquad
\mathsf{R}_1=
\begin{pmatrix}
\bm{R}_1 & 0 \\
0 & \bm{R}_1
\end{pmatrix}.$$
Here we focus our attention on a swimmer without rotational motion ($\bm{\Omega}(t)=\bm{0}$). Then we can assume that the motion of the swimmer is in the direction of $\bm{e}_1$, reducing the equation (\[eq17\]) into $$\varepsilon\cfrac{dU(t)}{dt}=-K(t)U+F(t)
\label{eq32},$$ where we denote $\varepsilon=R_S$, $U(t)=\bm{U}(t)\cdot \bm{e}_1$, $K(t)=-(\bm{K}_T(t)\bm{e}_1)\cdot\bm{e_1}$, and $F(t)=\bm{F}_D(t)\cdot\bm{e}_1$, and $K(t)$ is positive definite. Then the equation (\[eq32\]) is exactly solved as $$U(t)=\frac{1}{\varepsilon}e^{-\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\int_0^{t}K(t')dt'}\int_0^tdt'F(t')e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\int_0^{t'}K(t'')dt''}+U(0)e^{-\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\int_0^{t}K(t')dt'}
\label{eq33}.$$
Integrating by parts repeatedly[^3], we represent the equation (\[eq33\]) as the form of the asymptotic power series of the Stokes number $\varepsilon$ as $U(t)\sim \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\varepsilon^n U^{(n)}(t)$, where we use an assumption that $K(t)$ and $F(t)$ are smooth functions, and eliminate exponentially small terms from the asymptotic expansion. Then the first few terms of the expansion are
$$\begin{aligned}
U^{(0)}(t)&=F(t)K^{-1}(t)
\label{eq37}\\
U^{(1)}(t)&=-\cfrac{d}{dt}\left(F(t)K^{-1}(t)\right)K^{-1}(t)
\label{eq38}\\
U^{(2)}(t)&=\cfrac{d}{dt}\left(\cfrac{d}{dt}\left(F(t)K^{-1}(t)\right)K^{-1}(t)\right)K^{-1}(t)\label{eq39}.\end{aligned}$$
We now consider the breakdown of the scallop theorem. Assume a swimmer in a reciprocal motion. Since the propulsive force $F$ satisfies $F(t)=F(t')\frac{dt'}{dt}$ and $K(t)=K(t')$, where $t'=g(t)$, the zeroth order of equation (\[eq32\]) gives $$X^{(0)}(T)=\int_0^T F(t)K^{-1}(t)\,dt =\int_0^0 F(t')K^{-1}(t')\,dt'=0 ,$$ which corresponds to the scallop theorem[^4]． According to equation (\[eq38\]), the first-order displacement in one period of the reciprocal motion is represented as $$X^{(1)}=\int_0^TdtU(t)=-\int_0^{T}dt\cfrac{dU^{(0)}(t)}{dt}K^{-1}(t). \label{eqX1}$$ In the case of the reciprocal motion as $g(t)=t$ on $[0,T_r]$ and $g(t)=(T-t)T_r/(T-T_r)$ on $[T_r,T]$[^5], equation (\[eqX1\]) leads to $$\begin{aligned}
X^{(1)}(T)=&\frac{T}{T-T_r}\int_0^{T_r}dt U^{(0)}(t)\cfrac{dK^{-1}(t)}{dt} \nonumber \\
&+\frac{T}{T-T_r}\left(U^{(0)}(+0)K^{-1}(+0)-U^{(0)}(T_r-0)K^{-1}(T_r-0)\right).\end{aligned}$$ This does not necessarily vanish as we show in the next section That $X^{(1)}$ does not generally vanish, means that the scallop theorem breaks down at the first order of the Stokes number. This results are consistent with the continuous breakdown of the scallop theorem suggested by Gonzalez-Rodriguez and Lauga [@Gonzalez2009]. If, however, the stroke of the swimmer has some symmetry, the first-order displacement in one period of the stroke can also vanish, and the theorem holds true up to a higher order of the Stokes number, as also discussed in the next section.
Purcell’s scallop model {#model}
=======================
In this section we discuss the motion of the Purcell’s “scallop” model [@Becker2003] as an example of a swimmer with a finite Stokes number (Fig. \[scallop1\]). This swimmer with one hinge to move was first introduced by Purcell to explain the scallop theorem [@Purcell1977]. The “scallop” has two slender rods with the same length $l$ and with the same circular cross section of radius $r$. From the *symmetry* of the shape, it does not rotate and so become an example of the swimmer without rotation． We calculate resistive and propulsive forces using Cox’s slender-body theory [@Cox1970], which describes approximately well when the aspect ratio of the body $a=r/l$ is much smaller than 1. Let us take a coordinate $s$（$-l<s<l$）along the body from the bottom edge to the top, with the point of $s=0$ at the hinge. Let $\bm{\lambda}(s)$ denote the normal vector to the cross section． Cox’s theory gives the force exerted by fluid on an infinitesimal part of the body between $s$ and $s+ds$ as $$d\bm{F}(s)= \left(\int_{L(s)
}\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\sigma}dl \right)\,ds =-\zeta(2-\bm{\lambda}\bm{\lambda})\cdot\bm{u}\,ds
\label{eq43},$$ where $\zeta=2\pi\mu(\log{(2/a)})^{-1}$. Here the line integral is taken along the circumference $L(s)$ of the cross section at the position $s$, and $\bm{u}(s)$ indicates the total surface velocity of the part of the body, which is equivalent to the fluid velocity at the surface.
![The conceptual figure of the virtual swimmer of the Purcell’s “scallop”． The coordinates $\bm{e}_1,\bm{e}_2$ are the vacuum coordinates with the origin at the center of mass of the *virtual* “scallop”. []{data-label="scallop1"}](fig/scallop1-1.eps){width="6cm"}
The scallop is configured in two dimensional $\bm{e}_1\bm{e}_2$-plane as shown in Fig. \[scallop1\]. The motion is then in one-dimensional direction. The motion is driven by temporal variation of the angle $\alpha$; $\alpha(t)$ changes reciprocally as $\alpha_0\rightarrow \alpha_m\rightarrow \alpha_0$ (Fig. \[scallop4\]). The slender-body theory gives $\int_{L(s)}\,dl(\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\Sigma}_T)^{\textrm{T}}$ and the resistive coefficient $K$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{L(s)}\,dl(\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\Sigma}_T)^{\textrm{T}}(s)
&=& -\zeta\begin{pmatrix}
2-\cos^2\alpha & -\textrm{sgn}(s)\cos\alpha\sin\alpha \\
-\textrm{sgn}(s)\cos\alpha\sin\alpha & 2-\sin^2\alpha
\end{pmatrix}
\label{eq45}, \\
K&=&2\zeta l(2-\cos^2\alpha)
\label{eq44},\end{aligned}$$ in the vacuum coordinates. When we write the position and the velocity of the hinge as $X_H(t)=-0.5l\cos\alpha$ and $U_H(t)= +0.5l\sin\alpha (d\alpha/dt)$, it is found that the surface deformation velocity of the virtual swimmer is $\bm{u}'(s)=(U_H,0)+s(d\bm{\lambda}/dt)$, where $\alpha=\alpha(t)$ depends on time $t$ and hereafter we assume some smoothness of $\alpha(t)$ so that $\dot{\alpha}(0)=\ddot{\alpha}(0)=0$. The propulsive force $F$ is then derived from (\[eq45\]) as $$F=2\zeta l^2 \sin\alpha\cos^2\alpha\cfrac{d\alpha}{dt}
\label{eq46}.$$
Substitution of (\[eq44\]) and (\[eq46\]) into equation (\[eq32\]) gives $$\varepsilon'\cfrac{dU}{dt}=-(2-\cos^2\alpha)U+\cos^2\alpha \sin\alpha\cfrac{d\alpha}{dt}l
\label{eq47},$$ where $\varepsilon'$ is defined as $\varepsilon'=a^2\log(2/a)\varepsilon/2\omega$, and $\omega$ is the frequency of the stroke of the swimmer. Henceforth we nondimensionalize quantities, using $l$ and $1/\omega$ for the unit of length and time. Let us assume $\varepsilon'\ll 1$ and consider the expansion of the equation (\[eq47\]) in terms of $\varepsilon'$． At the zeroth order of $\varepsilon'$，we get the velocity $U^{(0)}$ as $$U^{(0)}(t)=\cfrac{\cos^2\alpha\sin\alpha}{2-\cos^2\alpha}\left(\cfrac{d\alpha}{dt}\right)
\label{eq48}$$ and thus the displacement of the center of mass in one period becomes $$X^{(0)}(t)=\int_0^t
U^{(0)}(t')\,dt'=\int_{\alpha_0}^{\alpha}\cfrac{\cos^2\alpha'\sin\alpha'}{2-\cos^2\alpha'}d\alpha'
\label{eq49}.$$ Since $X^{(0)}$ is a function of $\alpha$, the realization of the scallop theorem is confirmed. At the first order of $\varepsilon'$, equation (\[eq38\]) gives the first order displacement as $$X^{(1)}(T)=\int_0^{T}U^{(1)}(t)dt=-\int_0^{T}\cfrac{2\sin^2\alpha\cos^3\alpha}{(2-\cos^2\alpha)^2}\left(\cfrac{d\alpha}{dt}\right)^2dt
\label{eq50}.$$ Here we have used integration by parts and $\dot{\alpha}(0)=0$.
We now assume a reciprocal motion in which the swimmer opens and then closes its “shell” during one period. If $0<\alpha_0<\alpha<\alpha_m<\pi/2$, then the integrand of equation (\[eq50\]) is always positive, and the swimmer moves to $-\bm{e}_1$ direction by the effect of the mass inertia of the swimmer.
![Temporal variation of the shape of the swimmer.[]{data-label="scallop4"}](fig/scallop4-1.eps){width="12cm"}
If $0<\alpha_0<\alpha<\alpha_m<\pi$ and $\alpha_m=\pi-\alpha_0$, the period of motion of the swimmer can then be divided into 4 intervals,$I_{\alpha_0\rightarrow \pi/2}, I_{\pi/2\rightarrow \alpha_m},I_{\alpha_m\rightarrow \pi/2},I_{\pi/2\rightarrow \alpha_0}$, in each of which the motion is time-reversal or mirror-symmetric to that in another interval. If the speed of the deformation in $I_{\pi/2 \rightarrow \alpha_m}$ is $c_2$ times faster than that in $I_{\alpha_0\rightarrow \pi/2}$,
the first-order displacement in the first half, $ X^{(1)}_{\alpha_0\rightarrow\alpha_m}$, becomes $$X^{(1)}_{\alpha_0\rightarrow\alpha_m}=(1-c_2)
X^{(1)}_{\alpha_0\rightarrow\pi/2}
\label{eq52},$$ where $X^{(1)}_{\alpha_0\rightarrow\pi/2}$ denotes the first-order displacement in $I_{\alpha_0 \rightarrow \pi/2}$. Similarly, if the deformation speeds of in $I_{\alpha_m\rightarrow \pi/2}$ and $I_{\pi/2\rightarrow\alpha_0}$ are by $c_3$ and $c_4$ times faster than that in $I_{\alpha_0 \rightarrow\pi/2}$ respectively, the net displacement in one period of the reciprocal motion is $$X^{(1)}(T)=(1-c_2-c_3+c_4)X^{(1)}_{\alpha_0\rightarrow\pi/2}
\label{eq53}.$$ If $1-c_2-c_3+c_4=0$, we obtain $X^{(1)}(T)=0$ and the scallop theorem still holds up to the first order of Stokes number.
In the second order of $\varepsilon'$, we have $$X^{(2)}(T)=-\int_0^T \cfrac{1}{2-\cos^2\alpha}\left(\cfrac{dU^{(1)}}{dt}\right)dt
=\int_0^T\cfrac{4\sin^3\alpha\cos^4\alpha}{(2-\cos^2\alpha)^5}\left(\cfrac{d\alpha}{dt}\right)^3 dt
\label{eq54},$$ using integration by parts and the assumption that the angle $\alpha=\alpha(t)$ is a smooth enough function of time to satisfy $\ddot{\alpha}(0)=0$. With the same assumptions on the speed of the motion as in equation (\[eq53\]), the second-order displacement is obtained as, $$X^{(2)}(T)=(1+c_2^2-c_3^2-c_4^2)X^{(2)}_{\alpha_0\rightarrow\pi/2}
\label{eq55}.$$ Thus the symmetric deformation of $(c_2, c_3, c_4)=(1, 1, 1)$ gives the zero net displacement up to the second order: $X^{(1)}(T)=X^{(2)}(T)=0$. On the other hand, the different deformation speeds as $(c_2, c_3, c_4)=(1,2,2)$ produces the net displacement $X^{(2)}(T)\neq 0$ in one period of the motion while the first order displacement then vanishes: $X^{(1)}(T)=0$. This result implies that if the “shell” opens slowly and closes quickly, the swimmer with the symmetric stroke shown in Fig. \[scallop4\] gives the net displacement in $-\bm{e}_1$ direction at the second order of Stokes number.
Before ending this section, let us consider the case of $\varepsilon\gg 1$. Using equation (\[eq33\]), we expand the velocity of the swimmer in Taylor series of $1/\varepsilon$: $$U(t)=(1/\varepsilon)\int_0^t dt'F(t')+(1/\varepsilon^{2})\int_0^tdt'F(t')\int_t^{t'}K(t'')dt''+\mathcal{O}(1/\varepsilon^{3})
\label{eq56}.$$ Applying this equation to equation (\[eq47\]), we obtain at the first order of $1/\varepsilon'$ $$U^{(1)}(t)=
\int_{\alpha_0}^{\alpha}\cos^2\alpha\sin\alpha\,d\alpha
\label{eq56-2},$$ which is independent of the speed of deformation. In the case of $0<\alpha_0<\alpha<\alpha_m<\pi/2$, $X^{(1)}$ is positive quantity. Thus the “scallop” goes to $+\bm{e}_1$ direction when its “shell” opens slowly and closes quickly as real scallops do.
Summary and Conclusion
======================
We have established a framework to discuss a motion of a swimmer immersed in Stokes fluid, and given a rigorous proof for the scallop theorem. We have also discussed the breakdown of the theorem due to a nonzero mass of the swimmer, and shown that the degree of the breakdown depends on the symmetry of the stroke using the Purcell’s scallop model.
First of all, in order to define the deformation velocity we introduced the *virtual* swimmer which has the same shape as the *real* swimmer but has no ambient fluid. We then attached the *the vacuum coordinates* to the virtual swimmer and *the body coordinates* to the real swimmer. The position and orientation of the real swimmer is obtained by the affine transformation from the virtual swimmer. We derived the formulae which provide the velocity and the angular velocity of the swimmer when the surface deformation of the virtual swimmer is given in the case of vanishing Reynolds number $Re$ and oscillatory Reynolds number $R_\omega$. Using these formulae, we have proved *the scallop theorem* at a vanishing mass of the swimmer, or equivalently a zero Stokes number.
Then we studied the breakdown of the scallop theorem, taking a finite Stokes number into consideration especially in the case of the swimmer without rotating motion. We showed the net displacement is generally at the first order of the Stokes number using an asymptotic expansion. We took Purcell’s scallop model with a finite mass as an example and demonstrated the breakdown of the scallop theorem, but also showed that the theorem holds up to a higher order of the Stokes number for a swimmer deforming with a particular symmetry.
Our argument is based on the assumption of $Re, R_\omega \ll 1$ and $Re, R_\omega \ll R_S$. In reality, however, the time derivative term of the fluid equation may become important for such a dense swimmer, where $Re \ll R_\omega , R_S$, and $Re \ll 1$ are satisfied. Gavze [@Gavze1990] gave formulae for the fluid dynamical force and torque on a rigid (non-deformable) body with an arbitrary shape under such conditions. However, to our knowledge, an explicit form of fluid dynamical force on self-propulsive deformable swimmer has not yet been found in non-stationary Stokes flow. It is still an open question whether the scallop theorem holds in the case of a finite oscillatory Reynolds number.
The gravity effect on a swimmer may also be important. In the case of *Volvox*, the mass density of the body is a little heavier than the surrounding water. According to Drescher et al.[@Drescher2009], the density difference between the [*Volvox*]{} and water is approximately $\Delta\rho\sim 2\times 10^{-3}$g/cm$^3$. The characteristic velocity due to the gravity effect is estimated to be $U_g\sim 2\times 10^2$cm/sec by balancing the gravity effect with the resistive force on the body, $$\cfrac{\frac{4}{3}\pi A^3 \Delta\rho g}{6\pi \mu A U_g}\sim 1
\label{eq63}.$$ This velocity is comparable to the propulsive velocity of the swimmer. Burton et al. [@Burton2010] has recently studied a neutrally buoyant Purcell’s scallop model with separated positions of the centers of mass and of buoyancy. This kind of separation often occurs in microorganisms due to heterogeneity of mass distribution, and it may be of interest to apply our formulation to these organisms by including gravity and buoyancy.
Before ending, we should remark the possibility of another choice of the gauge fixing to define the deformation velocity of a swimmer. In this paper we have introduced a virtual swimmer and its associated vacuum coordinates to define the deformation velocity. This choice appears natural but is not unique, and there may be another coordinate system, which is useful in considering other subjects beyond the scallop theorem.
Acknowledgment {#acknowledgment .unnumbered}
==============
We would like to thank Prof. Takehiro for providing us with carefully considered feedback and valuable comments. Special thanks are also to Mr. Inubushi, Mr. Kimura, Ms. Obuse and Mr. Sasaki who gave us invaluable comments and warm encouragements.
[99]{} L. E. Becker, S. A. Koehler, and H. A. Stone, “On self-propulsion of micro-machines at low Reynolds number: Purcell’s three-link swimmer”, J. Fluid Mech., **490** (2003) 15-35. L. J. Burton, R. L. Halton, H. Choset and A. E. Hosoi, “Two-link swimming using buoyant orientation”, Phys. Fluids **22** (2010) 091703. T. Chambrion and A. Munnier, “Generalized scallop theorem for linear swimmers”, arXiv Preprint (2010) 1008.1098v1 \[math-ph\]. S. Childress, “*Mechanics of Swimming and Flying*”, (1981) Cambridge University Press. S. Childress and R. Dudley, “Transition from ciliary to flapping mode in a swimming mollusc: flapping flight as a bifurcation in $Re_\omega$”, J. Fluid Mech. **498** (2004) 257-288. R. G. Cox, “The notion of slender bodies in a viscous fluid, Part 1. General theory”, J. Fluid Mech., **44** (1970) 791-810. A. DeSimore, F. Alougues and A. Lefebvre, “Biological fluid dynamics: swimming at low Reynolds numbers”, Preprint SISSA **21** (2008) 1-13. K. Drescher, K. C. Leptos, I. Tuval, T. Ishikawa, T.J.Pedley, and R.E.Goldstein, “Dancing *Volvox*: hydrodynamic bound state of swimming algae”, Phys. Rev. Lett. **102** (2009) 168101. E. Gavze, “The accelerated motion of rigid bodies in non-steady stokes flow”, Int. J. Multiphase Flow, **16** (1990) 153-166. D. Gonzalez-Rodriguez and E. Lauga, “Reciprocal locomotion of dense swimmers in Stokes flow”, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter, **21** (2009) 204103. J. Happel and H. Brenner, *Low Reynolds number Hydrodynamics* (1965) Engelwood Cliffs. L. Koiler, K. Ehlers and R.Montgomery, “Problems and progress in microswimming”, J. Nonlinear Sci. **6** (1996) 507-541. E. Lauga, “Continuous breakdown of Purcell’s scallop theorem with inertia”, Phys. Fluid **19** (2007) 061703. E. Lauga, “The hydrodynamics of swimming microorganisms”, Rep. Prog. Phys., **72** (2009) 096601. E. Lauga, “Life at high Deborah number”, Euro. Phys. Lett. **86** (2009) 64001 E. Lauga, “Life around the scallop theorem”, Soft Matter 7(2011) 3060-3065. J. Lighthill, “Flagellar hydrodynamics”, SIAM review **18** (1976) 161-230. H. A. Lorentz, “Ein allgemeiner Satz, die Bewegung einer reibenden Flüssigkeit betreffend, nebst einigen Anwendungen desselben”, Abhandl. theoret. Phys., **1** (1906) 23 E. M. Purcell, “Life at low Reynolds number”, Am. J. Phys., **45(1)** (1977) 3-11. A. Shapere and F. Wilczek, “Geometry of self-propusion at low Reynolds number”, J. Fluid Mech. **198** (1989) 557-585 H. A. Stone and A. D. T. Samuel, “Propulsion of microorganisms by surface distortions”, Phys. Rev. Lett. **77** (1996) 4102-4104. S. G. Taylor, “Analysis of the swimming of microscopic organisms”, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A **209** (1951) 447-461. E. Yariv, “Self-propulsion in a viscous fluid: arbitrary surface deformations”, J. Fluid Mech., **550** (2006) 139-148.
[^1]: The relation of off-diagonal components of $\mathsf{K}$ is as below using Lorentz’ reciprocal theorem. If we take two solutions with the boundary condition $\bm{u}=\bm{U}$ and $\hat{\bm{u}}=\bm{\Omega}\times\bm{f}$ respectively at the surface $S$, we obtain $\bm{\sigma}=\bm{\Sigma}_T\bm{U}$ and $\hat{\bm{\sigma}}=\bm{\Sigma}_R\bm{\Omega}$ . Substitution of these into equation (\[eq8\]) gives $$\int_SdS\bm{n}\cdot (\bm{\Sigma}_T\bm{U})\bm{\Omega}\times\bm{f}=\int_SdS\bm{n}\cdot(\bm{\Sigma_R\bm{\Omega}})\bm{U}.$$ After some manipulations, we get $$\int_SdS\bm{\Omega}\cdot\bm{f}\times(\bm{n}\cdot\bm{\Sigma}_T)\bm{U}=\int_SdS\bm{\Omega}\cdot(\bm{n}\cdot{\bm{\Sigma}_R})^{\textrm{T}}\bm{U},$$ which implies that the transpose of an off-diagonal component is another off-diagonal component.
[^2]: This can be proved also by noticing that $$\bm{R}(T)=\bm{R}(0)\overline{\mathrm{T}}e^{\int_0^{T}\bm{A}(t)dt}=\bm{R}(0)\overline{\mathrm{T}}e^{\int_0^{0}\bm{A}(t')dt'}=\bm{1}.$$ where $\int_0^0$ symbolize the round integration from $t'=0$ to $t'=0$, and $\overline{T}$ means anti time-ordering operator.
[^3]: Denoting $E(t)=
e^{\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\int_0^{t}K(t')dt'}$, we have $E(t)=\epsilon K^{-1}(t)\dot{E}(t)$ and the integration becomes $$\int_0^t F(t')E(t')\,dt'
=\varepsilon \left[E(t')F(t')K^{-1}(t')\right]_0^t- \varepsilon \int_0^t \frac{d}{dt'}\left( F(t')K^{-1}(t')\right) E(t')\,dt'$$ and similarly.
[^4]: Here again we have used the symbolic notation $\int_0^0$.
[^5]: The $dg(t)/dt$ is discontinuous at $t=T/2$, and we divide the integral interval into $[0,T_r]$ and $[T_r,T]$
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- 'Dhiraj Kumar Hazra,'
- Arman Shafieloo
title: 'Search for a direction in the forest of Lyman-$\alpha$'
---
Introduction
============
Our understanding of the physical cosmology strongly depends on the data that we observe and the model assumptions that we make. Assumptions in the standard model sometime pose problems in understanding the true nature of the Universe. Statistical isotropy is one of such assumptions which we assume in almost all the data analysis. In this assumption we claim that the statistical properties of the observables in the Universe are same in all direction. While in parameter estimations from the datasets, isotropy is assumed, there have been a number of tests to confirm this assumption, using data from different cosmological probes, such as Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) [@Hinshaw:1996ut; @Spergel:2003cb; @Copi:2010na; @Ade:2013nlj; @Akrami:2014eta; @de; @OliveiraCosta:2003pu; @Abramo:2006gw; @Land:2005ad; @Land:2006bn; @Rakic:2007ve; @Samal:2007nw; @Samal:2008nv; @Eriksen:2007pc; @Hoftuft:2009rq; @Copi:2006tu; @Copi:2005ff; @Schwarz:2004gk; @Souradeep:2006dz] and Large Scale Structure (LSS) [@Fernandez-Cobos:2013fda; @Cai:2013lja; @Keenan:2009jh; @Keenan:2012gr; @Keenan:2013mfa; @Whitbourn:2013mwa; @Frith:2003tb; @Busswell:2003ta; @Frith:2005az; @Frith:2004wd; @Frith:2004tw; @Appleby:2014lra]. In this paper we investigate isotropy of the matter dominated Universe using the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest datasets in the redshift range $z \sim 2 -3$. Spectra of high redshift quasars contain absorption lines that trace the components of the IGM along the line of sight. In the case of Lyman-$\alpha$ forest, we find absorption lines from the first ionization state of the Hydrogen atoms. The wavelength of the absorption identifies the redshift of the neutral hydrogen cloud. Analyzing these absorption lines, collectively from a number of quasars, we can constrain properties of the IGM. In particular, the Lyman-$\alpha$ transmitted flux ($F$) (absorption [*w.r.t*]{} the estimated continuum spectrum) can be related to the dark matter overdensity ($\delta$) as $F=\bar{F}\exp[-A(1+\delta)^{2-0.7(\gamma-1)}]$ [@fdelta], where, $\bar{F}$ is the mean transmitted flux, $\gamma-1$ dictates the temperature density relation and $A$ is a redshift dependent constant. We shall address the statistics of the transmitted flux in the Lyman-$\alpha$ region at different redshifts. To have a theoretical model independent analysis, in this work we only consider the statistical properties of the observational data. In the last decade, detection of large number of quasar spectrum with high SNR enables us to perform this type of analysis. We use Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (BOSS) DR9 from Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS)-III [@sdss; @boss]. We perform our test in three different redshifts in the matter dominated epoch that enables us to track the isotropy along time. In each redshift, the isotropy is tested in medium, high and highest SNR of detection. We divide the sky in three patches using two different patch selection criteria. Since SDSS is a ground base survey which only has partial sky coverage, our test of isotropy will be limited by the survey area. Throughout the analysis we closely follow the survey parameters for the selection of data pixels from the quasar spectrum in order to obtain the PDF of the transmitted flux.
The paper is organized as follows : In section \[sec:formalism\] we discuss the data from BOSS-DR9 and the selection criteria for the data pixels for our analysis. We also outline the error estimation procedure for the flux PDF. Afterwards we discuss and tabulate the properties of the sky patches selected. In the results section \[sec:results\] we discuss the main outcome of our analysis. Finally in section \[sec:conclusions\] we conclude along with highlighting future prospects.
Data analysis
=============
\[sec:formalism\]
We use the latest available BOSS DR9 quasar Lyman-$\alpha$ forest data [@Lyman-sample]. The ninth data release contains 54,468 spectra of Lyman-$\alpha$ quasars with redshifts more than 2.15. They provide Lyman-$\alpha$ forest data in the redshift range $z\sim2-5.7$. However due to a smaller number of quasars with redshift higher than $z\sim3$ we restrict our analysis in the redshift $z\sim2-3$. BOSS-DR9 has a survey area of 3275 square degrees and hence our test of isotropy will be limited by this area. As has been discussed in [@Lyman-sample], out of 87,822 total spectra, the set of 54,468 spectra was selected after removing low redshift quasars, quasars having broad absorption lines, too low SNR and negative continuum. Note that the continuum to each quasar spectrum is estimated using mean-flux regulated principal component analysis (MF-PCA) techniques [@Leeetal] and they are provided along with the data. We would like to mention that even at this stage not all the data are appropriate for the isotropy test due to low SNR, damped Lyman-$\alpha$ (DLA), limited exposures and few other characteristics. Below we point out the data cuts that we have used to select a spectrum.
Quasar selection, data cuts
---------------------------
Our selection of data closely follows the BOSS criteria used to obtain constraints on the IGM [@bossigm]. As we mentioned earlier, we test the isotropy of the sky in three redshift bins with the central redshifts being 2.3, 2.6 and 2.9. The redshift bins have a bin width of $\Delta z=0.3$. In each of the redshift bins we impose the following data cuts. Firstly since large number of low SNR quasars can have a systematic bias in our results, we reject all the quasars with SNR $<6$. The rest of the quasars are binned in [*good*]{} ($6\le{\rm SNR}<8$), [*better*]{} ($8\le{\rm SNR}<10$) and [*best*]{} (${\rm SNR}\ge10$) categories. In the quasar rest frame we use $1041-1185\mathring{A}$ as the Lyman-$\alpha$ domain.
Lyman-$\alpha$ forest typically refers to neutral hydrogen atoms with column density of $10^{14}$ atoms per ${\rm cm}^2$ in the line of sight. The presence of DLA in a spectrum indicates extremely high column density (${\cal O} (10^{20})$ atoms per ${\rm cm}^2$). Following [@bossigm] we discard spectra with identified DLA in the sightlines. The provided data uses a DLA concordance catalogue for the identification of DLA’s. The detection efficiency of the catalogue decreases below neutral hydrogen column densities less than $10^{20.3}/{\rm cm}^2$. Hence, below this criteria, in our analysis, for each of the forest we correct the flux for the damping wings of DLA in the sightlines, provided with the data [@Lyman-sample]. We leave the spectra with neutral hydrogen column density of more than $10^{20.3}/{\rm cm}^2$ out of our analysis.
As mentioned earlier, the survey provides the continuum of each spectrum estimated using MF-PCA technique. Note that the transmitted flux is the observed flux [*w.r.t.*]{} the estimated continuum and hence a bad continuum estimation shall bias the calculated flux [^1]. Here too, following the survey criteria we reject the quasars which do not provide good fit to the spectrum redwards to the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest. We also reject spectra which had less than three individual exposures.
Our final selection criteria depends on the resolution of the BOSS spectographs. As has been mentioned in [@bossigm], BOSS spectographs do not resolve the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest. To evade this systematic effect that can reflect in the transmitted flux, we use similar procedure used in [@bossigm]. We stack the spectra according to the intrinsic wavelength dispersion ($\sigma_{\rm disp}$) at the Lyman-$\alpha$ wavelength of each central redshift bin. Note that in each pixel the $\sigma_{\rm disp}$ is provided along with the spectrum. From each redshift bin we then discard the 5$\%$ spectra from below and 10$\%$ spectra from above.
Each quasar spectrum contain certain number of data pixels in the Lyman-$\alpha$ region. In a redshift bin (say, $2.15<z<2.45$) some quasars may have all the Lyman-$\alpha$ pixels, some will have partial pixels from either blue end or red end of the Lyman-$\alpha$ domain. We here consider all the quasars satisfying the above criteria and also contributing more than 30 pixels in the redshift window.
Selection of sky patches
------------------------
Since BOSS-DR9 surveys in 3275 ${\rm deg}^2$ area, we need to make patches in the sky in particular ways. First we convert the coordinate of the quasars from J2000 equatorial system to galactic coordinate ($l,b$) system. Below, in Fig. \[fig:skycut\] we provide our selection of patches with different colors. In the first system we divide the sky using quadrant convention. Here we divide the sky in three patches where one patch remains in the southern hemisphere (red, $b<0\deg$) and the other two patches are in northern hemisphere ($b>0\deg$). The two patches in the northern hemisphere are divided in $l>180\deg$ (blue) and $l<180\deg$ (green) parts. In principle, the quadrant convention divides the southern hemisphere into two parts ($l>180\deg$ and $l<180\deg$) too, but since there are barely any data in $b<0\deg,l>180\deg$, we take only one patch from southern hemisphere. In our other selection, we divide the sky according to galactic latitude. The red patch remains same as it stays in the southern hemisphere. The patches in the northern hemisphere are divided in one patch with $b>50\deg$ (magenta) and another with $0\deg<b\le50\deg$ (black). Our first selection of patches is provided in the left of Fig. \[fig:skycut\] and the other selection is shown to the right.
-22 pt
In the following table \[tab:patch-info\] we tabulate the essential information about the selected patches and the overall sample in different redshift and different SNR. For different patches we provide the number of quasars and the number of pixels that pass all our data cuts discussed in the paragraph before. Note that apart from the red patch that stays in the southern hemisphere, other patches contain quasar number and the pixels that are comparable to each other. As we go towards higher redshifts we find lesser number of data pixels which is expected as we know there are not many high redshift quasars. This decrease in number of high redshift quasars limit our analysis to $z<3$. However, in each SNR bin we have enough pixels to perform a relatively robust statistical analysis. Also note that compared to $6\le {\rm SNR}<8$ bin, in the two higher SNR bins the numbers of quasars or pixels are approximately half. We should mention that this is not a concern since we assume the data from different SNR are independent and we compare the statistical properties of the transmitted flux in each SNR separately. Moreover the lack of large number of quasars in higher SNR bins are compensated by the less dispersion in the data from higher SNR quasar samples.
[c | c | c | c | c]{} Redshift range($z$) & SNR & Patch location & Number of quasars & Number of Lyman-$\alpha$ pixels\
& & Complete sky& 1091&285878\
& & $b<0^\circ$ (Red)& 226& 60631\
& & $b>0^\circ,~l<180^\circ$ (Green)&390 &100289\
& $6-8$ & $b>0^\circ,~l>180^\circ$ (Blue)&475 &124958\
& & $0^\circ<b<50^\circ$ (Black)&401 &106772\
& & $b>50^\circ$ (Magenta)&464 &118475\
& & Complete sky&498 &130242\
& & $b<0^\circ$ (Red)&106 &28686\
& & $b>0^\circ,~l<180^\circ$ (Green)&185 &48158\
$2.15-2.45$ ($\bar{z}=2.3$) & $8-10$ &$b>0^\circ,~l>180^\circ$ (Blue) &207 &53398\
& & $0^\circ<b<50^\circ$ (Black)&168 &45290\
& & $b>50^\circ$ (Magenta)&224 &56266\
& & Complete sky&567 &147679\
& & $b<0^\circ$ (Red)&122 &30899\
& & $b>0^\circ,~l<180^\circ$ (Green)& 187&47806\
& $>10$ &$b>0^\circ,~l>180^\circ$ (Blue)&258 &68974\
& & $0^\circ<b<50^\circ$ (Black)& 228& 62655\
& & $b>50^\circ$ (Magenta)&217 & 54125\
& & Complete sky&975 &230165\
& & $b<0^\circ$ (Red)& 221&53062\
& & $b>0^\circ,~l<180^\circ$ (Green)&373 &86995\
& $6-8$ & $b>0^\circ,~l>180^\circ$ (Blue)&381 &90108\
& & $0^\circ<b<50^\circ$ (Black)&348 & 80712\
& & $b>50^\circ$ (Magenta)& 406&96391\
& & Complete sky&475 &107539\
& & $b<0^\circ$ (Red)&110 &25099\
& & $b>0^\circ,~l<180^\circ$ (Green)& 181&41564\
$2.45-2.75$($\bar{z}=2.6$) & $8-10$ &$b>0^\circ,~l>180^\circ$ (Blue) &184 &40876\
& & $0^\circ<b<50^\circ$ (Black)& 141& 32220\
& & $b>50^\circ$ (Magenta)&224 &50220\
& & Complete sky&607 &144797\
& & $b<0^\circ$ (Red)&139 &33690\
& & $b>0^\circ,~l<180^\circ$ (Green)&224 &54156\
& $>10$ &$b>0^\circ,~l>180^\circ$ (Blue)&244 &56951\
& & $0^\circ<b<50^\circ$ (Black)&248 & 56434\
& & $b>50^\circ$ (Magenta)&220 &54673\
& & Complete sky&628 &139373\
& & $b<0^\circ$ (Red)&135 &30291\
& & $b>0^\circ,~l<180^\circ$ (Green)&250 &57698\
& $6-8$ & $b>0^\circ,~l>180^\circ$ (Blue)&243 & 51384\
& & $0^\circ<b<50^\circ$ (Black)&225 &50412\
& & $b>50^\circ$ (Magenta)&268 &58670\
& & Complete sky&372 &87257\
& & $b<0^\circ$ (Red)& 75&17879\
& & $b>0^\circ,~l<180^\circ$ (Green)& 150&35068\
$2.75-3.05$ ($\bar{z}=2.9$)& $8-10$ &$b>0^\circ,~l>180^\circ$ (Blue) &147 &34310\
& & $0^\circ<b<50^\circ$ (Black)&112 &25351\
& & $b>50^\circ$ (Magenta)& 185& 44027\
& & Complete sky&432 &97826\
& & $b<0^\circ$ (Red)&111 & 25645\
& & $b>0^\circ,~l<180^\circ$ (Green)&174 & 37713\
& $>10$ &$b>0^\circ,~l>180^\circ$ (Blue)&147 &34468\
& & $0^\circ<b<50^\circ$ (Black)&164 & 39660\
& & $b>50^\circ$ (Magenta)&157 &32521\
Error estimation
----------------
In this paper, as we have mentioned earlier, we compare the statistical properties of the observed data in different direction of the sky without comparing with any theoretical model. To obtain the uncertainties/errors in the estimated PDF of the transmitted flux, we need to generate the covariance matrix associated with the flux PDF. Here too, we follow similar procedure as adopted in the BOSS analysis, in order to obtain the covariance matrix. We follow bootstrap resampling of the data in each bin. We have a total of 36 bins in both type of patch selection: 3 SNR bins, 3 redshift bins and 4 bins corresponding to each of the 3 patches and a complete sample. In each bin, we gather all the pixels that pass through our data cut and provided in Table \[tab:patch-info\]. We perform bootstrap resampling of chunks upto $100\mathring{A}$ wavelengths obtained from each quasar spectrum and generate 1000 realizations of the data. From these samples covariance matrix of the flux PDF can be easily calculated. Using different realizations we did check the convergence of the diagonal terms of the covariance matrix and we could conclude that the choice of 1000 realizations has been conservative.
We concentrate on the statistical properties of the PDF or the data. Hence we calculate different statistical moments such as mean, median, variance, skewness and kurtosis of the PDF. We report the moments of the distribution that we obtain from the original data as well as the upper and lower error bounds on each of the moments that we calculate from the bootstrap simulations. For distribution of each moment, we generate the empirical cumulative distribution function (ECDF) and report the (34.15%) upper and lower error bounds, which we hereafter shall refer as 1$\sigma$ uncertainties in the distribution of the particular moment.
Before discussing the isotropy test on patches in next section, in Table \[tab:flux\] we report the mean transmitted flux and 1$\sigma$ uncertainties of the flux PDF that we obtain from the complete sample in the three redshifts and in three SNR bins. The number of quasars and the number of pixels that are used in our analysis are provided in Table \[tab:patch-info\] for the complete sample size. Note that as we go back in time (higher in redshift) the increase of neutral hydrogen is evident from the decrease of the transmitted flux in all SNR. In each SNR, the error on the flux are comparable and that indicates, though at high SNR the signal is better, the less number of quasars in high SNR keeps the uncertainties comparable to the uncertainties at lower SNR which contain larger number of quasars (for example, compare the [*good*]{} and the [*best*]{} SNR cases).
-15 pt
[c | c | c]{} Redshift range($z$) & SNR & $\bar{F}\pm\Delta F$\
& $6-8$&$0.826^{+0.154}_{-0.375}$\
$2.15-2.45$ ($\bar{z}=2.3$)&$8-10$&$0.822^{+0.138}_{-0.405}$\
& $>10$&$0.819^{+0.129}_{-0.487}$\
& $6-8$&$0.762^{+0.172}_{-0.39}$\
$2.45-2.75$ ($\bar{z}=2.6$)&$8-10$&$0.758^{+0.159}_{-0.427}$\
& $>10$&$0.756^{+0.152}_{-0.454}$\
& $6-8$&$0.69^{+0.191}_{-0.377}$\
$2.75-3.05$ ($\bar{z}=2.9$)&$8-10$&$0.687^{+0.181}_{-0.396}$\
& $>10$&$0.686^{+0.176}_{-0.413}$\
Analysis, results and discussions
=================================
\[sec:results\]
In the previous section we mentioned that we trisect the survey area in two ways. One patch, that is in southern galactic hemisphere remains common to both the selection. For the 5 patches, that are color coded (red, green, blue, magenta and black) we obtain the PDF of transmitted flux. However, we compare the statistical properties of the PDF within each selection type.
To start with, we provide the flux PDF with the errors in Fig. \[fig:comparison-PDF1\] for patch selection 1 (corresponding to the selection in the left of Fig. \[fig:skycut\]) and in Fig. \[fig:comparison-PDF2\] for patch selection 2 (the right selection in the Fig. \[fig:skycut\]). The colors of the PDF’s correspond to different patches (as shown in the Fig. \[fig:skycut\]). The PDF’s are calculated in the flux range \[-0.2-1.5\] in 34 bins. Theoretically the transmitted flux should be within 0 and 1 (for the complete and no absorption respectively) but due to the noise in observations and the bias in the continuum estimations, the transmitted flux might be obtained outside the theoretical boundary. The PDF’s are normalized such that the total area under each PDF is 1. In both the figures, we provide the PDF for different redshifts and different SNR. As we mentioned in the previous section, due to less number of quasars in the higher SNR bins, the errors on the flux PDFs are comparable to that of the lower SNR bins. In the plots of the PDF, the difference between the PDF’s in [*good, better*]{} and [*best*]{} SNR bins are evident. For the higher SNR bins the flux PDF are more sharp around the peak. It is interesting to note that at the same SNR and at the same redshift, the PDF of transmitted flux from different patches are very similar. In some of the bins we find the flux from one patch is different from other ones. To quantify the difference, we next look for the different moments of the PDFs.
In this paper, we restrict ourselves to calculating up-to the fourth moment, [*i.e.*]{} till kurtosis of the PDF. We calculate the mean ($\bar{F}$), the median ($F_{1/2}$), the variance ($\sigma^2$), the skewness ($s$) and the kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the flux PDFs in each bin. Since we have noticed in Fig. \[fig:comparison-PDF1\] and \[fig:comparison-PDF2\] that the PDFs are very different in different redshifts, we report the residual of such quantities obtained in a patch [*w.r.t.*]{} the complete sample. In Fig. \[fig:comparison-1\] we plot the 5 statistical quantities in residual space for the patch selection 1 and in Fig. \[fig:comparison-2\] we plot the same quantities for patch selection 2. As we are plotting in residual space, we find the moments are distributed about the zero. We should mention that here the errors represent the uncertainties of the corresponding statistical moments obtained from the ECDFs of the moments. The plotted errors represent 1$\sigma$ uncertainties.
Note that almost all the statistical moments from different patches are comparable to each other within their associated uncertainties. We would like to stress that we find this consistency throughout redshift $2-3$ and at all SNRs. Hence our results are [*consistent with the isotropic distribution of neutral hydrogen*]{} and also [*consistent with isotropic absorption of photons by the hydrogen clouds in the IGM at different redshifts*]{}.
A closer examination shows that almost none of the patches contain any moment which is systematically higher/lower than the total sample during the time evolution. Hence the properties in each patch is preserved during the matter dominated expansion of the Universe.
We should mention that we have obtained some deviations from isotropy in our analysis. We find the residual moments for the blue patch and the red patch (for patch selection 1) do not agree at 2$\sigma$ level in cases. For example, we refer to the median mismatch (at $z=2.3$, $6\le{\rm SNR}<8$), the variance mismatches (at $z=2.9$, $6\le{\rm SNR}<8$ and at $z=2.6$, ${\rm SNR}\ge10$) and skewness mismatches (at $z=2.9$ at $8\le{\rm SNR}<10$). Similarly, for patch selection 2 we find such deviations at 2$\sigma$ level within the red and the black patches. Since, the number of such deviations are only a few and all the moments agree within 3$\sigma$, we do not report any statistically significant deviation. Moreover, we should note that due to less number of quasars, the red patch at the southern hemisphere contains the largest dispersion in the distribution of the statistical moments which in turn can lead to such fluctuations. Hence, in order to rule out or confirm any deviations between the blue and the red patches (or between black and red patches) we need more detection of Lyman-$\alpha$ forest in the southern galactic hemisphere. Future surveys will be able to provide significantly more quasar spectra with higher sky coverage, which are essential to extend this initiative beyond the flux PDF level.
Conclusions
===========
\[sec:conclusions\] As a first approach to test the isotropy in the matter dominated epoch we have used the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest data in this paper. In order to remain independent from theoretical assumptions of the IGM, we have used only the observational data and compared the statistical properties of the PDF of the observed flux in different directions of the sky. Detection of large number high redshift quasar spectra by BOSS has enabled us to perform this test. Though we report the distribution of neutral hydrogen is consistent with isotropic Universe during $z\sim 2-3$, making any general claim about the isotropy of the Universe requires much more sky coverage. As we have mentioned before, our test of anisotropy is [*partial*]{} due to only 3275 ${\rm deg}^2$ sky coverage. With a larger sky coverage we can address the precise direction and significance of the possible anisotropy, if present. With upcoming observations like e-BOSS [@eboss] and DESI [@desi] we expect to detect higher quality of Lyman-$\alpha$ forest data, significantly higher number of quasar spectra with larger sky coverage. Hence, with the upcoming data the assumption of isotropy can be falsified with higher precision. Cross-correlating the data from different surveys will be also important to rule out any systematic effect.
Any presence of anisotropy in the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest is interesting and it points towards the distribution of neutral hydrogen, temperature-density relation and few other properties in the IGM. A straightforward extension of this topic would be to model the IGM using some semi-analytical modeling or simulations. With the modeling we can address if the significance of such anisotropy being statistical or physical. Moreover, if any physical anisotropy is found, we need to examine the change in the properties of the IGM it refers to and search for the probable cause.
We would like to conclude by mentioning that the major finding of our analysis is [*consistency of the data with the isotropic Universe in the final stage of matter dominated epoch ($z\sim2-3$), and unfortunately we found no preferred direction in the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest to guide the travelers*]{}. Though our result is a partial test, if similar tests on larger survey area also confirms the isotropy, that might hint towards the possibility that any late time anisotropy is probably caused by bulk flow and not an intrinsic anisotropy in the Universe.
Acknowledgments
===============
We would like to thank Tapomoy Guha Sarkar for important discussions, suggestions and comments on the manuscripts. We would also like to thank Amir Aghamousa, Stephen Appleby, Eric Linder, Pat McDonald, Graziano Rossi and Tirthankar Roy Choudhury for their comments and suggestions. We thank Khee-Gan Lee for various clarifications regarding the BOSS analysis of the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest data. D.K.H. wish to acknowledge support from the Korea Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, Gyeongsangbuk-Do and Pohang City for Independent Junior Research Groups at the Asia Pacific Center for Theoretical Physics. A.S. would like to acknowledge the support of the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2013R1A1A2013795). We acknowledge the use of data from SDSS III. 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.
[99]{}
G. Hinshaw, A. J. Banday, C. L. Bennett, K. M. Gorski, A. Kogut, C. H. Lineweaver, G. F. Smoot and E. L. Wright, Astrophys. J. [**464**]{} (1996) L25 \[astro-ph/9601061\]. D. N. Spergel [*et al.*]{} \[WMAP Collaboration\], Astrophys. J. Suppl. [**148**]{} (2003) 175 \[astro-ph/0302209\]. C. J. Copi, D. Huterer, D. J. Schwarz and G. D. Starkman, Adv. Astron. [**2010**]{} (2010) 847541 \[arXiv:1004.5602 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
A. de Oliveira-Costa, M. Tegmark, M. Zaldarriaga and A. Hamilton, Phys. Rev. D [**69**]{} (2004) 063516 \[astro-ph/0307282\]. L. R. Abramo, A. Bernui, I. S. Ferreira, T. Villela and C. A. Wuensche, Phys. Rev. D [**74**]{} (2006) 063506 \[astro-ph/0604346\]. K. Land and J. Magueijo, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**95**]{} (2005) 071301 \[astro-ph/0502237\]. K. Land and J. Magueijo, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**378**]{} (2007) 153 \[astro-ph/0611518\]. A. Rakic and D. J. Schwarz, Phys. Rev. D [**75**]{} (2007) 103002 \[astro-ph/0703266\]. P. K. Samal, R. Saha, P. Jain and J. P. Ralston, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**385**]{} (2008) 1718 \[arXiv:0708.2816 \[astro-ph\]\]. P. K. Samal, R. Saha, P. Jain and J. P. Ralston, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**396**]{} (2009) 511 \[arXiv:0811.1639 \[astro-ph\]\].
H. K. Eriksen, A. J. Banday, K. M. Gorski, F. K. Hansen and P. B. Lilje, Astrophys. J. [**660**]{} (2007) L81 \[astro-ph/0701089\]. J. Hoftuft, H. K. Eriksen, A. J. Banday, K. M. Gorski, F. K. Hansen and P. B. Lilje, Astrophys. J. [**699**]{} (2009) 985 \[arXiv:0903.1229 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. C. Copi, D. Huterer, D. Schwarz and G. Starkman, Phys. Rev. D [**75**]{} (2007) 023507 \[astro-ph/0605135\]. C. J. Copi, D. Huterer, D. J. Schwarz and G. D. Starkman, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**367**]{} (2006) 79 \[astro-ph/0508047\]. D. J. Schwarz, G. D. Starkman, D. Huterer and C. J. Copi, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**93**]{} (2004) 221301 \[astro-ph/0403353\]. T. Souradeep, A. Hajian and S. Basak, New Astron. Rev. [**50**]{} (2006) 889 \[astro-ph/0607577\]. P. A. R. Ade [*et al.*]{} \[Planck Collaboration\], arXiv:1303.5083 \[astro-ph.CO\]. Y. Akrami, Y. Fantaye, A. Shafieloo, H. K. Eriksen, F. K. Hansen, A. J. Banday and K. M. Górski, Astrophys. J. [**784**]{} (2014) L42 \[arXiv:1402.0870 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
R. Fernández-Cobos, P. Vielva, D. Pietrobon, A. Balbi, E. Martínez-González and R. B. Barreiro, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**441**]{} (2014) 2392 \[arXiv:1312.0275 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. R. G. Cai, Y. Z. Ma, B. Tang and Z. L. Tuo, Phys. Rev. D [**87**]{} (2013) 12, 123522 \[arXiv:1303.0961 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
R. C. Keenan, L. Trouille, A. J. Barger, L. L. Cowie and W. -H. Wang, Astrophys. J. Suppl. [**186**]{}, 94 (2010) \[arXiv:0912.3090 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
R. C. Keenan, A. J. Barger, L. L. Cowie, W. -H. Wang, I. Wold and L. Trouille, Astrophys. J. [**754**]{} (2012) 131 \[arXiv:1207.1588 \[astro-ph.CO\]\].
R. C. Keenan, A. J. Barger and L. L. Cowie, Astrophys. J. [**775**]{} (2013) 62 \[arXiv:1304.2884 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. J. R. Whitbourn and T. Shanks, arXiv:1307.4405 \[astro-ph.CO\].
W. J. Frith, G. S. Busswell, R. Fong, N. Metcalfe and T. Shanks, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**345**]{} (2003) 1049 \[astro-ph/0302331\]. G. S. Busswell, T. Shanks, P. J. Outram, W. J. Frith, N. Metcalfe and R. Fong, \[astro-ph/0302330\]. W. J. Frith, P. J. Outram and T. Shanks, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**364**]{} (2005) 593 \[astro-ph/0507215\]. W. J. Frith, T. Shanks and P. J. Outram, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**361**]{} (2005) 701 \[astro-ph/0411204\]. W. J. Frith, P. J. Outram and T. Shanks, \[astro-ph/0408011\]. S. Appleby and A. Shafieloo, JCAP [**1410**]{}, no. 10, 070 (2014) \[arXiv:1405.4595 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. L. Hui and N. Y. Gnedin, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**292**]{}, 27 (1997) \[astro-ph/9612232\]; N. Y. Gnedin and L. Hui, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. [**296**]{}, 44 (1998) \[astro-ph/9706219, astro-ph/9706219\]; P. McDonald, J. Miralda-Escude, M. Rauch, W. L. W. Sargent, T. A. Barlow and R. Cen, Astrophys. J. [**562**]{}, 52 (2001) \[Astrophys. J. [**598**]{}, 712 (2003)\] \[astro-ph/0005553\]. See, [http://www.sdss3.org/]{} See, [https://www.sdss3.org/surveys/boss.php]{}
K. G. Lee, S. Bailey, L. E. Bartsch, W. Carithers, K. S. Dawson, D. Kirkby, B. Lundgren and D. Margala [*et al.*]{}, arXiv:1211.5146 \[astro-ph.CO\]. K. G. Lee, N. Suzuki and D. N. Spergel, Astron. J. [**143**]{}, 51 (2012) \[arXiv:1108.6080 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. K. G. Lee, J. P. Hennawi, D. N. Spergel, D. H. Weinberg, D. W. Hogg, M. Viel, J. S. Bolton and S. Bailey [*et al.*]{}, Astrophys. J. [**799**]{}, no. 2, 196 (2015) \[arXiv:1405.1072 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. N. G. Busca, T. Delubac, J. Rich, S. Bailey, A. Font-Ribera, D. Kirkby, J. M. Le Goff and M. M. Pieri [*et al.*]{}, Astron. Astrophys. [**552**]{}, A96 (2013) \[arXiv:1211.2616 \[astro-ph.CO\]\]. See, [https://www.sdss3.org/future/eboss.php]{} See, [http://desi.lbl.gov]{}
[^1]: The effects of different continuum estimations are discussed in [@Busca:2012bu]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
address: |
Google, Inc., USA\
{yanzhanghe, tsainath}@google.com
bibliography:
- 'main.bib'
title: 'Streaming End-to-End Speech Recognition for Mobile Devices'
---
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Some of the white dwarfs exhibit among the strongest magnetic fields in the universe. Many of these degenerate magnetic stars are also rotating very slowly. Among these objects, Grw+70$^\circ$8247, with its century-long suspected rotation period and its 400MG magnetic field, stands as a particularly interesting object. Surprisingly, for this star, the first white dwarf in which a magnetic field was discovered, no spectropolarimetric observations have been discussed in the literature in the last 40 years. Here we present two sets of linear and circular polarisation spectra taken in 2015 and 2018, and we compare them with spectropolarimetric data obtained in the 1970s. Polarisation shows variability over a time interval of four decades, but some subtle changes may have been detected even over a three year time interval. Using the variation of the polarisation position angle as a proxy for the rotation of the magnetic axis in the plane of the sky, we conclude that the star’s rotation period probably lies in the range of $10^2$ to $10^3$ years. Our data analysis is accompanied by a description of our various calibrations and tests of the ISIS instrument at the William Herschel Telescope that may be of general interest for linear spectropolarimetric measurements. We also found discrepancies in the sign of circular polarisation as reported in the literature, and made explicit the definitions that we have adopted.'
author:
- |
S. Bagnulo$^{1}$ and J.D. Landstreet$^{1,2}$\
$^{1}$Armagh Observatory and Planetarium, College Hill, Armagh BT61 9DG, UK. [E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]]{}\
$^{2}$Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 3K7 [E-mail: [email protected]]{}\
bibliography:
- 'sbabib.bib'
date: 'Accepted 2019 April 11. Received 2019 April 10; in original form 2019 February 17'
title: 'The long term polarimetric variability of the strongly magnetic white dwarf Grw+70$^\circ$8247'
---
\[firstpage\]
polarization – stars: white dwarfs – stars: magnetic fields – stars: individuals: Grw+70$^\circ$8247
Introduction {#Sect_Intro}
============
A small percentage of white dwarfs (WDs) exhibit a magnetic field organised on a large scale over the stellar surface, probably the fossil remnant of a field that originated during an earlier stage of the star’s life. The mean magnitude of such fields ranges over more than five dex of strength, from a few kG to about 1000MG, and can have important physical effects on the host star, for example by transferring angular momentum internally and exchanging it with circumstellar material, and through suppressing atmospheric and envelope convection under many circumstances.
In a larger context, the fields of the magnetic white dwarfs (MWDs) are an example of the occasional occurrence of large static fields in a variety of stars during stellar evolution, including upper main sequence stars, white dwarfs, and neutron stars. The origin of these fields is still essentially completely mysterious. This phenomenon may be capable of providing valuable information on specific evolution paths (for example, of merging binary systems) that at present cannot be exploited because we have not understood some basic stellar processes. In addition, the fields of white dwarfs provide access to a plasma laboratory permeated by fields far too large to be generated statically in terrestrial laboratories.
Up to a field strength of the order of 80 or 100MG, white dwarf fields are detected and studied using the splitting, shifting and polarisation of spectral lines. For higher field strengths, spectral lines are smeared almost out of recognition but the fields may be identified through the broad-band continuum circular and linear polarisation usually observed throughout the optical and ultraviolet wavelength windows [@Feretal15], as well as through (usually very shallow) broad spectral features in the flux spectra.
Beyond identifying magnetic fields in white dwarfs, and estimating the magnitude of the magnetic field, it is of considerable interest to try to understand the distribution of field strength and direction over the stellar surface. This kind of information can help to clarify the interaction of the field with other physical processes in the underlying star, and may provide clues about the still unclear processes that lead to the occurrence of magnetic fields in a small fraction of white dwarfs.
Study of field structure generally requires observing the star repeatedly as it rotates. A number of magnetic white dwarfs exhibit short term variability, with a period that is associated to the star’s rotation period (typically from a few hours to a few days). As in the case of the better studied magnetic chemically peculiar stars of the main sequence (Ap stars), the magnetic variability is explained in terms of a magnetic field not symmetric about the rotation axis, so that the observer sees a magnetic configuration that changes as the star rotates. This oblique rotator model was proposed to explain the polarimetric behaviour of the magnetic Ap stars by @Stibbs50, and since then has been the basic model adopted for any large-scale stellar field that is not currently sustained by dynamo action.
Only about two dozen of the several hundred known MWDs have been clearly identified as having very high magnetic fields, above about 100 MG [e.g. @Feretal15 Fig. 5]. About half of these 100+ MG stars have emerged from the very large lists of new white dwarfs found as by-products of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). The other very high field MWDs were mostly found before the first data release from the SDSS by a variety of means, including surveys of broad-band circular polarisation or discovery of remarkable flux spectra (flux spectra are usually denoted here as Stokes $I$ spectra).
For the SDSS very high field MWDs, in general a single low S/N (typically in the range of 10 to 30), low resolution ($R \sim 2000$) spectrum is available, and the characteristic field strength assigned is usually found by comparing the observed spectrum to spectra from a large grid of precomputed flux spectra of MWDs of a large range of $T_{\rm eff}$ and field strength. The field structure assumed for the grid is a combination of low order multipoles, often dominated by a dipole. The WD atmosphere is assumed to be pure H, and only the spectrum of H is included in the model spectra, with spectral line positions taken from tables of atomic level splitting in very large fields such as those of @Wunetal85. The computation of the grid spectra and comparison with observed $I$ spectra is described in detail by @Jordan92 [@Eucetal02] and @Kueletal09.
This method of modelling provides a first, basic characterisation of typical field strength and a possible, but not unique, and almost certainly highly simplified, magnetic field geometry. It takes no account of the possibility that the field may look rather different as seen from different sides of the MWD as it rotates, and makes no use of information that may be contained in the linear and/or circular polarisation spectra (Stokes components $Q$, $U$, and $V$). The results of such an analysis provide information about the general magnitude of the field and possibly of the spread of field strength over the hemisphere visible at the time that the spectrum was taken, but little further information.
For most of the dozen or so earlier discovered, and generally brighter, very high field MWDs, more information is often available. For example, several Stokes $I$ spectra may have been taken, or spectra in non-optical wavelength regions such as the UV may be available, or there may be polarisation spectra (often of circularly polarised light, Stokes $V$, sometimes of the linear polarisation components $Q$ and $U$). For four of the 100+ MG field MWDs the rotation period is known, so data taken during a reasonably short interval could be assigned to distinct lines of sight to the MWD. When rotational phase-resolved data are available, models of the surface magnetic field strength and structure may be considerably better constrained. An excellent example of the quality of modelling that can be achieved when several phase-resolved spectra of both Stokes $I$ and $V$ are available is the analysis of PG1015$+$014 carried out by @Eucetal06 on the basis of modelling tools developed by @Jordan92 and @Eucetal02. Their results clearly show that the field of this star is dominated by regions with local field strength mostly in the range of 70–-80MG, and provide fairly well constrained low resolution maps of the large-scale distribution of flux over the surface.
However, although models have been developed for each of the four highest-field MWDs with known rotation periods, none of these four MWDs have been observed systematically enough to make it possible to try to model a series of phase-resolved flux and polarisation spectra.
Remarkably, for several of the earliest discovered and most intensely studied high-field magnetic white dwarfs, including the prototype, [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} = WD1900+705[^1], it is not even clear whether any real variations have been detected. Since any magnetic configuation not strictly symmetric about the rotation axis of the star should lead to some kind of observable variability as the underlying star rotates, these non-varying stars are suspected of having extremely long rotation periods, of the order of decades or centuries [as is also the case for a few middle main sequence magnetic Ap stars, e.g. @Mathys17]. For the MWDs in the tranche with fields above 100MG, variability may have been detected, but no rotation periods have been established that are longer than 1.4 days.
For these high-field stars, searching for modest levels of variability of polarisation through broad-band filters over time spans of decades is not straightforward. Both filter bandpasses and detector wavelength sensitivity change with time and technology, and observed variations may simply be the caused by a different sampling of the stellar polarised spectrum. The information content of filter polarimetry is also quite limited.
There is little doubt that the most robust method of identifying variability, measuring the rotation period, and obtaining spectral information useful for modelling and mapping the field structure, is to repeatedly obtain polarised spectra through large wavelength windows (say 2000Å or more), using high enough spectral resolution so that measurements taken over time with different instruments can be reliably compared. Perhaps surprisingly, this has so far hardly been done, even though at least two current facility spectropolarimeters, ISIS at the William Herschel Telescope of the ING, and FORS at the ESO VLT, are quite capable of measuring both circular and linear continuum polarisation accurately over large wavelength ranges, and have been capable of doing this for at least two decades. Fortunately, for a few of the brightest, most strongly magnetic and highly polarised white dwarfs, some low resolution archival spectropolarimetry is available for comparison with modern data [@Angetal72; @LanAng74; @LanAng75; @Angetal85; @Schetal96].
In this paper we present new moderate resolution line and continuum spectropolarimetry for [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}, and we compare our data to archival spectropolarimetry. It has not yet been established that [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} is actually variable, and on the basis of apparently constant data available decades ago it has been suggested that this white dwarf may be rotating with a period of order 10$^2$yr or more.
The search for subtle variations in the stellar polarised spectra has prompted us to pay particular attention to the characterisation of the polarimetric module of the instrument(s) employed in our observations, so that if differences between new spectropolarimetry and archival data are found, we can be reasonably sure that they are not due to instrumental artefacts in the old or the new data.
Definitions of the observed polarisation, with a special attention to the sign of circular polarisation {#Sect_Def}
=======================================================================================================
In this paper we will consider the reduced Stokes parameters ${\ensuremath{P_X}}=X/I$ (where $X=Q$, $U$, $V$) and the corresponding null profiles [$N_X$]{}. It will also be useful to describe the linear polarisation in terms of the fraction of linear polarisation ${\ensuremath{P_{\rm L}}}= ({\ensuremath{P_Q}}^2+{\ensuremath{P_U}}^2)^{1/2}$ and its position angle $\Theta$, such that ${\ensuremath{P_Q}}={\ensuremath{P_{\rm L}}}\,\cos(2\Theta)$ and ${\ensuremath{P_U}}={\ensuremath{P_{\rm L}}}\,\sin(2\Theta)$. The Stokes parameters are defined according to @Shurcliff62, and for linear polarisation we haved adopted as a reference direction the great circle passing through the object and the North Celestial Pole. The position angle of the linear polarisation $\Theta$ is measured positive looking at the source, counting counterclockwise from the great circle passing through the object and the North Celestial pole.
The two representations of linear polarisation (${\ensuremath{P_Q}},{\ensuremath{P_U}}$) and (${\ensuremath{P_{\rm L}}},\Theta$) are equivalent, but from the physical and geometrical point of view, $({\ensuremath{P_{\rm L}}},\Theta)$ may be more convenient for a physical understanding of variability and discrepancies. In case of the observations of standard stars, an incorrect alignement of the polarimetric optics is promptly detected by a discrepancy in the position angle of the polarisation. The position angle of polarisation due to the presence of a magnetic field is directly influenced by the transverse components of the magnetic field; for instance, in the Zeeman regime, and neglecting the magneto-optical effects, the direction of the maximum polarisation is parallel to the projected magnetic axis [e.g. @Lanetal93]. For small polarisation values, the position angle is not well defined, and may be dramatically affected even by small amounts of instrumental polarisation or other spurious effects; therefore sometimes the representation (${\ensuremath{P_Q}},{\ensuremath{P_U}}$) will be more convenient. In this paper, to report our observations of unpolarised standard stars, we will adopt the (${\ensuremath{P_Q}},{\ensuremath{P_U}}$) representation; to report our observations of standard stars for linear polarisation we will adopt the (${\ensuremath{P_{\rm L}}},\Theta$) representation. For our primary target, which is a magnetic star but has a polarisation close to zero at certain wavelength ranges, we will describe the linear polarisation both with $({\ensuremath{P_Q}},{\ensuremath{P_U}})$ and with $({\ensuremath{P_{\rm L}}},\Theta)$.
Our main target, [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}, is usually thought of as a star with circular polarisation approximately constant with time (and as such it was often suggested as a standard star for circular polarisation). However, it is found that literature data of circular polarisation measured in similar interval wavelength ranges have sometimes discrepant signs. For instance, @Kemetal70 and @AngLan70b reported a positive sign; @LanAng75 and @Butetal09 a negative value. This sign ambiguity is probably related to the adoption of different definitions of the Stokes parameters, and in particular of the sign of circular polarisation, as discussed for instance by @Clarke74, @Lanetal07 and @Bagetal09.
In this work we adopt the definition given in @LanLan04, @Lanetal07 and @Bagetal09, and consistent with @Shurcliff62, i.e., circular polarisation is [*positive*]{} (or [*right-handed*]{}) when the tip of the electric field vector is seen to rotate [*clockwise*]{} in a fixed plane perpendicular to the propagation of the light, looking at the source. As explained in @BagLan18, we determine the sign of our polarisation measurements by measuring the longitudinal field of well known magnetic stars using the weak-field relationship [e.g. @Bagetal02] $$\frac{V}{I} = -g_{\rm eff} \ 4.67\,10^{-13}\
\lambda^2\ \frac{1}{I} \frac{{\rm d}I}{{\rm d}\lambda} {\ensuremath{\langle B_z \rangle}}\label{Eq_Bz}$$ which tells us that a positive longitudinal field will cause Stokes $V$ to be positive in the blue wing of an absorption line and negative in the red wing. Some magnetic Ap stars that have been found with constant polarity over decades may be used as reference stars; for instance HD94660 and $\gamma$Equ (since the 1970s) are always reported with a negative longitudinal field, and our field measurements of $\gamma$Equ are indeed consistent with a negative sign (see Sect. \[Sect\_CirAli\]). Of course our empirical approach to link the sign of circular polarisation to the sign of the magnetic field just shifts the problem into the original determination of the polarity of the magnetic field of well known magnetic stars, which probably goes back to the extensive work on Ap stars by @Babcock58.
The ambiguity in the sign of circular polarisation does not seem to have affected the sign of the magnetic field reported in the literature. For instance, we note that @Putney95 reports a negative circular polarisation for [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} (see her Fig. 1c), i.e., with the sign opposite to what we measure. However, for the field determinations of MWDs in the Zeeman regime, she adopts Eq. (\[Eq\_Bz\]) with the plus sign in its right hand term, and so other authors do [e.g. @BorLan80]. This suggests that the sign of stellar magnetic fields are probably defined consistently in most if not all literature.
Removing the ambiguity in the sign of circular polarisation is obviously crucial to allow one a proper comparison of the observations of different authors and epochs. Establishing the geometrical significance of the sign of the circular polarisation is also important when the original of circular polarisation is associated to homochirality.
New Observations: instrument settings
=====================================
We carried out our new spectropolarimetric observations with the ISIS instrument of the William Herschel Telescope. The ISIS polarimetric module consists of an achromatic retarder waveplate ($\lambda/2$ for observations of linear polarisation, or $\lambda/4$ for observations of circular polarisation) which can be rotated to a series of fixed positions, followed by a Savart plate that splits the incoming radiation into two beams linearly polarised in directions perpendicular to each other, one along the principal plane of the plate (the parallel beam [$f^\parallel$]{}), and one perpendicular to that plane (the perpendicular beam [$f^\perp$]{}). These beams propagate parallel to each other but separated. A special 18 dekker prevents the superposition of each beam split by the Savart plate with the light coming from the other parts of the observed field of view. The use of a dichroic beam splitter with cut-off centred at 5300Å allows us to observe simultaneously in the blue arm with grating R600B (which we have set at a central wavelength = 4400Å so as to cover the spectral range of 3700–5300Å), and in the red arm with grating R1200R (central wavelength = 6500Å, to cover the spectral range 6100–6900Å). Our observations were obtained with slit width of 1.0, 1.2 and 2.0 for a spectral resolving power $R$ of 2500, 2050 and 1280 in the blue arm, and 8950, 7100 and 4500 in the red arm, respectively. Spectral features of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} are broad enough that observations obtained at the lowest resolution with the 2slit width did not appear more smeared than those obtained at the highest resolution with a 1 slit width.
For [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} we have obtained three observations of circular polarisation, two in August 2015 and one in November 2018, and two observations of linear polarisation, one in August 2015 and one in November 2018. During the November 2018 run (night 21 to 22), we obtained an additional set of observations both in circular and linear polarisation, but the selection of a wrong combination of decker and window readout did not allow us to record the background. Therefore, both datasets obtained on the night of November 21 were discarded.
For our measurements we adopted the use of the beam swapping technique [e.g. @Bagetal09] which minimises the impact of instrumental polarisation. ISIS circular polarisation measurements were obtained using a series of four exposures with the $\lambda/4$ retarder waveplate set at position angles $-45^\circ$, $+45^\circ$, $+45^\circ$, $-45^\circ$, while our linear polarisation measurements were obtained with a series of eight exposures with the $\lambda/2$ waveplate set at position angles $0^\circ$, $22.5^\circ$, $45^\circ$, $67.5^\circ$, $90^\circ$, $112.5^\circ$, $135^\circ$ and $157.5^\circ$.
The redundancy of our observing strategy allows us to measure also the so called null profiles [$N_X$]{}, which give us an experimental estimate of the uncertainties [@Donetal97; @Bagetal09].
The dates and times of the new observations, along with other data to be explained later, are listed in Table \[Table\_Grw\].
Data reduction {#Sect_DR}
==============
Reduction of circular polarisation data is fully explained in @BagLan18 and references therein. Most of the steps used to reduce linear spectropolarimetric data are similar to the procedure for reducing circular polarisation data, but additional steps have to be taken to correct linear polarisation measurements for the chromatism of the retarder waveplate. Also, because sky background may be linearly polarised, its subtraction is particularly crucial. These steps will be described in Sect. \[Sect\_Chroma\] and \[Sect\_BKG\] below.
Correction for the chromatism of the retarder waveplate {#Sect_Chroma}
-------------------------------------------------------
The position angle of the optical axes of the retarder wavelate is wavelength dependent, therefore the measured position angle will be affected by a (wavelength-dependent) offset $\epsilon (\lambda)$, which may be estimated by measuring the polarisation angle of a source for which the polarisation position angle is well known. Following @Bagetal09, the reduced Stokes parameters were obtained from the observed ${\ensuremath{P_Q}}'$ and ${\ensuremath{P_U}}'$ using $$\begin{array}{rcl}
{\ensuremath{P_Q}}(\lambda) &=& \phantom{-}{\ensuremath{P_Q}}'(\lambda)\,\cos(2\epsilon(\lambda)) + {\ensuremath{P_U}}'\sin(2\epsilon(\lambda))\\
{\ensuremath{P_U}}(\lambda) &=& - {\ensuremath{P_Q}}'(\lambda)\,\sin(2\epsilon(\lambda)) + {\ensuremath{P_U}}'\cos(2\epsilon(\lambda))\\
\end{array}$$ To calculate $\epsilon(\lambda)$ we have used observations of asteroid (2) Pallas that was observed by one of us (SB) on 2014-05-12 with ISIS in spectropolarimetric mode.
Background subtraction {#Sect_BKG}
----------------------
Our observations of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} were obtained close to Full Moon. For a $V=13.5$ target, the background level is relatively small, but because it is highly polarised, it may introduce spurious effects if not correctly subtracted (espcially in the case of linear polarisation measurements). In both our linear polarisation measurements of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}, the background level was about 10% of the source level, both in the blue and in the red spectral range. During the 2015 observations, the background polarisation was $\sim 36$% in the blue and $\sim
22$% in the red. In the 2018 observations, the background polarisation was about 51% in the blue and 28% in the red (see Sect. \[Sect\_BKG\_Sky\]).
In ISIS, the background sky may be measured in four 5 strips (two per beam) parallel to the strips illuminated by the target, each separated by 18 from the central beam which is centred on the target [see the bottom panels of Fig. 1 of @BagLan18].
We have experimented with different algorithms for background subtraction among those that are offered by the IRAF procedure [ apall]{}, finding that our final results for the polarisation of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} were always consistent with each other within photon noise error bars. We have also carried out a more critical experiment as follows: instead of extracting the background from both full side strips, we used only a small window of one of the strips (of course still considering both beams split by the Savart plate). The results of this experiment were fully consistent (within error bars) with those obtained by estimating the background flux using both full strips. We are therefore satisfied that the presence of a non-negligible polarised backgrounds does not affect our data, e.g., by introducing a systematic effect, apart from reducing their [$S/N$]{}.
In contrast, our linear polarisation measurements obtained during the rejected night 2018-09-21 could not be background subtracted, and the measured values were totally inconsistent with those obtained on the next night, when background subtraction could be correctly performed.
For circular polarisation, sky subtraction is a less critical step because the sky is not circular polarised. The effect of not subtracting the backround would be a dilution of the polarisation signal by a factor roughly equal to the ratio between the sky flux and the star flux.
From spectropolarimetry to broadband polarimetry {#Sect_BBP}
------------------------------------------------
Most of literature polarimetric data were obtained in broadband filters. For comparison purposes, it may be useful to compute synthetic broadband values using the formula $${\ensuremath{P_X}}(F) = \frac{\int_{0}^{\infty}\mathrm{d}{\lambda}\ {\ensuremath{P_X}}(\lambda)\,
I_X(\lambda)\, T_{\rm F}(\lambda)}{\int_{0}^{\infty}\mathrm{d}\lambda\ I_X(\lambda)\,T_{\rm F}(\lambda)}
\label{Eq_BBP}$$ where $T_{F}$ is the transmission function of the $F$ filter and $I_x$ is the sum of the fluxes in all beams and all images used to obtain the reduced Stokes $X$ parameter. The setting in the blue ISIS arm that we have used for the observations of the magnetic white dwarfs covers the $B$ filter, and the setting in the red ISIS covers the spectral range of the $R$ filter. After integrating the signal over a large wavelength interval, photon noise error becomes totally neglibile, but systematics and other effects are still present. As tentative estimates of the uncertaties of the broadband polarisation (BBP) values we will adopt the values obtained by replacing [$P_X$]{} in Eq. (\[Eq\_BBP\]) with the corresponding null profiles [$N_X$]{}, with the caveat that this method still leads to an underestimate of the errors, as it would not include, for instance, telescope and instrumental polarisation, or errors in matching the original filter transmission function or detector wavelength sensitivity function.
Quality checks {#Sect_QC}
==============
In the following we investigate the instrument accuracy and stability. We examine various potential issues that may affect the accuracy of our measurements: cross-talk from $I$ to $V$ (Sect. \[Sect\_IPcir\]), from $I$ to $Q$ and $U$ (Sect. \[Sect\_IPlin\]), and from $Q$ and $U$ to $V$ (Sect. \[Sect\_Xtalk\]). We present observations of magnetic stars and standard stars for linear polarisation that we have performed to check the correct alignment of the polarimetric optics (Sect.\[Sect\_CirAli\] for circular polarisation measurements and Sect. \[Sect\_LinAli\] for linear polarisation measurements). In Sect. \[Sect\_DIC\] we discuss whether the use of a dichroic introduces a signal of spurious polarisation, as warned by the ISIS user manual. In Sect. \[Sect\_Short\] we discuss the polarimetric efficiency at shorter wavelengths. All results are then summarised in Sect. \[Sect\_Summary\].
Estimate of instrumental circular polarisation in the continuum {#Sect_IPcir}
---------------------------------------------------------------
The large majority of nearby WDs have a spectrum that is intrinsically unpolarised. Our extensive surveys of WDs [see @BagLan18] offer abundant material to determine whether the instruments that we have used introduce a spurious signal of circular polarisation. For ISIS, we have found that the signal of circular polarisation in the continuum is generally $\la 0.03$% in the blue arm and $\la 0.05$% in the red arm.
Observations of unpolarised stars in linear polarisation {#Sect_IPlin}
--------------------------------------------------------
During the course of various observing runs with ISIS in spectropolarimetric mode we have obtained a number of measurements in linear spectropolarimetric mode of unpolarised stars listed in Table \[Table\_ZeroPol\] (in our list we have included star HD98099 that being within 50pc was deemed as probably non significantly polarised, although was never adopted as unpolarised standard star). Some observations have been obtained independently both in the red and in the blue arm (one after the other), and some have been obtained simultaneously in both arms with the use of a dichroic beam splitter. We note that using the highly-sensitive PlanetPol instrument, @Houetal06 estimated that the spurious polarisation introduced by the telescope optical surfaces of the WHT is of the order of $1.5\,10^{-5}$. Assuming that this was still true during our observing run, any measured signal of spurious polarisation would come from the ISIS instrument.
@Houetal06 argued that spurious linear polarisation introduced by the instrument could be characterised with the help of observations obtained with the instrument set at different position angles on sky. For instance, denoting with $P_Q^{(\alpha)}$, $P_U^{(\alpha)}$ the reduced Stokes parameters measured with the instrument position at PA= $\alpha$ on sky, one should measure: $$\label{Eq_Rot}
\begin{array}{rcl}
{\ensuremath{P_Q}}^{(0)} &=&\phantom{-}q + {\ensuremath{P_Q}}^{\rm instr}\\
{\ensuremath{P_Q}}^{(90)} &=& -q + {\ensuremath{P_Q}}^{\rm instr} \\
{\ensuremath{P_U}}^{(0)} &=&\phantom{-}u + {\ensuremath{P_U}}^{\rm instr} \\
{\ensuremath{P_U}}^{(90)} &=& -u + {\ensuremath{P_U}}^{\rm instr} \\
\end{array}$$ where $q$ and $u$ are the reduced Stokes parameters intrinsic to the source. In general, for an arbitrary PA $ =\alpha_0$, $$\begin{array}{rcl}
{\ensuremath{P_Q}}^{\rm instr} &=& \frac{1}{2}\, \left({\ensuremath{P_Q}}^{(\alpha_0)} + {\ensuremath{P_Q}}^{(\alpha_0+90)}\right)\\
{\ensuremath{P_U}}^{\rm instr} &=& \frac{1}{2}\, \left({\ensuremath{P_U}}^{(\alpha_0)} + {\ensuremath{P_U}}^{(\alpha_0+90)}\right) \, . \\
\label{Eq_Instr}
\end{array}$$ Our measurements are summarised in Table \[Table\_ZeroPol\] and in Fig. \[Fig\_Zero\], and show clearly that instrumental polarisation seems consistently well within 0.1% in both Stokes parameters $Q$ and $U$, with the exception of one observations of HD98161. Star HD144287 was observed twice with the instrument position angle rotated by 90. Instrumental polarisation measured via Eq. (\[Eq\_Instr\]) was found $\la 0.05$% at all wavelengths.
Star HD144287 was observed first with the dichroic, then independently without dichroic in the two arms. A comparison between the results shown no evidence that the use of dichroic leads to a spurious signal of linear polarisation in stars that are intrinsically unpolarised. We will come back to this point in Sect. \[Sect\_DIC\].
Crosstalk from linear to circular polarisation {#Sect_Xtalk}
----------------------------------------------
The optics that precede the retarder waveplate may transform linear into circular polarisation or viceversa. Observations of circular polarisation of a source that is strongly linearly polarised may be affected by cross-talk from linear to circular polarisation and may give a non null measurement even if the source is not intrinsically circularly polarised. This is a well known instrumental effect present for instance in the FORS instrument of the ESO VLT, in which it is believed that the instrument collimator (located [*above*]{} the polarimetric optics) transforms a few per cent of the linear polarisation into circular polarisation [see Sect. 7.4 of @Bagetal09]. To check whether ISIS at the WHT (which has no dichroic optics above the wave plates) suffers from this problem, we have observed HD25443, a standard star for linear polarisation, in linear and in circular polarisation, both in the red and in the blue arm simultanesouly, with the dichroic. We measured $\sim 5$% of linear polarisation (consistently with previous literature), 0.02% of circular polarisation in the blue and less than 0.05% in the red. Hence cross-talk from linear to circular polarisation is smaller than 1%. Because the typical linear polarisation of strongly magnetic white dwarfs is only a few percent, this crosstalk is an unimportant contributor to the error budget of $V/I$ measurements.
Alignment of the optics for circular polarisation: observations of magnetic stars {#Sect_CirAli}
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The correct alignment of the polarimetric optics used to measure circular polarisation was checked by measuring stars with known magnetic fields. For the ISIS observations obtained in our 2015 run, this check is described by @BagLan18. In our September 2018 run (on 2018-09-21 at 20:11 UT) we observed the magnetic Ap star $\gamma$Equ (=HD201610) and measured a mean longitudinal field of $-970\pm30$G in the blue arm and $-974\pm26$G in the red arm. These values are perfectly internally consistent, and are consistent with what is expected for that long period ($P \ga 100$y) magnetic variable [see Sect. 5.1.3 and Table A.1 of @BagLan18].
Alignment of the optics for linear polarisation {#Sect_LinAli}
-----------------------------------------------
Since we aim to detect subtle variations of the polarimetric properties of the target star, we need to pay special attention the correct alignment of the polarimetric optics. This was checked with the help of measurements of standard stars for linear polarisation (Sect. \[Sect\_SSLP\]), of the Moon (Sect. \[Sect\_Moon\]), of the twilight sky (Sect. \[Sect\_TWL\]) and of the background sky during our science observations (Sect. \[Sect\_BKG\_Sky\]).
### Observations of standard stars for linear polarisation {#Sect_SSLP}
The most obvious check to do is to observe standard stars for linear polarisation and compare the results with literature data. In order to assess the overal instrument stability we have considered ISIS data obtained in a period of time more extended than the epochs of the science observations presented in this paper. Since literature data report measurements in broadband filters, we have used Eq. (\[Eq\_BBP\]) to integrate the spectra obtained in the blue arm with the $B$ filter response curve, and the spectra in the red arm with the $R$ filter response curve. In Table \[Table\_STD\] we report all our observations of standard stars, even those that we suspect are affected by spurious signals. Our objective is not to establish a list of standard stars but to characterise the instrument and in particular check its stability. Results that are slightly off from expectations are still useful ot help to evaluate what can go wrong during spectopolarimetric observations.
It appears that, apart from the cases flagged in the Table footnotes, the position angle of the polarisation of standard stars is always within 1 of the literature data, and polarisation values differed at most by 0.1%. In the context of this investigation, these discrepancies are not significant, our conclusion is that ISIS observations of standard stars for linear polarisation confirm that the instrumental systematics are at most 0.1-0.2% and $1 -
2^\circ$. When not dominated by photon noise, uncertainties should be generally of that order of magnitude.
### The position angle of the polarisation of the Moon {#Sect_Moon}
The light scattered by the atmosphere-less objects of the solar system is polarised in the direction either parallel or perpendicular to the scattering plane. The angle $\Phi$ between the scattering plane and the great circle passing through the region of the sky pointed by the telescope and the North Celestial Pole can be obtained from the relationship [@Bagetal06] $$\label{Eq_Dir}
\begin{array}{l}
\sin {\ensuremath{\delta_\mathrm{Tel}}}\cos({\ensuremath{\alpha_\mathrm{o}}}- {\ensuremath{\alpha_\mathrm{Tel}}}) = \\
\ \ \ \cos({\ensuremath{\delta_\mathrm{Tel}}}) \tan({\ensuremath{\delta_\mathrm{o}}}) - \sin({\ensuremath{\alpha_\mathrm{o}}}- {\ensuremath{\alpha_\mathrm{Tel}}}) \frac{1}{\tan(\Phi)}\; ,\\
\end{array}$$ where $({\ensuremath{\alpha_\mathrm{o}}}, {\ensuremath{\delta_\mathrm{o}}})$ represent the coordinates of the Sun and $({\ensuremath{\alpha_\mathrm{Tel}}}, {\ensuremath{\delta_\mathrm{Tel}}})$ the coordinates of the observed target, in this case the Moon.
The Moon was observed at the beginning of each night of our observations. On 2015-09-01 and 2018-11-22, the Moon phase-angle (the angle between the Sun, the Moon and the observer, not to be confused with the angle $\Phi$ which identifies the position of the scattering plane in the plane of the sky) was 25 and 20. At these phase-angles, the (small) lunar polarisation is expected to be perpendicular to the scattering plane, and our measurements were found within 1-2 of the expected value $\Phi+90\degr$.
### Position angle of the polarisation of the twilight sky {#Sect_TWL}
Assuming a single scattering mechanism, the light scattered by the sky should be polarised in the direction perpendicular to the scattering plane. We verified that the position angle of the polarisation of the twilight sky was consistent with the value of $\Phi+90\degr$, where $\Phi$ is again obtained from Eq. (\[Eq\_Dir\]), in which $({\ensuremath{\alpha_\mathrm{o}}}, {\ensuremath{\delta_\mathrm{o}}})$ are the coordinates of the Sun and $({\ensuremath{\alpha_\mathrm{Tel}}}, {\ensuremath{\delta_\mathrm{Tel}}})$ are the coordinates of the point on the sky pointed by the telescope.
### Position angle of the polarisation of the background sky {#Sect_BKG_Sky}
The polarisation of the background sky of science observations may be accurately measured if exposures are sufficiently long and/or background intensity is sufficiently high, for instance because of the presence of the Moon. One can compare the direction of the polarisation of the background sky and verify that it is perpendicular to the scattering plane. During our science exposures, the background was illumniated (and highly polarised) because of the presence of a nearly full Moon (see Sect. \[Sect\_BKG\]). We found that the direction of the background sky was oriented within a few degree of the value $\Phi+90\degr$ as obtained from Eq. (\[Eq\_Dir\]), where $({\ensuremath{\alpha_\mathrm{o}}}, {\ensuremath{\delta_\mathrm{o}}})$ are the coordinates of the Moon and $({\ensuremath{\alpha_\mathrm{Tel}}}, {\ensuremath{\delta_\mathrm{Tel}}})$ the coordinates of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}.
Does the dichroic produce a spurious polarisation signal? {#Sect_DIC}
---------------------------------------------------------
The ISIS spectrographs has two different camera arms, one optimised for the red and one for the blue. The insertion of a dichroic beam splitter allows one to observe simultaneously with both arms. This is a very valuable instrument feature that doubles the diagnostic capabilities compared to a situation in which the two arms are fed individually in separate exposures. The instrument web pages suggests that light scattered by the back of the dichroic may compromise polarimetric measurements, and that therefore observations in spectropolarimetric mode should not be carried out in both arms simultaneously. In Sect. 4.2.2 of @BagLan18 we found that magnetic field measurements obtained with the dichroic inserted in the optical path do not differ significantly from those obtained when the blue and red arm are fed separately. Table \[Table\_STD\] shows that our observations of linear polarisation obtained with the dichroic are consistent with literature data, suggesting that spurious effects introduced by the dichroic, if present at all, are probably not very significant. Moreover, in 2015, the standard star for linear polarisation HD160529 was observed with the dichroic in the blue and red arms, and also (quasi-simultaneously) in the blue and red arm individually (see Fig. \[Fig\_Dic\] and Table \[Table\_STD\]). A similar observation was carried out on 6 March 2014 on the standard star HD160556 and on the unpolarised star HD144287 (see Table \[Table\_ZeroPol\]). The results of these two experiments do not point to spurious effects introduced by the dichroic. Therefore, even if the possibility that scattered light may affects polarimetric measurements should not be forgotten, we proceed assuming that the measurements obtained with the dichroic are not affected by significant spurious effects.
Polarimetric behaviour at shorter wavelenghts {#Sect_Short}
---------------------------------------------
In Sect. \[Sect\_Change\] we will see that at $\lambda \la
4000$Å, the ISIS circular polarisation spectrum of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} shows remarkable differences compared to previous data obtained in the 1970s. To explore whether the observed changes are due to an instrumental effect (for instance a dramatic change of the retardation or the position angle of the fast axis of ISIS retarder waveplate), we have inspected the polarisation spectrum of the strongly magnetic Ap star HD215441 that we obtained in 2015 [@BagLan18] with the same setting as [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} (see Fig. \[Fig\_Ap\]). Visual inspection shows that the higher order Balmer lines appear polarised in a similar way as H$\gamma$ and H$\beta$ (taking into account the fact that Zeeman effect varies as $\lambda^2$). In a more quantitative way, the longitudinal magnetic field calculated from each individual Balmer line via Eq. (\[Eq\_Bz\]) gives the same result (within error bars). We conclude that, in the observed spectral range, the chromatism of the quarter retarder waveplate is not reponsible for obvious artefacts.
Summary {#Sect_Summary}
-------
To summarise the results of this Section:
- We find negligible zero point polarisation present in observations of both circular and linear polarisation made with ISIS in spectropolarimeteric mode.
- We find negligible crosstalk between Stokes components $Q$, $U$, and $V$ in ISIS data.
- Both the scale and position angle deduced from ISIS linear spectropolarimetry are extremely accurate.
- Our methods for correcting for polarised night sky contaminating spectra of faint objects are robust and reliable.
- We did not find any evidence that the use of a dichroic beam-splitter with cut-off at 5300Å produces a signal of spurious polarisation.
- We did not find evidence for artefacts due to the chromatism of the quarter waveplate.
Observations of Grw+70$^\circ$8247 {#Sect_GR}
==================================
In the late 1960s James Kemp, an experimental physicist at the University of Oregon, realised that thermal emission from an incandescent body in a very strong magnetic field should display broad-band (spectrally diffuse) circular polarisation, at a level of the order of $10^{-2}$% for a field of $10^5$G [@Kemp70b]. He showed experimentally that this idea is qualitatively correct [@Kempetal70]. When he heard from George Preston of the Hale Observatories that efforts were being made to detect large fields in white dwarf stars [@Pres70; @AngLan70a], he adapted his laboratory polarimeter for astronomical observations and started a search for circular polarisation due to magnetic fields in bright WDs on the 24-inch telescope of the University of Oregon’s Pine Mountain Observatory.
At the suggestion of one of us (JDL), Kemp observed [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} and promptly detected strong circular polarisation. Following a telephone call from Kemp, three confirming measurements were obtained by Angel and Landstreet at Kitt Peak National Observatory, using the photoelectric polarimeter described by @AngLan70a. These measurements showed circular polarisation increasing with wavelength from about 1.5% at 380nm to 3.3% at 620nm. These observations represented the first discovery of a magnetic field in a white dwarf [@Kemetal70].
This result triggered a number of further surveys for magnetic fields in WDs, which up to the present have led to the identification of several hundred MWDs [@Feretal15]. [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} still has one of the strongest WD magnetic fields known. It is often considered to be a star with a constant signal of circular polarisation. However, it has not been monitored nearly as frequently as one could have imagined. In the following we will review the polarimetric measurements that are found in the literature (Sect. \[Sect\_GrCir\] and \[Sect\_GrLin\]), before presenting our new data (Sect. \[Sect\_Our\_Observations\]) and comparing them with earlier datasets (Sect. \[Sect\_Change\]).
Observations of circular polarisation in the literature {#Sect_GrCir}
-------------------------------------------------------
In this and in the following Sections we will report the sign of circular polarisation using our definition of Sect. \[Sect\_Def\]. Therefore, some numerical values may appear with the opposite sign with respect to that found in the original papers.
After the discovery by @Kemetal70, @AngLan70b reported a number of measurements of circular polarisation of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} obtained between 20 June and July 7 1970, made using the photolectric polarimeter descibed by @AngLan70a. No on-sky calibration sources were known for circular polarimetry, and the instrument performance was tested using circular polarisers. Observations were obtained without any filter, covering the spectral range 400 to 700nm [see Table 1 and Fig. 1 of @AngLan70b]. The circular polarisation was found to be constant with time over an interval of days.
Circular polarisation was also measured in eight different wavelength windows from 310 to 800nm, using filters with estimated FWHM between 30 and 120nm [see Table 2 and Fig. 2 of @AngLan70b]. These data provided a very low resolution ($R \sim 10$) spectrum of the wavelength dependence of the circular polarisation of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}. The peak circular polarisation was about 3.7%, around 415nm.
@KemSwe70 measured circular polarisation in the infrared, but we will not follow up further on this spectral region.
@Angetal72 reported further polarimetric monitoring of the star, which was observed again during four observing runs in late 1970 and early 1971 in circular polarisation, using a variety of filters. These measurements are compared with the earlier filter polarisation data. They appear to rule out substantial changes on a time scale of months shortward of 600nm. @Angetal72 noted a possibly real variation of circular polarisation at $\lambda = 740$nm, where circular polarisation decreased from about $2.4$% in 1970 to about $1.0$% in 1972, but this could have been due to the different red sensitivity of two different photomultipliers, one with S-20 red response and one with GaAs photocathodes, used in the polarimeter during this period.
The spectrum of circular polarisation was measured in June 1971 with higher spectral resolution (resolution 80Å below about 5500Å, and 160Å above, or resolving power $R \sim 40 - 50$), using the multichannel spectrophotometer (MCSP) on the 200-inch Hale telescope on Mount Palomar, which was converted into a spectropolarimeter with the addition of a Pockels cell waveplate followed by a polariser in front of the entrance aperture [@Angetal72]. Globally this polarisation spectrum is in agreement with the very low-resolution spectrum found with filters, but it has high enough $R$ to begin to reveal spectral features in Stokes $V/I$ associated with weak absorption features in the Stokes $I$.
@LanAng75 reported further observations using the MCSP as a spectropolarimeter. The circular polarisation spectrum observed in August 1972 was compared to a new, very similar $V/I$ spectrum from June 1973. Both were taken with spectral resolution of 80Å in the blue and 160Å in the red. No strongly significant differences among the three MCSP $V/I$ spectra were detected, suggesting that any changes occur on a time of a decade or more.
One more circular polarisation spectrum was taken in 1976 in the spectral window 4–7000Å. This spectrum, which has strongly variable resolution decreasing towards the red, was obtained using a prism spectropolarimeter with a Digicon detector on the Steward Observatory 2.3-m telescope [@Angetal85]. This spectrum was digitised from the published graph for this paper [^2]. Apart from a few differences due to the different resolving power of the Palomar and Steward spectra, all the circular polarisation spectra from the 1970s appear essentially identical. When the large differences in resolving power are taken into account, the polarised spectra are also in general agreement with the results of filter polarimetry. Overall, the available data show no convincing evidence for variability over the period of about six years during the 1970s when the star was actively observed.
@Putney95 published a circularly polarised spectrum of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} (see her Fig. 3), with a 11.1Å spectral resolution, in the spectral range 3900-8900Å. The spectrum was presented as “unpublished data” from Keck, and used for comparison with the spectra of other MWDs. We assume that were obtained around the time of other similar spectra presented in the paper, i.e., late 1994 or early 1995. Also this spectrum was digitised by us for its use in this paper.
WHT archive data revealed that the star was observed a number of times with the ISIS instrument, both in spectroscopic and spectropolarimetric mode. In this paper we consider circular spectropolarimetric observations obtained in 2004-08-05 at UT 21:28, obtained for a total 480s exposure time with grating R600B in the wavelength range 4000 – 5200Å and a 1.12 slit width. Setting is very similar to what we have used in the blue arm, except that, compared to our data, the archive spectrum is offset by about 450Å to the red. A lower $S/N$ ratio spectrum was obtained the next night and appears consistent with the one obtained on August 5, within photon-noise error bars.
[Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} has been used as a standard star for circular BBP by @Butetal09, who report measurements in the [ *UBVRI*]{} filters consistent with previous literature (see their Table 5), e.g. 3.6, 4.0 and 4.1% in the $B$, $V$ and $R$ filters, respectively. We have found in the literature no other published monitoring of circular BBP of this star.
Observations of linear polarisation in the literature {#Sect_GrLin}
-----------------------------------------------------
In addition to a series of circular polarisation measurements (Sect. \[Sect\_GrCir\]), @AngLan70b discovered strong linear polarisation, and measured the relevant Stokes parameters using four different filters in the spectral range between 310 and 700nm. They detected a peak polarisation around 380nm of 3.7% (but no linear polarisation at $\lambda \ga 500$nm), with a position angle in the blue between $16^\circ$ and $24^\circ$. @Angetal72 reported similar values measured in September 1970 and July 1971.
A single MCSP linear polarisation spectrum, observed with resolutions 160 and 360Å (in blue and red respectively) in August 1972, in the range 329 to 1092nm, was reported by @LanAng75; they also reported a private communication from Gehrels suggesting detection of a rotation of the position angle at 560nm.
Another MCSP linear polarisation spectrum, very similar to the one reported by @LanAng75 was obtained on 28 April 1975 by Angel and Landstreet (unpublished). Over most of the spectral window studied, these two Palomar linear polarisation spectra are very similar but perhaps not quite identical.
A single linear polarisation spectrum, very similar to the circular polarisation spectrum from the Steward Observatory team described in the previous section, was obtained in 1976 by @Angetal85. This spectrum (digitsed as for the circular polarisation spectrum from the same paper) shows somewhat more significant changes relative to the two Palomar linear polarisation spectra. Some of these differences are certainly due to the markedly higher resolving power of the Steward spectrum relative to the Palomar spectra in the blue, but other differences, between 5500–6500Å, may possibly be real. Overall, however, these data, together with the BBP observations, do not provide convincing evidence of variability of the linear polarisation during the 1970s.
@West89 obtained a single BBP measurement during 1986 in the $B$ filter: 3.19% with $\Theta=19^\circ.76$.
@FriJor01 searched for variability due to rapid rotation of linear polarisation using a trailing technique at the 2.2m telescope of Calar Alto in the Johnson B filter. They confirmed that the linear polarisation of the star is not variable on a time-scale of minutes.
New intensity and polarisation spectra {#Sect_Our_Observations}
--------------------------------------
Our new data consist of intermediate resolution flux and polarised spectra obtained in 2015 and 2017.
In the MWDs with the largest fields, the spectral features of the intensity spectrum are often shallow, and display low contrast with respect to the continuum, hence they might not be obvious to the eye. In an effort to make these features stand out more clearly without requiring extremely accurate flux calibration of our spectra, we have experimented the use of the quantity $\delta \mathcal{F}_{\rm
N}$. This is defined as the difference between the intensity spectrum as observed ($\mathcal{F}$) and its smoothed version $\mathcal{F}_{\rm s}$, normalised to the smoothed spectrum: $$\delta \mathcal{F}_{\rm N} = \frac{\mathcal{F}- \mathcal{F}_{\rm s}}{\mathcal{F}_{\rm s}}
\label{Eq_Smooflux}$$ where the smoothed intensity spectrum is calculated with a Fourier filter $N$Å wide. Obviously, this quantity is prone to enhance not only stellar features but also spectral features due to the Earth’s atmosphere and spurious instrumental effects (for example coming from the CCD). However, this function is found to be very helpful in identifying various spectral features in the intensity spectrum, therefore we have decided to adopt it.
Figure \[Fig\_WD19\] presents both archival and new polarisation spectra of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}. Table \[Table\_Grw\] gives the observing log and reports the broadband values of our new polarisation spectra calculated via Eq. (\[Eq\_BBP\]).
From top to bottom, the various panels of Fig. \[Fig\_WD19\] show 1) the measured (unpolarised) flux $\mathcal{F}$, not corrected for the instrument transmission function; 2) the difference $\delta
\mathcal{F}_{\rm 300}$ defined by Eq. (\[Eq\_Smooflux\]) (limited to our new WHT data only); 3) the reduced Stokes parameter $V/I$; 4) the reduced Stokes parameter $Q/I$; 5) the reduced Stokes parameter $U/I$; 6) the fractional linear polarisation [$P_{\rm L}$]{}; and 7) the polarisation position angle $\Theta$. Literature data shown in Fig. \[Fig\_WD19\] are those obtained at Mount Palomar in 1972 (circular and linear), 1973 (circular only), and 1975 (linear only), as well as the Steward spectra (linear and circular) from 1976.
The interpretation of the spectrum of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} remained a mystery for more than a decade after the discovery of its magnetic field. The main spectral line features were identified when calculations of the wavelengths of line components of the spectrum of hydrogen in fields of hundreds of MG were successfully made by @Roesetal84. Using these data, @Angetal85 were able to account qualitatively for all the principal absorption features in the optical spectrum as being due to H in a magnetic field ranging in strength between about 160 and 320MG. This interpretation of the observed spectra was confirmed by comparison of the observed Stokes $I$ spectrum with spectrum synthesis calculations of @Jordan92, who however showed that the atomic data were not yet sufficient to make possible modelling of the polarisation spectra.
In the blue ISIS spectrum, the well-known Minkowski band at 4135Å [@GreMat57] stands out spectacularly both in $\delta \mathcal{F}_{\rm N}$ and in Stokes $Q/I$, $U/I$ and $V/I$. Other Minkowski bands at 3650Å and 4466Å are also visible. Additional, somewhat weaker but apparently real absorption features confirmed by corresponding polarisation features are found at about 4300Å, 4480Å, and possibly at 4950Å. Corresponding absorption lines are seen in some of the model Stokes $I$ spectra computed by @Jordan92; because these are quite weak features in the raw Stokes $I$ spectrum, it is not clear if most of them are present in the observed $I$ spectrum of @Angetal85. A very weak feature in the Stokes $I$ spectrum at 6650Å also correponds to weak but quite clear feature in the $\delta \mathcal{F}_{\rm N}$, $V/I$ and $Q/I$ spectra. This feature may correspond to the 3s’0–2p+1 component of H$\alpha$, which is stationary at about 6643Å at a field strength of about 140MG and appears in the syntheses of @Jordan92.
--------------- -------------------- ------------- -------------------- ------------- --------------
[$P_{\rm L}$]{}(%) $\Theta$ () [$P_{\rm L}$]{}(%) $\Theta$ () [$P_V$]{}(%)
FORS B Bessel 5.11 138.1 3.08 31.5 3.22
FORS b\_high 5.14 138.1 2.76 30.7 3.58
ACAM B Bessel 5.13 138.1 2.86 31.0 3.43
--------------- -------------------- ------------- -------------------- ------------- --------------
: \[Tab\_Filters\] Polarisation of standard star HD25443 and of MWD [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} (observed on 2018-09-22) integrated in different $B$ filters as explained in the text.
Broadband polarimetry measurements may not be suitable to detect real variability
=================================================================================
Since this work is primarily devoted to the search for subtle variablity of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} we make a preliminary comment about BBP measurements.
In the blue spectral region, the polarisation of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} changes rapidly with wavelength. Therefore, BBP measurements obtained with slightly different instruments settings may differ one from each other, even if the polarisation intrinsic to the star is constant. This can be easily seen via numerical simulations through Eq. (\[Eq\_BBP\]), using the observed spectra but different filter transmission curves. As an example, Table \[Tab\_Filters\] shows the integrated polarisation calculated using Eq. (\[Eq\_BBP\]) and the transmission functions of three different broadband $B$ filters: an old $B$ Bessel filter used with the FORS instrument of the ESO VLT, the currently used FORS b\_high filter, and the $B$ Bessel filter used with the ACAM instrument of the WHT (filter transmission curves may be found in the respective instrument web pages). For [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}, the results differ by 0.2–0.3%, which may well be larger than uncertainties due to photon noise, and hence easily detected.
This excercise shows that subtle changes observed in BBP measurements may actually be due to small differences of the transmission function of the instrument+telescope, rather than stellar variability. It is important to note that such differences due to different filters would not be detected in the observations of a standard star for linear polarisation. Table \[Tab\_Filters\] shows that, due to its smooth behaviour with wavelength, the differences in the wavelength integrated polarisation of a standard star are of the order of $10^{-4}$, i.e., some 10 times smaller than those calculated for [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}. Even using the same instrument and instrument setup for broad band measurement may not lead to conclusive results because instrument sensitivity may change over the years in a way not detectable through the monitoring of standard stars.
Has the polarised spectrum of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} changed with time? {#Sect_Change}
=======================================================================
Inspection of the data from the 1970s in Fig. \[Fig\_WD19\] confirms the conclusions of the original literature, i.e., that circular polarisation spectra obtained from 1972 to 1976 appear very similar to each other, and that the linear polarisation spectra obtained over the same period of time show at most some small differences in the blue spectral regions. Our new measurements obtained in 2015 and 2018 also seem [*nearly*]{} identical to each other.
Compared to the measurements in the 1970s, our new circular polarisation clearly show significant differences both in the red and at the shortest wavelengths. Linear polarisation shows obvious changes in the blue, and perhaps marginal differences in the red. Since about 40 years have elapsed between the observations of @Angetal72 [@LanAng75; @Angetal85] and our observations, polarisation measurements set a time scale for the changes of the order of decades or more.
In the following we inspect and comment on these differences in more detail.
Intensity spectra
-----------------
ISIS data reveal that $\delta \mathcal{F}_{\rm N}$ is constant within the 3-year interval of time from 2015 to 2018, both in the blue and in the red part of the observed spectrum. Unfortunately, we are not able to perform a meaningful comparison with intensity data obtained in previous decades.
Circular polarisation
---------------------
As noted above, circular polarisation spectra obtained between 1972 and 1976 appear very similar to each other, as do the three circular polarisation spectra obtained by us in 2015 and 2018. However, when comparing datasets obtained 40 years apart, the amplitude of cirular polarisation has changed significantly at $\lambda \la 4000$Å, betwen 4400 and 5000Å and between 6100 and 6700Å. Spectra obtained by @Putney95 and WHT archive data obtained in 2004 show also some differences as discussed below.
### The blue
The most remarkable variation in the circular polarisation spectra of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} is seen at $\lambda \la 4000$Å. Compared to the spectra obtained in the 1970s, circular polarisation is offset by about $-1$%. A careful inspection also shows that while the two datasets obtained in 2015 are fully consistent among themselves (within error bars), the polarisation measured in 2018 is slightly different precisely in those wavelength regions where large differences are detected when we compare data taken 40-45 years apart. This is best seen in Fig. \[Fig\_BlueVis\]. Differences bewteen 2015 and 2018 datasets are tiny (e.g. $\sim-0.2$% at $\lambda\la
4000$Å). They are above the uncertainty due to photon noise, but not large enough to exclude that they are entirely due to some systematics. However, the fact that they appear in the same spectral region where large changes are seen in a 40-years interval of time suggests that the variability detected during a three-year span may well be intrinsic to the source (rather than due to an instrumental effect). Obviously this conclusion should be confirmed by further monitoring.
Differences are prominent also betweeen 4400 and 4600Å, where circular polarisation had a maximum in 1995, then decreased in 2004 and continued to decrease in 2015 and 2018.
Due to the large variations of the polarisation in the Minkowski bands, a comparison between our measurements synthetically integrated in the blue (3.43% in a $B$ Bessel filter) and the $3.61\pm0.11$% value measured in the $B$ filter by @Butetal09 is not meaningful, apart from confirming that the polarisation does not change much within a time-scale of a few years.
### The red
Circular polarisation around 6500Å seems to have increase by about 1.5% from the 1970s (when it was about 3%) to $\sim 4.5$% at the time of our observations. In this spectral region we have not detected any change between 2015 and 2018, but data obtained in 1995 were in between the values measured in the two epochs. At 6800Å, data obtained by @Putney95 show the lowest values among all datasets ($\sim 1$%).
Our BBP measurements in the red (4.0% integrated over a $R$ filter) are consistent with the relatively recent BBP measurement of @Butetal09, who had detected a signal of $4.06\pm0.16$%. In conclusion, we have clearly detected a change of 1.5% over a 40+ years interval, but we have found no evidence of change over a time-scale of the order of three years.
Linear polarisation
-------------------
No large changes of the fraction of linear polarisation are detected either on a short (3-year) or long (40 year) time-scale. However, over a 40–45 year interval of time, the position angle has definitely changed by more than 10 both in the blue and in the red. In the following we look at the various linear polarisation spectra and their differences in more detail.
On the long time scale sampled by the difference between the 1970s data and our recent ISIS spectra (40 years), there definitely are changes. In particular, below 4000Å, the recent level of linear polarisation sampled by $Q/I$ seems to have decreased, while that sampled by $U/I$ is larger. This corresponds to a very significant rotation of the position angle of the linear polarisation away from the value of $\sim 20\degr$ found in the 1970’s to about 33 in recent times.
We note that the measurement by @West89 obtained 1986 suggests also a decrease of linear polarisation compared to the 1970s (3.19% in the $B$ filter, for a position angle of $ 19.1 \pm 0.8$) but as discussed in Sect. \[Sect\_BBP\] these kinds of comparison should be made with caution.
It is notable that although the circular polarisation is quite different from zero throughout the visible spectrum, the non-zero linear polarisation is present essentially below 5500Å, with possible low-level features suggested by the Steward spectrum, but largely absent from the lower resolution MCSP data. The position angle in the red as measured in the 1970s was around 110, with a fair amount of scatter due to the small but not quite vanishing amplitude of $Q$ and $U$ in that region. In the ISIS data, both $Q$ and $U$ are also close to zero, therefore the position angle has a large uncertainty, but is consistent with a 10–30 rotation from the value measured in the 1970s.
We conclude that linear polarisation measurements are certainly variable over a time-scale of decades, mostly in terms of a rotation, while no significant variation has been detected on time scale of three years. A rotation constant in wavelength provides a first rough description of the change in linear polarisation.
Constraints on the rotation period of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}
============================================================
Measurements of the position angle of the broadband linear polarisation of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} in the blue between about 3800 and 4600Å may be used to try to detect evidence of stellar rotation, under the assumption that the polarisation position angle $\Theta$ tracks the position angle of the magnetic axis $\Lambda$.
We assume that the star may be described by an oblique rotator model, with rotation axis tilted at an angle $i$ with respect to the line of sight, and that the magnetic axis, for example a dipole axis, is tilted at an angle $\beta$ with respect to the rotation axis. Formally, the angle $i$ identifies the positive rotation pole, and the angle $\beta$ identifies the positive magnetic pole, and both $i$ and $\beta$ may range from 0 to 180[e.g. @Lanetal98]. For simplicity, we will assume that $i \le 90\degr$ and $\beta \le
90\degr$, a situation to which one can always be brought back to, after reversing the rotation direction, the polarity of the magnetic field, or both [see Sect. 3 of @Lanetal98]. None of these transformations will affect our conclusions below, which depend neither on the direction of the rotation, nor on the sign of the magnetic field.
There are two rather different geometrical situations that we should consider when interpreting time variations in the observed position angle of linear polarisation. One situation is when the tilt angle of the rotation axis $i$ is smaller than the obliquity of the magnetic axis $\beta$, and one when the tilt angle $i$ is larger than the obliquity $\beta$.
\(1) When $i < \beta$, the position angle of the dipolar axis $\Lambda$ will span the range 0 to 360 as the star rotates. This situation is visualised in the left panel of Fig. \[Fig\_ORM\], and may be more easily understood by thinking of a star with the rotation axis parallel to the line of sight ($i=0\degr$) and the magnetic axis perpendicular to the rotation axis ($\beta = 90\degr$). As the star rotates, the magnetic pole completes a 360 tour in the plane of the sky, and the polarisation spans twice the range $0-180$, always rotating in the same direction. Note, however, that the specific example of a rotation axis perpendicular to the line of sight implies that the longitudinal component of the magnetic field should be constant as the star rotates; this is not consistent with the observations of circular polarisation of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}, which show variability with time.
\(2) When $i > \beta$, the projected dipolar axis will not complete a full 360 as the star rotates, but would simply oscillate on the sky, changing direction every half rotation period (see the right panel of Fig. \[Fig\_ORM\]). The amplitude of the wobble of the position angle would be larger, the larger the value of $\beta$.
Because the position angle of linear polarisation may be quite precisely determined, searching for changes in the direction of the position angle is clearly a relatively straight-forward method of detecting stellar rotation, unless the star rotates extremely slowly, or the field axis and the rotation axis are very closely parallel.
As we have detected rotation of the polarisation position angle, which we assume is due to rotation of the underlying star rather than significant evolution of the stellar magnetic field structure, it is of interest to try to obtain constraints on the stellar rotation period from the observations. Of course, we are severely limited by the obvious fact that we have not yet observed one full rotation, and so we do not yet know whether the geometry of the rotation axis and field obliquity is closer to case (1) or (2).
If the situation is close to case (1), with $i \le \beta$, then a single rotation produces two full circles of the position angle on the sky. In this case we might have observed 10–15$^\circ$ of a full 360$^\circ$ rotation in about 40 years, suggesting a rotation period of the order of one millenium.[^3]
If [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} is closer to case (2), the minimum possible period would correspond to our two main epochs of observation corresponding roughly to the two extremes of position angle oscillation. In this case another 40 or 50 years might bring the position angle back to about 20$^\circ$. If this is the situation, the rotation period might be as short as a century.
In this discussion, we have made the implicit assumption that the polarisation position angle has monotonically changed during the last 40 years. In fact, we are not aware of linear polarisation measurements that can validate this. Also, we note that our period limit estimates are based on the assumption that ${\rm d} \Lambda / {\rm d}t$ is constant with time. This clearly cannot be true, around the epoch of inversion of the direction of changes of $\Lambda$, in scenario no. 2. Also, the effect of Faraday rotation may change as the star rotates, affecting also the assumption that ${\rm d} \Lambda / {\rm d}t$ is constant with time. However, our simple modelling should be sufficient for an order-of-magnitude estimate of the rotation period, which is all we can extract from the very limited available data. We conclude that the rotation period lies probably in the range of 10$^2$ to 10$^3$ yr.
Our period estimate may seem outrageously long, but there are main sequence stars known to have rotation periods near the lower limit, for example the star HD201601 = $\gamma$Equ, with a period estimated to be about one century [@Leroetal94; @Bychetal16]. It is clear that physical processes exist that are capable of removing virtually all of a star’s angular momentum, and that one of the most powerful of these processes acts through the stellar magnetic field.
Conclusions
===========
We have presented new polarisation spectra of the white dwarf [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}, one of the most strongly magnetic of the known MWDs, and searched for variability.
To carry out our investigation, we had to perform a careful analsysis of various polarimetric measurements obtained with the ISIS instruments in the last few years. We found some important results that help to characterise the instrument, and that may be useful to other users interested in the polarimetric capabilities at the WHT. In particular we found that:
- Both linear and circular instrumental polarisation are smaller (in absolute value) than 0.05%.
- Cross-talk from linear to circular polarisation is negligible for most practical situations. Our estimate is that less than 1% of the linear polarisation signal is transformed into circular polarisation.
- We found no evidence that the use of a dichroic beam splitter introduces a spurious linear polarisation signal, confirming what was already found for circular polarisation by @BagLan18.
- We have presented a list of ISIS observations of standard stars for linear polarisation to which we may refer in the future to monitor instrument stability,
- We have used lunar spectra, twilight spectra and background spectra to confirm the alignment of the polarimetric optics. This method may be adopted more systematically as it is probably faster and more accurate than observing standard stars.
- We have found inconsistencies between the way the circular polarisation of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} has been reported over the years; we have discussed the definition of the sign of circular polarisation, and clarified what we have adopted.
Regarding the scientific investigation of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}:
- We have shown that spectropolarimetry in all four Stokes parameters (as opposed to broad band polarization measurement) is the method of choice for the study of strongly magnetic white dwarfs for two reasons. One is that only spectropolarimetry may reveal the shape of the Stokes profiles of the spectral features; the other is that it allows to discriminate between changes of the instrument sensitivity and changes of the polarisation intrinsic to the source.
- We have clearly established the variability of the polarisation spectra of the MWD [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}. We have argued that the observed rotation of the position angle of linear polarisation suggests that the rotation period is probably in the range of 10$^2$ to 10$^3$yr. This result would imply that [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} is one of the most slowly rotating stars known.
At this early stage in re-starting systematic observations of the highest-field MWDs, we hope that we have re-launched the systematic observation of these mysterious and potentially very important objects, which contain the largest fields in the universe that are easily observable directly in optical light. One of the long-term goals of this work is to obtain the observations needed to determine the rotation period of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{}, and to map the surface field structure, a task that we are obliged to leave to future generations of astronomers.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
This work is based on observations collected at the William Herschel Telescope, operated on the island of La Palma by the Isaac Newton Group, programmes P17 during semester 15B, and programme P15 during semested 18B. Important ISIS calibration data were obtained in the context of programme P5 during semester 14A, programme P30 during semester 14B, P28 during semester 15A. This paper has also made use of data obtained from the Isaac Newton Group Archive which is maintained as part of the CASU Astronomical Data Centre at the Institute of Astronomy, Cambridge. JDL acknowledges the financial support of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), funding reference number 6377-2016. We thank Ian Skillen (ING) for calculating the instrument position angle on sky when the instrument and telescope were in the parking position, Tom Marsh for 2004 WHT data of [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} and Stefan Jordan for his useful review of this manuscript.
\[lastpage\]
[^1]: In addition to being the first magnetic white dwarf discovered, and the first high-field MWD, [Grw+70$^\circ$8247]{} (which was identified and catalogued in the Greenwich Observatory zone of the Astrographic Catalogue) was only the fifth white dwarf ever identified [@Kuip35].
[^2]: Using software available at https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer/
[^3]: It was this argument, applied in the 1970s to an upper limit of perhaps $4^\circ$ of position angle rotation in two years of observation, that led to the suggestion of a period of the order of 100yr or longer [@LanAng75], which has frequently been repeated in the literature.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Graph signals offer a very generic and natural representation for data that lives on networks or irregular structures. The actual data structure is however often unknown a priori but can sometimes be estimated from the knowledge of the application domain. If this is not possible, the data structure has to be inferred from the mere signal observations. This is exactly the problem that we address in this paper, under the assumption that the graph signals can be represented as a sparse linear combination of a few atoms of a structured graph dictionary. The dictionary is constructed on polynomials of the graph Laplacian, which can sparsely represent a general class of graph signals composed of localized patterns on the graph. We formulate a graph learning problem, whose solution provides an ideal fit between the signal observations and the sparse graph signal model. As the problem is non-convex, we propose to solve it by alternating between a signal sparse coding and a graph update step. We provide experimental results that outline the good graph recovery performance of our method, which generally compares favourably to other recent network inference algorithms.'
address: 'Signal Processing Laboratory (LTS4), EPFL, Switzerland '
bibliography:
- 'mybibfile.bib'
title: Graph Learning under Sparsity Priors
---
graph learning, graph signal processing, Laplacian matrix, sparse signal prior, graph dictionary
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
Graphs provide a flexible tool for modelling and manipulating complex data that resides on topologically complicated domains such as transportation networks, social, and computer networks, brain analysis or even digital images. Typically, once a graph is well-defined, classical data analysis and inference tasks can be effectively performed by using tools such as spectral graph theory or generalization of signal processing notions in the graph domain [@Shuman13a]. However, it is often the case that the graph structures are not defined a priori or the intrinsic relationships between different signal observations are not clear or are defined only in a very subtle manner. Since the definition of a meaningful graph plays a crucial role in the analysis and processing of structured data, the inference of the graph itself from the data is a very important problem that has not been well investigated so far.
The definition of the graph has been initially studied in a machine learning framework with simple models such as K-nearest neighbour graphs and other heuristically defined graph kernels [@Ng02], [@Zhou04] or convex combinations of them [@Argyriou]. Richer adaptivity to the data is obtained by relating the graph structure more closely to data properties in order to infer a graph topology. Techniques such as sparse inverse covariance estimations [@Banerjee08], [@Friedman08] rely on Gaussian graphical models to identify partial correlations between random variables and define graph edges. Such techniques have also been extended to very large graphs, by learning highly structured representations [@celik14]. More recent works relax the assumption of a full rank precision matrix by infering the graph topology from a graph signal processing perspective [@Dong_2015], [@Kalofolias16], [@Pavez16], [@PasdeloupGMPR16] under explicit graph signal smoothness assumptions. The above works assume that the data globally evolves smoothly on the underlying structure. However, such a model might not be very precise for many real world datasets, which can feature highly localized behaviors or piecewise smoothness. The recent framework in [@SegarraMMR16] that observes graph signals as white signals filtered with a graph shift operator polynomial, is one of the first network inference works to depart from explicit global smoothness assumptions. A similar idea uses adjacency matrix polynomials to model causation in time-varying signals [@mei2015signal], [@mei2016signal].
In this work, we consider a generic model where the graph signals are represented by (sparse) combinations of overlapping local patterns that reside on the graph. That is, given a set of graph signals, we model these signals as a linear combination of only a few components (i.e., atoms) from a graph structured dictionary that captures localized patterns on the graph. We incorporate the underlying graph structure into the dictionary through the graph Laplacian operator. In order to ensure that the atoms are localized in the graph vertex domain, we further impose the constraint that our dictionary is a concatenation of subdictionaries that are polynomials of the graph Laplacian [@Thanou14]. Based on this generic model, we cast a new graph learning problem that aims at estimating a graph that explains the data observations, which should eventually form a sparse set of localized patterns on the learned graph. We propose an alternating optimization algorithm to address the resulting nonconvex inverse problem, which is based on a sparse coding step obtained with orthogonal matching pursuit (OMP) and a graph learning step performed by applying a projected gradient descent step. We finally provide a few illustrative experiments on synthetic data, and we show that our generic graph signal model leads to better graph recovery performance than state-of-the-art algorithms. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. We describe our graph learning framework in Section 2. We then present our alternating optimization algorithm in Section 3, and evaluate the graph recovery performance in Section 4.
Graph Learning Framework
========================
Sparse signal representation on graphs
--------------------------------------
We first present the graph signal processing framework used in this work. We consider an undirected, weighted graph $G = (V, E, W)$ with a set of $N$ vertices $V$, edges $E$ and a weighted adjacency matrix $W$, with the weight value $W_{ij}=0$ if there is no edge between $i$ and $j$. We define a signal on the graph $G$ as a function $y:V \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, where $y(v)$ denotes the value of a signal on a vertex $v$. One of the most useful graph operators that is widely used in graph signal processing tasks, is the normalized Laplacian operator, defined as $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L} = I - D^{-\frac{1}{2}}WD^{-\frac{1}{2}},\end{aligned}$$ where $I$ is the identity matrix and $D$ is the diagonal degree matrix. This graph operator has a complete set of orthonormal eigenvectors $\chi = \{\chi_0,\chi_1, ..., \chi_{N-1}\}$ with a corresponding set of non-negative eigenvalues. These eigenvectors form a basis for the definition of the graph Fourier transform [@Shuman13a], which provides a spectral representation of graph signals.
Similarly to classical signal processing, one can design an overcomplete dictionary $\mathcal{D}$ for signals on graphs, such that every graph signal $y$ can be represented as a sparse linear combination of dictionary atoms, i.e., $y \approx \mathcal{D} x $, where $x$ is a sparse vector of coefficients. In order to obtain an effective representation of graph signals, the dictionary has to incorporate the structure of the graph. In particular, we consider here a polynomial graph structured dictionary, which has been shown to provide sparse representations of a general class of graph signals that are linear combinations of graph patterns positioned at different vertices of the graph [@Thanou14]. The dictionary $\mathcal{D} = \left[\mathcal{D}_1, \mathcal{D}_2, ..., \mathcal{D}_S\right]$ is defined as a concatenation of $S$ subdictionaries of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{D}_s &= \hat{g}_s (\mathcal{L}) = \sum_{k=0}^K \alpha_{sk} \mathcal{L}^k \\
&= \sum_{k=0}^K \alpha_{sk} (I - D^{-\frac{1}{2}}WD^{-\frac{1}{2}})^k,\end{aligned}$$ where $\hat{g}_s(\cdot)$ is the generating kernel of the subdictionary $\mathcal{D}_s$. In this particular signal model, the graph Laplacian captures the connectivity of the graph, while the polynomial coefficients reflect the distribution of the signal in particular neighbourhoods of the graph. Furthermore, the behaviour of these kernels in graph eigenvalues describes the nature of atom signals in the graph. Namely, a kernel promoting low frequency components will result in smooth atoms on the graph. The polynomial coefficients, together with the graph Laplacian, fully characterize the dictionary. In the rest of this paper, we consider the general class of graph signals that have sparse representation in the dictionary $\mathcal{D}$.
Problem formulation
-------------------
Equipped with the sparse graph signal model defined above, we can now formulate our graph learning problem. In particular, given a set of signal observations $Y = \left[y_1, y_2, ..., y_M\right] \in \mathbb{R}^{N\times M}$, we want to infer a graph $G$, such that the observed signals have a sparse representation in the graph dictionary built on $G$. More formally, the graph learning problem can be cast as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{W, X} ~~~ &||Y - \mathcal{D}X||_F^2 + \beta_W ||W||_1\\
\text{subject to }
\nonumber~~&\mathcal{D} = \left[\mathcal{D}_1, \mathcal{D}_2, ..., \mathcal{D}_S\right],\\
\nonumber~~~ &\mathcal{D}_s = \sum_{k=0}^K \alpha_{sk} \mathcal{L}^k, \forall s\in \{1, ..., S\}\\
\label{opt_prob}~~~ &\mathcal{L} = I - D^{-\frac{1}{2}}WD^{-\frac{1}{2}}\\
\nonumber~~~ &W_{ij} = W_{ji} \geq 0, \forall
i,j, i\neq j\\
\nonumber~~~ &W_{ii} = 0, \forall i \\
\nonumber~~~ &||x_m||_0 \leq T_0, \forall m\in \{1, ..., M\}\end{aligned}$$ where $T_0$ is the sparsity level of the coefficients of each signal, $\beta_W$ is a parameter that controls the graph sparsity i.e., the number of non-zero edges of the graph, through the $L_1$ norm of the graph adjacency matrix $W$, and $x_m$ is the $m^{th}$ column of the matrix $X$. The optimization is performed over the weight matrix $W$ instead of $\mathcal{L}$ that is used explicitly in the dictionary construction, as the constraints defining a valid weight matrix $W$ are much simpler to handle than those defining a valid Laplacian. Namely, a valid $\mathcal{L}$ must be positive semi-definite, while the weight matrix assumes only symmetry and non-negativity of the weights.
Finally, we assume in this work that the dictionary kernels, i.e., the coefficients $\alpha_{sk}$, are known. We can for example model these generating kernels $\hat{g}_s(\cdot)$ as graph heat kernels and compute the polynomial coefficients $\alpha_{sk}$ as a $K$-order Taylor approximation coefficients. Other kernel choices are possible, such as spectral graph wavelets [@Hammond11], where the polynomial coefficients could be inferred from a Chebyshev polynomial approximation, or a priori learned kernels [@Thanou14]. For the sake of simplicity, we also consider the $S$ and $K$ are determined by a priori information about the nature of the target application, or optimized separately.
Graph learning algorithm
========================
Next, we discuss the solution obtained by our graph learning framework. As the optimization problem (\[opt\_prob\]) is non-convex, we solve the problem by alternating between the sparse coding and the weight matrix update steps, which is a widely used techniques for solving ill-posed non-convex problems.
In the first step, we fix the weight matrix $W$ and optimize the objective function with respect to the sparse codes $X$, which leads to the following optimization problem $$\begin{aligned}
\operatorname*{arg\,min}_{X} &||Y - \mathcal{D}X||_F^2\\
\text{subject to } &||x_m||_0 \leq T_0, \forall m\in \{1, ..., M\}.\end{aligned}$$ The $L_0$-“norm" constraint ensures sparsity of the sparse codes. We solve the above problem using orthogonal matching pursuit (OMP) [@Tropp04]. Before updating $X$, we normalize the atoms of the dictionary $\mathcal{D}$ to be of unit norm. This step is essential for the OMP step in order to treat all atoms equally. To recover our initial structure, after computing $X$, we renormalize the atoms of our dictionary and the sparse coding coefficients in such a way that the product $\mathcal{D} X$ remains constant. In the second step, we fix the sparse codes and we update the dictionary, i.e., the graph. Estimating the weight matrix with fixed sparse codes $X$, however, remains non-convex, as the dictionary $\mathcal{D}$ is constructed from a $K$-order polynomials of $\mathcal{L}$, and thus of $W$. The optimization problem becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
\operatorname*{arg\,min}_{W}& ||Y - \mathcal{D}X||_F^2 + \beta_W ||W||_1\\
\text{subject to }
\nonumber~~&\mathcal{D} = \left[\mathcal{D}_1, \mathcal{D}_2, ..., \mathcal{D}_S\right],\\
\nonumber~~~ &\mathcal{D}_s = \sum_{k=0}^K \alpha_{sk} \mathcal{L}^k, \forall s\in \{1, ..., S\}\\
~~~ &\mathcal{L} = I - D^{-\frac{1}{2}}WD^{-\frac{1}{2}}\\
~~~ & W_{ij} = W_{ji} \geq 0, \forall
i,j, i\neq j\\
~~~ & W_{ii} = 0, \forall i.\end{aligned}$$ We propose a solution based on a gradient descent step followed by simple projections into the weight matrix constraints. The gradient of the smooth term of the objective function can be given in a closed form as follows $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber &\nabla_W\|Y -\sum_{s=1}^S\mathcal{D}_s X_s\|_{F}^2 \\
& = \sum_{s=1}^S \sum_{k=1}^K\alpha_{sk}\big(-\sum_{r = 0}^{k-1} 2 A_{k,r}^T + \mathbf{1}_{N\times N}(B_{k}\circ I) \big), \end{aligned}$$ where $A_{k,r} = D^{-1/2}\mathcal{L}^{k-r-1} X_s (Y - \mathcal{D}X)^T \mathcal{L}^r D^{-1/2},$ $B_{k} = \sum_{r=0}^{k-1}D^{-1/2}WA_{k,r}D^{-1/2} + A_{k,r} W D^{-1},$ $\mathbf{1}_{N\times N}$ is a matrix of ones, $I$ is an $N\times N$ identity matrix, and $\circ$ denotes the pairwise (Hadamard) product. This result is obtained by using properties of the trace operator and applying the chain rule for the gradient. However, we omit the detailed derivation of the gradient due to space constraints. To approximate the gradient of the non-differentiable $\beta_W ||W||_1$ term, we use $\beta_W \mbox{sign}(W)$. This operation ends up shrinking all positive elements by $\beta_W$ in every step, while not changing the zero ones. To avoid complex projections, we use a symmetric gradient with a zero-diagonal. By doing so, we are optimizing over only $N(N-1)/2$ variables, instead of $N^2$. Note that the projections are quite simple, i.e., $$\begin{aligned}
\underset{\tilde{W_{ij}}\geq 0}{\text{argmin} }||\tilde{W_{ij}} - W_{ij}||_F^2 =
\begin{cases}
0,& \text{if } W_{ij}\leq 0\\
W_{ij}, & \text{otherwise,}
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ and even promote sparsity. The way that we approximate the gradient of the $\beta_W ||W||_1$ term, together with the projection to the positive space, bears strong similarity to using the proximal operator for the $L_1$ norm, with the only difference being in the fact that we project to the positive space after performing the gradient descent. It is important to note that since we are alternating between the sparse coding and the graph update step, there is no theoretical guarantee for convergence to a local optimum. However, the method has shown promising results in all conducted tests, as we will see in the next section.
![Generating kernels for a polynomial dictionary[]{data-label="fig:kernels"}](kernels)
Simulation results
==================
[0.22]{} ![An example of atoms generated from two different polynomial kernels and centered at the same vertex.[]{data-label="fig:atoms"}](atom_k15_v50_1 "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.22]{} ![An example of atoms generated from two different polynomial kernels and centered at the same vertex.[]{data-label="fig:atoms"}](atom_k15_v50_2 "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
We have tested the performance of our algorithms on synthetic data that follow our signal model. We carry our experiments on sparse Erdős-Rényi model (ER) [@Erdos60] graphs with $N=20, 50$ and 100 vertices, and on an radial basis function (RBF) random graph. In the case of the RBF graph, we generate the coordinates of the vertices uniformly at random in the unit square, and we set the edge weights based on a thresholded Gaussian kernel function: $$\begin{aligned}
W(i,j)=\begin{cases}
e^{-\frac{[\text{dist}(i,j)]^2}{2\sigma^2}}, & \text{if}\ dist(i,j)\leq \kappa \\
0, & \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ All graph topologies are designed to have approximately $3N$ edges, and we generate 100 random instances of the graph. For numerical reasons, every graph is stripped of its isolated vertices, but full graph connectedness is not necessarily insured. For each instance of the graph, we then construct a parametric dictionary as a concatenation of $S = 2$ subdictionaries designed as polynomials of degree $K = 15$. The generating kernels for each subdictionary are defined by the Taylor approximation of two heat kernels, one of which is shifted in the spectral domain to cover high graph frequencies, allowing for a more general class of signals. More precisely, we define $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{g}_1(\lambda) \approx e^{-2 \lambda}, \quad \hat{g}_2(\lambda) \approx 1 - e^{- \lambda},\end{aligned}$$ where we use $\approx$ because of the fact that each exponential function is approximated by a 15-order polynomial. The obtained kernels are illustrated in Fig. \[fig:kernels\]. An example of corresponding atoms for a graph with a thresholded Gaussian kernel can be seen on Fig. \[fig:atoms\].
Then, we generate a set of 200 training graph signals using randomly generated sparse coding coefficients from a normal distribution. These sparse codes represent each signal as a linear combination of $T_0 = 4$ atoms from the dictionary. We use these training signals and the known polynomial coefficients to learn a graph with our proposed graph learning algorithm. The weight matrix is initialized as a random symmetric matrix with values between 0 and 1, and a zero diagonal. The parameter $\beta_W$ and the gradient descent step size are determined with grid search.
We threshold the small entries of the learned matrix in order to recover a strongly sparse graph structure. Determining a good threshold value proves to be crucial in obtaining a relevant graph. As a rule of thumb in these synthetic settings, we threshold our results in such a way that the number of learned edges approximately equals to the number of the edges of the groundtruth graph. In more general settings, where the groundtruth graph is not known, we discard the entries of the matrix that are smaller than a predefined threshold of $10^{-4}$.
mean value/graph size **20** **50** **100**
---------------------------- -------- -------- ---------
**edges precision** 0.9985 0.9948 0.9818
**edges recall** 0.9983 0.9946 0.9810
**sparse codes precision** 0.7708 0.9317 0.9244
**sparse codes recall** 0.8001 0.9464 0.9316
: Mean accuracies for different graph sizes
\[tab:tests\]
Table \[tab:tests\] shows the mean precision and recall in recovering the graph edges and also the sparse codes, per graph size, averaged over 100 different graph instances. As expected, the edge recovery accuracy drops slightly with the size of the graph, due to the fact that the number of training signals has not been changed proportionally to the graph size. On the other hand, the recovery performance of sparse codes is much higher in graphs of sizes 50 and 100 than in smaller graphs. We note that this is probably due to the fact that all tests are performed on training signals constructed from equal number of atoms. For that reason, the overlapping of atoms is much higher in small graphs, making the recovery of sparse codes a more challenging task.
Moreover, we have tested the influence of both the sparsity level and the size of the training set on an ER graph with 100 vertices. Fig. \[fig:sparsity\_nsig\] displays the F-measure score for the recovered edges and the sparse codes. As expected, we can see that a larger number of training signals leads to better recovery. In addition, signals constructed from a smaller number of atoms are more efficient in graph recovery as the atoms are less likely to overlap. Finally, it is worth noting that we have also run experiments in non-ideal settings where the generating kernels of the training signals are not identical to the kernels used in the optimization algorithm. We have observed that our algorithm is pretty robust to such noise which supports its potential towards practical settings.
![Recovery accuracy depending on sparsity and the number of signals.[]{data-label="fig:sparsity_nsig"}](sparsity_nsig){width="1\linewidth"}
Next, we compare our model with two state-of-the-art graph learning algorithms, i.e., Dong et al. [@Dong_2015] and Segarra et al. [@SegarraMMR16], which have however been designed for smooth graph signal models. In order to have reasonably fair comparisons, we generate piecewise smooth signals, with both generating kernels favouring low frequencies ($\hat{g}_1(\lambda) \approx e^{-2 \lambda}, \hat{g}_2(\lambda) \approx e^{- \lambda}$). We compare these methods on 50 ER graphs of size 20, with a probability of an edge of $p=0.3$, and 50 RBF graphs of size 20, and train them on 500 signals. All hyper-parameters are optimized with a grid search. The average F-measure scores are given in Table \[tab:compare\] and we can see that our method performs better than the other two algorithms. We notice that, when the signals do not necessarily consist of only low-pass kernels, the improvement over these methods is higher as expected.
Type/Method Our Dong [@Dong_2015] Segarra [@SegarraMMR16]
------------- ----- ------------------- -------------------------
ER 1 0.9112 0.9738
RBF 1 0.9379 0.9170
: Edges F-measures for different methods
\[tab:compare\]
Conclusions
===========
In this paper, we have presented a framework for learning graph topologies from signal observations under the assumption that the signals are sparse on a graph-based dictionary. Experimental results confirm the usefulness of the proposed algorithm in recovering a meaningful graph topology and in leading to better data understanding and inference. Even though these results seem promising, more efforts are needed to improve the scalability of learning with the graph size, possibly with help of graph reduction and reconstruction methods.
Supplementary materials
=======================
Complementary MATLAB code can be found on:\
<https://github.com/Hermina/GraphLearningSparsityPriors>
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We derive Hardy type inequalities for a large class of sub-elliptic operators that belong to the class of $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians and find explicit values for the constants involved. Our results generalize previous inequalities obtained for Grushin type operators $$\Delta_{x}+ |x|^{2\alpha}\Delta_{y},\qquad\ (x,y)\in\mathbb{R}^{N_1}\times\mathbb{R}^{N_2},\ \alpha\geq 0,$$ which were proved to be sharp.'
address:
- |
Dipartimento di Matematica, Università di Bologna\
Piazza di Porta San Donato, 5, IT-40126 Bologna - Italy
- |
Felix-Klein-Center for Mathematics, University of Kaiserslautern\
Paul-Ehrlich-Str. 31, D-67663 Kaiserslautern - Germany\
BCAM - Basque Center for Applied Mathematics\
Mazarredo, 14 E-48009 Bilbao, Basque Country - Spain
author:
- 'Alessia E. Kogoj'
- Stefanie Sonner
title: 'Hardy Type Inequalities for $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians'
---
[^1]
Introduction {#sec_intro}
============
Let $\Omega\subset {\mathbb{R}}^N$ be a domain, where $N\geq 3.$ The $N$-dimensional version of the classical Hardy inequality states that there exists a constant $c>0$ such that $$c\int_\Omega\frac{|u(x)|^2}{|x|^2}dx\leq \int_\Omega |\triangledown u(x)|^2dx,$$ for all $u\in H_0^1(\Omega).$ If the origin $\{0\}$ belongs to the set $\Omega,$ the optimal constant is $c=\left(\frac{N-2}{2}\right)^2,$ but not attained in $H_0^1(\Omega).$ Hardy originally proved this inequality in 1920 for the one-dimensional case.
Hardy inequalities are an important tool in the analysis of linear and non-linear PDEs (see, e.g., [@BrVa],[@DAm2],[@VaZu]), and over the years the classical Hardy inequality has been improved and extended in many directions. Our aim is to derive Hardy type inequalities for a class of degenerate elliptic operators extending previous results by D’Ambrosio in [@DAm]. He obtained a family of Hardy type inequalities for the Grushin type operator $$\Delta_{x}+ |x|^{2\alpha}\Delta_{y},\qquad \ (x,y)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_2},$$ where $\alpha$ is a real positive constant. The class of operators we consider contains Grushin type operators and, e.g., operators of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta_{x}+ |x|^{2\alpha}\Delta_{y} + |x|^{2\beta}|y|^{2\gamma} \Delta_{z},
\qquad (x,y,z)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_2}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_3},\end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha,\beta$ and $\gamma$ are real positive constants.
Recently, for Grushin type operators improved Hardy inequalities were obtained in [@SuYa; @YaSuKo], Hardy inequalities involving the control distance in [@Xi] and Hardy inequalities in half spaces with the degeneracy at the boundary in [@Li].
After the seminal paper [@GaLa] by Garofalo and Lanconelli, where the Hardy inequality for the Kohn Laplacian on the Heisenberg group was proved, a large amount of work has been devoted to Hardy type inequalities in sub-elliptic settings. For a wide bibliography regarding this topics we directly refer to the paper [@DAm2] by D’Ambrosio.
The proof of our inequalities is based on an approach introduced by Mitidieri in [@Mi] for the classical Laplacian. Our results coincide for the particular case of Grushin type operators with the inequalities D’Ambrosio obtained in [@DAm], where he proved that the inequalities are sharp. We derive explicit values for the constants in the inequalities, but are currently not able to show its optimality in the general case.
The outline of our paper is as follows: We first introduce the class of operators we consider and formulate several examples. In Section \[sec\_approach\] we explain our approach to derive Hardy type inequalities and give a motivation for the weights appearing in the inequalities. The main results are stated and proved in Section \[sec\_hardy\]. In the appendix we illustrate the relation between the fundamental solution and Hardy inequalities and comment on the difficulties we encounter proving the optimality of the constant in our inequalities.
$\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians {#sec_def}
============================
Here and in the sequel, we use the following notations. We split ${\mathbb{R}}^N$ into $${\mathbb{R}}^N={\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times\cdots\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_k}, \qquad$$ and write $$x=(x^{(1)},\dots,x^{(k)})\in {\mathbb{R}}^N,\qquad x^{(i)}= (x^{(i)}_1,\dots,x^{(i)}_{N_i}),\qquad i=1,\dots,k.$$ The degenerate elliptic operators we consider are of the form $$\Delta_\lambda=\lambda_1^2\Delta_{x^{(1)}}+\cdots +\lambda_k^2\Delta_{x^{(k)}},$$ where the functions $\lambda_i:{\mathbb{R}}^{N}\rightarrow{\mathbb{R}}$ are pairwise different and $\Delta_{x^{(i)}}$ denotes the classical Laplacian in ${\mathbb{R}}^{N_i}.$ We denote by $|x|$ the euclidean norm of $x\in{\mathbb{R}}^m,\ m\in{\mathbb{N}},$ and assume the functions $\lambda_i$ are of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_1(x)&= 1,\\
\lambda_2(x)&=|x^{(1)}|^{\alpha_{21}},\\
\lambda_3(x)&=|x^{(1)}|^{\alpha_{31}}|x^{(2)}|^{\alpha_{32}},\\
&\ \, \vdots \\
\lambda_k(x)&= |x^{(1)}|^{\alpha_{k1}}|x^{(2)}|^{\alpha_{k2}}\cdots|x^{(k-1)}|^{\alpha_{k k-1}},\qquad x\in{\mathbb{R}}^N,\end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha_{ij}\geq 0$ for $i=2,\dots,k, j=1,\dots,i-1.$ Setting $\alpha_{ij}=0$ for $j\geq i$ we can write $$\begin{aligned}
\label{lam}
\lambda_i(x)=\prod_{j=1}^{k}|x^{(j)}|^{\alpha_{ij}}, \qquad i=1,\dots,k.\end{aligned}$$
This implies that there exists a *group of dilations* $(\delta_r)_{r>0},$ $$\begin{aligned}
\delta_r:{\mathbb{R}}^N\rightarrow{\mathbb{R}}^N,\quad \delta_r(x)=\delta_r(x^{(1)},\dots,x^{(k)})=(r^{\sigma_1}x^{(1)},\dots,r^{\sigma_k}x^{(k)}),\end{aligned}$$ where $1=\sigma_1\leq\sigma_i$ such that $\lambda_i$ is $\delta_r$-*homogeneous of degree* $\sigma_i-1$, i.e., $$\begin{aligned}
\label{dilations}\lambda_i(\delta_r(x))=r^{\sigma_i-1}\lambda_i(x),\qquad \forall x\in{\mathbb{R}}^N,\ r>0,\ i=1,\dots,k,\end{aligned}$$ and the operator $\Delta_\lambda$ is $\delta_r$-homogeneous of degree two, i.e., $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta_\lambda (u(\delta_r(x)))=r^2 (\Delta_\lambda u) (\delta_r(x))\qquad \forall u\in C^\infty ({\mathbb{R}}^N).\end{aligned}$$
We denote by $Q$ the [*homogeneous dimension*]{} of ${\mathbb{R}}^N$ with respect to the group of dilations $(\delta_r)_{r>0}$, i.e., $$Q:=\sigma_1N_1+\dots+\sigma_k N_k.$$ $Q$ will play the same role as the dimension $N$ for the classical Laplacian in our Hardy type inequalities.
For functions $\lambda_i$ of the form we find $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_1&= 1,\\
\sigma_2&=1+\sigma_1\alpha_{21},\\
\sigma_3&=1+\sigma_1\alpha_{31}+\sigma_2\alpha_{32}, \\
&\ \vdots \\
\sigma_k&= 1+\sigma_1\alpha_{k1}+ \sigma_2\alpha_{k2} +\cdots+\sigma_{k-1} \alpha_{k k-1}.\end{aligned}$$
If the functions $\lambda_i$ are smooth, i.e., if the exponents $\alpha_{ji}$ are integers, the operator $\Delta_\lambda$ belongs to the general class of operators studied by Hörmander in [@Ho] and it is hypoelliptic (see Remark 1.3, [@KoLa]). The simplest example is the operator $$\partial_{x_1}^2+ |x_1|^{2\alpha}\partial_{x_2}^2,\qquad x=(x_1,x_2)\in{\mathbb{R}}^2,\ \alpha\in{\mathbb{N}},$$ where $\partial_{x_i}=\frac{\partial}{\partial_{x_i}}, \ i=1,2,$ that Grushin studied in [@Gr]. He provided a complete characterization of the hypoellipticity for such operators when lower terms with complex coefficients are added. For real $\alpha > 0$ the operator is commonly called of *Grushin-type*.\
Operators $\Delta_\lambda$ with functions $\lambda_i$ of the form belong to the class of $\Delta_\lambda$*-Laplacians.* Franchi and Lanconelli introduced operators of $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacian type in 1982 and studied their properties in a series of papers. In [@FrLa1] they defined a metric associated to these operators that plays the same role as the euclidian metric for the standard Laplacian. Using this metric in [@FrLa2] and [@FrLa3] they extended the classical De Giorgi theorem and obtained Sobolev type embedding theorems for such operators. Recently, adding the assumption that the operators are homogeneous of degree two, they were named $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians by Kogoj and Lanconelli in [@KoLa], where existence, non-existence and regularity results for solutions of the semilinear $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplace equation were analyzed. The global well-posedness and longtime behavior of solutions of semilinear degenerate parabolic equations involving $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians were studied in [@KoSo], and this result was extended in [@KoSo2], where also hyperbolic problems were considered. We finally remark that the $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians belong to the more general class of $X$*-elliptic operators* introduced in [@LaKo]. For these operators Hardy inequalities of other kind with weights determined by the control distance were proved by Grillo in [@Gri].\
To conclude this section we recall some of the examples in our previous paper [@KoSo].
\[ex1\] Let $\alpha$ be a real positive constant and $k=2$. We consider the Grushin-type operator $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta_\lambda=\Delta_{x^{{(1)}}}+ |x^{{(1)}}|^{2\alpha} \Delta_{x^{(2)}},$$ where $\lambda=(\lambda_1,\lambda_2)$, with $\lambda_1(x)=1$ and $\lambda_2(x) = |x^{{(1)}}|^{\alpha},$ $x\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_2}$. Our group of dilations is $$\begin{aligned}
\delta_r\left(x^{{(1)}},x^{{(2)}}\right)=\left(r x^{{(1)}}, r^{\alpha+1} x^{{(2)}}\right),\end{aligned}$$ and the homogenous dimension with respect to $(\delta_r)_{r>0}$ is $Q=N_1 +N_2(\alpha+1)$.
More generally, for a given multi-index $\alpha=(\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_{k-1})$ with real constants $\alpha_i> 0$, $i=1,\ldots,k-1,$ we consider $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta_\lambda = \Delta_{x^{{(1)}}} + |x^{{(1)}}|^{2\alpha_1} \Delta_{x^{(2)}} +\ldots+ |x^{{(1)}}|^{2\alpha_{k-1}} \Delta_{x^{{(k)}}}.$$ The group of dilations is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\delta_r\left(x^{{(1)}}, \ldots,x^{{(k)}}\right)=\left(r x^{{(1)}},r^{1+\alpha_1}x^{(2)},\ldots, r^{1+\alpha_{k-1}} x^{{(k)}}\right),\end{aligned}$$ and the homogeneous dimension is $Q=N+\alpha_1N_2+\alpha_2N_3+\cdots+\alpha_{k-1}N_k.$
\[ex2\] For a given multi-index $\alpha=(\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_{k-1})$ with real constants $\alpha_i> 0$, $i=1,\ldots,k-1,$ we define $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta_\lambda = \Delta_{x^{{(1)}}} + |x^{{(1)}}|^{2\alpha_1} \Delta_{x^{{(2)}}} + |x^{(2)}|^{2\alpha_2} \Delta_{x^{(3)}} +\ldots+ |x^{(k-1)}|^{2\alpha_{k-1}} \Delta_{x^{{(k)}}}.$$ Then, in our notation $\lambda=\left(\lambda_1,\ldots,\lambda_k\right)$ with $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_1 (x)&= 1,\quad
\lambda_i(x)= |x^{(i-1)}|^{\alpha_{i-1}}, \ i=2,\ldots, k,\quad x\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times\cdots\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_k},\end{aligned}$$ and the group of dilations is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\delta_r\left(x^{{(1)}}, \ldots,x^{{(k)}}\right)=\left(r^{\sigma_1} x^{{(1)}},\ldots, r^{\sigma_k} x^{{(k)}}\right)\end{aligned}$$ with $\sigma_1 =1$ and $\sigma_i =\alpha_{i-1} \sigma_{i-1} +1$ for $i=2,\ldots,k$. In particular, if $\alpha_1=\ldots=\alpha_{k-1} =\alpha$, the dilations become $$\begin{aligned}
\delta_r \left(x^{{(1)}}, \ldots, x^{{(k)}}\right) = \left( r x^{{(1)}}, r^{\alpha+1} x^{(2)},\ldots, r^{\alpha^{k-1}+\ldots+\alpha+1} x^{{(k)}}\right).\end{aligned}$$
\[ex3\] Let $\alpha, \beta$ and $\gamma$ be positive real constants. For the operator $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta_\lambda =\Delta_{x^{{(1)}}} + |x^{{(1)}}|^{2\alpha} \Delta_{x^{{(2)}}} + |x^{{(1)}}|^{2\beta} |x^{{(2)}}|^{2\gamma} \Delta_{x^{(3)}},\end{aligned}$$ where $\lambda= (\lambda_1,\lambda_2,\lambda_3)$ with $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_1 (x)= 1,\quad
\lambda_2 (x)= |x^{(1)}|^{\alpha},\quad
\lambda_3(x) = |x^{(1)}|^{\beta}|x^{(2)}|^{\gamma},\quad x\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_2}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_3},\end{aligned}$$ we find the group of dilations $$\begin{aligned}
\delta_r\left(x^{{(1)}},x^{{(2)}},x^{(3)}\right)=\left ( r x^{{(1)}}, r^{\alpha+1} x^{{(2)}}, r^{\beta + (\alpha +1)\gamma +1} x^{(3)}\right).\end{aligned}$$
How we approach Hardy-type inequalities {#sec_approach}
=======================================
Our Hardy type inequalities are based on the following approach indicated by Mitidieri in [@Mi].
Let $\Omega\subset {\mathbb{R}}^N,$ $N\geq 3,$ be an open subset and $p>1.$ We assume $u\in C_0^1(\Omega),$ and the vector field $h\in C^1(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^N)$ satisfies $\textnormal{div} h>0.$ The divergence theorem implies $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{\Omega}|u(x)|^p \textnormal{div} h(x)\,dx = -p\int_{\Omega} |u(x)|^{p-2}u(x)\triangledown u(x)\cdot h(x)\,dx, \end{aligned}$$ where $\cdot$ denotes the inner product in ${\mathbb{R}}^N.$ Taking the absolute value and using Hölder’s inequality we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{\Omega}|u(x)|^p \textnormal{div} h(x)dx &=-p\int_{\Omega} |u(x)|^{p-2}u(x)\triangledown u(x)\cdot h(x)dx\\
&\leq
p\left( \int_{\Omega} |u(x)|^{p} \textnormal{div} h(x)dx\right)^{\frac{p-1}{p}}
\left( \int_{\Omega} \frac{|h(x)|^p}{ (\textnormal{div} h(x))^{p-1}}|\triangledown u(x)|^{p}dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p}},\end{aligned}$$ and it follows that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{hardy}
\int_{\Omega}|u(x)|^p \textnormal{div} h(x)dx
\leq
p^p \int_{\Omega} \frac{|h(x)|^p}{ (\textnormal{div} h(x))^{p-1}}|\triangledown u(x)|^{p}dx.\end{aligned}$$
If we choose the vector field $$h_\varepsilon(x):=\frac{x}{(|x|^2+\varepsilon)^{\frac{p}{2}}},$$ where $\varepsilon>0,$ then $$\begin{aligned}
\textnormal{div} h_\varepsilon(x) = \frac{N-p\frac{|x|^2}{|x|^2+\varepsilon}}{(|x|^2+\varepsilon)^{\frac{p}{2}}},\qquad |h_\varepsilon(x)|=\frac{|x|}{(|x|^{2}+\varepsilon)^{\frac{p}{2}}}.\end{aligned}$$ Assuming that $N>p$ we have $\textnormal{div} h_\varepsilon>0,$ and from inequality we obtain $$\frac{1}{p^p}\int_\Omega\left(N- p\frac{|x|^2}{|x|^2+\varepsilon}\right)\frac{|u(x)|^p}{(|x|^2+\varepsilon)^{\frac{p}{2}}}\, dx
\leq
\int_{\Omega}\left(N- p\frac{|x|^2}{|x|^2+\varepsilon}\right)^{-(p-1)}\frac{|x|^p}{(|x|^2+\varepsilon)^{\frac{p}{2}}} |\triangledown u(x)|^{p}\, dx.$$ Taking the limit $\varepsilon$ tends to zero, the classical Hardy inequality follows from the dominated convergence theorem,$$\left( \frac{N-p}{p}\right)^p\int_{\Omega}\frac{|u(x)|^p}{|x|^p} \, dx
\leq
\int_{\Omega} |\triangledown u(x)|^{p}\, dx,$$ and by a density argument it is satisfied for all functions $u\in H_0^1(\Omega).$ If the origin $\{0\}$ belongs to the domain $\Omega,$ the constant $\frac{N-p}{p}$ is optimal, but not attained in $H_0^1(\Omega).$\
This approach can be generalized to deduce Hardy type inequalities for degenerate elliptic operators. For the operators $\Delta_\lambda$ with functions $\lambda_i$ of the form and a function $u$ of class $C^1(\Omega)$ we define $$\triangledown_\lambda u:=(\lambda_1\triangledown_{x^{(1)}}u,\dots,\lambda_k\triangledown_{x^{(k)}}u),\qquad
\lambda_i\triangledown_{x^{(i)}}:=(\lambda_i\partial_{x_1^{(i)}},\dots,\lambda_i\partial_{x_{N_i}^{(i)}}),\ i=1,\dots,k.$$ We will obtain a wide family of Hardy type inequalities, that include as particular cases inequalities of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\left(\frac{Q-p}{p}\right)^p\int_\Omega\frac{|u(x)|^{p}}{[[x]]_\lambda^p}dx&\leq
\int_\Omega\psi(x)|\triangledown_\lambda u(x)|^pdx,\label{hardy1}\\
\left(\frac{Q-p}{p}\right)^p\int_\Omega\varphi(x)\frac{|u(x)|^{p}}{[[x]]_\lambda^p}dx&\leq
\int_\Omega|\triangledown_\lambda u(x)|^p dx,\label{hardy2}\end{aligned}$$ where $Q$ is the homogeneous dimension, and $\varphi$ and $\psi$ are suitable weight functions. Moreover, $[[\cdot]]_\lambda$ is a homogeneous norm that replaces the euclidean norm in the classical Hardy inequality.\
We introduce the following notation. For a vector field $h$ of class $C^1(\Omega;{\mathbb{R}}^N)$ we define $$\textnormal{div}_\lambda h :=\sum_{i=1}^k\lambda_i\textnormal{div}_{x^{(i)}} h,\qquad
\textnormal{div}_{x^{(i)}} h :=\sum_{j=1}^{N_i}\partial_{x_j^{(i)}} h.$$ The subsequent lemma follows from the divergence theorem and can be shown similarly as inequality . See also Theorem 3.5 in [@DAm] for the particular case of Grushin-type operators.
\[lem0\] Let $h\in C^1(\Omega;{\mathbb{R}}^N)$ be such that $\textnormal{div}_{\lambda} h\geq0.$ Then, for every $p>1$ and $u\in C_0^1(\Omega)$ such that $\frac{|h|}{(\textnormal{div}_{\lambda} h)^{\frac{p}{p-1}}}|\triangledown_{\lambda}u|\in L^p(\Omega)$ we have $$\int_\Omega |u(x)|^p \textnormal{div}_{\lambda} h(x)\, dx \leq
p^p \int_\Omega \frac{|h(x)|^p}{(\textnormal{div}_{\lambda} h(x))^{p-1}} |\triangledown_{\lambda} u(x)|^p\, dx.$$
We define $$\sigma:=
\left(
\begin{matrix}
I_{1} & 0 & \cdots &0 \\
0 & \lambda_2 I_{2} & & \vdots\\
\vdots&&\ddots&0\\[1.2ex]
0 & \cdots&0& \lambda_k I_{k}
\end{matrix}\right),$$ where $I_{i}$ denotes the identity matrix in ${\mathbb{R}}^{N_i},$ $i=1,\dots,k.$ The divergence theorem implies $$\begin{aligned}
0&=\int_{\partial\Omega}|u|^p h\cdot \sigma \nu\, d\zeta=\int_\Omega \textnormal{div}_{\lambda}(|u|^p h)\,dx
=\int_\Omega p|u|^{p-2}u\triangledown_{\lambda} u \cdot h\, dx+\int_\Omega |u|^p \textnormal{div}_{\lambda}h\, dx,\end{aligned}$$ where $\nu$ denotes the outward unit normal at $\zeta\in\partial \Omega.$ Applying Hölder’s inequality we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\int_\Omega |u|^p \textnormal{div}_{\lambda}h\, dx&=-\int_\Omega p|u|^{p-2}u\triangledown_{\lambda} u \cdot h\, dx\leq
\int_\Omega p|u|^{p-1}|\triangledown_{\lambda} u| |h| \,dx\\
&\leq p\left( \int_\Omega |u|^{p} (\textnormal{div}_{\lambda}h+\epsilon) \, dx\right)^{\frac{p-1}{p}} \left(\int_\Omega \frac{|h|^p}{ (\textnormal{div}_{\lambda}h +\epsilon)^{p-1}} |\triangledown_{\lambda} u|^p \,dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p}},\end{aligned}$$ and consequently, $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\int_\Omega |u|^p \textnormal{div}_{\lambda}h\, dx}{\left( \int_\Omega |u|^{p} (\textnormal{div}_{\lambda}h+\epsilon) \, dx\right)^{\frac{p-1}{p}}}&
\leq p\left(\int_\Omega \frac{|h|^p}{ (\textnormal{div}_{\lambda}h +\epsilon)^{p-1}} |\triangledown_{\lambda} u|^p \,dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}.\end{aligned}$$ The statement of the lemma now follows from the dominated convergence theorem.
To illustrate our approach we first consider Hardy type inequalities of the form , i.e., $$\begin{aligned}
\left(\frac{Q-p}{p}\right)^p\int_\Omega\frac{|u(x)|^{p}}{[[x]]_\lambda^p}\,dx&\leq
\int_\Omega \psi(x)|\triangledown_\lambda u(x)|^p\,dx,\end{aligned}$$ with a certain weight function $\psi$ and homogeneous norm $[[ \cdot ]]_\lambda.$
Motivated by Lemma \[lem0\] we look for a function $h$ satisfying $$\textnormal{div}_\lambda h(x)=\frac{Q-p}{[[x]]_\lambda^p}.$$ If we choose $$h(x)=\frac{1}{[[x]]_\lambda^p}\left(\frac{\sigma_1 x^{(1)}}{\lambda_1(x)},\dots,\frac{\sigma_k x^{(k)}}{\lambda_k(x)} \right),$$ and since $\lambda_i$ does not depend on $x^{(i)}$ we obtain $$\textnormal{div}_\lambda h(x)=\frac{Q}{[[x]]_\lambda^p}-p\frac{1}{[[x]]_\lambda^{p+1}}\sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_ix^{(i)}\cdot \triangledown_{x^{(i)}}(\|x\|_\lambda).$$ Consequently, the homogeneous norm $[[\cdot]]_\lambda$ should fulfill the relation $$\begin{aligned}
\label{p1}
\sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_ix^{(i)}\cdot\triangledown_{x^{(i)}}([[x]]_\lambda)=[[x]]_\lambda.\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, computing the norm of $h$ we obtain $$|h(x)|^2=\frac{1}{[[x]]_\lambda^{2p}}\frac{1}{\prod_{i=1}^k\lambda_i(x)^2}
\left(\prod_{j\neq 1}\lambda_j(x)^2 \sigma_1^2 |x^{(1)}|^2 + \dots + \prod_{j\neq k}\lambda_j(x)^2 \sigma_k^2 |x^{(k)}|^2
\right),$$ which motivates to consider the homogeneous norm $$\begin{aligned}
\label{p2}
[[x]]_\lambda=
\left(\prod_{j\neq 1}\lambda_j(x)^2 \sigma_1^2 |x^{(1)}|^2 + \dots + \prod_{j\neq k}\lambda_j(x)^2 \sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2
\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}}.\end{aligned}$$ The exponent is determined by requiring $[[\cdot]]_\lambda$ to be $\delta_r$-homogeneous of degree one. Since the functions $\lambda_i$ are of the form , the relation is satisfied.
Hardy Inequalities for $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians {#sec_hardy}
==================================================
Our homogeneous norms {#sec_semi}
---------------------
We recall that $
\Delta_\lambda=\lambda_1^2\Delta_{x^{(1)}}+\cdots +\lambda_k^2\Delta_{x^{(k)}}
$ with functions $\lambda_i$ of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda_i(x)=\prod_{j=1}^{k}|x^{(j)}|^{\alpha_{ij}}, \qquad i=1,\dots,k,\end{aligned}$$ which are $\delta_r$-homogeneous of degree $\sigma_i-1$ with respect to a group of dilations $$\delta_r(x)=(r^{\sigma_1}x^{(1)},\dots, r^{\sigma_k}x^{(k)}),\qquad x\in{\mathbb{R}}^N,\ r>0.$$ Using our previous notations follow the relations $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{j=1}^k\alpha_{ij}\sigma_j&=\sigma_i-1,&
\prod_{i=1}^k\lambda_i(x) &=\prod_{j=1}^k|x^{(j)}|^{\sum_{i=1}^k\alpha_{ij}}.\end{aligned}$$
We define the homogenous norm $[[\cdot]]_\lambda$ associated to the $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacian by relation , $$\begin{aligned}
[[x]]_\lambda:=\left(\prod_{i \neq 1}\lambda_i(x)^2\sigma_1^2|x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+ \prod_{i\neq k}\lambda_i(x)^2\sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}},\qquad x\in{\mathbb{R}}^N.\end{aligned}$$
Under our hypotheses $[[\cdot]]_\lambda$ can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
[[x]]_\lambda&=\left(\prod_{j= 1}^k |x^{(j)}|^{\sum_{i\neq 1}2\alpha_{ij}} \sigma_1^2|x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+
\prod_{j= 1}^k |x^{(j)}|^{\sum_{i\neq k}2\alpha_{ij}} \sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}}.\end{aligned}$$
We compute the homogeneous norm $[[\cdot]]_\lambda$ for some of the operators in our previous examples.
- For Grushin-type operators $$\Delta_\lambda=\Delta_x+|x|^{2\alpha}\Delta_y, \qquad
(x,y)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_2},$$ where the constant $\alpha$ is non-negative, the definition leads to the same distance from the origin that D’Ambrosio considered in [@DAm], $$[[(x,y)]]_\lambda=\left(|x|^{2(1+\alpha)}+(1+\alpha)^2 |y|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\alpha)}}.$$
- For operators of the form $$\Delta_\lambda=\Delta_x+|x|^{2\alpha}\Delta_y+|x|^{2\beta}\Delta_z,\qquad (x,y,z)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_2}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_3},$$ with non-negative constants $\alpha$ and $\beta,$ we obtain $$[[(x,y,z)]]_\lambda=\left(|x|^{2(1+\alpha+\beta)}+(1+\alpha)^2|x|^{2\beta} |y|^2
+(1+\beta)^2|x|^{2\alpha} |z|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\alpha+\beta)}}.$$
- For $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians of the form $$\Delta_\lambda=\Delta_x+|x|^{2\alpha}\Delta_y+|x|^{2\beta}|y|^{2\gamma}\Delta_z,\qquad
(x,y,z)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_2}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_3},$$ where the constants $\alpha, \beta$ and $\gamma$ are non-negative, we get $$\begin{aligned}
[[(x,y,z)]]_\lambda
= \left(|y|^{2\gamma}|x|^{2(1+\alpha+\beta)}+(1+\alpha)^2|x|^{2\beta}|y|^{2(1+\gamma)}
+(1+\mu)^2|x|^{2\alpha} |z|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\alpha+\mu)}},\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu=\beta+(1+\alpha)\gamma.$
\[prop\] Our homogeneous norm $[[\cdot]]_\lambda$ satisfies the following properties:
- It is $\delta_r$-homogeneous of degree one, i.e., $$[[\delta_r(x)]]_\lambda=r[[x]]_\lambda.$$
- It fulfills the relation $$\sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_i\left(x^{(i)}\cdot \triangledown_{x^{(i)}}\right)[[x]]_\lambda=[[x]]_\lambda.$$
$(1)$ Let $x\in{\mathbb{R}}^N.$ The homogeneity of the functions $\lambda_i$ implies that $$\begin{aligned}
&\ [[\delta_r(x)]]_\lambda \\
=&\ \left(\prod_{i \neq 1}(\lambda_i(\delta_r(x)))^2\sigma_1^2|r^{\sigma_1}x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+
\prod_{i\neq k}(\lambda_i(\delta_r(x)))^2\sigma_k^2|r^{\sigma_k}x^{(k)}|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}}\\
=&\ \left(\prod_{i \neq 1}r^{2\sigma_1}r^{2(\sigma_i-1)}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_1^2|x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+
\prod_{i\neq k}r^{2\sigma_k}r^{2(\sigma_i-1)}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}}\\
=&\ \left(r^{2+\sum_{i=1}^k2(\sigma_i-1)}\prod_{i \neq 1}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_1^2|x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+ \prod_{i\neq k}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}}
= r[[x]]_\lambda.\end{aligned}$$\
$(2)$ We observe $$\begin{aligned}
&\ x^{(l)}\cdot \triangledown_{x^{(l)}}[[x]]_\lambda\\
=&\ \frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}\left(\prod_{i \neq 1}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_1^2|x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+ \prod_{i\neq k}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}-1}\\
&\ \left( (2\sum_{j\neq1}\alpha_{jl})\prod_{i \neq 1}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_1^2|x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+ (2\sum_{j\neq k}\alpha_{jl}) \prod_{i\neq k}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2+
2\prod_{i \neq l}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_l^2|x^{(l)}|^2 \right),\end{aligned}$$ and using the relation $\sum_{l=1}^k\sigma_l\alpha_{jl}=\sigma_j-1$ it follows that $$\begin{aligned}
&\ \sum_{l=1}^k\sigma_l\left(x^{(l)}\cdot \triangledown_{x^{(l)}}\right)[[x]]_\lambda\\
=&\ \frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}\left(\prod_{i \neq 1}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_1^2|x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+ \prod_{i\neq k}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}-1}\\
&\ 2\left( ((\sum_{j\neq1}\sum_{l=1}^k\sigma_l\alpha_{jl})+\sigma_1)\prod_{i \neq 1}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_1^2|x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+ ((\sum_{j\neq k}\sum_{l=1}^k\sigma_l\alpha_{jl})+\sigma_k) \prod_{i\neq k}(\lambda_i(x))^2\sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2 \right) \\
=&\ [[x]]_\lambda.\end{aligned}$$
Main results
------------
We denote by $\mathring{W}_\lambda^{1,p}(\Omega)$ the closure of $C_0^1(\Omega)$ with respect to the norm $$\|u\|_{\mathring{W}_\lambda^{1,p}(\Omega)}:=\left(\int_\Omega|\triangledown_\lambda u(x)|^p dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p}},$$ and for $\psi\in L^1_{loc}(\Omega)$ such that $\psi>0$ a.e. in $\Omega$ we define the space $\mathring{W}_\lambda^{1,p}(\Omega,\psi)$ as the closure of $C_0^1(\Omega)$ with respect to the norm $$\|u\|_{\mathring{W}_\lambda^{1,p}(\Omega;\psi)}:=\left(\int_\Omega|\triangledown_\lambda u(x)|^p \psi(x) dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}.$$
\[thm\_semi\] Let $p>1$ and $\mu_1,\dots,\mu_k,\ s\in{\mathbb{R}}$ be such that $s<N_1+\mu_1$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\label{cond1}
-p\min\{\alpha_{1i},\dots\alpha_{ki},1 \} +s<N_i+\mu_i \qquad i=1,\dots,k.\end{aligned}$$ Then, for every $u\in \mathring{W}_\lambda^{1,p}(\Omega, \psi),$ we have $$\left(\frac{Q-s+\sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_i\mu_i}{p}\right)^p\int_\Omega\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_\lambda^s}|u(x)|^p\ dx\leq
\int_\Omega\psi(x)\left|\triangledown_\lambda u(x)\right|^p\ dx,$$ where $ \psi(x)=\frac{[[x]]_\lambda^{p(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))-s}}{\prod_{i=1}^k |x^{(i)}|^{p(\sum_{j=1}^k\alpha_{ji})- \mu_i} }.$
In particular, for $s=p$ and $\mu_1=\cdots=\mu_k=0$ we get $$\left(\frac{Q-p}{p}\right)^p\int_\Omega\frac{|u(x)|^p}{[[x]]_\lambda^p}\ dx\leq
\int_\Omega\frac{[[x]]_\lambda^{\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1)}}{\prod_{i=1}^k\lambda_i(x)^p}\left|\triangledown_\lambda u(x)\right|^p\ dx,$$ and choosing $s=p(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))$ and $\mu_i=p\sum_{j=1}^k\alpha_{ji}$ we obtain $$\left(\frac{Q-p}{p}\right)^p\int_\Omega\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k\lambda_i(x)^p}{[[x]]_\lambda^{p(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}}|u(x)|^p\ dx
\leq\int_\Omega \left|\triangledown_\lambda u(x)\right|^p\ dx.$$
We deduce the inequalities from Lemma \[lem0\]. To this end for $\varepsilon>0$ we define $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda^\varepsilon&:=(\lambda_1^\varepsilon,\dots,\lambda_k^\varepsilon),\qquad
\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x):=\prod_{j=1}^k\left(|x^{(j)}|^2+\varepsilon\right)^{\frac{\alpha_{ij}}{2}}, \quad i=1,\dots, k,\\
[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}&:=\left(\sum_{j=1}^k\Big(\prod_{i\neq j}\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x)^2\sigma_j^2|x^{(j)}|^2\Big)\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}}\end{aligned}$$ and consider the function $$h_\varepsilon(x):=\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^s}
\left(\frac{\sigma_1x^{(1)}}{\lambda^\varepsilon_1(x)},\dots, \frac{\sigma_k x^{(k)}}{\lambda^\varepsilon_k(x)}\right).$$ We obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\textnormal{div}_{\lambda} h_\varepsilon(x)=&\
\sum_{i=1}^k\frac{\lambda_i(x)}{\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x)}\triangledown_{x^{(i)}}\cdot \left(\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^s} \sigma_i x^{(i)} \right)\\
=&\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^s}
\left( \sum_{i=1}^k\frac{\lambda_i(x)}{\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x)}\left(N_i\sigma_i+\sigma_i\mu_i-s \frac{1}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}}\sigma_i x^{(i)} \cdot\triangledown_{x^{(i)}}([[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda})\right)\right)\\
=&\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^s} c_\varepsilon(x),
$$ where $$c_\varepsilon(x):=\sum_{i=1}^k\frac{\lambda_i(x)}{\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x)}\left(N_i\sigma_i+\sigma_i\mu_i-s \frac{1}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}}\sigma_i x^{(i)} \cdot\triangledown_{x^{(i)}}([[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda})\right).$$ Using Proposition \[prop\] we observe that $$\begin{aligned}
\lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow 0} c_\varepsilon(x)=\sum_{i=1}^k\left(N_i\sigma_i+\sigma_i\mu_i-s \right)= Q-s+\sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_i\mu_i,\end{aligned}$$ which is positive by our hypothesis. Moreover, there exist positive constants $\alpha_1$ and $\alpha_2$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{bound}
0<\alpha_1\leq c_\varepsilon(x)\leq \alpha_2<\infty\qquad \forall x\in\Omega.\end{aligned}$$ Indeed, we compute $$\begin{aligned}
&\ x^{(l)}\cdot \triangledown_{x^{(l)}}[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}\\
=&\ \frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}\left(\prod_{i \neq 1}(\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x))^2\sigma_1^2|x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+ \prod_{i\neq k}(\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x))^2\sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}-1}\\
=&\ \Big\{ \frac{|x^{(l)}|^2}{|x^{(l)}|^2+\varepsilon}\Big[(2\sum_{j\neq1}\alpha_{jl})\prod_{i \neq 1}(\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x))^2\sigma_1^2|x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+ (2\sum_{j\neq k}\alpha_{jl}) \prod_{i\neq k}(\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x))^2\sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2\Big]\\
& +2\prod_{i \neq l}(\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x))^2\sigma_l^2|x^{(l)}|^2 \Big\},\end{aligned}$$ and consequently, using the relation $\sum_{l=1}^k\sigma_l\alpha_{jl}=\sigma_j-1$ it follows that $$\begin{aligned}
c_\varepsilon(x)=&\sum_{l=1}^k\frac{\lambda_l(x)}{\lambda_l^\varepsilon(x)}\left(N_l\sigma_l+\sigma_l\mu_l\right)
-s\frac{1}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}}\sum_{l=1}^k\frac{\lambda_l(x)}{\lambda_l^\varepsilon(x)} \sigma_l
x^{(l)} \cdot\triangledown_{x^{(l)}}([[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda})\\
&\sum_{l=1}^k\frac{\lambda_l(x)}{\lambda_l^\varepsilon(x)}\left(N_l\sigma_l+\sigma_l\mu_l\right)
-s\frac{1}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}}[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^{1-2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}\sum_{l=1}^k \sigma_l
x^{(l)} \cdot\triangledown_{x^{(l)}}([[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda})\\
\geq &\sum_{l=1}^k\frac{\lambda_l(x)}{\lambda_l^\varepsilon(x)}\left(N_l\sigma_l+\sigma_l\mu_l\right)-
s\frac{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^{-2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}}{(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}\cdot \\
&\ \Big\{ ((\sum_{j\neq1}\sum_{l=1}^k\sigma_l\alpha_{jl})+\sigma_1)\prod_{i \neq 1}(\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x))^2\sigma_1^2|x^{(1)}|^2+\cdots+ ((\sum_{j\neq k}\sum_{l=1}^k\sigma_l\alpha_{jl}) +\sigma_k)\prod_{i\neq k}(\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x))^2\sigma_k^2|x^{(k)}|^2 \Big\}\\
=&\sum_{l=1}^k\frac{\lambda_l(x)}{\lambda_l^\varepsilon(x)}\left(N_l\sigma_l+\sigma_l\mu_l\right)-
s\geq N_1+\mu_1-s>0.\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, $$\begin{aligned}
c_\varepsilon(x)=&\sum_{l=1}^k\frac{\lambda_l(x)}{\lambda_l^\varepsilon(x)}\left(N_l\sigma_l+\sigma_l\mu_l-s \frac{1}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}}\sigma_l
x^{(l)} \cdot\triangledown_{x^{(l)}}([[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda})\right)\\
\leq & \sum_{l=1}^k\left(N_l\sigma_l+\sigma_l\mu_l\right)<\infty,\end{aligned}$$ which concludes the proof of property .
Moreover, we compute $$\begin{aligned}
| h_\varepsilon(x) | & =\ \frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^s}
\left(\sum_{i=1}^k\frac{\sigma_i^2|x^{(i)}|^2}{\lambda^\varepsilon_i(x)^2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}
\\
&=\ \frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^s}
\frac{\left( \sum_{i=1}^k \prod_{j\neq i} \lambda^\varepsilon_j(x)^2 \sigma_i^2|x^{(i)}|^2 \right)^{\frac{1}{2}}}{\prod_{i=1}^k \lambda^\varepsilon_i(x)}\\
&=
\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^{(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))-s}
}{\prod_{i=1}^k \lambda^\varepsilon_i(x)},\end{aligned}$$ and Lemma \[lem0\] applied to $h_\varepsilon$ yields $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{1}{p^p}\int_\Omega c_\varepsilon(x) \frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^s} |u(x)|^p dx\\
\leq &
\ \int_\Omega \frac{1}{c_\varepsilon(x)^{(p-1)}}\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^{s}}
\left(\sum_{i=1}^k\frac{\sigma_i^2|x^{(i)}|^2}{\lambda^\varepsilon_i(x)^2}\right)^{\frac{p}{2}}|\triangledown_{\lambda} u(x)|^p\ dx,\\
\leq &
\ \frac{1}{\alpha_1^{(p-1)}}\int_\Omega \frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_{\lambda}^{s}}
\left(\sum_{i=1}^k\frac{\sigma_i^2|x^{(i)}|^2}{\lambda_i(x)^2}\right)^{\frac{p}{2}}|\triangledown_{\lambda} u(x)|^p\ dx\\
=&\ \frac{1}{\alpha_1^{(p-1)}}\int_\Omega\psi(x)|\triangledown_{\lambda} u(x)|^p\ dx.\end{aligned}$$ Since $$\lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow0}c_{\varepsilon}(x)=Q+\sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_i\mu_i-s,$$ the theorem now follows from the dominated convergence theorem by taking the limit $\varepsilon$ tends to zero.
The first condition on the exponents in Theorem \[thm\_semi\] allows to derive the uniform estimates for $c_\epsilon(x)$ in the proof, while the condition ensures that $\psi$ belongs to $L^1_{loc}(\Omega).$
We formulated a very general family of Hardy-type inequalities, the parameters allow to adjust the weights and to move them from one side of the inequality to the other. Particular choices lead to inequalities of the form or .
For Grushin-type operators $\Delta_\lambda=\Delta_x+|x|^{2\alpha}\Delta_y,$ $\alpha\geq 0, (x,y)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_2},$ we recover the Hardy inequalities of Theorem 3.1 in [@DAm], where it was proved that the constants are optimal.
For the convenience of the reader we first formulated Hardy type inequalities for the particular case of our homogeneous norms $[[\cdot]]_\lambda.$ We now generalize Theorem \[thm\_semi\] and consider homogeneous distances from the origin $\|\cdot \|_\lambda$ that satisfy the relation $$\sum_{j=1}^k\sigma_j\left( x^{(j)}\cdot\triangledown_{x^{(j)}} \right) \|x\|_{\lambda} = \|x\|_{\lambda},\qquad x\in{\mathbb{R}}^N.$$ For instance, we could choose $$\begin{aligned}
&&\|x\|_{\lambda}&:=\left(\sum_{j=1}^k |x^{(j)}|^{2\prod_{i\neq j}\sigma_i}\right)^{\frac{1}{2\prod_{i=1}^k\sigma_i}},&& x\in{\mathbb{R}}^N,\label{dist1}
\\
\textnormal{or}&&\|x\|_{\lambda}&:=\left(\sum_{j=1}^k(\sigma_j |x^{(j)}|)^{2\prod_{i\neq j}\sigma_i}\right)^{\frac{1}{2\prod_{i=1}^k\sigma_i}},&& x\in{\mathbb{R}}^N.
\label{dist2}
$$
For Grushin-type operators the second distance $\|\cdot\|_{\lambda}$ coincides with our homogeneous norm $[[\cdot]]_\lambda$ and with the distance considered by D’Ambrosio in [@DAm].
We compute the first of the homogeneous distances for our previous examples.
- For operators of the form $$\Delta_\lambda=\Delta_x+|x|^{2\alpha}\Delta_y+|x|^{2\beta}\Delta_z,\qquad (x,y,z)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_2}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_3},$$ with non-negative constants $\alpha$ and $\beta,$ we obtain $$\|(x,y,z)\|_\lambda=\left(|x|^{2(1+\alpha)(1+\beta)}+ |y|^{2(1+\beta)}
+|z|^{2(1+\alpha)}\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\alpha)(1+\beta)}}.$$
- For $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians of the form $$\Delta_\lambda=\Delta_x+|x|^{2\alpha}\Delta_y+|x|^{2\beta}|y|^{2\gamma}\Delta_z,\qquad
(x,y,z)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_2}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_3},$$ where the constants $\alpha, \beta$ and $\gamma$ are non-negative, we get $$\begin{aligned}
\|(x,y,z)\|_\lambda
= \left(|x|^{2(1+\alpha)(1+\mu)}+|y|^{2(1+\mu)}
+|z|^{2(1+\alpha)}\right)^{\frac{1}{2(1+\alpha)(1+\mu)}},\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu=\beta+(1+\alpha)\gamma.$
\[thm\_dist\] Let $p>1$ and $\mu_1,\dots,\mu_k, s,t\in{\mathbb{R}}$ be such that $s+t<N_1+\mu_1$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\label{cond2}
-p\min\{\alpha_{1i},\dots\alpha_{ki},1 \} +s+\frac{t}{\sigma_i}<N_i+\mu_i \qquad i=1,\dots,k.\end{aligned}$$
Then, for every $u\in\mathring{W}_\lambda^{1,p}(\Omega,\psi)$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\left(\frac{Q-s-t+\sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_i\mu_i}{p}\right)^p\int_\Omega\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{\|x\|_{\lambda}^t[[x]]_\lambda^s}|u(x)|^p\ dx
& \leq\ \int_\Omega
\psi(x)\left|\triangledown_\lambda u(x)\right|^p\ dx,\end{aligned}$$ where $\psi(x)=\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{ \mu_i-p\sum_{j=1}^k\alpha_{ji}}}{\|x\|_{\lambda}^t [[x]]_\lambda^{s-p(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}},$ and $\|\cdot\|_{\lambda}$ denotes the homogeneous norm or .
In particular, for $s=0,$ $\mu_i=0$ and $t=p$ we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\left(\frac{Q-p}{p}\right)^p\int_\Omega\frac{|u(x)|^p}{\|x\|_{\lambda}^p}\ dx&\leq
\int_\Omega\frac{[[x]]_\lambda^{p(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}}{\|x\|_{\lambda}^p\prod_{j=1}^k\lambda_j(x)^p}
\left|\triangledown_\lambda u(x)\right|^p\ dx.\end{aligned}$$ For $t=0$ we recover the Hardy inequalities in Theorem \[thm\_semi\] with our homogeneous norms $[[\cdot]]_\lambda.$
We prove the statement for the homogeneous norm . The result for the distance follows analogously. We deduce the inequalities from Lemma \[lem0\]. To this end we define the function $$h_\varepsilon(x):=\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^t [[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^s}
\left(\frac{\sigma_1x^{(1)}}{\lambda_1^\varepsilon(x)},\dots, \frac{\sigma_kx^{(k)}}{\lambda_k^\varepsilon(x)}\right),$$ where $||\cdot||_{\varepsilon,\lambda}$ is a smooth approximation of $||\cdot||_\lambda,$ $$\begin{aligned}
||x||_{\varepsilon,\lambda}&=\left(\sum_{j=1}^k (|x^{(j)}|^2+\varepsilon)^{\prod_{i\neq j}\sigma_i}\right)^{\frac{1}{2\prod_{i=1}^k\sigma_i}}.
$$ We obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\left| h_\varepsilon(x)\right|&=\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}\ [[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^{(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))-s}
}{\prod_{i=1}^k \lambda^\varepsilon_i(x)\ \|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^t},\\
\textnormal{div}_{\lambda} h_\varepsilon(x)&=
\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^t [[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^s}
\bigg(c_\varepsilon(x)-t \frac{1}{\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}} \sum_{i=1}^k\frac{\lambda_i(x)}{\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x)}\sigma_i x^{(i)} \cdot\triangledown_{x^{(i)}}(\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda} )\bigg)\\
&=\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^t [[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^s}
\bigg(c_\varepsilon(x)-\eta_\varepsilon(x)\bigg),\end{aligned}$$ where $c_\varepsilon$ was defined in the proof of Theorem \[thm\_semi\] and $$\eta_\varepsilon(x):=t \frac{1}{\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}} \sum_{i=1}^k\frac{\lambda_i(x)}{\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x)}\sigma_i x^{(i)} \cdot\triangledown_{x^{(i)}}(\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda} ).$$ We observe that $$\begin{aligned}
0\leq\eta_\varepsilon(x)&=t \frac{1}{\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}} \bigg(\sum_{i=1}^k\frac{\lambda_i(x)}{\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x)}
\frac{|x^{(i)}|^2}{|x^{(i)}|^2+\varepsilon}(|x^{(i)}|^2+\varepsilon)^{\prod_{j\neq i}\sigma_j }\bigg)\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^{1-2\prod_{j=1}^k\sigma_k}\\
&\leq t\frac{1}{\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}}\bigg( \sum_{i=1}^k
(|x^{(i)}|^2+\varepsilon)^{\prod_{j\neq i}\sigma_j }\bigg)\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^{1-2\prod_{j=1}^k\sigma_k}=t\end{aligned}$$ and consequently, it follows from the proof of Theorem \[thm\_semi\] that $$c_\varepsilon(x)-\eta_\varepsilon(x) \geq N_1+\mu_1-s -t>0.$$ Moreover, we have $$\lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow 0}(c_\varepsilon(x)-\eta_\varepsilon(x))=Q+ \sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_i\mu_i-s-t.$$ By our assumptions $Q>s+t-\sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_i\mu_i,$ which implies that $\textnormal{div}_{\lambda} h_\varepsilon>0$ for all sufficiently small $\varepsilon>0.$ Lemma \[lem0\] applied to the function $h_\varepsilon$ leads to the inequality $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{1}{p^p}\int_\Omega(c_\varepsilon(x)-\eta_\varepsilon(x))\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k(|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^t[[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^s}|u(x)|^p\ dx\\
\leq &\ \int_\Omega\frac{1}{(c_\varepsilon(x)-\eta_\varepsilon(x))^{(p-1)}}
\psi_\varepsilon(x)\left|\triangledown_{\lambda} u(x)\right|^p\ dx,\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\psi_\varepsilon(x)&=\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{\|x\|_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^t [[x]]_{\varepsilon,\lambda}^{s}}
\bigg(\sum_{i=1}^k\frac{\sigma_i^2|x^{(i)}|^2}{\lambda_i^\varepsilon(x)^2}\bigg)^{\frac{p}{2}}\\
&\leq \frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{\|x\|_{\lambda}^t [[x]]_{\lambda}^{s}}
\bigg(\sum_{i=1}^k\frac{\sigma_i^2|x^{(i)}|^2}{\lambda_i(x)^2}\bigg)^{\frac{p}{2}}=\psi(x).\end{aligned}$$ By taking the limit $\varepsilon$ tends to zero the statement of the theorem follows from the dominated convergence theorem.
The first condition on the exponents in Theorem \[thm\_dist\] allows to derive the uniform estimates for $\eta_\epsilon(x)$ in the proof, while the condition ensures that $\psi$ belongs to $L^1_{loc}(\Omega).$
Finally, we formulate Hardy type inequalities without weights.
Let $N_1>p>1.$ Then, for every $u\in\mathring{W}_\lambda^{1,p}(\Omega)$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\left(\frac{N_1-p}{p}\right)^p\int_\Omega\frac{|u(x)|^p }{|x^{(1)}|^{p}}\ dx
&\leq\int_\Omega |\triangledown_{\lambda} u(x)|^p\ dx,\\
\left(\frac{N_1-p}{p}\right)^p\int_\Omega\frac{|u(x)|^p }{\|x\|_{\lambda}^{p}}\ dx
&\leq\int_\Omega |\triangledown_{\lambda} u(x)|^p\ dx.\end{aligned}$$
It suffices to prove the first inequality. The second inequality is an immediate consequence of the first, since the norms satisfy $\|x\|_{\lambda}\geq |x^{(1)}|,$ $x\in{\mathbb{R}}^N.$ We define the function $$h_\varepsilon(x):=\frac{1}{(|x^{(1)}|^2+\varepsilon)^{\frac{p}{2}}}\left(x^{(1)},0,\dots,0\right)$$ and compute $$\begin{aligned}
\textnormal{div}_{\lambda} h_\varepsilon(x)&=\frac{N_1-p\frac{|x^{(1)}|^2}{|x^{(1)}|^2+\varepsilon}}{(|x^{(1)}|^2+\varepsilon)^{\frac{p}{2}}}>0,\\
|h_\varepsilon(x)|&=\frac{|x^{(1)}|}{(|x^{(1)}|^2+\varepsilon)^{\frac{p}{2}}}.\end{aligned}$$ Since $N_1>p$ we have $\textnormal{div}_{\lambda} h_\varepsilon>0,$ and Lemma \[lem0\] applied to $h_\varepsilon$ yields the inequality $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{1}{p^p}\int_\Omega \left(N_1-p \frac{|x^{(1)}|^2}{|x^{(1)}|^2+\varepsilon}\right)\frac{|u(x)|^p }{(|x^{(1)}|^2+\varepsilon)^{\frac{p}{2}}}\ dx \\
\leq & \int_\Omega\left(N_1-p \frac{|x^{(1)}|^2}{|x^{(1)}|^2+\varepsilon}\right)^{-(p-1)} \frac{|x^{(1)}|^p}{(|x^{(1)}|^2+\varepsilon)^{\frac{p}{2}}}
|\triangledown_{\lambda} u(x)|^p\ dx.\end{aligned}$$ The first inequality of the theorem now follows from the dominated convergence theorem by taking the limit $\varepsilon$ tends to zero.
Some Remarks on the Optimality of the Constant {#sec_optimal}
===============================================
For the particular case of Grushin type operators D’Ambrosio proved in [@DAm] that the constants in the inequalities in Theorem \[thm\_semi\] are optimal. The optimality was shown similarly to the classical case using the explicit form of the function for which the Hardy inequality becomes an equality. This function does not belong to the Sobolev space $H_0^1(\Omega),$ but an approximating sequence in $H_0^1(\Omega)$ is used in the proof. Moreover, the function is strongly related to the fundamental solution at the origin. For more general $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians this function as well as the fundamental solution are unknown, and at present we are not able to prove that our Hardy type inequalities are sharp.\
Using the fundamental solution at the origin the following observations yield a simple proof for Hardy inequalities. We will only consider the case $p=2$ here.
Let $\lambda$ be of the form , $\Omega\subset{\mathbb{R}}^N$ be a domain, $N\geq 3,$ and $\Phi$ be the fundamental solution at the origin of $-\Delta_\lambda$ on $\Omega,$ i.e., $$\begin{aligned}
-\Delta_\lambda \Phi&=c\delta_0,\\
\Phi&>0,\end{aligned}$$ for some constant $c>0,$ where $\delta_0$ denotes the Dirac delta function. Moreover, let $u\in C^1_0(\Omega)$ and $v:=u\Phi^{-\frac{1}{2}}.$ Then, the following identities follow from integration by parts and the properties of the fundamental solution (see [@AdSe] for the case of the classical Laplacian), $$\begin{aligned}
\label{fundamental}
\begin{split}
\int_\Omega |\triangledown_\lambda u|^2dx&=\frac{1}{4} \int_\Omega\frac{|\triangledown_\lambda \Phi|^2}{|\Phi|^2}u^2dx+
\frac{1}{2} \int_\Omega\triangledown_\lambda \Phi \triangledown_\lambda(v^2)dx+\int_\Omega|\triangledown_\lambda v|^2\Phi dx \\
&=\frac{1}{4} \int_\Omega\frac{|\triangledown_\lambda \Phi|^2}{|\Phi|^2}u^2dx+
\frac{1}{2} cv^2(0)+\int_\Omega|\triangledown_\lambda v|^2\Phi dx \\
&=\frac{1}{4} \int_\Omega\frac{|\triangledown_\lambda \Phi|^2}{|\Phi|^2}u^2dx
+\int_\Omega|\triangledown_\lambda v|^2\Phi dx\geq\frac{1}{4} \int_\Omega\frac{|\triangledown_\lambda \Phi|^2}{|\Phi|^2}u^2dx,
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where we used that $v(0)=u(0)\Phi(0)^{-\frac{1}{2}}=0.$
The fundamental solution at the origin for the Grushin-type operator $$\Delta_\lambda=\Delta_x+|x|^{2\alpha}\Delta_y,\qquad \alpha\geq 0,\ z= (x,y)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N_1}\times{\mathbb{R}}^{N_2}$$ is of the form $$\Phi(x,y)=\frac{c}{[[(x,y)]]_\lambda^{Q-2}},$$ for some constant $c\geq0$ (see [@DAmLu]). The estimate implies the weighted Hardy type inequality $$\begin{aligned}
\int_\Omega |\triangledown_\lambda u(z)|^2dz&\geq \frac{1}{4} \int_\Omega\frac{|\triangledown_\lambda \Phi(z)|^2}{|\Phi(z)|^2}u(z)^2\, dz=
\frac{(Q-2)^2}{4} \int_\Omega\frac{|x|^{2\alpha}}{[[(x,y)]]_\lambda^{2(1+\alpha)}}u(z)^2dz,\end{aligned}$$ which is a particular case of the inequalities in Theorem \[thm\_semi\]. To show the optimality of the constant we consider the identity $$\begin{aligned}
\int_\Omega\left| \triangledown_\lambda u(z) -\varphi(z)u(z)\right|^2 dz
&=\int_\Omega\left| \triangledown_\lambda u(z)\right|^2 +|u(z)|^2 \left( |\varphi(z)|^2 + \textnormal{div}_\lambda\varphi(z) \right) dz\end{aligned}$$ and observe that the function $$\varphi(x,y)=-\frac{Q-2}{2}\frac{|x|^{2\alpha}}{[[(x,y)]]_\lambda^{2(1+\alpha)}}\left(x,\frac{(1+\alpha)y}{|x|^\alpha}\right),$$ which we applied in the proof of Theorem \[thm\_semi\], satisfies $$|\varphi(x,y)|^2 + \textnormal{div}_\lambda\varphi(x,y)=-\left(\frac{Q-2}{2}\right)^2\frac{|x|^{2\alpha}}{[[(x,y)]]_\lambda^{2(1+\alpha)}}.$$ A solution of the equation $$\triangledown_\lambda u(x,y) =-\frac{Q-2}{2}\frac{|x|^{2\alpha}}{[[(x,y)]]_\lambda^{2(1+\alpha)}}\left(x,\frac{(1+\alpha)y}{|x|^\alpha}\right)u(x,y)$$ is the function $$u(x,y)=\frac{1}{[[(x,y)]]_\lambda^{\frac{Q-2}{2}}},$$ which was used in [@DAm] to prove the optimality of the constant. It transforms the Hardy inequality into an equality, but does not belong to the class $\mathring W_\lambda^{1,2}(\Omega)$ if the domain $\Omega$ contains the origin (see [@DAm], p.728).\
The fundamental solution for general $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians is unknown. Assuming that there exists a homogeneous distance from the origin $d_\lambda$ such that the fundamental solution is given by $\Phi=d_\lambda^{2-Q}$ we obtain $$\frac{|\triangledown_\lambda \Phi(x)|^2}{|\Phi(x)|^2}=(Q-2)^2\frac{|\triangledown_\lambda d_\lambda(x)|^2}{|d_\lambda(x)|^{2}},$$ and implies the Hardy type inequality $$\begin{aligned}
\int_\Omega |\triangledown_\lambda u(x)|^2dx&\geq \frac{(Q-2)^2}{4} \int_\Omega\frac{|\triangledown_\lambda d_\lambda(x)|^2}{|d_\lambda(x)|^2}|u(x)|^2\, dx.\end{aligned}$$ Consequently, if the fundamental solution was known we could define the distance $d_\lambda:=\Phi^{\frac{1}{2-Q}}$ and compute explicit, weighted Hardy inequalities.
On the other hand, suitable to analyze the optimality of the constants in our family of Hardy type inequalities is the relation $$\begin{aligned}
\label{id}
\int_\Omega\left|\frac{\varphi (x)}{\psi(x)}u(x)-\psi(x) \triangledown_\lambda u(x)\right|^2 dx =
\int_\Omega\psi(x)^2 \left| \triangledown_\lambda u(x)\right|^2 +
u(x)^2\left( \frac{|\varphi (x)|^2}{\psi(x)^2} + \textnormal{div}_\lambda \varphi(x)\right)dx,\end{aligned}$$ which follows from integration by parts, where $\varphi:{\mathbb{R}}\rightarrow{\mathbb{R}}^N$ is a vector field and $\psi:{\mathbb{R}}\rightarrow{\mathbb{R}}$ a scalar function. Comparing with the first inequality in Theorem \[thm\_semi\] we choose $$\psi(x)^2 =\frac{[[x]]_\lambda^{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))-s}}{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{2\sum_{j=1}^k\alpha_{ji}- \mu_i}},$$ and observe that the function $$\varphi(x)=-\frac{Q-s+\sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_i\mu_i}{2}
\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_\lambda^s}
\left(\frac{\sigma_1x^{(1)}}{\lambda_1(x)},\dots, \frac{\sigma_kx^{(k)}}{\lambda_k(x)}\right),$$ which we used to prove the theorem, satisfies $$\left( \frac{|\varphi (x)|^2}{\psi(x)^2} + \textnormal{div}_\lambda \varphi(x)\right)=
-\left(\frac{Q-s+\sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_i\mu_i}{2}\right)^2\frac{\prod_{i=1}^k|x^{(i)}|^{\mu_i}}{[[x]]_\lambda^s}.$$ Consequently, the Hardy type inequality in Theorem \[thm\_semi\] is an equality if $u$ is a solution of the equation $$\triangledown_\lambda u(x)=\frac{\varphi (x)}{\psi(x)^2}u(x),$$ i.e., $$\begin{aligned}
\label{problem}
\triangledown_{x^{(i)}}u(x)=-\frac{Q-s+\sum_{i=1}^k\sigma_i\mu_i}{2} \frac{\prod_{j\neq i}\lambda_j(x)^2}{\|x\|_\lambda^{2(1+\sum_{i=1}^k(\sigma_i-1))}}\sigma_i x^{(i)}u(x),
\qquad i=1,\dots,k.\end{aligned}$$ Except for Grushin type operators we are unable to solve this equation, not even for the particular $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplacians in Examples \[ex1\] to \[ex3\].
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We would like to thank Prof. Enrique Zuazua for valuable discussions and remarks and Prof. Ermanno Lanconelli and Prof. Enzo Mitidieri for some helpful comments.
A. Bonfiglioli, E. Lanconelli and F. Uguzzoni, *Stratified Lie Groups and Potential Theory for their sub-Laplacians*, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg (2007).
Adimurthi, A. Sekar, *Role of the fundamental solution in Hardy-Sobolev-type inequalities*, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 136A, pp. 1111–1130 (2006).
L. D’Ambrosio, *Hardy inequalities related to Grushin type operators*, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 132 No.3, pp. 725–734 (2003).
L. D’Ambrosio, *Hardy-type inequalities related to degenerate elliptic differential operators*, Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5) Vol. IV, pp. 451-486 (2005).
L. D’Ambrosio, S. Lucente, *Nonlinear Liouville theorems for Grushin and Tricomi operators*, J. Differential Equations, 193, pp. 511–541 (2003).
H. Brezis, J.L. Vázquez, *Blow-up solutions of some nonlinear elliptic problems*, Revista Matemática de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid 10 (2), pp. 443–469 (1997).
B. Franchi and E. Lanconelli, *Une métrique associée à une classe d’opérateurs elliptiques dégénérés*. Conference on linear partial and pseudodifferential operators (Torino, 1982), Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Politec. Torino 1983, Special Issue, pp. 105–114 (1984).
B. Franchi and E. Lanconelli, *An embedding theorem for Sobolev spaces related to non-smooth vectors fields and Harnack inequality*, Comm. Partial Differential Equations, 9 No.13, pp. 1237–1264 (1984).
B. Franchi and E. Lanconelli, *Hölder regularity theorem for a class of nonuniformly elliptic operators with measurable coefficients*, Ann. Sc. Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. 10, No.4, pp. 523–541 (1983).
N. Garofalo and E. Lanconelli, *Frequency functions on the Heisenberg group, the uncertainty principle and unique continuation*, Ann. Inst. Fourier Grenoble 40, pp. 313–356 (1990).
G. Grillo, *Hardy and Rellich-type inequalities for metrics defined by vector fields*, Potential Anal. 18 (3), pp. 187–217 (2003).
V.V. Grushin, *On a Class of Hypoelliptic Operators*, Math. USSR Sbornic, Vol. 12, No.3, pp. 458–476 (1970).
L. Hörmander, *Hypoelliptic second order differential equations*. Acta Math., 119, pp. 147–171 (1967).
A. Kogoj, E. Lanconelli, *On Semilinear $\Delta_\lambda$-Laplace Equation,* Nonlinear Anal. 75, pp. 4637–4649 (2012).
A.E. Kogoj, S. Sonner, *Attractors for a class of semi-linear degenerate parabolic equations,* J. Evol. Equ. 13, pp. 675–691 (2013).
A.E. Kogoj, S. Sonner, *Attractors met $X$-elliptic operators,* J. Math. Anal. Appl. 420, pp. 407–434 (2014).
E. Lanconelli, A.E. Kogoj, *$X$-elliptic operators and $X$-control distances,* Contributions in honor of the memory of Ennio De Giorgi, Ric. Mat. 49 suppl., pp. 223–243 (2000).
Z. Li, *A Hardy inequality for the Grushin type operators,* Math. Inequal. Appl. 15, pp. 923–930 (2012).
E. Mitidieri, *A simple approach to Hardy inequalities,* Mat. Zametki 67, pp. 189–220 (2000).
D. Su, Q. Yang, *Improved Hardy inequalities in the Grushin planes,* J. Math. Anal. Appl. 393, pp. 509–516 (2012).
J.L. Vázquez, E. Zuazua, *The Hardy inequality and the asymptotic behaviour of the heat equation with an inverse square potential*, J. Funct. Anal. 173, pp. 103–153 (2000).
Y.-X. Xiao, *Some Hardy inequalities on half spaces for Grushin type operators,* Math. Inequal. Appl. 16, pp. 793–807 (2013).
Q. Yang, D. Su, Y. Kong, *Improved Hardy inequalities for Grushin operators,* J. Math. Anal. Appl. 424, pp. 321–343 (2015).
[^1]: Until May 2014 the second author was supported by the ERC Advanced Grant FPT-246775 NUMERIWAVES.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We present the application of the SU($N$) ($N>2$) spin-wave theory to spin-orbital Mott insulators whose ground states exhibit magnetic orders. When taking both the spin and orbital degrees of freedom into account rather than projecting onto the Kramers doublet, the lowest spin-orbital locking energy levels, due to the inevitable spin-orbital multipole exchange interactions, the SU($N$) spin-wave theory should take the place of the SU($2$) one. To implement the application, we introduce an efficient general local mean field approach which involves all the local fluctuations into the SU($N$) linear spin-wave theory. Our approach is tested firstly by calculating the multipolar spin-wave spectra of the SU($4$) antiferromagnetic model. Then we apply it to spin-orbital Mott insulators. It is revealed that the Hund’s coupling would influence the effectiveness of the isospin-$1/2$ representation when the spin orbital coupling is not large enough. Besides, we also calculate the spin-wave spectra based on the first principle calculations for two concrete materials, $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$ and Sr$_2$IrO$_4$. The SU($N$) spin-wave theory appropriately depicts the low-energy magnons and the spin-orbital excitations qualitatively.'
author:
- 'Zhao-Yang Dong'
- Wei Wang
- 'Jian-Xin Li'
bibliography:
- 'SUn.bib'
title: 'SU($N$) spin-wave theory: Application to spin-orbital Mott insulators'
---
INTRODUCTION
============
The physics of transition-metal oxides (TMOs) with $4d$ or $5d$ orbitals occupied has drawn considerable attention recently. One reason is that the spin-orbital coupling (SOC), which was considered as a small perturbation until recently, entangles the spin and orbital degrees of freedom. This effect in cooperation with electronic correlations could give rise to a novel type of insulators (spin-orbital Mott insulators) in which the local moments are spin-orbital entangled $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ Kramers doublets[@Witczak-Krempa2014; @Kim2008; @Kim2014]. Another is their crystal structures with a special bond geometry formed by edge-shared octahedra, which will result in the anisotropy and the frustration of the effective Hamiltonian[@Jackeli2009], because the exchange coupling between the local moments depends highly on the spatial direction of the exchange path. The Hamiltonian with such a novel symmetry could lead to unconventional magnetism, including spin liquids, multipolar orders and uncommon magnetic orders[@Witczak-Krempa2014]. In real materials, the zigzag (Na$_2$IrO$_3$[@Liu2011] and $4d$ TMOs $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$[@Sears2015; @Banerjee2016; @Ran2017]), spiral (Li$_2$IrO$_3$ [@Biffin2014; @Williams2016; @Biffin2014a]) type magnetic orderings, and a canted antiferromagnetic (AF) structure (Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ )[@Gum2009; @Kim2012] have been proved.
Generally, $4d$ and $5d$ states are spatially so extended that the Hubbard interaction is reduced compared to that of $3d$ states. However, owing to the large crystal field and SOC, a separate band with a reduced bandwidth allows for the opening of a Mott gap. The underlying picture for this process is as following. For a $d^{5}$ electronic configuration, when the two $e_g$ orbitals split off due to the crystal field of octahedrons, the five electrons loaded on the $t_{2g}$ orbitals results in a $s=1/2$ hole residing in an effective $l=1$ orbitals. A strong SOC leads to a system with a fully filled $J_{\rm eff}=3/2$ band and a half-filled $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ band. Thus, the so-called spin-orbital Mott insulators emerge even with a relatively small electronic correlation. In this case, the $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ states present the essential physics and effectively behavior as spin-$1/2$ pseudo spins. The resulting spin-exchange model can be obtained by projecting the electronic Hamiltonian onto the $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ Kramers doublet which consists of only dipole-dipole interaction terms. To study the low-energy excitations of this spin-$1/2$ system with a magnetically ordered ground state, one can resort to the famous SU($2$) linear spin-wave theory[@Haraldsen2009]. However, in many real materials the mixing between the $e_g$ and $t_{2g}$ orbitals are always presented and the deviation from the spherical symmetry drags some composition of $J_{\rm eff}=3/2$ states into the Kramers doublet[@PhysRevB.91.241110]. In addition, the Hund’s coupling in the multi-orbital system will induce electrons to orbit in the same direction. All of these would weaken the validity of the picture of a half-filling $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ Kramers doublet, and complicate the spin exchange Hamiltonian by introducing the interactions between spin-orbital multipolar momentum[@Witczak-Krempa2014]. Thus, the spin-orbital multipolar orders and excitations are needed to be considered.
Generally, to study a spin-$1/2$ system with a magnetically ordered ground state and small quantum fluctuations, the famous SU($2$) linear spin-wave theory[@Haraldsen2009] are used, in which the spins are regarded as a classical three-components vector and its fluctuations are described by rotations of the vector. However, when the degrees of freedom of both spins and orbitals are involved, it is insufficient to treat the local states as the rotations of a classical three-components angular momentum. Therefore, a generalization of the SU($2$) linear spin-wave theory is needed[@PhysRevB.60.6584]. Recently, the SU($N$) spin-wave theory based on the multi-boson approach has been introduced[@PhysRevB.85.125116; @PhysRevLett.108.257203; @PhysRevB.86.174428; @Muniz2014]. Since the generators of the SU($N$) group can be represented as bilinear forms in $N$-flavored bosons, instead of two bosons in the SU($2$) spin-wave theory, the low-energy modes of the SU($N$) spin-wave theory are described with $N-1$ different bosons, which would provide a more accurate description of the low-energy excitations for unconventional magnetic orders.
In this paper, we will use the SU($N$) spin-wave theory to study the magnetic excitations in spin-orbital Mott insulators. In the SU($N$) spin-wave theory, the local order parameter is defined in the space of SU($N$) unitary transformations of the local spin states, instead of the SU($2$) space of local spin rotations, and it consists of $N^2-1$ components of the SU($N$) order parameter in the most general form. Therefore, a universal local mean field theory facilitating the SU($N$) spin-wave theory is required. Here, we introduce a general efficient local mean field theory based on the supercoherent state[@Fatyga1991], which fully includes the on-site quantum fluctuations essential for multipolar states. As an illustration, we first apply the SU($N$) spin-wave theory to a toy three-band Hubbard model on a hexagon lattice, and focus on the examination of the effect of Hund’s coupling by calculating the weights of $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ stats in the ground state and spin-wave spectra. If the SOC is not large enough to lift the spin-orbital excitations across the $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ and $J_{\rm eff}=3/2$ states away from those within the $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ doublets, the Hund’s coupling will compel the angular momentum $L$ to parallel the spin momentum. Therefore, the low energy physics is not governed only by the $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ effective Hamiltonian. We then study the spin excitations in two systems of TMOs, $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$ and Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ where the effective Hamiltonian include both spin and orbital degrees of freedom, by using the SU ($N$) linear spin-wave theory. Our results for the magnetic ground states and their low-energy spin dynamics in two systems are consistent with recent experiments[@Banerjee2016; @Ran2017; @Kim2012; @Kim2014]. In addition, we can obtain the high-energy spin-orbital excitations across the gap in the presence of the spin-orbital coupling. The paper is organized in the following manner. In section \[spinwave\], we briefly review the Schwinger bosons representation and SU($N$) spin-wave theory, then introduce the general local mean field theory. In section \[su4\], based on the SU($4$) antiferromagnetic Hamiltonian[@Qi2008a; @Wu2003; @Hung2011], we calculate its magnon excitations and spin-$3/2$’s $l=2$ multipole-multipole correlation function. In section \[tmo\], we apply the SU($N$) spin-wave theory to spin-orbital Mott insulators. First, we derive an effective Hamiltonian from a three-band Hubbard model with the SOC in the hexagon lattice and study the magnetic dynamics by the SU($N$) spin-wave theory. Then we calculate the spin correlation function of $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$ with the five-band Hubbard model and correlation function of resonant inelastic X-Ray scattering (RIXS) operators[@Luo1993] of Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ with a three-band Hubbard model.
SU($N$) linear spin-wave theory {#spinwave}
===============================
Muniz et al present a mathematical framework of the multi-boson approach to generalize the traditional spin-wave theory from SU($2$) to SU($N$)[@Muniz2014]. As we know, the effective exchange models from the electron models in the strong interaction limit would always be written as $$H_0= J_{\mu\nu\mu'\nu'}^{rr'}S_r^{\mu\nu}S_{r'}^{\mu'\nu'}+h_{\mu\nu}^rS_r^{\mu\nu},
\label{eq0}$$ where the repeated index $r,r',\mu,\nu,\mu'\nu'$ is summed up, and $S_r^{\mu\nu}$ are the generators of SU($N$) group, which obey the commutation relations $$[S_r^{\mu\nu},S_{r'}^{\mu'\nu'}]=\delta_{r,r'}(S_r^{\mu\nu'}\delta_{\mu'\nu}-S_r^{\mu'\nu}\delta_{\mu\nu'}).
\label{eq1}$$ Then, they can be represented by Schwinger bosons. In the spin-wave theory, one of the bosons will be condensed depending on a given magnetic order and the rest $N-1$ different bosons will be used to describe the low-energy modes of systems. In this section, we will first review the multi-boson approach based on the Schwinger bosons representation. Then, a general local mean field theory will be introduced and applied to the SU($N$) linear spin-wave theory.
Schwinger bosons representation
-------------------------------
It is often useful to map a spin model into a bosonic one, which may be easier to study since bosons have simple commutation relations. Also, the common magnons are bosonic excitations which are proper to be represented in bosonic language. In the Schwinger bosons representation, the SU($N$) generators are written as[@Arovas1988], $$\begin{aligned}
S_r^{\mu\nu}&=&b_r^{\mu\dagger} b_r^\nu,
\label{eq2}\\
\sum_{\mu=0}^{n-1} b_r^{\mu\dagger} b_r^\mu&=&n_b,
\label{eq3}\end{aligned}$$ where $b_r^{\mu\dagger}$ and $b_r^\mu$ ($\mu=0,1,...,n-1$) are bosonic creation and annihilation operators on the local site $r$, respectively. Eq. (\[eq3\]) is a constraint on the bosonic operators in the physical space. $n_b$ is the number of bosons on the local site, denoting the order of the irreducible representations of SU($N$) group. For the well known SU($2$) linear spin-wave theory, we set $n_b=2S$. Here we use $n_b$=1 for simplicity. Thus, $n_b$ indicates the dimensions of the local state and there is an one-to-one match between each boson and each local dimension. Furthermore, the space of local operators is a $n^2$-dimensional linear space, which could be expanded on the basis of the identity and the $n^2-1$ generators of SU($N$) group. Correspondingly, the identity is the constraint Eq. (\[eq3\]) and $n^2-1$ generators are bilinear forms $b^{\mu\dagger} b^\nu$. So, any local operator can be expressed as a linear combination of bosonic bilinear forms.
To sum up, all local fluctuations are described by bosonic particle-hole forms $b^{\mu\dagger} b^\nu$. For instance, if there is a local spin $S=3/2$, then local fluctuations can be expanded by the multipole expansion, which has $16=(2S+1)^{2}$ different scattering channels classified by the total spin of a pair of particle and hole. $$M_{l,m}=\sum_{m_1}(-1)^{s_2+m-m_1}C_{m_1,m-m_1,m}^{s_1,s_2,l} b^{s_1,m_1 \dagger} b^{s_2,m_1-m},
\label{eq4}$$ where $C_{m_1,m-m_1,m}^{s_1,s_2,l}$ are Clebsch-Gordan coefficients, and $(s_1,m_1), (s_2,m-m_1)$ are the spin quantum numbers of the particle and hole, respectively. $M_{l,m}$ is multipole spin operators. $M_{l,m}$ is the identity when $l=0$, the dipolar operators $S_+$, $S_-$ and $S_z$ when $l=1$, and the quadrupolar and octupolar operators when $l=2,3$. There are totally $16=\sum_{l=0}^3 2l+1$ multipole spin operators, which are equal to the dimensions of the space of local operators and can also be expanded by SU($N$) generators. Therefore, SU($N$) spin-wave theory based on this multi-boson approach includes all of bosonic multipolar excitations.
Local mean field theory
-----------------------
It is necessary to construct a general local mean field theory to utilize all advantages of the SU($N$) spin-wave theory. As we known, the parameter manifold of a $n$-dimensional ($n$-D) state is $(n-1)$-D complex projective space CP($n-1$) when the overall phase is neglected. There are $n-1$ complex parameters, which are $2(n-1)$ real parameters. The local mean-field state should travel all over the space, so according to the supercoherent states constructed by Fatyga et al[@Fatyga1991], we assume the test local wave function to be generated from a unitary transformation acting on an given state, $$\left|T\right\rangle_r=U(\bm{x}_r)b_r^{0\dagger}\left|0\right\rangle.
\label{eq5}$$ $U(\bm{x}_r)$ is the unitary transformation and $\left|0\right\rangle$ is the vacuum without any bosons: $$\begin{aligned}
U(\bm{x}_r) &=& \mathrm{exp}[i\sum_{\mu\neq0}(x_r^{2\mu-1}(b_r^{0\dagger} b_r^\mu+b_r^{\mu\dagger} b_r^0),
\nonumber\\
&&+x_r^{2\mu}(ib_r^{\mu\dagger} b_r^0-ib_r^{0\dagger} b_r^\mu))]
\label{eq7} \\
\left|0\right\rangle &=& (\underbrace{0,0,0,...,0}_n)^T,\end{aligned}$$ where $\bm{x}\in \mathrm{R}^{2(n-1)}$, the $2(n-1)$-D real space. Obviously, $U(\bm{x}_r) $ is particle conserved, so the test state complies with the constraint Eq. (\[eq3\]). It is arduous to find the minimum in such a plain space. Thus, we will utilize the structure of CP($n-1$) to convert the $\bm{x}\in \mathrm{R}^{2(n-1)}$ parameter space to the rotation space in the $n$-D complex space, $$\begin{aligned}
x^1&=\theta_1{\rm cos}(\theta_2){\rm cos}(\phi_1), \\
x^2&=\theta_1{\rm cos}(\theta_2){\rm sin}(\phi_1), \\
x^3&=\theta_1{\rm sin}(\theta_2){\rm cos}(\theta_3){\rm cos}(\phi_2), \\
x^4&=\theta_1{\rm sin}(\theta_2){\rm cos}(\theta_3){\rm sin}(\phi_2), \\
...,\\
x^{2n-3}&=\theta_1{\rm sin}(\theta_2)\ldots {\rm sin}(\theta_{n-1}){\rm cos}(\phi_{n-1}), \\
x^{2(n-1)}&=\theta_1{\rm sin}(\theta_2)\ldots {\rm sin}(\theta_{n-1}){\rm sin}(\phi_{n-1}), \\
\theta_j&\in\{0,\pi\},\phi_j\in\{0,2\pi\}.\end{aligned}$$ When $n=2$, it is the well known state of spin-$1/2$, $\left|T\right\rangle=({\rm cos}(\theta_1), e^{i\phi_1}{\rm sin}(\theta_1))^T$, where $(\theta_1,\phi_1)$ are Euler angles. It corresponds to a rotation in $2$-D complex space or $3$-D real space.
The mean field ground state of the system is the direct product state of local wave function, $\left|G\right\rangle=\bigotimes\left|T\right\rangle_r$, which would minimize the energy of $\left\langle G\right| H\left|G\right\rangle$. Due to the translational symmetry of the ground state, generally only the magnetic cell is considered in the spin-wave theory.
SU($N$) Linear spin-wave approximation
--------------------------------------
It is known that the spin-wave approximation is based on the Holstein-Primakoff (HP) bosons which define the spin-deviation operators. Its generalization can be obtained by extending the HP representation from SU($2$) to SU($N$)[@Muniz2014]. To obtain the SU($N$) HP bosons, we should first determine the condensed boson which creates the local state minimizing the mean-field energy. According to the variational form of the mean field ground state introduced in the last subsection, the condensed boson is the one minimizing $\left\langle G\right| H\left|G\right\rangle$, with $\left|G\right\rangle=\prod_r \tilde{b}_r^{0\dagger} \bigotimes\left|0\right\rangle_r$. It is related to the Schwinger boson $\mathbf{b}_r$ via the unitary transformation Eq. (\[eq7\]), $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eqb}
\tilde{b}_r^{0\dagger}=\sum_\mu U_{0\mu}(\bm{x}_r)b_r^{\mu\dagger}.\end{aligned}$$ Namely, $\tilde{b}_r^{0\dagger}$ is the $\mu=0$ component of $\tilde{\mathbf{b}}_r$, and the corresponding creation and annihilation operator are replaced by a number according to the constraint of Eq. (\[eq3\]), $$\tilde{b}_r^{0^\dagger}\simeq\tilde{b}_r^0\simeq\sqrt{1-\sum_{\mu=1}^{n-1}\tilde{b}_r^{\mu\dagger} \tilde{b}_r^\mu}.
\label{eq8}$$ Then, the $N-1$ bosons $\tilde{b}_r^{\mu\neq0}$ become the HP bosons, which describe the spin waves originating from fluctuations around the ordered spin state created by the condensed boson $\tilde{b}_r^{0\dagger}$. Substituting Eq. (\[eq8\]) into the Hamiltonian Eq. (\[eq0\]) and retaining only the quadratic terms, we get, $$\begin{aligned}
H & \simeq& \sum_{\langle r,r'\rangle}J_{0000}^{rr'}+(J_{\mu00\nu'}^{rr'}b_r^{\mu\dagger} b_{r'}^{\nu'}+J_{0\nu0\nu'}^{r,r'}b_r^\nu b_{r'}^{\nu'}+H.c)\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_r h_{00}^{r}+h_{\mu'\nu'}^{r} b_{r}^{\mu'\dagger} b_{r}^{\nu'}+\sum_{\langle r,r'\rangle}[(J_{\mu\nu00}^{rr'}-J_{0000}^{rr'} \delta_{\mu\nu})b_{r}^{\mu'\dagger} b_{r}^{\nu'}\nonumber\\
&&+(J_{00\mu'\nu'}^{rr'}-J_{0000}^{rr'} \delta_{\mu'\nu'})b_{r'}^{\mu'\dagger} b_{r'}^{\nu'}],
\label{eq9}\end{aligned}$$ where the index $\mu,\nu,\mu',\nu'\neq0$ and will be summed up when appear twice in a single term, and the tilde $\tilde{}$ on $J_{\mu\nu\mu'\nu'}^{rr'}$ and $b_r^\mu$, which denotes the expressions after the unitary transformation that minimizes the mean field variational energy, is omitted for simplicity.
Now Eq. (\[eq9\]) is a free bosonic Hamiltonian and can be solved by performing the Fourier transformation, $$b_k^\mu={1\over \sqrt{L}}\sum_r b_r^\mu e^{i{\bf k}\cdot{\bf r}},$$ with $L$ the lattice number of the system. It leads to, $$\begin{aligned}
H&=&\sum_k\psi_k^\dagger h(k) \psi_k,\nonumber
\\
\psi_k&=&(b_k^1,...,b_k^{M(n-1)},b_{-k}^{1\dagger},...,b_{-k}^{M(n-1)\dagger})^T,
\label{eq10}\end{aligned}$$ where $M$ is the size of magnetic cell. There are two diagonalization methods for a bosonic Hamiltonian as proposed by White[@White1965] and Colpa[@Colpa1978]. After diagonalization, we get the spin-wave dispersion $\epsilon_\mu(k)$ as expressed by, $$\begin{aligned}
H&=&\sum_{\mu=1}^{M(n-1)}\epsilon_\mu(k)\gamma_k^{\mu \dagger}\gamma_k^\mu, \nonumber
\\
\gamma_k^\mu&=&T_{\mu'}^\mu b_k^{\mu'},
\label{eq11}\end{aligned}$$ with $T_{\mu'}^\mu$ the element of the matrix used to diagonalize the Hamiltonian. As noted, the SU($N$) spin-wave theory includes not only the dipole-dipole correlations, but also the multipole-multipole correlations. In general, the correlation function of two SU($N$) generators can be written by, $$\begin{aligned}
S^{\mu\nu\mu'\nu'}(k,\omega)&=&{1\over 2M(n-1)}\int dt e^{-i\omega t} \nonumber \\
& &\times\Sigma_{r,r'}e^{i{\bf k}\cdot({\bf r}-{\bf r'})} \langle S_r^{\mu\nu}S_{r'}^{\mu'\nu'}(t)\rangle.\label{eq13}\end{aligned}$$ As same as the SU($2$) linear spin-wave theory, only the quadratic forms of the dynamical part of correlation functions are calculated. Therefore, the correlation function is expanded in $\langle b^{\mu\dagger}b^\mu\rangle$, which describes the probability to excite one of bosonic excitations. It is clear that there are $M(n-1)$ spin-wave modes.
SU($4$) antiferromagnetism {#su4}
==========================
As an example, we first calculate the spin-wave spectrum for the SU($4$) antiferromagnetic model in a square lattice. The model can be generated from the generic one-band Hubbard model loaded with spin-$3/2$ fermions. Due to Pauli¡¯s exclusion principle, the wave functions of two on-site fermions have to be antisymmetric. The total spin of two on-site spin-$3/2$ fermions can only be either singlet ($S =0$) or quintet ($S =2$). So the effective model at quarter-filling will have only two exchange channels, and the spin singlet channel results in the SU($4$) antiferromagnetic Hamiltonian: $$H=J\sum_{\langle i,j\rangle}\left[\sum_{1\leq a<b\leq5}\Gamma_i^{ab}\Gamma_j^{ab}-\sum_{a=1}^5\Gamma_i^a\Gamma_j^a\right],
\label{eq14}$$ where $\Gamma^a$ are Dirac matrices which form Clifford algebra, $\{\Gamma^a,\Gamma^b\}=2\delta^{ab}$ and $\Gamma^{ab}=\left[\Gamma^a,\Gamma^b\right]/(2i)$. Specifically, the five Dirac matrices can be expressed as tensor products of tow Pauli spin-$1/2$ matrices $(\sigma^\alpha,\tau^\beta)$, or represented by symmetric bilinear combinations of the components of a spin-$3/2$ operator, $S^x,S^y,S^z$: $$\begin{aligned}
&\Gamma^1=\sigma^z\tau^y={1\over\sqrt{3}}\left\{S^y,S^z\right\}, \\ &\Gamma^2=\sigma^z\tau^x={1\over\sqrt{3}}\left\{S^x,S^z\right\}, \\
&\Gamma^3=\sigma^y\tau^0={1\over\sqrt{3}}\left\{S^x,S^y\right\}, \\ &\Gamma^4=\sigma^x\tau^0={1\over\sqrt{3}}\left[(S^x)^2-(S^y)^2\right],\\
&\Gamma^5=\sigma^z\tau^z=(S^z)^2-{5\over4}.\end{aligned}$$ First of all, the spin exchange Hamiltonian stems from a SU($2$) symmetrical one-band Hubbard model with spin-$3/2$ fermions, so it has the genetic SU($2$) symmetry. Also, all $15$ Gamma operators together span the SU($4$) algebra. Among them, the $10$ $\Gamma^{ab}$ operators are SO($5$) anti-symmetric tensors, while the five $\Gamma^a$ are SO($5$) vectors. Thus the Hamiltonian Eq. (\[eq14\]) obviously possesses SO($5$) symmetry. Moreover it also has a hidden SU($4$) symmetry in the bipartite lattice[@Wu2003]. We can define a particle-hole transformation $b^\mu\rightarrow\mathcal{J}b^{\mu\dagger}$ with an antisymmetric matrix $\mathcal{J}=i\sigma^x\tau^y$. With this operation, the fundamental representation transforms to a conjugate representation where $\Gamma^{ab*}=\Gamma^{ab}$ and $\Gamma^{a*}=-\Gamma^{a}$. If transforming all $B$ sublattices into the conjugate representation, then we have, $$H=J\sum_{\langle i,j\rangle}\left[\sum_{1\leq a<b\leq5}\Gamma_i^{ab*}\Gamma_j^{ab}+\sum_{a=1}^5\Gamma_i^{a*}\Gamma_j^a\right].
\label{eq15}$$ One should note that Eq. (\[eq14\]) is invariant under SU($4$) rotations and conjugate rotations on sublattices $A$ and $B$, respectively, rather than under uniform SU($4$) transformations.
In a square lattice, the SU($4$) linear spin wave theory shows a long-range Neel order which is consistent with the quantum Monte Carlo simulations[@Harada2003]. There are three local order parameters of SU($4$) Neel order in the square lattice: $\left(\Gamma^{12},\Gamma^{34},\Gamma^5\right)=\left((-1)^{x+y}m,(-1)^{x+y}m,m\right)$. In the case of spin-$3/2$, they can be expanded in multipole orders as defined in Eq. (\[eq4\]): $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma^{12} &= {2\over \sqrt{5}}(2M_{1,0}-M_{3,0}), \\
\Gamma^{34} &= {2\over \sqrt{5}}(M_{1,0}+2M_{3,0}), \\
\Gamma^5 &=2M_{2,0}.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, we choose to calculate a quadrupolar-quadrupolar correlation function along high symmetry directions, $$M_2(k,\omega)\propto\sum_{r,r'}e^{i{\bf k}\cdot({\bf r}-{\bf r'})}\int dt e^{-i\omega t} \left\langle \sum_m M_{2,m}({\bf r})M_{2,m}^{\dagger}({\bf r},t)\right\rangle,$$ The numerical results are shown in Fig. \[fig1\]. The Goldstone manifold is CP($3$) = U($4$)$/[$U(1)$\bigotimes $U($3$)$]$ with $6$ branches of spin waves, which are degenerated and look like the dispersion of the SU($2$) antiferromagnetic spin waves in a square lattice. However, the quadrupolar-quadrupolar correlation exhibits a noticeable intensity at the $\Gamma=(0,0)$ point as shown in Fig. \[fig1\]. It is in sharp contrast to the behavior of the antiferromagnetic spin-spin correlation, which vanishes at that point.
 Spin waves of the SU($4$) antiferromagnetic model in a square lattice along high symmetry directions. The dashed lines denote the dispersions, and the size and color of the marks indicate the intensity of the quadrupolar-quadrupolar correlation function.](su4.pdf){width="40.00000%"}
SU($N$) spin wave study of TMOs {#tmo}
===============================
As we know, most of TMOs have a magnetic ordered ground state. Considering that these magnetic ordered states can be described by isospins which are the entangled states of spin and orbital degrees of freedom, we use the SU($N$) spin wave theory to investigate excitations from the ordered state. We will first present a general method to derive the effective exchange model from an electron model in the strong interaction limit. We consider the multi-band Hubbard model which is suitable to describe properties of TMOs, $$H=\sum_{\langle ij\rangle,\alpha\alpha'}t_{\alpha\alpha'}^{ij} c^{\dagger}_{i\alpha}c_{j\alpha'}+\sum_iH_i.
\nonumber$$ Here the first term is hopping terms with $t_{\alpha\alpha'}^{ij}$ the element of hopping integrals, and $\alpha$ indicates all the local degrees of freedom, such as orbitals and spins. $H_i$ are the local interactions which include the multi-band Hubbard term $V_i$, SOC $O_i$, and local potential field $W_i$, $$\begin{aligned}
V_i&=
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{mm'nn'}\sum_{\sigma\tau\mu\nu}\delta_{\sigma\nu}\delta_{\tau\mu}
\{U\delta_{m=m'=n=n'} (1-\delta_{\sigma\tau}) \nonumber \\
&+ U^{\prime}\delta_{mn'}\delta_{m'n}(1-\delta_{mm'}) + J_{h}\delta_{mn}\delta_{m'n'}(1-\delta_{mm'}) \nonumber \\
&+ J^{\prime}\delta_{mm'}\delta_{mn'}(1-\delta_{mn})(1-\delta_{\sigma\tau})\} \nonumber \\
&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\cdot c^\dag_{im\sigma}c^\dag_{im'\tau}c_{in\mu}c_{in'\nu},
\label{eq:Hu}\\
O_i&=\lambda \bm{S}_i\cdot \bm{L}_i,\label{eq:SOC}\\
W_i&= \sum_{\alpha\beta} w_{i\alpha\beta}c_{i\alpha}^\dagger c_{i\beta}.\label{eq:SOC}\end{aligned}$$ where $U$ ($U^{\prime}$) is the intra-orbital (inter-orbital) Coulomb interaction, $J_{h}$ and $J^{\prime}$ are the Hund’s coupling and the pairing hopping, respectively. In this paper, we employ $U=U^\prime+2J_{h}$ and $J^\prime=J_{h}$ as used usually.
By means of the perturbation theory, we treat the hopping terms as the perturbation in the strong interaction limit and obtain the effective exchange model which can be generally written as, $$\begin{aligned}
H_{\rm eff}&=&\sum_iP_i^0H_iP_i^0+\sum_{\langle i,j\rangle}\left[H_{i\rightarrow j}+H_{j\rightarrow i}\right],
\label{eq16}\\
H_{i\rightarrow j}&=&\sum_{ \footnotesize{\begin{array}{c}
(lre)\\
\alpha\alpha'\beta\beta
\end{array}}
}{1\over \Delta_{lre}}t_{\alpha'\alpha}^{\langle ij\rangle}\left[s_i^{\alpha'\beta'}\right]_{(lre)}t_{\beta\beta'}^{\langle ji\rangle}\left[\tilde{s}_j^{\beta\alpha}\right]_{(lre)}.\label{eq17}\end{aligned}$$ The first term in Eq. (\[eq16\]) is the zero and first order perturbation term, and the second is the second order perturbation term accounting for the virtual hoppings of electrons contributing to spin exchanges. $P_i^0$ is the operator projecting the Hamiltonian $H_i$ into its low-energy subspace. $s_i^{\alpha\beta}=c^{\dagger}_{i\alpha}c_{i\beta}$ and $\tilde{s}_i^{\beta\alpha}=c_{i\alpha} c_{i\beta}^{\dagger}$ are SU($N$) generators and their conjugate representation, respectively. $(lre)$ denotes various scattering channels related to the virtual processes from a low energy state $|\psi_r\rangle=\prod_i|r_i\rangle$ to a high one $|\psi_e\rangle=\prod_i|e_i\rangle$, and back to the low one $|\psi_l\rangle=\prod_i|l_i\rangle$, where $\prod_i|r_i\rangle$ is the eigenstate of Hamiltonian $\sum_iH_i$. $1/ \Delta_{lre}= 1/2(E_{li}+E_{lj}-E_{ei}-E_{ej})+ 1/2(E_{ri}+E_{rj}-E_{ei}-E_{ej})$, in which $E_{mi}$ ($m=l,e,r$) is the eigenenergy of the local state $|m_i\rangle$ on the site $i$. $[~]_{(lre)}$ indicates a special representation of $s_i^{\alpha\beta}$ and $\tilde{s}_j^{\beta\alpha}$ in the states $(|l_i\rangle,|r_i\rangle,|e_i\rangle)$ $$\begin{aligned}
% \nonumber to remove numbering (before each equation)
\left[s_i^{\alpha\beta}\right]_{(lre)} &=& |l_i\rangle\langle l_i|c_i^{\alpha\dagger} |e_i\rangle\langle e_i| c_i^\beta |r_i\rangle\langle r_i|,\nonumber\\
&=&\langle l_i|c_i^{\alpha\dagger} |e_i\rangle\langle e_i| c_i^\beta |r_i\rangle S_i^{l_ir_i},\\
\left[\tilde{s}_i^{\beta\alpha}\right]_{(lre)} &=& |l_i\rangle\langle l_i|c_i^{\alpha} |e_i\rangle\langle e_i| c_i^{\beta\dagger} |r_i\rangle\langle r_i|,\nonumber\\
&=&\langle l_i|c_i^{\alpha} |e_i\rangle\langle e_i| c_i^{\beta\dagger} |r_i\rangle S_i^{l_ir_i},\\\end{aligned}$$ where $S_i^{l_ir_i}=|l_i\rangle\langle r_i|$ is the SU($N$) generator in the fundamental representation defined on the low-energy space of $H_i$. We note the symmetry of Hamiltonian Eq. (\[eq17\]) is related to the symmetry of $(|l_i\rangle,|r_i\rangle,|e_i\rangle)$ and $t_{\alpha'\alpha}^{ij}$, which are determined by the symmetry of the crystal structure. Now with Eq. (\[eq16\]), we will carry out the SU($N$) spin wave calculation.
Three band Hubbard model with an SOC on the hexagon lattice
-----------------------------------------------------------
As an illustration of the application of the SU($N$) spin wave theory, let us first consider a simple three band Hubbard model with one spin-$1/2$ particle per site and SOC, $-\lambda \vec{s}\cdot\vec{l}$ (The minus sign is due to that $l$ is a mirror angular momentum) on the hexagon lattice. The Hubbard term presents SU($2$) and SO($3$) symmetry with $U=U'+2J_h$. Focusing on the effect of Hund’s coupling and SOC, we suppose a simply isotripic hopping term, $t_{\alpha'\alpha}^{ij}=t\delta_{\alpha'\alpha}$ only among the nearest neighbours.
If SOC is absent, its effective exchange model is comparatively explicit. Because the wave functions of two on-site fermions have to be antisymmetric, there are only three exchange channels. The initial and final low energy states are singly occupied states with zero energy, and three intermediate states which are vacuum states on one site and doubly occupied states on the other site with 1) total spins are $S=1$, total orbital momentums $L=1$ and $\Delta_{lre}=-U+3J_h$, 2) total spins are $S=0$, total orbital momentums $L=2$ and $\Delta_{lre}=-U+J_h$ and 3) total spins are $S=0$, total orbital momentums $L=0$ and $\Delta_{lre}=-U-2J_h$. However, when SOC is comparable to the Hubbard term, $\lambda\sim U$, there will be $20=2\times5\times2$ channels due to the interplay of the SOC and Hund’s coupling: two kinds of initial and final states with energy $\lambda/2$ and $-\lambda$ respectively, and five kinds of intermediate states with energy $U-3J_h-\lambda/2,(2U-J_h-\lambda\pm\sqrt{25J_h^2+10J_h\lambda+9\lambda^2})/2$ and $(4U-8J_h+\lambda\pm\sqrt{16J_h^2+8J_h\lambda+9\lambda^2})/4$. Substituting $\Delta_{lre}$ with the corresponding $(|l_i\rangle,|r_i\rangle,|e_i\rangle)$ and $t_{\alpha'\alpha}^{ij}$ into Eq. (\[eq17\]), we can easily obtain the exchange model numerically.
If $J_h=0,\lambda=0$, $H_i$ has SU($6$) symmetry, so does $(|l_i\rangle,|r_i\rangle,|e_i\rangle)$ and $t_{\alpha'\alpha}^{ij}$, but the symmetry of eigenstates will be broken into SU($2$) by either SOC or Hund’s coupling. Furthermore, when $t_{\alpha'\alpha}^{ij}$ is SU($2$) symmetrical, the effective Hamiltonian must be SU($2$) symmetrical too. If $\lambda\gg J_h$, only the lowest energy channel is active. In this case, the Hamiltonian can be further approximated to be an effective isospin-$1/2$ model. However, the Hund’s coupling will lower the energy of the spin parallelling states of two electrons, while the SOC will lower the energy of single electron $J_{\rm eff}=s-l=1/2$ states. This would influence the validity of the isospin $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ model. Therefore, we intend to take both $\lambda$ and $J_h$ into account to examine the SU($6$) spin-wave spectrum of the system.
 Weights of the $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ states in ground states vary with $\lambda$ and $J_h$, calculated based on the three band Hubbard model with an SOC on the hexagon lattice. The intra-orbital Coulomb interaction is $U=5.0$ ](phase.pdf){width="30.00000%"}
Firstly, the local mean field theory suggests a magnetic cell with two sites, so we suppose the local mean field wave function in two sublattices of the hexagon lattice are $|T_A\rangle$ and $|T_B\rangle$. In order to verify the validity of the isospin $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ model, we calculate the weight $(\langle J_{\rm eff}=1/2|T_A\rangle$+$\langle J_{\rm eff}=1/2|T_B\rangle)/2$ of $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ states in ground states as shown in Fig. \[fig2\]. We use the hopping term $t=1$ as unit, set $U=5.0$ and change $\lambda$ and $J_h$ from $0$ to $1.2$. There are roughly three regions: **A**. Rightside region in which the ground states are dominated by $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ states; **B**. A bump in the area of small $\lambda$ and $J_h$ where ground states are also dominated by $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ states; **C**. $J_h$ is so large that the ground states are mixed by the $J_{\rm eff}=3/2$ states. The blue discontinuous region on the right top is due to the divergence of the second order perturbation, which means the SOC gap is comparable to the Hubbard gap. Thus the low energy physics can certainly be described by the $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ doublet in the region beyond this discontinuous region (where the SOC is dominated).
 Spin waves of three band Hubbard model on the hexagon lattice with SOC $\lambda$ and Hund’s coupling $J_h$, which are: a) $\lambda=0,J_h=0$, b) $\lambda>0,J_h=0$ and c) $\lambda=0,J_h>0$.](su6.pdf){width="30.00000%"}
Let us first consider some extreme situations. The calculated dispersions for spin excitations in three band Hubbard model based on the spin wave theory for several cases are shown in Fig. \[fig11\]. When $J_h=0$ and $\lambda=0$, there are highly degenerated zero energy spin waves suggesting that the magnetic order are unstable, as shown in Fig. \[fig11\] a). This is because the ground state is the SU($6$) plaquette state[@Nataf2016; @Zhao2012] in this situation, where SU($6$) spins form local singlets on a hexagon plaquette. There is no long-range ordering on which the SU($N$) spin wave theory is based, so the spin wave theory fails in this case. As $\lambda$ increases, the zero energy spin waves are lifted \[see Fig. \[fig11\] b)\], and the system approaches ordered phases because the fluctuations become weak gradually as the system departs the SU($6$) symmetry due to SOC. On the other hand, there is a ferromagnetic-like spin wave emerging when turning on the Hund’s coupling $J_h$ instead of SOC $\lambda$, as shown in Fig. \[fig11\] c). However, there is still some zero energy degeneracies. Thus, the ground state may be still an SU($6$) plaquette state or some RVB states.
 Spin waves with paremeters: a) $\lambda=0.9,J_h=0.6$, b) $\lambda=0.4,J_h=0.4$ and c) $\lambda=0.2,J_h=1.1$. The dashed lines denote dispersions. The size and saturation of makers indicate the intensity of correlation function, and three different channels are indicated by three different colors. e)Reciprocal lattices and high symmetry directions of a hexagon lattice. d)The legend indicating the compositions of the correlation function.](dcf.pdf){width="46.00000%"}
Then, we study the correlation functions in three regions **A**,**B** and **C**, respectively. In the dipole-dipole approximation, the correlation function consists of three parts of contributions: spin flippings within either $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ or $3/2$ states and spin flippings across the $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ and $J_{\rm eff}=3/2$ states, which are denoted by $1\rightleftarrows1$, $3\rightleftarrows3$ and $1\rightleftarrows3$, respectively. In Figs \[fig3\] a)-c), we present the dispersions of spin waves denoted by the dashed lines and intensities of the correlation functions indicated by the saturation of three different colors and size of markers. The colors will mix as shown by the legend in Fig. \[fig3\] e), when spin wave excitations includes more than two types of contributions. In region **A**, the result suggests an antiferromagnetic-like spin wave at low energies, which is linear around $\Gamma$ point and the intensity diverges at $\Gamma'$ but vanishes at $\Gamma$ point, and a ferromagnetic-like spin wave at high energies above $2$, which is parabolic around $\Gamma$ point and the intensity is higher at $\Gamma$ than $\Gamma'$ point. At the meantime, the result calculated by using the local mean field theory shows the system has a $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ antiferromagnetic ordered ground state, confirming that the excitations at low energies are indeed antiferromagnetic spin waves. As shown by the cyan-blue color in Fig. \[fig3\] a), these low-energies excitations comes basically from spin flippings within the $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ states, so the low-energy physics in region **A** is dominated by isospin-$1/2$ states. Furthermore, the excitations arising from the spin flippings across the $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ and $J_{\rm eff}=3/2$ states as denoted by the magenta color are far beyond the low-energy excitations due to the sufficiently large SOC. Thus, we arrive at the conclusion that an effective isospin Heisenberg model can depict the low-energy physics in region **A**, which is also consistent with the calculation of weights of $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ states in ground states as shown in Fig. \[fig2\]. When the SOC is decreased, we will enter gradually into region **B**. In this progress, the gap between the low-energy antiferromagnetic spin wave and the high-energy ferromagnetic spin wave decreases gradually. However, as long as $J_h$ is not large enough, although the dispersion of ferromagnetic spin waves overlaps with the low energy one, the two spin waves do not entangle each other, as indicated by Fig. \[fig3\] b) where the colors representing two different kinds of spin waves do not mix. Thus, apart from the effective isospin Heisenberg terms in the Hamiltonian, which describes the antiferromagnetic spin waves, there have to be another term to describe the ferromagnetic spin waves at least. Starting from region **B**, one can increase $J_h$ to enter into region **C**. In this region, the antiferromagnetic and ferromagnetic spin waves are entangled, so that there is no well-defined antiferromagnetic-like spin waves or ferromagnetic-like spin waves, and the local test wave functions of ground state in two different sublattices are not completely orthogonal, namely $\langle T_A|T_B\rangle\approx0.016$. Because the ground state consists of both $ J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ and $ J_{\rm eff}=3/2$ states now, the multipolar orders are inevitable to be taken into account. Its dipolar order parameters $\langle J_{\rm eff}^\alpha\rangle$ are almost antiferromagnetic, but quadrupolar order parameters $\langle J_{\rm eff}^\alpha J_{\rm eff}^\beta+J_{\rm eff}^\beta J_{\rm eff}^\alpha\rangle$ are ferromagnetic. In this case, all degrees of freedom have to be taken into account and there is no so-called isospin effective Hamiltonian, so the SU($N$) spin wave theory rather than the traditional SU($2$) one is applicable.
$\alpha$-RuCl$_3$ and Sr$_2$IrO$_4$
------------------------------------
In this subsection, we will use the SU($N$) spin-wave theory to study spin dynamics in $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$ and Sr$_2$IrO$_4$. Both $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$ and Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ have a $d^5$ configuration and have an octahedral crystal field. Their differences are that the active electrons residing in $4d$ orbitals of Ru has a smaller SOC than that in $5d$ of Ir, and $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$ is a honeycomb lattice while Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ is a square lattice.
$\alpha$-RuCl$_3$ has a layered crystal structure with $\mathrm{Ru}^{3+}$ forming the honeycomb lattice layers and the energy bands near the Fermi level are dominated by the $d$ orbitals of Ru. We consider a five band tight-binding model with five electrons per site and the on-site crystal fields to describe the $4d^5$ configuration of $\mathrm{Ru}^{3+}$. The tight-binding parameters include the nearest-, next-nearest- and third-nearest-neighbour hopping integrals, which are obtained by fitting to the energy-band dispersions calculated by the first principle calculations and given in our previous paper Ref. \[\]. We take $U=2.7~{\rm eV},J_h=0.13U, U'=U-2J_h,~{\rm and}~\lambda=0.14~{\rm eV}$[@PhysRevLett.117.126403; @PhysRevB.93.075144; @Banerjee2016; @PhysRevB.93.214431; @PhysRevB.91.241110; @Wang2017] in the following calculations. Then, an effective exchange model is obtained numerically according to Eq. (\[eq16\]). Due to the large crystal field potential on the $e_g$ orbitals, there are isolated six lowest energy states, onto which we will project the initial and final states. Using the local mean field theory and the SU($N$) Linear spin-wave approximation introduced in Sec. \[spinwave\], we investigate numerically the magnetic ground state and spin dynamics. Numerical results show that the magnetic ground state has a zigzag type order of which the magnetic unit cell contains four sites (two cells), in agreement with experiments in $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$[@Sears2015; @Banerjee2016; @Ran2017] The spin-spin correlation functions calculated by Eq. (\[eq13\]) is shown in Fig. \[fig4\] a). Below $30$ meV, four zigzag spin waves are evident, and the other sixteen excitations around $200$ meV come from the spin-orbital excitations across the $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ and $J_{\rm eff}=3/2$ states. Though there is long-range zigzag spin order, the results in Fig. \[fig4\] a) show that the low-energy spin waves have a gap of about $2$ meV at $M$ point and the spin-spin correlation function has a maximum magnitude also at $M$ point. These results are consistent with the recent experiments of inelastic neutron scatterings on $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$[@Banerjee2016; @Ran2017]. On the other hand, the gap between the zigzag spin waves and the spin-orbital excitations is of about $210$ meV, thus suggests that the low energy physics of $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$ could be captured by an effective isospin-$1/2$ model. We have found in our previous paper Ref. \[\] that the minimum effective isospin-$1/2$ model is the K-$\Gamma$ model containing a ferromagnetic nearest-neighbor Kitaev interaction (K) and a nearest-neighbor off-diagonal exchange interaction ($\Gamma$).
 Spin-spin correlation functions for $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$ a), and correlation functions of RIXS operators[@Luo1993] for Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ b) along the high-symmetry lines, calculated by the SU($N$) spin-wave theory.](RuClSrIrO.pdf){width="40.00000%"}
Now let us turn to Sr$_2$IrO$_4$. We start our investigations from a three band Hubbard model with a single hole per site to fit the band dispersion around the Fermi level[@Watanabe2010; @Wang2015], and choose $U=3.6~{\rm eV},J_h=0.18U,~{\rm and}~\lambda=0.37~{\rm eV}$ in the calculation. Because iridium is a strong absorber of neutrons, it is more useful to calculate the resonant inelastic X-ray scattering (RIXS) spectrum for the purpose of a comparison with experiments. RIXS involves a second order process that includes an absorption and an emission of a photon. In the fast collision approximation, the direct RIXS spectrum is proportional to the correlation function of spin-orbital moment operators[@Luo1993]. Due to the two scattering progresses (absorption and emission), the total angular momentum of spin-orbital moment operators is equal to the coupling of two $l=1$ angular momenta (angular momentum exchange of the two scatterings is one in the dipole limit). Thus, there exists multipole-multipole correlations in RIXS besides the usual dipole-dipole correlations. It is known that the RIXS spectrum of Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ is dependent on the incident angle[@Kim2014]. So, we calculate the correlation function for two different incident angles $\theta=8^{\circ}, 85^{\circ}$ using the SU($6$) spin theory, and the results are presented in Fig. \[fig4\] b) where the left hand one is for $\theta=8^{\circ}$ and right hand for $\theta=85^{\circ}$. Below $200$ meV, both results exhibit the gapless antiferromagnetic spin waves dispersing up linearly from the $\Gamma$ point, which are consistent with experiments in Sr$_2$IrO$_4$[@Gum2009; @Kim2012; @Kim2014]. Above $200$ meV, a gap of $180$ meV exists arising from the SOC, and the spin-orbital excitations across the gap are ferromagnetic-like spin waves that are parabolic around $\Gamma$ point. Moreover, there is a small gap in the spin-orbital exciton resulting from the splitting in the $t_{2g}$ orbital. We also notice that these spin-orbital exciton modes correspond to a type of SU($N$) bosons in the framework of the SU($N$) spin-wave theory. As for the incident-angle dependence of the spectrum, one can see that the scattering intensity of the low-energy $J_{\rm eff}=1/2$ antiferromagnetic magnon is suppressed heavily, and at the same time the spin-orbital excitations are strongly enhanced for a small incident angle such as $\theta=8^{\circ}$, as shown in the left-hand side in Fig. \[fig4\] b). While, an opposite behavior of the spectrum is observed for a large incident angle such as $\theta=85^{\circ}$ (the right-hand side in Fig. \[fig4\] b)). Around the $\Gamma'$ point, the intensity vanishes and only the dispersion of the spectrum is reserved, because the resolution is influenced due to the antiferromagnetic divergence at $\Gamma'$.
The results presented above demonstrate a good performance of the SU($N$) spin wave theory in the study of magnetic orders and dynamics in TMOs. Compared with the SU($2$) spin wave theory, the SU($N$) theory contains more than one type of uncondensed bosons, so that the spin-orbital or multipolar orders and excitations can be captured. Of course, the linear approximation used here involves only single magnon excitations and does not take their interactions into account. So, the broadening and renormalization of the magnonic spectrum are not captured. To study other spin dynamics, such as magnon decay effects[@Chernyshev2009; @Winter2017], one should goes beyond the linear order approximation. We note that some modifications of the spin-wave theory [@Takahashi1989; @Du2015] have been developed in the SU($2$) case, their generalizations to the SU($N$) case deserve further study.
Conclusion
==========
In summary, we implement the application of the SU($N$) spin wave theory by introducing an efficient local mean field method based on the supercoherent state. The approach is tested firstly by applying to the investigation of magnetic properties in the SU($4$) antiferromagnetic model in a square lattice. We find a long-range Neel order which is consistent with the quantum Monte Carlo simulations, and this order can be interpreted by multipolar orders of $3/2$ spins. We have also calculated the multipolar spin waves of the SU($4$) antiferromagnetic model, to demonstrate the application of SU($N$) spin wave theory in the description of multipolar orderings. Due to the entanglement of spin and orbital degrees of freedom, the multipole-multipole exchange terms are also present in the effective exchange models of spin-orbital Mott insulators. Only if the spin-orbital coupling is large enough that the low-energy physics is confined in Kramers doublet, the effective Hamiltonian will be described by an isospin-$1/2$ model. In this aspect, we examine a toy three-band Hubbard model on a hexagon lattice and find that the Hund’s coupling also affects the validity of the isospin-$1/2$ picture when the spin-orbital coupling is below a critical value. Finally, we apply the SU($N$) spin wave theory to two systems of spin-orbital Mott insulators, $\alpha$-RuCl$_3$ and Sr$_2$IrO$_4$. Our results for the magnetic ground states and their low-energy spin dynamics in both systems are consistent with recent experiments. We also obtain the high-energy spin-orbital excitations across the gap in the presence of the spin-orbital coupling.
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11374138 and 11774152) and National Key Projects for Research and Development of China (Grant No. 2016YFA0300401).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
Loeb and Waxman have argued that high energy neutrinos from the decay of pions produced in interactions of cosmic rays with interstellar gas in starburst galaxies would be produced with a large enough flux to be observable. Their model is reexamined here and we obtain an upper limit to the diffuse neutrino flux from starburst galaxies. The upper limit obtained here is a factor of $\sim$5 lower than the flux which they predict. Our predicted neutrino flux would be below the atmospheric neutrino foreground flux at energies below $\sim$ 300 TeV and therefore would be unobservable. Compared with predicted fluxes from other extragalactic high energy neutrino sources, starburst neutrinos with $\sim$ PeV energies would have a flux considerably below that predicted for AGN models.
We also estimate an upper limit for the diffuse GeV [ $\gamma$-ray]{} flux from starbust galaxies to be $\cal{O}$$(10^{-2})$ of the observed [ $\gamma$-ray]{}background, much less than the component from unresolved blazars and more than an order of magnitude below the estimate of Thompson [**]{}
address: 'NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA'
author:
- 'F.W. Stecker'
title: 'Are Diffuse High Energy Neutrinos and [ $\gamma$-rays]{} from Starburst Galaxies Observable?'
---
= 1.0truecm
extragalactic neutrinos; starburst galaxies
Introduction
============
Interactions of cosmic-ray nuclei with interstellar gas nuclei in our galaxy produce secondary pions. The neutral pions then decay to produce most of the galactic $\gamma$-rays above 0.1 GeV which have been observed [@st77]; the decay of the charged pions produces galactic cosmic-ray neutrinos [@st79].
It was pointed out 30 years ago that the distribution of high energy [ $\gamma$-rays]{} in our Galaxy is related to the distribution of molecular clouds and very young hot high-mass stars in OB associations which are short-lived and explode into supernovae [@st75; @st76]. This association between supernovae which are likely to produce cosmic rays and dense regions of molecular gas led to the scenario where interactions between the gas and cosmic rays then produce the [ $\gamma$-rays]{} [*via*]{} the decay of the $\pi^0$ mesons produced in these interactions. A natural implication then would be that galaxies which were undergoing a phase of extremely active star formation would be likely sources of high energy [ $\gamma$-rays]{}. Such sources are known as “starburst galaxies”. Detailed model calculations have been made to predict [ $\gamma$-ray]{}fluxes above 100 MeV for the starburst galaxies Arp 220 [@to04] and NGC 253 [@to05]. The predicted flux for Arp 220 is close to the sensitivity limit for the [*GLAST*]{} large area telescope whereas the predicted flux for NGC 253 is an order of magnitude higher than that sensitivity limit[^1] and close to the upper limit obtained from the [*EGRET*]{} data [@bl99].
Loeb and Waxman (LW) have suggested that such hadronic processes in starbust galaxies, involving cosmic ray interactions with interstellar gas followed by the decay of $\pi^{\pm}$’s, can produce, [*in toto*]{}, a large enough background of diffuse high energy neutrinos to be observable [@lw06] with a very large neutrino detector such as [*Icecube*]{} [@ha06]. LW then argue that radio observations of starburst galaxies imply a [*lower limit*]{} on the cumulative extragalactic neutrino flux from starburst galaxies which is within the sensitivity range of [*Icecube*]{}. This argument is examined here and the opposite conclusion is obtained. Indeed, we derive an [*upper limit*]{} to the cumulative high energy neutrino flux from starburst galaxies. The diffuse flux of GeV [ $\gamma$-rays]{} from the same processes is found to be $\cal{O}$$(10^{-2})$ of the observed [ $\gamma$-ray]{}background, much less than the component from unresolved blazars and more than an order of magnitude below the estimate of Thompson [**]{} [@th06].
Radio Emission and the Neutrino Flux from Starbust Galaxies
===========================================================
LW start with the observed synchrotron emission from starburst galaxies which is produced by relativistic electrons in these sources [@yu01]. They then make the assumptions that (1) the presence of relativistic electrons in these sources implies the presence of relativistic protons, (2) the protons lose essentially all of their energy to pion production, and (3), a lower limit to the energy loss rate of the protons can then be obtained from the synchrotron radio flux by assuming that all of the electrons (and positrons) which are radiating are from pion decay.
Assumption (1) is a reasonable one which is supported by observations of cosmic rays in our own Milky Way galaxy. Assumption (3), [*viz.*]{}, the “lower limit” assumption depends on assumption (2). However, assumptions (2) and (3) can be questioned because (a) the synchrotron radiating electrons may be largely accelerated primaries rather than secondaries related to pion production and decay as is the case in our own Galaxy, and (b) the conditions in starburst galaxies are significantly different from those in our own galaxy. In particular, starburst galaxies exhibit strong “superwinds” [@ho03]. Such winds have significant dynamical effects and may disrupt magnetic fields and drive protons out of these galaxies before they can lose all of their energy by interacting with interstellar gas nuclei to produce pions. In contrast, assumption (2) of LW assumes full trapping of relativistic nuclei in the disks of starburst galaxies to the point where they only lose energy in hadronic interactions with gas atoms. This is in stark contrast to the situation in our own galaxy. (See footnote 2.)
These two caveats call into serious question the argument that the radio data can provide a true lower limit on the cumulative diffuse flux of neutrinos from starburst galaxies. Let us, however, ignore them and consider that assumptions (1)-(3) are reasonable for obtaining an analytic [*upper limit*]{} for such a flux. Let us then accept the other estimates which lead to the ratio of injected power of protons to electrons at a fixed particle energy, $\eta_{p/e} \simeq 6$ and a neutrino luminosity which is then related to the local radio luminosity density by
$$E_{\nu}^2\Phi_{\nu} (E_{\nu} = 1 GeV) \simeq (ct_{H}/4\pi)\zeta
[4f(dL_{f}/dV)]_{f = 1.4 GHz}$$
where $t_{H}$ is the age of the universe and $\zeta = 3$ is an evolution factor which takes account of the fact that starburst galaxies were more numerous in the past [@lw06]. LW take the local energy production rate per unit volume at a frequency f = 1.4 GHz to be $\simeq 10^{28.5}$ W Mpc$^{-3}$. Let us reexamine this value for $f(dL_{f}/dV)]_{f = 1.4 GHz}$.
The local 1.4 GHz energy production rate has been derived by LW by making use of an important connection bewteen radio emission and far infrared (FIR) emission in galaxies given in the paper of Yun, Reddy and Condon (YRC) [@yu01]. That paper uses the data on [*IRAS*]{} galaxies to derive the local infrared luminosity density at 60 $\mu$m to be $2.6 \times 10^7 L_{{\ifmmode_{\mathord\odot}\else$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi}}$ Mpc$^{-3}$. This [*total*]{} power density is then used by LW to obtain the 1.4 GHz power density [*via*]{} a strong empirical correlation between the FIR and 1.4 GHz luminosity densities.
The key difference between the result to be derived here and that obtained by LW is in chosing how to interpret the paper of YRC. YRC state that less than 10% of the local FIR luminosity density is contributed by luminous IR galaxies with $L_{FIR} > 10^{11} M_{{\ifmmode_{\mathord\odot}\else$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi}}$; this is the component which includes the starburst galaxies. (Figure 11 of YRC yields an estimate of $\sim$ 6%.)
If we take the local contribution from starburst galaxies at 60$\mu$m to be $2.6 \times 10^6L_{{\ifmmode_{\mathord\odot}\else$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi}}$ (the 10% upper limit found by YRC), using the relation (4) of YRC as shown in their Fig. 5(a) one finds that the component of the local radio luminosity density related to the starburst galaxies is at most $\Phi_{\rm 1.4
GHz} = 10^{18.4}$ W Hz$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-3}$ which, when multiplied by 1.4 GHz, gives $\Phi_{1.4 GHz} < 10^{27.5}$ W Mpc$^{-3}$. This value is an order of magnitude lower than the flux obtained by LW [@lw06].[^2]
This is not the whole story because there is a higher relative fraction of the energy input from the higher relative number of starburst galaxies at higher redshifts. To estimate this effect, we assume that the FIR background is proportional to the integrated star formation activity rate. The fraction of the FIR background, $\kappa(\Delta z)$ contributed by galaxies in different redshift ranges, $\Delta z$, is obtained from Ref. [@la05]. Then we multiply $\kappa(\Delta z$) by the fraction of the FIR background contributed by starburst galaxies in different redshift ranges, $\xi(\Delta z)$, to estimate the mean fraction of the total FIR background contributed by starburst galaxies. Estimates for $\kappa$ and $\xi$ are shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Relative contributions to the $\nu$ Starburst Galaxy Flux (see text).
Redshift Range ($\Delta z$) $\kappa(\Delta z)$ [@la05] $\xi(\Delta z)$ Reference for $\xi$
----------------------------- ---------------------------- ----------------- ---------------------
0 to 0.2 10% $<$ 10% [@yu01]
0.2 to 1.2 68% $\sim$ 13% [@la05]
$>$1.2 22% $\sim$ 60% [@er06]
Using the results from Table 1, we estimate that 23% of the observed FIR background integrated over redshift is from starburst galaxies.
Observability of High Energy Neutrinos from Starburst Galaxies
==============================================================
The upper limit on the radio flux from starburst galaxies obtained above can be used to obtain an upper limit on the neutrino flux from starburst galaxies by using equation (1) as derived by LW. One then finds that the neutrino background energy flux from starburst galaxies would be at most $\sim 2 \times 10^{-8}$ GeV cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ Such a flux would be undetectable above the atmospheric background neutrino flux, even if equation (1) is assumed to be valid when extrapolated to 300 TeV and even granting all of the assumptions made by LW.
Table 2: Neutrino Energy Fluxes (GeV cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$)
$\nu$ Source $E^2\Phi(10 \rm TeV)$ $E^2\Phi(100\rm TeV)$ $E^2\Phi(1 \rm PeV)$ Reference
--------------------- ----------------------- ------------------------- ---------------------- ------------
Atm: AMANDA-II $2 \times 10^{-6}$ $7 \times 10^{-8}$ $<3 \times 10^{-9}$ [@bo06]
Atm (Vertical) $7 \times 10^{-7}$ $\sim 2 \times 10^{-9}$ — [@ga05]
AMANDA-II Diff.Lim. $9 \times 10^{-8}$ $9 \times 10^{-8}$ $9 \times 10^{-8}$ [@hi06]
Starburst Galaxies $< 2 \times 10^{-8}$ $< 2 \times 10^{-8}$ $< 2 \times 10^{-8}$ This paper
AGN Cores $5 \times 10^{-10}$ $10^{-8}$ $10^{-7}$ [@st05]
AGN $3 \times 10^{-9}$ $3 \times 10^{-8}$ $2 \times 10^{-7}$ [@mpr]
GRB $5 \times 10^{-10}$ $3 \times 10^{-9}$ $3 \times 10^{-9}$ [@wb]
Icecube Sensitivity — $4 \times 10^{-9}$ $4 \times 10^{-9}$ [@ri05]
Table 2 shows a comparison of the upper limit on the flux from starburst galaxies given here with the atmospheric neutrino flux and with approximate model predictions of neutrino fluxes [ $\gamma$-ray]{} bursts (GRB) and active galactic nuclei (AGN) along with detector array sensitivities. It can be seen from this table that at 100 TeV none of the extragalactic sources proposed will dominate over the atmospheric foreground. The table shows that the present preliminary upper limit on the diffuse neutrino energy flux below 1 PeV from AMANDA-II is $\sim8.8 \times 10^{-8}$ GeV cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ in the 10 TeV to 1 PeV energy range [@hi06]. The full [*Icecube*]{} detector array is expected to push down to a sensitivity of $\sim 10^{-9}$ GeV cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ in the energy range 100 TeV $< E_{\nu} <$ 100 PeV after several years of observation.[^3] Under the extreme assumption that the primary cosmic ray spectra in all starburst galaxies are as hard as $E^{-2}$ up to energies $\cal{O}$(10 PeV), PeV neutrinos from starburst galaxies may be detectable just above the projected sensitivity of [*Icecube*]{}.[^4] However, as can be seen from Table 2, above 1 PeV the AGN models predict fluxes which will be significantly larger than the the atmospheric foreground (expected to be $< 3 \times 10^{-9})$ GeV cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ at 1 PeV), as well as the fluxes from [ $\gamma$-ray]{} bursts (GRB) and starburst galaxies.
Observability of Diffuse [ $\gamma$-rays]{} from Starburst Galaxies
===================================================================
In a follow-up paper to LW, Thompson [**]{} [@th06] have estimated the contribution of $\pi^{0}$-decay [ $\gamma$-rays]{} from starburst galaxies to the observed [ $\gamma$-ray]{} background in the GeV energy range. Using an $E^{-2}$ primary spectrum they get estimates of $E^2\Phi(E)$ fluxes for both [ $\gamma$-rays]{} and neutrinos of $3 \times 10^{-7}$ GeV cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$. This is a factor of 3 larger than the neutrino flux of LW because they estimate that all of the electrons in these galaxies are from $\pi^{\pm}$ decay and they make the further hypothesis that a significant fraction the synchrotron radiating electrons which emit at 1.4 GHz lose energy by processes other than synchotron radiation ([*viz.*]{}, bremsstrahlung and ionization in dense gas clouds.) Should the diffuse differential neutrino particle spectrum continue $\propto E^{-2}$ up to 10 TeV and above, the flux predicted in Ref. [@th06] would be more than a factor of 3 above the AMANDA-II limit, although no such claim is made in Ref. [@th06].
Our estimated [ $\gamma$-ray]{} flux for the same $E^{-2}$ primary spectrum is $\sim 2 \times 10^{-8}$ GeV cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ for [ $\gamma$-ray]{} energies less than $\sim 10$ GeV. This is $\cal{O}$$(10^{-2})$ of the observed flux of $\sim 1.4 \times
10^{-6}$ GeV cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ determined by the [*EGRET*]{} group [@sr98]. Above $\sim 10$ GeV the background spectrum will steepen owing to absorption from pair production interactions with the extragalactic ultraviolet background radiation [@ss96]. It should be noted in this context that Stecker and Salamon have shown that the bulk of the observed background can be produced by unresolved blazars [@ss96]. Thus, the contribution to the diffuse [ $\gamma$-ray]{} background from starburst galaxies should be unobservable. In this context, we note that almost all of the observed extragalactic GeV [ $\gamma$-ray]{} sources are blazars; no starburst galaxies have been observed.
Acknowlegdments {#acknowlegdments .unnumbered}
===============
The author would like to thank Eliot Quataert for his comments and for bringing Ref. [@th06] to his attention. This work was supported by NASA Grant ATP03-0000-0057.
[999]{}
Stecker, F. W. 1977, [*[ Astrophys. J.]{}*]{} [**212**]{}, 60.
Stecker, F. W. 1979, [*[ Astrophys. J.]{}*]{} [**228**]{}, 919.
Stecker, F. W. 1975, [*[ Phys. Rev. Letters]{}*]{} [**35**]{}, 188.
Stecker, F. W. 1976, [*Nature*]{} [**260**]{}, 412.
Torres, D. F. 2004, [*[ Astrophys. J.]{}*]{} [**617**]{}, 966.
Domingo-Santamaría, E. and Torres, D. F. 2005, [*Astron. and Astrophys.*]{} [**444**]{}, 403.
Blom, J. J.[**]{} 1999, [*[ Astrophys. J.]{}*]{} [**516**]{}, 744.
Loeb, A. and Waxman, E. [*JCAP*]{} 05(2006)003.
Halzen, F. 2006, [e-print astro-ph/ ]{}0602132.
Thompson, T. A., Quataert, E. and Waxman, E. 2006, [e-print astro-ph/ ]{}0606665.
Yun, M. S., Reddy, N. A. and Condon, J. J. 2001, [*[ Astrophys. J.]{}*]{} [**554**]{}, 803.
Lagache,G., Dole, H. and Puget, J.-L. 2005, in [*The Fabulous Destiny of Galaxies: Bridging Past and Present*]{}, in press, [e-print astro-ph/ ]{}0509556. Erb, D. K., [**]{} 2006, [*[ Astrophys. J.]{}*]{} [**646**]{}, 107.
Hoopes, C. G. [**]{} 2003 , [*[ Astrophys. J.]{}*]{} [**596**]{}, L175.
Bouchta, A. 2006, [e-print astro-ph/ ]{}0606235.
Gaisser, T. K. 2005, [*Phys. Scripta*]{} [**T121**]{}, 51.
Hill, G.C. (for the IceCube Collaboration) 2006, paper presented at the [*Neutrino 2006 Intl. Conf.*]{}, Santa Fe, NM.
Stecker, F. W. 2005, [*Phys. Rev. D*]{} [**72**]{} 107301.
Mannheim, K., Protheroe, R. J. and Rachen, J. P. 2001, [*Phys. Rev. D*]{} [**63**]{} 023003.
Waxman, E. and Bahcall, J. N. 1997, [*[ Phys. Rev. Letters]{}*]{} [**78**]{}, 2292.
The Icecube Collaboration (M. Ribordy [**]{}), [e-print astro-ph/ ]{}0509322.
Sreekumar, P. [*et al*]{} 1998, [*[ Astrophys. J.]{}*]{} [**494**]{}, 523.
Stecker, F. W. and Salamon, M. H. 1996, [*[ Astrophys. J.]{}*]{} [**464**]{}, 600.
[^1]: For information on [*GLAST*]{} see [http://www-glast.stanford.edu]{}
[^2]: One might also ask why not consider more “normal” galaxies with lower FIR luminosities and add them all in to estimate a higher neutrino flux? We note that in the case of our own galaxy, cosmic rays lose only a small fraction of their energy in pion producing interactions before escaping the disk, contrary to assumption (2). Also, cosmic rays with energies above 1 PeV (the relevant range for producing 100 TeV neutrinos) have a differential particle spectrum $\propto E^{-3.2}$, much steeper than the $E^{-2}$ spectrum assumed by LW. This spectrum probably reflects both a steeper composite source spectrum and a shorter confinement time than those at lower energies.
[^3]: F. Halzen, private communication
[^4]: Even if we make a second extreme assumption that 100% of the IR galaxies at redshifts greater than 1.2 are starburst galaxies, we would still predict a neutrino flux $< 3 \times 10^{-8}$ GeV cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We present an algorithm that enables one to perform locally adaptive block thresholding, while maintaining image continuity. Images are divided into sub-images based some standard image attributes and thresholding technique is employed over the sub-images. The present algorithm makes use of the thresholds of neighboring sub-images to calculate a range of values. The image continuity is taken care by choosing the threshold of the sub-image under consideration to lie within the above range. After examining the average range values for various sub-image sizes of a variety of images, it was found that the range of acceptable threshold values is substantially high, justifying our assumption of exploiting the freedom of range for bringing out local details.'
address:
- 'University of Buffalo, NY, 14260, USA'
- 'Physical Research Laboratory, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad, 380 009, India'
- 'Dhirubhai Ambani Institute of Information and Communication Technology, Gandhinagar, 382 009, India'
author:
- 'S. Hemachander'
- 'A. Verma'
- 'S. Arora'
- 'Prasanta K. Panigrahi'
title: Locally Adaptive Block Thresholding Method with Continuity Constraint
---
,
,
,
Block Thresholding; Boundary Mismatch; Image Continuity; Image Variance
Introduction
============
Applications like document image analysis \[Dawoud and Kamel (2001)\], quality inspection of materials, non-destructive testing \[Sezgen and Sankur (2001)\] etc., require the concerned images to be thresholded. Numerous methods to perform image thresholding exist in the literature \[Trier and Jain (1995), Sezgen and Sakur (2004), Sahoo and Soltani (1998), Huang et al. (2005)\]. Thresholding algorithms can be classified into the following main categories: Histogram shape \[Rosennfeld and Torre (1983), Sezan (1985), Ramesh et al. (1995), Wang et al. (2002)\], where the aim of the algorithm is to find an optimal threshold that separates two major peaks in the histogram, is implemented by sending a smoothing filter on the histogram and then a difference filter or by fitting the histogram with two Gaussians. But the main disadvantage of histogram-based methods is their disregard of spatial information. Image entropy based methods \[Pun (1980), Kapur et al.(1985), Li and Lee(1993),Li and Tam (1998)\] use the entropy of the image as a constraint for threshold selection. The two common ways in which this can be done is by the maximization of entropy of the thresholded image or minimization of cross entropy between input image and the output binary image.
General image attributes \[Tsai (1985), Hertz and Schafer (1998), Gorman (1994), Arora et al. (2005)\] can also be effectively used, where the threshold is selected based on some similarity measure between the original image and the binarized version of the image. These can take the form of edges, shapes, color or other suitable attributes like compactness or connectivity of the objects, resulting from the binarization process or the coincidence of edge fields. But the disadvantage of the above method lies in its complexity and the relatively low image quality.
Clustering of gray level \[Ridler and Calward (1978), Leung and Lam (1996), Kittler and Illingworth (1986), Pal and Pal (1989)\], based methods aim to find two clusters in pixel distribution, a foreground cluster and a background cluster. Various algorithms exist for finding these clusters. Spatial information \[Abutaleb (1989)\] utilize information of objects and background pixels in the form of context probabilities, correlation functions, co-occurrence probabilities, local linear dependence models of pixels, two dimensional entropy etc.
Locally adaptive thresholding based methods \[White and Rohrer (1983), Niblack (1986), Lindquist (1999), Trier and Taxt (1995)\], are characterized by calculation of threshold at every pixel. The value of the threshold depends upon some local parameters like mean, variance, and surface fitting parameters or their suitable combinations. In one approach, the gray value of the pixel is compared with the average of the gray values in some neighborhood; if the pixel is significantly larger than the average, it is assigned as foreground, otherwise it is classified as background. Another common method adapts the thresholding according to local mean $ (\mu) $ and standard deviation $ (\sigma) $ over the window size. The threshold at every pixel $(i, j)$ is calculated as $ T (i, j)=\mu(i, j)+k.s (i, j)$, for a suitable value of k. Niblack’s method for thresholding is a well-known example of this class. The calculation of threshold at every pixel makes this technique relatively time consuming.
In approaches based on global thresholds, which are faster as compared to their local counterparts, one calculates a single threshold value for the entire image. A common example of this class is Otsu’s (1979) method of thresholding; this is an iterative approach, which assumes that the gray level histogram is the sum of two normal intensity distributions. Since the thresholding is done once for the whole image, one may lose certain local characteristics. Hence, the thresholding of images based on local attributes have proved to be generally superior to the global thresholding methods in terms of final image quality. A number of the above thresholding methods suffer from the problem of image continuity, which cannot be tolerated in applications pertaining to medical imaging, remote sensing, optical character recognition etc., where image continuity plays a crucial role.
The usual method of calculation of local threshold for every pixel, with the help of information present in a window defined around it, is computationally intensive. In this paper, we present a hybrid method, where the threshold is calculated only once in a window. This locally adaptive block thresholding (LABT) algorithm makes use of the threshold values of the neighboring sub-images to calculate a range. Image continuity is obtained by choosing the threshold value of the sub-image under consideration to lie within the range of values specified by the algorithm.
The above algorithm is applied to a wide variety of images and it is observed that the local details are preserved to a great extent. In addition to that, the algorithm fared better in terms of time-complexity as compared to the other thresholding techniques.
Before proceeding to the details of the technique, it is convenient to define the following notations. In this text, $S_{m, n}$ denotes a sub-image, where $\it m$ and $\it n$ denote the position of the sub-image in the matrix of sub-images. Threshold chosen for the sub-image $S_{m, n}$ on application of an appropriate thresholding technique, is denoted by $OT_{m, n}$ (Original Threshold). Threshold value of sub-image $S_{m, n}$ after application of the present algorithm, is denoted by $T_{m, n}$. The range of threshold values that $S_{m, n}$ can take, without violating its continuity with the upper (left) sub-image, is denoted by $UR_{m, n}~(LR_{m, n})$.
Procedure For Local Block Thresholding With Continuity Constraint
=================================================================
The given image needs to be divided into a number of sub-images of size $\it m \times \it n$, where the values of $\it m$ and $\it n$ can be chosen on the basis of standard image attributes. In this paper image variance has been chosen as that attribute. The image having larger variance is divided into more number of sub-images in order to bring out finer details, whereas an image with a lower variance is divided into low number of sub-images in order to be computationally inexpensive. The reason to divide a given image into sub-images based on some attribute (image variance in this case), is to balance between image quality and time complexity by choosing the right sub-image size depending upon the application under consideration and level of finer details to be extracted from the image. In a number of cases e.g., optical character recognition, the sub-image size is dictated by the image under consideration. The sub-image size can also be left as a variable, to be determined by the desired amount of image details. This may have usefulness to medical imaging. The number of rows and columns of the image are then converted to multiples of $\it m$ and $\it
n$ respectively.
Once the division of image has been done, the sub-images are scanned from top-left to bottom-right. Constraint is then imposed on the threshold selection of a sub-image by thresholds of upper and left sub-images, i.e., continuity is sought between $S_{m, n}$ and $S_{m-1,
n}$, and $S_{m, n}$ and $S_{m, n-1}$.
Any threshold determination technique can be used to binarize the sub-image $S_{m, n}$, starting from $S_{1, 1}$. The thresholds $T_{m-1, n}$ and $T_{m, n-1}$ of the neighboring sub-images are used to impose constraint of continuity on the threshold $T_{m, n}$ of the sub-image $S_{m, n}$. The choice of threshold $T_{m, n}$ of $S_{m, n}$ is constrained to a range $R_{m, n}$. This range is determined using the threshold values of the neighboring sub-images and the bordering pixel values of the sub-image under consideration. Any value in the range $R_{m, n}$ when used to threshold the columns (rows) of $S_{m, n}$, that borders the adjacent sub-image $S_{m-1, n}~(S_{m, n-1})$, classify them into foreground or background, in the same way $T_{m-1, n}~(T_{m, n-1})$ classifies the pixels of those borders. Stating in symbolic terms, if $\tau T_{m, n}$ denotes thresholding operation, i.e., classifying every pixel of a given array/matrix into foreground or background, using $T_{m, n}$, the constraint is then stated as:
$$\tau T_{m,n}(S_{m,n}(outer~lining))=\tau
T_{m-1,n}(S_{m,n}(outer~lining))$$
if the outer lining is a row of pixels and,
$$\tau T_{m,n}(S_{m,n}(outer~lining))=\tau
T_{m,n-1}(S_{m,n}(outer~lining))$$
if the outer lining is a column of pixels
The range of threshold values $R_{m, n}$, that a sub-image can take while maintaining image continuity with the upper and side block, is determined in the following manner. An array comprising of threshold Tm-1,n of the upper sub-image and pixel values of $R_{m, n}$’s uppermost row (say, $\it X$), which borders the upper sub-image with maximum and minimum pixel values, is created. Pixel values in $\it X$, which are equal to $T_{m, n}$, are deleted before $\it X$ is added to the array in order get values other than $T_{m-1, n}$. Appending minimum and maximum pixel values ensures the presence of values, greater and less than $T_{m-1, n}$. Let the values that are immediately lower and greater than $T_{m-1, n}$ in the array, be $R_{l1}$ and $R_{h1}$, respectively. Then the range dictated by the upper sub-image is
$$UR_{m, n}= [R_{l1+1},R_{h1}].$$
The classification of foreground and background pixels is done, assuming the definition of thresholding as $ X
<$ threshold $=> X = $ background, and $X \geq$ threshold $=> X =$ foreground.
The same procedure is applied to determine the range $LR_{m, n}$ dictated by the left sub-image. Here, $\it X$ is the column of $S_{m, n}$ which borders the left sub-image and the threshold to be added to the array is $T_{m, n-1}$ .The effective range, within which the threshold of $S_{m,
n}$, has to be selected to avoid discontinuity, is
$$R_{m, n}= UR_{m,n}\cap LR_{m,n}.$$
Algorithm
=========
The salient features of the proposed LABT algorithm can be stated in the following manner:
1\) The image is divided into number of same-sized rectangular sub-images based on the variance of the whole image. Other attributes of the image can also be used for this purpose.
2\) Image is then made into a multiple of the sub-image, by a suitable operation.
3\) Starting from $S_{1,1}$, operations are performed on the sub-images row-wise, i.e., the image is scanned from top-left to bottom right.
4\) An original threshold $OT_{m,n}$ of $S_{m,n}$, is determined, using a suitable thresholding technique.
5\) The range $R_{m,n}$ for the sub-window under consideration is worked out, using $T_{m-1,n}$ and $T_{m,n-1}$ with the help of above method.
6\) For $S_{1,1}$, the threshold $T_{1,1}=OT_{1,1}$. For the sub-images in the topmost row (leftmost column), continuity is maintained only with the left (upper) sub-images.
7\) In case $OT_{m,n}$ falls out of $R_{m,n}$, it is brought to the nearest extreme of $R_{m,n}$, using the above specified procedure, and denoted by $T_{m,n}$.
The above algorithm thus ensures that continuity is maintained across sub-images. Sub-image size can be changed depending upon the purpose, i.e., a smaller sub-image size can be taken to bring out finer details, whenever it is necessary. Bigger size sub-images are advisable for document image thresholding, where fuzzy outlines of letters need to be made well defined. A bigger sub-image size will help in keeping the threshold almost constant, across letters, thereby providing a consistent cut-off for removing fuzziness.
Results and Observations
========================
\
We observed reduction in the average size of the range $R_{m,n}$ with increasing sub-image size. This can be seen from Fig. 1a. This reduction in size is because of the availability of elements nearer to $T_{m,n}$ in the bordering array $\it X$, when the sub-image size gets bigger. Since the algorithm starts from $S_{1,1}$ and propagates downwards, it is preferable to binarize $S_{1,1}$ with threshold obtained by applying threshold over the whole image.
\
The second plot (Fig. 1b) shows the variation of the fraction of times threshold exceeds the range constraint; with sub-image size averaged over 35 images. The fraction of times $OT_{m,n}$ falling outside $R_{m,n}$ decreases with increase in sub-image size. This is due to stabilization of threshold across sub-images, when the sub-image size is increased. This is as expected, given the large-scale homogeneity present in numerous images.
\
We are presenting a few images for which the familiar method of thresholding, i.e., area division of cumulative distribution function (ADCDF), is used to binarize the sub-images. We have also used Otsu’s algorithm for the same purpose. Superior thresholding methods, when used in conjunction with this algorithm, will give far better results. For the purpose of illustrating the efficacy of our procedure and comparison, we have also presented the binarized images, using Otsu (global) and Niblack (local) thresholding methods in Fig. 2. One clearly sees that the present locally adaptive block thresholding method clearly does well in terms of extracting local features as well as retaining the visual image quality. We have checked this property of LABT in a variety of images.
\
For text images, thresholding followed by morphological operation like thinning gives good results (Fig. 3a & Fig 3b). It is advisable to choose the sub-image size to be more than the average object size in the image. This ensures the whole object, to be uniformly classified as background or foreground, and avoids classification of within-object variation.
The computational time and PSNR for different thresholding techniques, implemented with and without the locally adaptive block thresholding (LABT), has been shown in table 1. It is quite obvious from the results that the standard thresholding techniques fare better when applied in conjunction with our algorithm. The table also shows that the number of times threshold exceeds the range, and number of times the range dictated by upper and side sub-image does not overlap for three different thresholding algorithms are quite small. This justifies our assumption of exploiting the freedom of range for bringing out local details.
To avoid possible errors arising from the scanning of the image, row-wise from top to bottom, one can scan the image in different ways and perform an ORing operation of the different images, as specified below:
1\) Image is thresholded in the usual way.
2\) Invert the original image upside down and threshold the image. Then invert it back to the original state.
3\) Invert the given image right side left and threshold the image. Then invert it back.
4\) ORing operation is carried out on the above images to get the resulting image, which is equivalent to scanning the image in different ways and ORing them. Not just scanning row-wise from top to bottom.
The results of the ORing operation thus give superior results as shown in Fig. 4. One can see much clearer local details in the final image.
Conclusion and Discussion
=========================
In this paper, a new locally adaptive block thresholding method has been proposed, which acts as a hybrid between known local and global methods. It can also be used in conjunction with other methods of binarization to bring out details of an image. It should be emphasized that the same is accomplished without introducing too much of time complexity, an extremely desired attribute of any binarization scheme. The present algorithm has been designed to ensure that the transitions between sub-windows are maintained continuously. This maintains image continuity.
The efficacy of the method has been demonstrated in the context of a variety of images of different types. This procedure may also be useful when a variable window size is required. The portions of an image requiring detailed investigations may be divided into finer sub images, whereas other portions of the image can be divided into bigger box sizes. In this case, one needs to explore the problem of boundary mismatch and continuity more carefully. The boundary mismatch can be possibly taken care by pushing the boundary of the block that created the mismatch, till the selected threshold falls within the range. This problem is currently under investigation and will be reported elsewhere.
[999]{}
Abutaleb, A. S., 1989. Automatic Thresholding of Gray-level Pictures Using Two-Dimensional Entropy, Computer Vision Graphics and Image Processing, 47, 22-32.
Arora, S., Acharya, J., Verma, A., Panigrahi, P., 2005. Multilevel thresholding for image Segmantation through a Fast Statistical Recursive Algorithm. arXiv:cs.CV/0602044.
Chang, C. H., Tian, H., Srikanthan, T., Lim, C. S., 2002. Field programmable gate array based architecture for real time image segmentation by region growing algorithm, Journal of Electronic Imaging, 11 (4), 469-478.
Dawoud, A., Kamel, M., 2001. Binarization of document images using image dependent model. International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition (ICDAR), Seattle, U.S.A , 49-53.
Gorman, L. O’, 1994. Binarization and Multi-thresholding of Document Images using Connectivity, Graphical Models and Image Processing, 56, 494-506.
Hertz, L., Schafer, R. W., 1998. Multilevel Thresholding Using Edge Matching, Computer Vision Graphics and Image Processing, 44, 279-295.
Huang, Q., Gai, W., Cai, W., 2005. Thresholding technique with adaptive window selection for uneven lighting image. Pattern Recognition Letters 26, 801-808.
Kapur, J. N., Sahoo, P. K., Wong, A. K. C., 1985. A New Method for Gray-level Picture Thresholding Using the Entropy of the histogram, Graphical Models and Image Processing, 29, 273-285.
Kittler, J., Illingworth, J., 1986. Minimum Error Thresholding, Pattern Recognition, 19, 41-47.
Leung, C. K. , Lam, F. K.,1996. Performance analysis of class of iterative image thresholding algorithms, Pattern Recognition, 29(9), 1523-1530.
Li, C. H., Lee, C. K., 1993. Minimum Cross-Entropy Thresholding, Pattern Recognition, 26, 617-625.
Li, C. H., Tam, P. K. S., 1998. An Iterative Algorithm for Minimum Cross -Entropy Thresholding, Pattern Recognition Letters, 19, 771-776.
Niblack, W., 1986. An Introduction to Image Processing, Prentice-Hall, 115-116.
Oh, W., Lindquist, B., 1999. Image thresholding by indicator kringing, IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, PAMI, 21, 590-602.
Otsu, N., 1979. A threshold selection method from gray level histograms, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 9, 62-66.
Pal, N. R., Pal, S. K., 1989. Entropic Thresholding, Signal Processing, 16, 97-108.
Pun, T., 1980. A New Method for Gray -Level Picture Threshold Using the Entropy of the Histogram, Signal Processing, 2 (3), 223-237.
Ramesh, N., Yoo, J. H., Sethi, I. K., 1995. Thresholding Based on Histogram Approximation, IEE Proc.Vis.Image, Signal Proc., 142 (5), 271-279.
Ridler, T. W., Calvard, S., 1978. Picture thresholding using an iterative selection method, IEEE Trans. System, Man and Cybernetics, SMC-8, 630-632.
Rosenfeld, A., De La Torre, P., 1983. Histogram Concavity Analysis as an Aid in Threshold Selection, IEEE Trans System, Man and Cybernetics, SMC-13, 231-235.
Sahoo, P. K., Soltani, S., Wong, A. K. C., Chen, Y., 1998. A survey of Thresholding Techniques, Computer Graphics and Image Processing, 41, 233-260.
Sezan, M. I., 1985. A Peak Detection Algorithm and its Application to Histogram Based Image Data Reduction, Graphical Models and Image Processing, 29, 47-59.
Sezgin, M., Sankur, B., 2001. Comparison of Thresholding methods for non-destructive testing applications, International Conference on Image Processing IEEE ICIP’01, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Sezgin, M., Sankur., B, 2004. Survey over image thresholding techniques and quantative performance evaluation. Journal of Electronic Imaging, 13(1), 146-167.
Trier, O., Jain, A., 1995. Goal-directed evaluation of binarization methods, IEEE Tran. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 7, 1191-1201.
Trier, O. D., Taxt, T., 1995. Evaluation of binarization methods for document images, IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, PAMI, 312-315.
Tsai, W. H., 1985. Moment-preserving thresholding: A new approach, Graphical Models and Image Processing, 19, 377-393.
Wang, Q., Chi, Z., Zhao, R., 2002. Image thresholding by maximizing of non-fuzziness of the 2D grayscale histogram. Computer Image and Vision Understanding, 85, 100-116.
White, J. M., Rohrer, G. D., 1983. Image Thresholding for Optical Character Recognition and Other Application Requiring Character Image Extraction, IBM J Res. Develop, 27 (4), 400-411.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We define a mesoscopic ring in a 2-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) interrupted by two tunnel barriers, enabling us to apply a well-defined potential difference between the two halves of the ring. The electron interference in the ring is modified using a perpendicular magnetic field and a bias voltage. We observe clear Aharonov-Bohm oscillations up to the quantum Hall regime as a function of both parameters. The electron travel time between the barriers is found to increase with the applied magnetic field. Introducing a scattering model, we develop a new method to measure the non-equilibrium electron dephasing time, which becomes very short at high voltages and magnetic fields. The relevance of electron-electron interactions is discussed.'
address:
- '$^1$Department of Applied Physics and DIMES, Delft University of Technology, PO Box 5046, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands'
- '$^2$NTT Basic Research Laboratories, Atsugi-shi, Kanagawa 243-0198, Japan'
- '$^3$Department of physics, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan'
- '$^*$also at ERATO Mesoscopic Correlation Project'
author:
- |
W.G. van der Wiel$^{1,*}$, Yu.V. Nazarov$^{1}$, S. De Franceschi$^{1}$, T. Fujisawa$^{2}$,\
J.M. Elzerman$^{1,*}$, E.W.G.M. Huizeling$^{1}$, S. Tarucha$^{2,3,*}$ and L.P. Kouwenhoven$^{1,*}$
title: 'Electro-magnetic Aharonov-Bohm effect in a 2-D electron gas ring'
---
[2]{} Aharonov and Bohm predicted that the phase of an electron wave is affected by both magnetic and electric potentials, being observable in an interference experiment [@AB59]. A magnetic flux, $\Phi$, threading a loop leads to an oscillating contribution to the conductance with period $\Phi _{0} = h/e$: the [*magnetic*]{} Aharonov-Bohm (AB) effect. In a solid state device, AB oscillations are observable at mesoscopic scale, where quantum coherence is preserved. The effect was first observed in a metal ring [@Webb85] and later in 2DEG rings [@Timp87].
In the case of the [*electrostatic*]{} AB effect, as originally suggested, the electron phase is affected by an electrostatic potential, although the electrons do not experience an electric field [@AB59]. The required geometry is difficult to realize and so far only geometries have been investigated where an electric field changes the interference pattern [@Petrashov; @Vegvar; @Krafft]. In Ref. [@Nazarov93] a ring geometry interrupted by tunnel barriers was suggested, where a bias voltage, $V$, leads to an electrostatically controlled AB effect with predictions very similar to the original proposal [@AB59]. This effect was observed in a disordered metal ring with two tunnel junctions [@Oudenaarden98].
In this Letter, we report the observation of an electrostatic AB effect in a quasi-ballistic ring-shaped 2DEG system interrupted by tunnel barriers. There are two important distinctions from metal systems that play a key role in the present study. First, only a few electron modes are involved in transport, in contrast to tens of thousands in a typical metal wire. Second, in a 2DEG we can enter the quantum Hall regime using a perpendicular magnetic field, $B$.
We observe both a magnetic and electrostatic AB effect up to the edge channel regime (filling factor $\nu$ = 3). The electron travel time between the barriers increases with $B$. We ascribe this to the bending effect of the Lorentz force on the electron trajectories. Importantly, the electrostatic oscillations form a new tool to determine the non-equilibrium electron dephasing time, $\tau_{\phi}$. The possibility to estimate the electron dephasing time at a controlled, finite energy and magnetic field distinguishes this method from weak localization experiments used to estimate the (equilibrium) electron dephasing time [@Mohanty97].
\[fig1\]
We find that $\tau_{\phi}$ decreases as a function of $B$ and $V$ and reaches $\tau_{\phi} |\varepsilon| \simeq \hbar$ at the highest $B$, with $\varepsilon$ the electron energy measured from the Fermi level. This demonstrates the increasing importance of many-body effects at quantizing magnetic fields where the Fermi-liquid picture and the quasi-particle concept are at the edge of applicability.
Our device (Fig. 1a) consists of an AB ring defined in a 2DEG [@Wiel00]. The gate electrodes $V_{gu}$ and $V_{gl}$ define a barrier in each arm of the ring. The effective width of the arms supports $N_{tr} \simeq$ 10 transport channels (i.e. the conductance of the ring without barriers is approximately $10e^{2}/h$ at $B$ = 0 T). In addition to the dc bias voltage, $V$, we apply a relatively small ac voltage (3 to 10 $\mu$V) between source and drain contacts. We measure the differential conductance, $G=dI/dV$, using a lock-in technique in a dilution refrigerator with a base temperature of 15 mK.
Figure 1c shows the differential AB conductance, $G_{AB}$, versus $B$ and $V$, around 1.9 T. $G_{AB}$ is extracted from the measured $G$, by fitting a polynomial to the smoothly varying background in $G$. Subtraction of this polynomial yields the oscillating part, $G_{AB}$. The barriers are tuned such that the conductance through one arm is 0.2 $e^{2}/h$. $G_{AB}$ as function of magnetic field exhibits AB oscillations with a period $B_{0}$ = 1.0 mT, in good agreement with $h/(eS)$, where $S$ is the area enclosed by the ring. The effect of the dc bias voltage, $V$, is schematically shown in Fig. 1b. The transmitted part of the electron wave has
energy $\varepsilon_{R}$, whereas the reflected part has $\varepsilon_{L}$ with respect to the Fermi level in each half of the ring (note $eV$ = $\varepsilon_{R}$ - $\varepsilon_{L}$ and $|\varepsilon_{L}|$,$|\varepsilon_{R}|$,$|eV| \ll E_{F}$). The energy difference leads to a phase difference $\Delta \Phi _{V}$ $=2\pi eVt_{0}/h$, where $t_{0}$ is the ($B$-dependent) time the reflected and transmitted electron waves spend in their respective parts of the ring before they interfere [@Nazarov93]. We thus expect electrostatic AB oscillations by changing $V$.
The dashed line in Fig. 1c highlights the effect of the applied dc voltage, $V$. The red curve at $V$ = 48 $\mu$V has a minimum when it crosses the dashed line. By decreasing $V$ the amplitude of the AB oscillations decreases. The two blue curves near $V$ = 24 $\mu$V show a case where the amplitudes are small and the sign of the amplitude changes. At $V$ = 0 $\mu$V, the amplitude is maximal. Comparing the 48 and 0 $\mu$V traces, the AB oscillation has acquired a change in phase by $\pi$. This continues by another phase shift of $\pi$ when $V$ is decreased to -42 $\mu$V. Thus, the electrostatic period, $V_{0}$, is 90 $\mu$V at this magnetic field. This corresponds to an electron travel time $t_{0}$ = 45 ps. We note that the Onsager-Büttiker symmetry relation $G(B)
= G(-B)$ for a 2-terminal measurement [@Buttiker88] only holds at small bias voltages. Therefore, the phase of the oscillations at the field of the dashed line is not restricted to 0 or $\pi$.
Figure 2 shows a color scale plot of $G_{AB}$ versus $B$ and $V$ for five different $B$ ranges. The main features of the results are as follows. The amplitude of the AB oscillations is relatively small ranging from $\sim$0.01$G$ to $\sim$0.1$G$. The period of the oscillations in $G_{AB}(V)$ decreases with $B$, as is clearly seen by comparing the different panels in Fig. 2. For $B$ = 0.4 T, 1.9 T, 3.6 T, and, less clearly, for $B$ = 4.7 T, the phase of the magnetic oscillations exhibits sharp $\pi$-shifts at lower voltages. At higher voltages, the phase changes more smoothly. At $B$ = 2.5 T, the phase changes smoothly over the entire voltage range. We return to the phase evolution at different $B$ and $V$ later, when we discuss our scattering model.
The AB amplitude decreases with $V$ and, the higher $B$, the faster the decrease. The decreasing AB amplitude is clearly seen in Fig. 3 where we plot the normalized AB conductance, $G_{AB}(V)/G_{AB}(V=0)$, versus $V$ at $B$ = 1.9 T. We stress that Fig. 3 is obtained by taking a single horizontal cut, i.e. for a single $B$ with no averaging [@average], from the $B$ = 1.9 T panel of Fig. 2 (but over a larger voltage range). Note that $G_{AB}(V)/G_{AB}(V=0)$ can be negative since it only represents the oscillating part of the total conductance. The curve is approximately symmetric in $V$ ($G_{AB}(V) \approx G_{AB}(-V)$), indicating that within the range of applied voltages the electron travel time, $t_0$, hardly changes with $V$. Thus, the electrostatic period does not vary within the applied bias window and we cannot attribute the decrease with $V$ in Fig. 3 to self-averaging of trajectories with different periods. We therefore believe that the only possible mechanism for the decrease is electron dephasing due to inelastic processes.
The small relative amplitude of the AB oscillations indicates strong elastic scattering in the arms, whereas the quickly decreasing AB amplitude with $V$ indicates strong inelastic scattering. Since these scattering mechanisms were not included in the model of Ref. , we introduce a simple interference model including dephasing, proceeding along the lines of the general scattering formalism [@Buttiker86].
We assume single-channel tunnel junctions with transmission amplitudes $t_{1}$ and $t_{2}$, respectively. A small AB amplitude implies that the amplitudes of propagating waves between the junctions, $r_{12}^{L}$ or $r_{21}^{R}$ (see Fig. 4), are small so that we only consider scattering processes of first order in $r$. The oscillating part of the transmission probability, $T_{AB}$, is built up from the pairwise interference of the electron trajectories shown in Fig. 4. Collecting the contributions at a given energy, we obtain $$T_{AB} = 2 {\rm Re}(t_1t^*_2 e^{i\Phi_{AB}} (r^L_{12} + r^{*L}_{21}) ( r^R_{21} + r^{*R}_{12}))$$ We assume right-left symmetry [@RLsymmetry] and specify the energy dependence of the propagation amplitudes as follows $$r^L_{12(21)} = r_{- (+)}e^{i\varepsilon_L t_0/\hbar}; \
r^R_{12(21)} = r_{+ (-)}e^{i\varepsilon_R t_0/\hbar}$$ where $r_{+(-)}$ correspond to (counter)clockwise propagation of electrons along the ring (remind that $eV$ = $\varepsilon_{R}$ - $\varepsilon_{L}$). For the differential conductance this yields (assuming $t_1=t_2$) $$\begin{aligned}
G_{AB}(V)/G= |r_{-}|^2 \cos(eVt_0/\hbar) \cos(2 \pi \Phi/\Phi_{0}+\Phi_{a})+ \nonumber \\
|r_{+}|^2 \cos(eVt_0/\hbar) \cos(2 \pi \Phi/\Phi_{0} + \Phi_{b}) + \nonumber \\
2 |r_{+}r_{-}|[\cos(eVt_0/\hbar + \Phi_c) + \nonumber \\
\sin(eVt_0/\hbar+\Phi_c)eVt_0/\hbar] \cos(2 \pi \Phi/\Phi_{0} +
\Phi_{d}) \label{general_formula}\end{aligned}$$ where $\Phi_{a,b,c,d}$ are contributions to the phase that vary slowly with $B$ in comparison to $\Phi/\Phi_{0}$ (e.g. due to bending of the electron trajectories). At small $B$ time reversability holds, implying $r_{+}=r_{-}$ and $\Phi_{a,b,d} =0$. Under these conditions, the phase of the magnetic oscillations only changes by $\pi$ as a function of $V$. Interestingly, the same happens at high $B$. In this case Lorentz bending suppresses counterclockwise propagation, so that $r_{+}\gg r_{-}$. The result is then dominated by the second term in Eq. \[general\_formula\]. For a $B$-interval in which $\Phi_{b}$ can be considered constant, we find again that the phase of the magnetic oscillations only changes by $\pi$ as a function of $V$. In the intermediate regime $r_{+}\simeq r_{-}$, and $\Phi_{a,b,c,d}$ vary slowly with $B$. The phase of the magnetic oscillations in this case continuously shifts with voltage, saturating at $ V \gg \hbar / t_0 e$.
To model electron dephasing due to inelastic processes, we assume that the electron amplitudes at a given energy are suppressed by a factor exp$(-t/2\tau _{\varphi })$, $\tau _{\varphi }(\varepsilon)$ being the energy-dependent dephasing time. In analogy with results found for a disordered electron gas in the quantum Hall regime [@Polyakov98], disordered metal-like systems [@Altshuler85], composite fermions [@Lee96] and a Luttinger liquid [@GlazmanNATO], we propose a dephasing time proportional to energy, $\hbar /\tau _{\varphi
}(\varepsilon)=2\alpha \varepsilon$. Here $\alpha$ is a dimensionless factor of the order of the dimensionless 2DEG conductance, $G/(e^2/h)$. A small value for $\alpha$ ($\alpha \ll
1$) and large conductances ($G\gg e^{2}/h$) correspond to vanishing electron-electron interactions [@Altshuler85]. On the contrary, $\alpha \simeq 1$ and $G \simeq e^{2}/h$ signal the importance of many-body effects. In the limit of $r_{+}\gg r_{-}$ our model for the dephasing gives $$\begin{aligned}
G_{AB}(V)/G = |r_{+}|^2 [\cos(eVt_0/\hbar)- \nonumber \\
\alpha \sin(e|V|t_0/\hbar)] e^{-\alpha e|V|/\hbar}
\cos(2 \pi \Phi/\Phi_{0} + \Phi_{b})
\label{fit_formula}\end{aligned}$$
Our scattering model provides an explanation for the observed experimental results. The model accounts for the abrupt $\pi$-phase changes observed in Fig. 2 at the lowest ($B$ = 0.4 T and 1.9 T) and highest ($B$ = 3.6 T and 4.7 T) magnetic fields (provided $V$ is small). In the intermediate regime ($B$ = 2.5 T) the model explains also why the phase varies more continuously. The well-defined period $t_0$ probably indicates the formation of an edge channel connecting the junctions. However, the magnitude of the AB oscillations is small. This signals a strong scattering to and from the edge channel involving almost localized states at higher magnetic field. One can estimate $|r_{+}|^2$ as a classical probability, assuming uniform distribution
over the transport channels in the ring and $1/3$ suppression due to scattering near the openings to the source and drain leads. This gives $|r_{+}|^2 \simeq 1/3 N_{tr} = 0.03$, which is in agreement with the experimental value of $G_{AB}(V=0)/G \simeq 0.02$ at low $B$.
We use Eq. \[fit\_formula\] to fit the experimental $V$-dependence of the AB amplitude, as shown in Fig. 3 for the particular case $B$ = 1.9 T. The reasonable quality of the fit supports our model for the dephasing time. From such fits we extract values for $t_0$ and $\alpha$ at various magnetic fields. The left inset to Fig. 3 shows our results for the $B$-dependence of $t_0$. The values in the edge channel regime are fitted to a straight line with a slope of 6 ps/T. The increase of the travel time can be attributed to the decreasing drift velocity, $v_{drift}=|{\bf E}| /B$, $|{\bf E}|$ being the modulus of the confining electric field at the arm edges. An estimate based on parabolic confinement gives $|{\bf E}| \simeq 1-4$ $10^{5}$ V/m. This implies a slope $d t_0/dB$ between 5 and 20 ps/T, which is in reasonable agreement with the observed value.
In the right inset to Fig. 3 we show our results for $\alpha =
\hbar/2\varepsilon\tau_{\phi}(\varepsilon)$. The $\alpha$ values are rather high and increase with $B$. At $\varepsilon$ = 10 $\mu$eV, we find $\tau_{\phi}$ = 180 ps at $B$ = 0.4 T and $\tau_{\phi}$ = 65 ps at $B$ = 4.7 T. The usual Fermi-liquid theory assumes well-defined quasi-particles, corresponding to $\alpha \ll 1$. The fact that we observe $\alpha \simeq 1$ signals the importance of many-body effects (electron-electron interactions) in our sample. The Fermi-liquid theory here is on the edge of applicability. We attribute this to significant scattering in the arms of the ring. For a clean 2DEG one expects no significant many-body effects until $\nu < 1$ ($B_{\nu = 1}$ = 14 T in our 2DEG). One can consider $\alpha$ as an effective dissipative conductance in units
of $e^{2}/h$ [@Polyakov98; @Altshuler85]. In our case, the relevant conductance is that of the arms of the AB ring, which is of the order of $e^{2}/h$ at the highest magnetic fields. This is consistent with the observed $\alpha$ values.
In conclusion, using an electro-magnetic AB effect, we find a new method to determine the non-equilibrium electron dephasing time in a 2DEG, which becomes very short at high voltages and magnetic field.
We thank G. Seelig, M. Büttiker, T. Hayashi, A. van Oudenaarden and R. Schouten for their help. We acknowledge financial support from the Specially Promoted Research Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research; the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture in Japan; the Dutch Organization for Fundamental Research on Matter; the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization Joint Research Program (NTDP-98); and the European Union through a Training and Mobility of Researchers Program network.
Y. Aharonov and D. Bohm, Phys. Rev. [**115**]{}, 485 (1959).
R.A. Webb [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**54**]{}, 2696 (1985).
G. Timp [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**58**]{}, 2814 (1987).
S. Washburn [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**59**]{}, 1791 (1987).
P.G.N. de Vegvar [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. B [**40**]{}, R3491 (1989).
B. Krafft [*et al.*]{}, Physica E [**9**]{}, 635 (2001).
Yu.V. Nazarov, Phys. Rev. B [**47**]{}, 2768 (1993); Yu.V. Nazarov, Physica B [**189**]{}, 57 (1993).
A. van Oudenaarden [*et al.*]{}, Nature [**391**]{}, 768 (1998).
P. Mohanty [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**78**]{}, 3366 (1997).
W.G. van der Wiel [*et al.*]{}, Science [**289**]{}, 2105 (2000).
M. Büttiker, IBM J. Res. Dev. [**32**]{}, 317 (1988).
In Ref. [@Oudenaarden98] the correlation function $\langle
G_{AB}(B,V)G_{AB}(B+\Delta B,V+\Delta V)\rangle$ is calculated, where the angle brackets denote an ensemble average. For a given $\Delta V$, one averages over an ensemble of pairs of $G_{AB}-B$ traces, each pair having a $\Delta V$ voltage difference. This recipe causes that, if the potential landscape fluctuates on the scale of $\Delta V$, and hence affects the (electrostatic) AB period, the correlation function decreases.
M. Büttiker, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**57**]{}, 1761 (1986).
This is a reasonable assumption, since in our experiment we tune the barriers to have equal transmission.
D.G. Polyakov and K.V. Samokhin, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**80**]{}, 1509 (1998).
B.L. Altshuler and A.G. Aronov in Electron-Electron Interactions in Disordered Systems, edited by A. L. Efros and M. Pollak (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1985).
P.A. Lee, E.R. Mucciolo and H. Smith, Phys. Rev. B [**54**]{}, 8782 (1996).
M.P.A. Fisher and L.I. Glazman in Mesoscopic Electron Transport, edited by L.L. Sohn [*et al.*]{}, NATO ASI, Ser. E, Vol. 345 (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1997).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
A method for modeling non-Newtonian fluids (dilatants and pseudoplastics) by a power law under the Godunov-Peshkov-Romenski model is presented, along with a new numerical scheme for solving this system. The scheme is also modified to solve the corresponding system for power-law elastoplastic solids.
The scheme is based on a temporal operator splitting, with the homogeneous system solved using a finite volume method based on a WENO reconstruction, and the temporal ODEs solved using an analytical approximate solution. The method is found to perform favorably against problems with known exact solutions, and numerical solutions published in the open literature. It is simple to implement, and to the best of the authors’ knowledge it is currently the only method for solving this modified version of the GPR model.
address: 'Cavendish Laboratory, Department of Physics, Cambridge University, UK'
author:
- Haran Jackson
- Nikos Nikiforakis
bibliography:
- '28\_Users\_hari\_Git\_private\_phd\_papers\_Working\_A\_\_\_\_and\_Plastic\_Solids\_under\_the\_GPR\_Model\_refs.bib'
title: 'A Numerical Scheme for Non-Newtonian Fluids and Plastic Solids under the GPR Model'
---
@path[[“/Users/hari/Git/private/phd/papers/Working/A Numerical Scheme for Non-Newtonian Fluids and Plastic Solids under the GPR Model/”]{}]{}
Godunov-Peshkov-Romenski ,GPR ,Non-Newtonian ,Plasticity ,Operator Splitting
Introduction
============
Background
----------
The Godunov-Pehskov-Romenski (GPR) model of continuum mechanics (see @peshkov_hyperbolic_2016) has been purported to represent an alternative formulation to describe both fluids and solids within the same hyperbolic system of differential equations. From a practical perspective, the potential ramifications of this include: the simplification of software made for the simulation of phenomena involving different states of matter (as commented on in @jackson_fast_2017); and the use of the vast array of effective numerical solvers designed for first-order hyperbolic systems. From a theoretical perspective, an advantage of the GPR model is that it cannot produce waves of infinite speed, unlike the parabolic Navier-Stokes equations. Additionally, the first-principles derivation of the mechanism by which viscous effects appear under the GPR model has been commented to be more appropriate than the more phenomenological viscous law appearing in the traditional Navier-Stokes formulation (see @peshkov_unified_2017).
Thus far, the GPR model has been solved for a wide array of different fluids (inviscid and viscous Newtonian) and solids (elastic and elastoplastic) (see @dumbser_high_2015 [@boscheri_cell_2016; @peshkov_theoretical_2018; @peshkov_unified_2017]). It has also been extended to incorporate the effects of electrodynamics (see @dumbser_high_2016) and general relativity (see @peshkov_general_2018). To the best of our knowledge, it is yet to be formally extended to include non-Newtonian power-law fluids, however. A method for doing so is presented in this paper. Building upon the work of @jackson_fast_2017 (in which a numerical scheme based upon a split solver was presented for Newtonian fluids and elastic solids under the GPR model) a numerical scheme is then presented in for solving this new model. This scheme is adapted to work also for elastoplastic power-law materials. The scheme is validated against several 1D and 2D tests in , with discussion presented in .
The GPR Model\[subsec:The-GPR-Model\]
-------------------------------------
The GPR model, first introduced in @peshkov_hyperbolic_2016 - and expanded upon by @dumbser_high_2015 and @boscheri_cell_2016 - takes the following form:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial\rho}{\partial t}+\frac{\partial\left(\rho v_{k}\right)}{\partial x_{k}} & =0\label{eq:DensityEquation}\\
\frac{\partial\left(\rho v_{i}\right)}{\partial t}+\frac{\partial(\rho v_{i}v_{k}+p\delta_{ik}-\sigma_{ik})}{\partial x_{k}} & =0\label{eq:MomentumEquation}\\
\frac{\partial A_{ij}}{\partial t}+\frac{\partial\left(A_{ik}v_{k}\right)}{\partial x_{j}}+v_{k}\left(\frac{\partial A_{ij}}{\partial x_{k}}-\frac{\partial A_{ik}}{\partial x_{j}}\right) & =-\frac{\psi_{ij}}{\theta_{1}}\label{eq:DistortionEquation}\\
\frac{\partial\left(\rho J_{i}\right)}{\partial t}+\frac{\partial\left(\rho J_{i}v_{k}+T\delta_{ik}\right)}{\partial x_{k}} & =-\frac{\rho H_{i}}{\theta_{2}}\label{eq:ThermalEquation}\\
\frac{\partial\left(\rho E\right)}{\partial t}+\frac{\partial\left(\rho Ev_{k}+\left(p\delta_{ik}-\sigma_{ik}\right)v_{i}+q_{k}\right)}{\partial x_{k}} & =0\label{eq:EnergyEquation}\end{aligned}$$
where $\theta_{1}$ and $\theta_{2}$ are positive scalar functions, and $\psi=\frac{\partial E}{\partial A}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}=\frac{\partial E}{\partial\boldsymbol{J}}$. The following definitions are given:
$$\begin{aligned}
p & =\rho^{2}\left.\frac{\partial E}{\partial\rho}\right|_{s,A}\label{eq:p def}\\
\sigma & =-\rho A^{T}\left.\frac{\partial E}{\partial A}\right|_{\rho,s}\label{eq:sig def}\\
T & =\left.\frac{\partial E}{\partial s}\right|_{\rho,A}\label{eq:T def}\\
\boldsymbol{q} & =T\frac{\partial E}{\partial\boldsymbol{J}}\label{eq:q def}\end{aligned}$$
To close the system, the EOS must be specified, from which the above quantities and the sources can be derived. $E$ is the sum of the contributions of the energies at the molecular scale (microscale), the material element[^1] scale (mesoscale), and the flow scale (macroscale):
$$E=E_{1}\left(\rho,s\right)+E_{2}\left(\rho,s,A,\boldsymbol{J}\right)+E_{3}\left(\boldsymbol{v}\right)\label{eq:EnergyDefinition}$$
Here, as in previous studies, such as @dumbser_high_2015 and @boscheri_cell_2016, $E_{1}$ is taken to be either the ideal gas EOS, a shock Mie-Gruneisen EOS, or the EOS of nonlinear hyperelasticity (see @barton_exact_2009).
$E_{2}$ has the following quadratic form:
$$E_{2}=\frac{c_{s}\left(\rho,s\right)^{2}}{4}\left\Vert \dev\left(G\right)\right\Vert _{F}^{2}+\frac{c_{t}\left(\rho,s\right)^{2}}{2}\left\Vert \boldsymbol{J}\right\Vert ^{2}$$
$c_{s}$ is the characteristic velocity of transverse perturbations. $c_{t}$ is related to the characteristic velocity of propagation of heat waves[^2]:
$$c_{h}=\frac{c_{t}}{\rho}\sqrt{\frac{T}{c_{v}}}$$
In previous studies, $c_{t}$ has been taken to be constant, as it will be in this study.
$G=A^{T}A$ is the Gramian matrix of the distortion tensor, and $\dev\left(G\right)$ is the deviator (trace-free part) of $G$:
$$\dev\left(G\right)=G-\frac{1}{3}\tr\left(G\right)I$$
$E_{3}$ is the usual specific kinetic energy per unit mass:
$$E_{3}=\frac{1}{2}\left\Vert \boldsymbol{v}\right\Vert ^{2}$$
The following forms are taken:
$$\begin{aligned}
\theta_{1} & =\frac{\tau_{1}c_{s}^{2}}{3\left|A\right|^{\frac{5}{3}}}\\
\theta_{2} & =\tau_{2}c_{t}^{2}\frac{\rho T_{0}}{\rho_{0}T}\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\tau_{1} & =\begin{cases}
\frac{6\mu}{\rho_{0}c_{s}^{2}} & viscous\thinspace fluids\\
\tau_{0}\left(\frac{\sigma_{0}}{\left\Vert \dev\left(\sigma\right)\right\Vert _{F}}\right)^{n} & elastoplastic\thinspace solids
\end{cases}\label{eq:tau1}\\
\tau_{2} & =\frac{\rho_{0}\kappa}{T_{0}c_{t}^{2}}\end{aligned}$$
The justification of these choices is that classical NavierStokesFourier theory is recovered in the stiff limit $\tau_{1},\tau_{2}\rightarrow0$ (see @dumbser_high_2015). The power law for elastoplastic solids is based on material from @barton_eulerian_2011.
Finally, it is straightforward to verify that as a consequence of , , , , we have the following relations:
$$\begin{aligned}
\sigma & =-\rho c_{s}^{2}G\dev\left(G\right)\\
\boldsymbol{q} & =c_{t}^{2}T\boldsymbol{J}\\
-\frac{\psi}{\theta_{1}(\tau_{1})} & =-\frac{3}{\tau_{1}}\left|A\right|^{\frac{5}{3}}A\dev\left(G\right)\\
-\frac{\rho\boldsymbol{H}}{\theta_{2}\left(\tau_{2}\right)} & =-\frac{T\rho_{0}}{T_{0}\tau_{2}}\boldsymbol{J}\end{aligned}$$
The following constraint also holds (see @peshkov_hyperbolic_2016):
$$\det\left(A\right)=\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}$$
The GPR model and Godunov and Romenski’s 1970s model of elastoplastic deformation in fact rely upon the same equations. The realization of Peshkov and Romenski was that these are the equations of motion for an arbitrary continuum - not just a solid - and so the model can be applied to fluids too. Unlike in previous continuum models, material elements have not only finite size, but also internal structure, encoded in the distortion tensor.
The strain dissipation time $\tau_{1}$ of the GPR model is a continuous analogue of Frenkel’s “particle settled life time” (detailed in @frenkel_kinetic_1947); the characteristic time taken for a particle to move by a distance of the same order of magnitude as the particle’s size. Thus, $\tau_{1}$ characterizes the time taken for a material element to rearrange with its neighbors. $\tau_{1}=\infty$ for solids and $\tau_{1}=0$ for inviscid fluids. It is in this way that the GPR model seeks to describe all three major phases of matter, as long as a continuum description is appropriate for the material at hand.
The evolution equation for $\boldsymbol{J}$ and its contribution to the energy of the system are derived from Romenski’s model of hyperbolic heat transfer, originally proposed in @malyshev_hyperbolic_1986 [@romenski_hyperbolic_1989], and implemented in @romenski_conservative_2007 [@romenski_conservative_2010]. In this model, $\boldsymbol{J}$ is effectively defined as the variable conjugate to the entropy flux, in the sense that the latter is the derivative of the specific internal energy with respect to $\boldsymbol{J}$. Romenski remarks that it is more convenient to evolve $\boldsymbol{J}$ and $E$ than the heat flux or the entropy flux, and thus the equations take the form given here. $\tau_{2}$ characterizes the speed of relaxation of the thermal impulse due to heat exchange between material elements.
Power-Law Fluids\[sec:Power-Law-Fluids\]
========================================
{height="0.2\paperheight"}
The stress-strain relationships for various kinds of fluids are shown in . Dilatants and pseudoplastics may be modelled using the following power law, with $n>1$ and $0<n<1$, respectively:
$$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{\sigma} & =K\left|\boldsymbol{\dot{\gamma}}\right|^{n-1}\boldsymbol{\dot{\gamma}}\\
\boldsymbol{\dot{\gamma}} & =\nabla\boldsymbol{v}+\nabla\boldsymbol{v}^{T}-\frac{2\tr\left(\nabla\boldsymbol{v}\right)}{3}I\end{aligned}$$
$K>0$ is known as the *consistency*, and $K\left|\boldsymbol{\dot{\gamma}}\right|^{n-1}$ is the *apparent viscosity*. The norm is taken to be:
$$\left|X\right|=\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}X_{ij}X_{ij}}=\frac{\left\Vert X\right\Vert _{F}}{\sqrt{2}}$$
In @dumbser_high_2015 it was noted that when expressing the state variables as an asymptotic expansion in the relaxation parameter $\tau_{1}$, to first order we have:
$$\boldsymbol{\sigma}=\frac{1}{6}\tau_{1}\rho_{0}c_{s}^{2}\left(\nabla\boldsymbol{v}+\nabla\boldsymbol{v}^{T}-\frac{2}{3}\tr\left(\nabla\boldsymbol{v}\right)\boldsymbol{I}\right)\label{eq:AsymptoticRelationship}$$
Thus, for a power law fluid, we require that:
$$\frac{1}{6}\tau_{1}\rho_{0}c_{s}^{2}=K\left|\boldsymbol{\dot{\gamma}}\right|^{n-1}$$
Taking moduli of both sides of , we also have:
$$\left|\boldsymbol{\sigma}\right|=\frac{1}{6}\tau_{1}\rho_{0}c_{s}^{2}\left|\boldsymbol{\dot{\gamma}}\right|$$
Combining these two relationships, we obtain:
$$\tau_{1}=\frac{6K^{\frac{1}{n}}}{\rho_{0}c_{s}^{2}}\left|\frac{1}{\boldsymbol{\sigma}}\right|^{\frac{1-n}{n}}\coloneqq\tau_{0}\left|\frac{1}{\boldsymbol{\sigma}}\right|^{\frac{1-n}{n}}\label{eq:=0003C4-power-law}$$
Numerical Schemes\[sec:Numerical-Schemes\]
==========================================
Note that , , , , can be written in the following form:
$$\frac{\partial\boldsymbol{Q}}{\partial t}+\boldsymbol{\nabla}\cdot\boldsymbol{F}\left(\boldsymbol{Q}\right)+\boldsymbol{B}\left(\boldsymbol{Q}\right)\cdot\nabla\boldsymbol{Q}=\boldsymbol{S}\left(\boldsymbol{Q}\right)$$
As described in @toro_reimann_2009, a viable way to solve inhomogeneous systems of PDEs is to employ an operator splitting. That is, the following subsystems are solved:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial\boldsymbol{Q}}{\partial t}+\boldsymbol{\nabla}\cdot\boldsymbol{F}\left(\boldsymbol{Q}\right)+\boldsymbol{B}\left(\boldsymbol{Q}\right)\cdot\nabla\boldsymbol{Q} & =\boldsymbol{0}\label{eq:HomogeneousSubsystem}\\
\frac{d\boldsymbol{Q}}{dt} & =\boldsymbol{S}\left(\boldsymbol{Q}\right)\label{eq:ODESubsystem}\end{aligned}$$
The advantage of this approach is that specialized solvers can be employed to compute the results of the different subsystems. Let $H^{\delta t},S^{\delta t}$ be the operators that take data $\boldsymbol{Q}\left(x,t\right)$ to $\boldsymbol{Q}\left(x,t+\delta t\right)$ under systems and respectively. A second-order scheme (in time) for solving the full set of PDEs over time step $\left[0,\Delta t\right]$ is obtained by calculating $\boldsymbol{Q_{\Delta t}}$ using a Strang splitting:
$$\boldsymbol{Q_{\Delta t}}=S^{\frac{\Delta t}{2}}H^{\Delta t}S^{\frac{\Delta t}{2}}\boldsymbol{Q_{0}}$$
In the scheme proposed here, the homogeneous subsystem will be solved using a WENO reconstruction of the data, followed by a finite volume update, and the temporal ODEs will be solved with appropriate ODE solvers. It should be noted that there are other choices of solvers for the homogeneous system that could have been made (e.g. see MUSCL, SLIC, and WAF, among others in @toro_reimann_2009). The WENO method was chosen due to the arbitrarily high-order spatial reconstructions it is able to produce.
Noting that $\frac{d\rho}{dt}=0$ over the ODE time step, the operator $S$ entails solving the following systems:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dA}{dt} & =\frac{-3}{\tau_{1}}\left|A\right|^{\frac{5}{3}}A\dev\left(G\right)\label{eq:DistortionODE}\\
\frac{d\boldsymbol{J}}{dt} & =-\frac{1}{\tau_{2}}\frac{T\rho_{0}}{T_{0}\rho}\boldsymbol{J}\label{eq:ThermalODE}\end{aligned}$$
These systems can be solved concurrently with a stiff ODE solver. The Jacobians of these two systems to be used in an ODE solver are given in the appendix of @jackson_fast_2017. However, these systems can also be solved separately, using the analytical results presented in and , under specific assumptions. The second-order Strang splitting is then:
$$\boldsymbol{Q_{\Delta t}}=D^{\frac{\Delta t}{2}}T^{\frac{\Delta t}{2}}H^{\Delta t}T^{\frac{\Delta t}{2}}D^{\frac{\Delta t}{2}}\boldsymbol{Q_{0}}$$
where $D^{\delta t},T^{\delta t}$ are the operators solving the distortion and thermal impulse ODEs respectively, over time step $\delta t$. This allows us to bypass the relatively computationally costly process of solving these systems numerically.
The Homogeneous System
----------------------
A WENO reconstruction of the cell-averaged data is performed at the start of the time step (as described in @dumbser_ader-weno_2013). Focusing on a single cell $C_{i}$ at time $t_{n}$, we have $\boldsymbol{w^{n}}\left(\boldsymbol{x}\right)=\boldsymbol{w^{n}}_{p}\Psi_{p}\left(\boldsymbol{\chi}\left(\boldsymbol{x}\right)\right)$ in $C_{i}$ where $\Psi_{p}$ is a tensor product of basis functions in each of the spatial dimensions. The flux in $C$ is approximated by $\boldsymbol{F}\left(\boldsymbol{x}\right)\approx\boldsymbol{F}\left(\boldsymbol{w}_{p}\right)\Psi_{p}\left(\boldsymbol{\chi}\left(\boldsymbol{x}\right)\right)$. $\boldsymbol{w}_{p}$ are stepped forwards half a time step using the update formula:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\boldsymbol{w_{p}^{n+\frac{1}{2}}}-\boldsymbol{w_{p}^{n}}}{\Delta t/2}= & -\boldsymbol{F}\left(\boldsymbol{w_{k}^{n}}\right)\cdot\nabla\Psi_{k}\left(\boldsymbol{\chi_{p}}\right)\\
& -\boldsymbol{B}\left(\boldsymbol{w_{p}^{n}}\right)\cdot\left(\boldsymbol{w_{k}^{n}}\nabla\Psi_{k}\left(\boldsymbol{\chi_{p}}\right)\right)\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
i.e.
$$\boldsymbol{w_{p}^{n+\frac{1}{2}}}=\boldsymbol{w_{p}^{n}}-\frac{\Delta t}{2\Delta x}\left(\begin{array}{c}
\boldsymbol{F}\left(\boldsymbol{w_{k}^{n}}\right)\cdot\nabla\Psi_{k}\left(\boldsymbol{\chi_{p}}\right)\\
+\boldsymbol{B}\left(\boldsymbol{w_{p}^{n}}\right)\cdot\left(\boldsymbol{w_{k}^{n}}\nabla\Psi_{k}\left(\boldsymbol{\chi_{p}}\right)\right)
\end{array}\right)\label{eq:WENO half step}$$
where $\boldsymbol{\chi_{p}}$ is the node corresponding to $\Psi_{p}$. This evolution to the middle of the time step is similar to that used in the second-order MUSCL and SLIC schemes (see @toro_reimann_2009) and, as with those schemes, it is integral to giving the method presented here its second-order accuracy.
Integrating over $C$ gives:
$$\boldsymbol{Q_{i}^{n+1}}=\boldsymbol{Q_{i}^{n}}-\Delta t_{n}\left(\boldsymbol{P_{i}^{n+\frac{1}{2}}}+\boldsymbol{D_{i}^{n+\frac{1}{2}}}\right)$$
where
$$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{Q_{i}^{n}} & =\frac{1}{V}\int_{C}\boldsymbol{Q}\left(\boldsymbol{x},t_{n}\right)d\boldsymbol{x}\\
\boldsymbol{P_{i}^{n+\frac{1}{2}}} & =\frac{1}{V}\int_{C}\boldsymbol{B}\left(\boldsymbol{Q}\left(\boldsymbol{x},t_{n+\frac{1}{2}}\right)\right)\cdot\nabla\boldsymbol{Q}\left(\boldsymbol{x},t_{n+\frac{1}{2}}\right)d\boldsymbol{x}\\
\boldsymbol{D_{i}^{n+\frac{1}{2}}} & =\frac{1}{V}\varoint_{\partial C}\boldsymbol{\mathcal{D}}\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{-}}\left(\boldsymbol{s},t_{n+\frac{1}{2}}\right),\boldsymbol{Q^{+}}\left(\boldsymbol{s},t_{n+\frac{1}{2}}\right)\right)d\boldsymbol{s}\end{aligned}$$
where $V$ is the volume of $C$ and $\boldsymbol{Q^{-},Q^{+}}$ are the interior and exterior extrapolated states at the boundary of $C$, respectively.
Note that can be rewritten as:
$$\frac{\partial\boldsymbol{Q}}{\partial t}+\boldsymbol{M}\left(\boldsymbol{Q}\right)\cdot\nabla\boldsymbol{Q}=\boldsymbol{0}$$
where $\boldsymbol{M}=\frac{\partial\boldsymbol{F}}{\partial\boldsymbol{Q}}+\boldsymbol{B}$. Let $\boldsymbol{n}$ be the normal to the boundary at point $\boldsymbol{s}\in\partial C$. For the GPR model, $\hat{M}=\boldsymbol{M}\left(\boldsymbol{Q}\left(\boldsymbol{s}\right)\right)\cdot\boldsymbol{n}$ is a diagonalizable matrix with decomposition $\hat{M}=\hat{R}\hat{\Lambda}\hat{R}^{-1}$ where the columns of $\hat{R}$ are the right eigenvectors and $\hat{\Lambda}$ is the diagonal matrix of eigenvalues. Define also $\boldsymbol{\hat{F}}=\boldsymbol{F}\cdot\boldsymbol{n}$ and $\hat{B}=\boldsymbol{B}\cdot\boldsymbol{n}$. Using these definitions, the interface terms arising in the FV formula have the following form:
$$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{\mathcal{D}}\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{-}},\boldsymbol{Q^{+}}\right) & =\frac{1}{2}\left(\boldsymbol{\hat{F}}\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{+}}\right)+\boldsymbol{\hat{F}}\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{-}}\right)\right)\\
& +\frac{1}{2}\left(+\tilde{B}\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{+}}-\boldsymbol{Q^{-}}\right)+\tilde{M}\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{+}}-\boldsymbol{Q^{-}}\right)\right)\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
$\tilde{M}$ is chosen to either correspond to a Rusanov/Lax-Friedrichs flux (see @toro_reimann_2009):
$$\tilde{M}=\max\left(\max\left|\hat{\Lambda}\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{+}}\right)\right|,\max\left|\hat{\Lambda}\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{-}}\right)\right|\right)$$
or a Roe flux (see @dumbser_simple_2011): $$\hat{M}=\left|\int_{0}^{1}M\left(\boldsymbol{\boldsymbol{q^{-}}}+z\left(\boldsymbol{q^{+}}-\boldsymbol{q^{-}}\right)\right)dz\right|$$
or a simplified OsherSolomon flux (see @dumbser_simple_2011 [@dumbser_universal_2011]):
$$\tilde{M}=\int_{0}^{1}\left|\hat{M}\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{-}}+z\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{+}}-\boldsymbol{Q^{-}}\right)\right)\right|dz$$
where
$$\left|\hat{M}\right|=\hat{R}\left|\hat{\Lambda}\right|\hat{R}^{-1}$$
$\tilde{B}$ takes the following form:
$$\tilde{B}=\int_{0}^{1}\hat{B}\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{-}}+z\left(\boldsymbol{Q^{+}}-\boldsymbol{Q^{-}}\right)\right)dz$$
$\boldsymbol{P_{i}^{n+\frac{1}{2}}},\boldsymbol{D_{i}^{n+\frac{1}{2}}}$ are calculated using an $N+1$-point Gauss-Legendre quadrature, replacing $\boldsymbol{Q}\left(\boldsymbol{x},t_{n+\frac{1}{2}}\right)$ with $\boldsymbol{w^{n+\frac{1}{2}}}\left(\boldsymbol{x}\right)$.
The Thermal Impulse ODEs\[subsec:The-Thermal-Impulse-ODEs\]
-----------------------------------------------------------
The following analytical solution to the thermal impulse ODEs was first presented in @jackson_fast_2017. It is included here for completeness.
Taking the EOS for the GPR model and denoting by $E_{2}^{\left(A\right)},E_{2}^{\left(J\right)}$ the components of $E_{2}$ depending on $A$ and $\boldsymbol{J}$ respectively, we have:
$$\begin{aligned}
T & =\frac{E_{1}}{c_{v}}\\
& =\frac{E-E_{2}^{\left(A\right)}\left(\rho,s,A\right)-E_{3}\left(\boldsymbol{v}\right)}{c_{v}}-\frac{1}{c_{v}}E_{2}^{\left(J\right)}\left(\boldsymbol{J}\right)\nonumber \\
& =c_{1}-c_{2}\left\Vert \boldsymbol{J}\right\Vert ^{2}\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
where:
$$\begin{aligned}
c_{1} & =\frac{E-E_{2}^{\left(A\right)}\left(A\right)-E_{3}\left(\boldsymbol{v}\right)}{c_{v}}\\
c_{2} & =\frac{c_{t}^{2}}{2c_{v}}\end{aligned}$$
Over the time period of the ODE , $c_{1},c_{2}>0$ are constant. We have:
$$\frac{dJ_{i}}{dt}=-\left(\frac{1}{\tau_{2}}\frac{\rho_{0}}{T_{0}\rho}\right)J_{i}\left(c_{1}-c_{2}\left\Vert \boldsymbol{J}\right\Vert ^{2}\right)$$
Therefore:
$$\frac{d}{dt}\left(J_{i}^{2}\right)=J_{i}^{2}\left(-a+b\left(J_{1}^{2}+J_{2}^{2}+J_{3}^{2}\right)\right)$$
where
$$\begin{aligned}
a & =\frac{2\rho_{0}}{\tau_{2}T_{0}\rho c_{v}}\left(E-E_{2}^{\left(A\right)}\left(A\right)-E_{3}\left(\boldsymbol{v}\right)\right)\\
b & =\frac{\rho_{0}c_{t}^{2}}{\tau_{2}T_{0}\rho c_{v}}\end{aligned}$$
Note that this is a generalized Lotka-Volterra system in $\left\{ J_{1}^{2},J_{2}^{2},J_{3}^{2}\right\} $. It has the following analytical solution:
$$\boldsymbol{J}\left(t\right)=\boldsymbol{J}\left(0\right)\sqrt{\frac{1}{e^{at}-\frac{b}{a}\left(e^{at}-1\right)\left\Vert \boldsymbol{J}\left(0\right)\right\Vert ^{2}}}$$
The Distortion ODEs\[subsec:The-Distortion-ODEs\]
-------------------------------------------------
The following analytical solution to the distortion ODEs for Newtonian fluids was first presented in @jackson_fast_2017. It is included here, as the solutions for non-Newtonian fluids and elastoplastic solids depend on the Newtonian solution.
### Newontian Fluids\[subsec:Analytical-Approximation\]
Let $k_{0}=\frac{3}{\tau_{1}}\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{5}{3}}>0$ and let $A$ have singular value decomposition $U\Sigma V^{T}$. Then:
$$G=\left(U\Sigma V^{T}\right)^{T}U\Sigma V^{T}=V\Sigma^{2}V^{T}$$
$$\tr\left(G\right)=\tr\left(V\Sigma^{2}V^{T}\right)=\tr\left(\Sigma^{2}V^{T}V\right)=\tr\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)$$
Therefore:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dA}{dt} & =-k_{0}U\Sigma V^{T}\left(V\Sigma^{2}V^{T}-\frac{\tr\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)}{3}I\right)\\
& =-k_{0}U\Sigma\left(\Sigma^{2}-\frac{\tr\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)}{3}\right)V^{T}\nonumber \\
& =-k_{0}U\Sigma\dev\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)V^{T}\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
It is a common result (see @giles_extended_2008) that:
$$d\Sigma=U^{T}dAV$$
and thus:
$$\frac{d\Sigma}{dt}=-k_{0}\Sigma\dev\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)$$
Using a fast $3\times3$ SVD algorithm (such as in @mcadams_computing_2011), $U,V,\Sigma$ can be obtained, after which the following procedure is applied to $\Sigma$, giving $A\left(t\right)=U\Sigma\left(t\right)V^{T}$.
Denote the singular values of $A$ by $a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}$. Then:
[ $$\Sigma\dev\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
a_{1}\left(a_{1}^{2}-\alpha\right) & 0 & 0\\
0 & a_{1}\left(a_{1}^{2}-\alpha\right) & 0\\
0 & 0 & a_{1}\left(a_{1}^{2}-\alpha\right)
\end{array}\right)$$ ]{}
where
$$\alpha=\frac{a_{1}^{2}+a_{2}^{2}+a_{3}^{2}}{3}$$
Letting $x_{i}=\frac{a_{i}^{2}}{\det\left(A\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}}=\frac{a_{i}^{2}}{\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}}$ we have:
$$\frac{dx_{i}}{d\tau}=-3x_{i}\left(x_{i}-\bar{x}\right)\label{eq:StretchODESystem}$$
where $\tau=\frac{2}{\tau_{1}}\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{7}{3}}t$ and $\bar{x}$ is the arithmetic mean of $x_{1},x_{2},x_{3}$. This ODE system travels along the surface $\Psi=\left\{ x_{1},x_{2},x_{3}>0,x_{1}x_{2}x_{3}=1\right\} $ to the point $x_{1},x_{2},x_{3}=1$. This surface is symmetrical in the planes $x_{1}=x_{2}$, $x_{1}=x_{3}$, $x_{2}=x_{3}$. As such, given that the system is autonomous, the paths of evolution of the $x_{i}$ cannot cross the intersections of these planes with $\Psi$. Thus, any non-strict inequality of the form $x_{i}\geq x_{j}\geq x_{k}$ is maintained for the whole history of the system. By considering it is clear that in this case $x_{i}$ is monotone decreasing, $x_{k}$ is monotone increasing, and the time derivative of $x_{j}$ may switch sign.
We now explore cases when even the reduced ODE system need not be solved numerically. Define the following variables:
$$\begin{aligned}
m & =\frac{x_{1}+x_{2}+x_{3}}{3}\\
u & =\frac{\left(x_{1}-x_{2}\right)^{2}+\left(x_{2}-x_{3}\right)^{2}+\left(x_{3}-x_{1}\right)^{2}}{3}\end{aligned}$$
It is a standard result that $m\geq\sqrt[3]{x_{1}x_{2}x_{3}}$. Thus, $m\geq1$. Note that $u$ is proportional to the internal energy contribution from the distortion. From we have:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{du}{d\tau} & =-18\left(1-m\left(m^{2}-\frac{5}{6}u\right)\right)\\
\frac{dm}{d\tau} & =-u\end{aligned}$$
Combining these equations, we have:
$$\frac{d^{2}m}{d\tau^{2}}=-\frac{du}{d\tau}=18\left(1-m\left(m^{2}-\frac{5}{6}u\right)\right)$$
Therefore:
$$\left\{ \begin{array}{c}
\frac{d^{2}m}{d\tau^{2}}+15m\frac{dm}{d\tau}+18\left(m^{3}-1\right)=0\\
m\left(0\right)=m_{0}\\
m^{'}\left(0\right)=-u_{0}
\end{array}\right.$$
We make the following assumption, noting that it is true in all physical situations tested in this study:
$$m\left(t\right)=1+\eta\left(t\right),\quad\eta\ll1\;\forall t\geq0\label{eq:Assumption}$$
Thus, we have the linearized ODE:
$$\left\{ \begin{array}{c}
\frac{d^{2}\eta}{d\tau^{2}}+15\frac{d\eta}{d\tau}+54\eta=0\\
\eta\left(0\right)=m_{0}-1\\
\eta^{'}\left(0\right)=-u_{0}
\end{array}\right.\label{eq:Linearized}$$
This is a Sturm-Liouville equation with solution:
$$\eta\left(\tau\right)=\frac{e^{-9\tau}}{3}\left(ae^{3\tau}-b\right)$$
where
$$\begin{aligned}
a & =9m_{0}-u_{0}-9\\
b & =6m_{0}-u_{0}-6\end{aligned}$$
Thus, we also have:
$$u\left(\tau\right)=e^{-9\tau}\left(2ae^{3\tau}-3b\right)$$
Denote the following:
$$\begin{aligned}
m_{\Delta t} & =1+\eta\left(\frac{2}{\tau_{1}}\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{7}{3}}\Delta t\right)\\
u_{\Delta t} & =u\left(\frac{2}{\tau_{1}}\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{7}{3}}\Delta t\right)\end{aligned}$$
Once these have been found, we have:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{x_{i}+x_{j}+x_{k}}{3} & =m_{\Delta t}\\
\frac{\left(x_{i}-x_{j}\right)^{2}+\left(x_{j}-x_{k}\right)^{2}+\left(x_{k}-x_{i}\right)^{2}}{3} & =u_{\Delta t}\\
x_{i}x_{j}x_{k} & =1\end{aligned}$$
This gives:
$$\begin{aligned}
x_{i} & =\frac{\Xi}{6}+\frac{u_{\Delta t}}{\Xi}+m_{\Delta t}\\
x_{j} & =\frac{1}{2}\left(\sqrt{\frac{x_{i}\left(3m_{\Delta t}-x_{i}\right)^{2}-4}{x_{i}}}+3m_{\Delta t}-x_{i}\right)\label{eq:xj}\\
x_{k} & =\frac{1}{x_{i}x_{j}}\label{eq:xk}\end{aligned}$$
where
$$\begin{aligned}
\Xi & =\sqrt[3]{6\left(\sqrt{81\Delta^{2}-6u_{\Delta t}^{3}}+9\Delta\right)}\\
\Delta & =-2m_{\Delta t}^{3}+m_{\Delta t}u_{\Delta t}+2\end{aligned}$$
Note that taking the real parts of the above expression for $x_{i}$ gives:
$$\begin{aligned}
x_{i} & =\frac{\sqrt{6u_{\Delta t}}}{3}\cos\left(\frac{\theta}{3}\right)+m_{\Delta t}\label{eq:xi}\\
\theta & =\tan^{-1}\left(\frac{\sqrt{6u_{\Delta t}^{3}-81\Delta^{2}}}{9\Delta}\right)\label{eq:=0003B8}\end{aligned}$$
At this point it is not clear which values of $\left\{ x_{i},x_{j},x_{k}\right\} $ are taken by $x_{1},x_{2},x_{3}$. However, this can be inferred from the fact that any relation $x_{i}\geq x_{j}\geq x_{k}$ is maintained over the lifetime of the system. Thus, the stiff ODE solver has been obviated by a few arithmetic operations.
### Power Law Fluids
Take the singular value decomposition $A=U\Sigma V^{T}$. Note that:
$$\sigma=-\rho c_{s}^{2}A^{T}A\dev\left(A^{T}A\right)=-\rho c_{s}^{2}V\Sigma^{2}\dev\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)V^{T}$$
Thus:
$$\left\Vert \sigma\right\Vert _{F}^{k}=\rho^{k}c_{s}^{2k}\left\Vert \Sigma^{2}\dev\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)\right\Vert _{F}^{k}$$
Thus, according to , and letting $k=\frac{1-n}{n}$, we have:
$$\frac{d\Sigma}{dt}=-\frac{3}{\tau_{0}}\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{5}{3}}\frac{\rho^{k}c_{s}^{2k}}{2^{\frac{k}{2}}}\left\Vert \Sigma^{2}\dev\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)\right\Vert _{F}^{k}\Sigma\dev\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)$$
Letting $x_{i}=\frac{a_{i}^{2}}{\det\left(A\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}}=\frac{a_{i}^{2}}{\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}}$ then $\Sigma^{2}=\det\left(A\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}X$ where $X=\diag\left(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3}\right)$. Thus, we have:
$$\frac{dx_{i}}{d\tilde{t}}=-3\left\Vert X\dev\left(X\right)\right\Vert _{F}^{k}x_{i}\left(x_{i}-\bar{x}\right)\label{eq:StretchODESystem-2-1}$$
where:
$$\tilde{t}=\frac{2}{\tau_{0}}\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{4k+7}{3}}\left(\frac{\rho c_{s}^{2}}{\sqrt{2}}\right)^{k}t$$
Note that:
$$\begin{aligned}
9\left\Vert X\dev\left(X\right)\right\Vert _{F}^{2} & =4\left(x_{1}^{4}+x_{2}^{4}+x_{3}^{4}\right)\\
& -2\left(x_{1}^{2}x_{2}^{2}+x_{3}^{2}x_{2}^{2}+x_{1}^{2}x_{3}^{2}\right)\nonumber \\
& +\sum_{i\neq j,j\neq k,k\neq i}x_{i}^{2}x_{j}x_{k}-4\sum_{i\neq j}x_{i}^{3}x_{j}\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
Defining $m,u$ as before, we have:
$$\left\Vert X\dev\left(X\right)\right\Vert _{F}^{2}=\frac{1}{2}u^{2}+4m^{2}u-6m^{4}+6m$$
This leads to the following coupled system of ODEs:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{du}{d\tilde{t}} & =-18\frac{d\tau}{d\tilde{t}}\left(1-m\left(m^{2}-\frac{5}{6}u\right)\right)\\
\frac{dm}{d\tilde{t}} & =-\frac{d\tau}{d\tilde{t}}u\end{aligned}$$
where we have defined the variable $\tau$ by:
$$\frac{d\tau}{d\tilde{t}}=\left(\frac{1}{2}u^{2}+4m^{2}u-6m^{4}+6m\right)^{\frac{k}{2}}$$
Using the approximation solution from before:
$$\begin{aligned}
m\left(\tau\right) & =1+\frac{e^{-9\tau}}{3}\left(ae^{3\tau}-b\right)\label{eq:m(=0003C4)-1}\\
u\left(\tau\right) & =e^{-9\tau}\left(2ae^{3\tau}-3b\right)\label{eq:u(=0003C4)-1}\end{aligned}$$
It is straightforward to verify that:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d\tau}{d\tilde{t}} & =\frac{1}{54^{\frac{k}{2}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}
108ae^{-6\tau}-324be^{-9\tau}\\
+180a^{2}e^{-12\tau}-612abe^{-15\tau}\\
+459b^{2}e^{-18\tau}-24a^{2}be^{-21\tau}\\
+\left(48ab^{2}-4a^{4}\right)e^{-24\tau}\\
+\left(16a^{3}b-24b^{3}\right)e^{-27\tau}\\
-24a^{2}b^{2}e^{-30\tau}+16ab^{3}e^{-33\tau}\\
-4b^{4}e^{-36\tau}
\end{array}\right)^{\frac{k}{2}}\\
& \equiv\frac{f\left(\tau\right)^{\frac{k}{2}}}{54^{\frac{k}{2}}}\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
$f\left(\tau\right)$ is approximated by $g\left(\tau\right)\equiv ce^{-\frac{c}{\lambda}\tau}$, where:
$$\begin{aligned}
c & =108a-324b+180a^{2}-612ab+459b^{2}\\
& -24\left(a^{2}b-2ab^{2}+b^{3}\right)-4\left(a-b\right)^{4}\nonumber \\
\lambda & =18a-36b+15a^{2}-\frac{204ab}{5}+\frac{51b^{2}}{2}\\
& -\frac{8a^{2}b}{7}+2ab^{2}-\frac{8b^{3}}{9}-\frac{a^{4}}{6}+\frac{16a^{3}b}{27}\nonumber \\
& -\frac{4a^{2}b^{2}}{5}+\frac{16ab^{3}}{33}-\frac{b^{4}}{9}\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
Note that $f\left(0\right)=g\left(0\right)$ and $\int_{0}^{\infty}\left(f\left(\tau\right)-g\left(\tau\right)\right)d\tau=0$. Thus, we have:
$$\frac{d\tau}{d\tilde{t}}\approx\left(\frac{c}{54}\right)^{\frac{k}{2}}e^{-\frac{kc}{2\lambda}\tau}$$
Therefore:
$$\begin{aligned}
\tau & \approx\frac{2\lambda}{kc}\log\left(\frac{kc}{2\lambda}\left(\frac{c}{54}\right)^{\frac{k}{2}}\tilde{t}+1\right)\\
& =\frac{2\lambda}{kc}\log\left(\frac{kc}{\tau_{0}\lambda}\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{4k+7}{3}}\left(\frac{\sqrt{c}\rho c_{s}^{2}}{6\sqrt{3}}\right)^{k}t+1\right)\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
### Elastoplastic Solids
For elastoplastic materials governed by the power law described in :
$$\frac{d\Sigma}{dt}=-\frac{3}{\tau_{0}}\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{5}{3}}\frac{\left(\frac{3}{2}\right)^{\frac{n}{2}}\rho^{n}c_{s}^{2n}\left\Vert \dev\left(\Sigma^{2}\dev\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)\right)\right\Vert _{F}^{n}}{\sigma_{0}^{n}}\Sigma\dev\left(\Sigma^{2}\right)$$
Thus, we have:
$$\frac{dx_{i}}{d\tilde{t}}=-3\left\Vert \dev\left(X\dev\left(X\right)\right)\right\Vert _{F}^{n}x_{i}\left(x_{i}-\bar{x}\right)\label{eq:StretchODESystem-2}$$
where:
$$\tilde{t}=\frac{2}{\tau_{0}}\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{4n+7}{3}}\left(\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}}\frac{\rho c_{s}^{2}}{\sigma_{0}}\right)^{n}t$$
Note that:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{27}{2}\left\Vert \dev\left(X\dev\left(X\right)\right)\right\Vert _{F}^{2} & =\frac{3}{2}\sum_{i\neq j,j\neq k,k\neq i}x_{i}^{2}x_{j}x_{k}\\
& -2\sum_{i\neq j}x_{i}^{3}x_{j}\nonumber \\
& -3\left(x_{1}^{2}x_{2}^{2}+x_{3}^{2}x_{2}^{2}+x_{1}^{2}x_{3}^{2}\right)\nonumber \\
& +4\left(x_{1}^{4}+x_{2}^{4}+x_{3}^{4}\right)\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
Thus we have:
$$\left\Vert \dev\left(X\dev\left(X\right)\right)\right\Vert _{F}^{2}=\frac{1}{6}u^{2}+4m^{2}u-6m^{4}+6m$$
This leads to the following coupled system of ODEs:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{du}{d\tilde{t}} & =-18\frac{d\tau}{d\tilde{t}}\left(1-m\left(m^{2}-\frac{5}{6}u\right)\right)\\
\frac{dm}{d\tilde{t}} & =-\frac{d\tau}{d\tilde{t}}u\end{aligned}$$
where we have defined the variable $\tau$ by:
$$\frac{d\tau}{d\tilde{t}}=\left(\frac{1}{6}u^{2}+4m^{2}u-6m^{4}+6m\right)^{\frac{n}{2}}$$
Then we have:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{du}{d\tau} & =-18\left(1-m\left(m^{2}-\frac{5}{6}u\right)\right)\\
\frac{dm}{d\tau} & =-u\end{aligned}$$
Using the approximate solution , again, it is straightforward to verify that:
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d\tau}{d\tilde{t}} & =\frac{1}{54^{\frac{n}{2}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}
108ae^{-6\tau}-324be^{-9\tau}\\
+108a^{2}e^{-12\tau}-396abe^{-15\tau}\\
+297b^{2}e^{-18\tau}-24a^{2}be^{-21\tau}\\
+\left(48ab^{2}-4a^{4}\right)e^{-24\tau}\\
+\left(16a^{3}b-24b^{3}\right)e^{-27\tau}\\
-24a^{2}b^{2}e^{-30\tau}+16ab^{3}e^{-33\tau}\\
-4b^{4}e^{-36\tau}
\end{array}\right)^{\frac{n}{2}}\\
& \equiv\frac{f\left(\tau\right)^{\frac{n}{2}}}{54^{\frac{n}{2}}}\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
$f\left(\tau\right)$ is approximated by $g\left(\tau\right)\equiv ce^{-\lambda\tau}$, where:
$$\begin{aligned}
c & =108a-324b+108a^{2}-396ab+297b^{2}\\
& -24\left(a^{2}b-2ab^{2}+b^{3}\right)-4\left(a-b\right)^{4}\nonumber \\
\lambda & =18a-36b+9a^{2}-\frac{132ab}{5}+\frac{33b^{2}}{2}\\
& -\frac{8a^{2}b}{7}+2ab^{2}-\frac{8b^{3}}{9}-\frac{a^{4}}{6}\nonumber \\
& +\frac{16a^{3}b}{27}-\frac{4a^{2}b^{2}}{5}+\frac{16ab^{3}}{33}-\frac{b^{4}}{9}\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
Note that $f\left(0\right)=g\left(0\right)$ and $\int_{0}^{\infty}\left(f\left(\tau\right)-g\left(\tau\right)\right)d\tau=0$. Thus, we have:
$$\frac{d\tau}{d\tilde{t}}\approx\left(\frac{c}{54}\right)^{\frac{n}{2}}e^{-\frac{nc}{2\lambda}\tau}$$
Therefore:
$$\begin{aligned}
\tau & \approx\frac{2\lambda}{nc}\log\left(\frac{nc}{2\lambda}\left(\frac{c}{54}\right)^{\frac{n}{2}}\tilde{t}+1\right)\\
& =\frac{2\lambda}{nc}\log\left(\frac{nc}{\tau_{0}\lambda}\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{4n+7}{3}}\left(\frac{\sqrt{c}}{6}\frac{\rho c_{s}^{2}}{\sigma_{0}}\right)^{n}t+1\right)\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
Thus, the value of $A$ at time $\Delta t$ is found by substituting the following into , :
$$\tau=\frac{2\lambda}{nc}\log\left(\frac{nc}{\tau_{0}\lambda}\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{\frac{4n+7}{3}}\left(\frac{\sqrt{c}}{6}\frac{\rho c_{s}^{2}}{\sigma_{0}}\right)^{n}\Delta t+1\right)$$
The results are in turn substituted into , , .
Distortion Correction in Fluids
-------------------------------
Owing to the linearization step in , the method presented will perform poorly if the mean of the normalized singular values of the distortion tensor, $m$, deviates significantly from $1$. To avert this, the following resetting procedure was applied globally for fluid flow problems when $m>1.03$:
$$\begin{aligned}
E & \mapsto E-\frac{c_{S}^{2}}{4}\left\Vert \dev\left(G\right)\right\Vert _{F}^{2}\\
A & \mapsto\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_{0}}\right)^{1/3}I\end{aligned}$$
This is justified by the fact that the distortion tensor is not a macroscopically-measurable quantity. This transformation leaves the density, pressure, and velocity of the fluid unchanged, and was found to improve the stability of the numerical scheme, while at the same time producing correct results, as demonstrated in the following section.
Numerical Results\[sec:Numerical-Results\]
==========================================
In this section, a variety of test problems are solved, with a dual purpose. Firstly, we demonstrate the ability of the modified GPR formulation presented in to model power-law fluids. Secondly, we demonstrate the efficacy of the numerical schemes presented in in solving this system, and the existing power-law plasticity formulation of the GPR model.
Strain Relaxation Test
----------------------
The aim of this test is to gauge the accuracy of the approximate analytic solver for the distortion equations.
Take initial data used by Barton:
$$A=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 0 & 0\\
-0.01 & 0.95 & 0.02\\
-0.015 & 0 & 0.9
\end{array}\right)^{-1}$$
The following parameter values were used: $\rho_{0}=1,c_{s}=0.219,n=4,\sigma_{0}=9\times10^{-4},\tau_{0}=0.1$.
The evolution of the components of the distortion tensor, according to both the approximate analytical solver and a stiff numerical ODE solver, are given in , , and . As can be seen, the approximate analytic solver compares well with the exact solution for the distortion tensor $A$, and thus also the stress tensor and the energy.
![\[fig:Distortion-ODEs\_A-plastic\]Distortion tensor components during the Strain Relaxation Test: approximate analytical solution (crosses) and numerical ODE solution (solid line)](1_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A_N___e_GPR_Model_figs_Plastic_Distortion_ODEs_A1.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}![\[fig:Distortion-ODEs\_A-plastic\]Distortion tensor components during the Strain Relaxation Test: approximate analytical solution (crosses) and numerical ODE solution (solid line)](2_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A_N___e_GPR_Model_figs_Plastic_Distortion_ODEs_A2.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}
![\[fig:Distortion-ODEs\_=0003C3-plastic\]Stress tensor components during the Strain Relaxation Test: approximate analytical solution (crosses) and numerical ODE solution (solid line)](3_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A_N____GPR_Model_figs_Plastic_Distortion_ODEs___1.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}![\[fig:Distortion-ODEs\_=0003C3-plastic\]Stress tensor components during the Strain Relaxation Test: approximate analytical solution (crosses) and numerical ODE solution (solid line)](4_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A_N____GPR_Model_figs_Plastic_Distortion_ODEs___2.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}
![\[fig:Distortion-ODEs\_=000395-plastic\]Total energy during the Strain Relaxation Test: approximate analytical solution (crosses) and numerical ODE solution (solid line)](5_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A_N___he_GPR_Model_figs_Plastic_Distortion_ODEs_E.png){width="50.00000%"}
Poiseuille Flow
---------------
The aim of this test is to gauge both the performance of the modified formulation of the GPR model in simulating power-law fluids, and the accuracy of the new numerical scheme we have presented to solve it. The problem of poiseuille flow has been chosen due to the availability of an analytical solution against which to compare.
This test consists of a fluid traveling down a channel of constant width $L$, with a constant pressure gradient $\Delta p$ along the length of the channel. No-slip boundary conditions are imposed on the channel walls. For a non-Newtonian fluid obeying a power law, the steady-state velocity profile across the channel is given by @ferras_analytical_2012:
$$\begin{aligned}
v & =\frac{\rho}{k}\left(\frac{\Delta p}{K}\right)^{1/n}\left(\left(\frac{L}{2}\right)^{k}-\left(x-\frac{L}{2}\right)^{k}\right)\\
k & =\frac{n+1}{n}\end{aligned}$$
where $x\in\left[0,L\right]$.
In this case, $L=0.25$, $\Delta p=0.48$, $K=10^{-2}$. The fluid is initially at rest, with $\rho_{0}=1$, $A=I$, $p=100/\gamma$. It follows an ideal gas EOS with $\gamma=1.4$, $c_{s}=1$. The pressure gradient is imposed by means of a body force, implemented as a constant source term to the momentum equation.
The final time was taken to be $20$, so that in each case the system had reached steady state. 100 cells were taken across the width of the channel. A third order WENO method was used, with a CFL number of 0.6.
Results for various values of $n$ are shown in . The exact solutions are shown as dotted lines, with the numerical solutions in solid colors. Note that there is good agreement between the numerical solutions and exact solutions for all values of $n$.
{width="50.00000%"}{width="50.00000%"}
Lid-Driven Cavity
-----------------
This lid-driven cavity test has been chosen here as a famous multidimensional problem against which the power-law fluid framework we have presented can be benchmarked. See @sverdrup_highly_2018 for detailed analysis of this problem, under power-law fluids and other non-Newtonian fluids.
The test consists of a square grid, with one side at a constant velocity of $1$, and the other three stationary, with no-slip boundary conditions imposed. The fluid obeys an ideal gas EOS with $\gamma=1.4$ and $c_{s}=1$. It obeys a viscosity power law with $K=10^{-2}$, for various $n$. It is initially at rest, with $\rho=1$, $p=1$, $A=I$.
The grid is chosen to have size $100\times100$. A third order WENO method is used, with a CFL number of 0.5.
and show the results of running the system to steady state, for $n=1.5$ and $n=0.5$, respectively. The results are compared with those of @bell_p-version_1994 and @neofytou_3rd_2005. As can be seen, there is very good agreement for the case $n=1.5$, with the split solver performing slightly less well for the case $n=0.5$. The 2D streamline plots found in take the characteristic forms found in the aforementioned literature.
{width="50.00000%"}{width="50.00000%"}
{width="50.00000%"}{width="50.00000%"}
{width="50.00000%"}{width="50.00000%"}
Elastoplastic Piston
--------------------
We now demonstrate the ability of our new numerical scheme to deal with problems involving elastoplastic materials. This test is taken from @peshkov_theoretical_2018, with exact solutions found in @maire_nominally_2013.
In this test, a piston with speed $20ms^{-1}$ is driven into copper initially at rest. An elastic shock wave develops, followed by a plastic shock wave. The following parameters were used: $\rho_{0}=8930,c_{s}=2244,\sigma_{0}=9\times10^{7},\tau_{0}=1$. The shock Mie-Gruneisen EOS is used for the internal energy, with $p_{0}=0,c_{0}=3940,\Gamma_{0}=2,s=1.48$. 400 grid cells were used, with a third order WENO method, and a CFL number of 0.7.
and demonstrate the results using the split solver for various values of $n$. These results are compared with the exact solution to the problem under ideal plasticity (to which the former results should converge as $n\rightarrow\infty$). The split solver is able to cope with larger values of $n$ than those that have been presented in @peshkov_theoretical_2018. The results here are correspondingly closer to the ideal plasticity solution that they approximate, than those found in the aforementioned paper.
![\[fig:piston\]Density and velocity in the elastoplastic piston test, for various values of power-law parameter $n$](14_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A____the_GPR_Model_figs_Elasto-Plastic_Piston___.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}![\[fig:piston\]Density and velocity in the elastoplastic piston test, for various values of power-law parameter $n$](15_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A_____the_GPR_Model_figs_Elasto-Plastic_Piston_v.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}
![\[fig:piston-1\]Zoom view of density and velocity in the elastoplastic piston test, for various values of power-law parameter $n$](16_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A____PR_Model_figs_Elasto-Plastic_Piston____zoom.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}![\[fig:piston-1\]Zoom view of density and velocity in the elastoplastic piston test, for various values of power-law parameter $n$](17_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A____GPR_Model_figs_Elasto-Plastic_Piston_v_zoom.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}
Cylindrical Shock
-----------------
The purpose of this test is to demonstrate the efficacy of the split solver in multidimensional elastoplastic problems.
This test is taken from @barton_eulerian_2011. It consists of a slab of copper, occupying the domain $\left[0,20\right]^{2}$, initially at rest. The region $r\leq2$ is at ambient conditions, with zero pressure. The region $r>2$ is at raised pressure $10^{10}$ and temperature $600$.
The simulation is run to time $t=10^{-5}$, on a grid of shape $500\times500$. A fourth order WENO scheme is used, with a CFL number of 0.8. The resulting radial density, velocity, stress tensor, and temperature profiles are given in , , , , and 2D heatmaps for density and speed are given in .
The results are compared with those of the 1D radially-symmetric scheme found in @barton_eulerian_2011, which are in turn compared with the 2D results from the same publication. As can be seen, the 2D results computed using the new split solver for the GPR model more closely match the 1D radially-symmetric results than the 2D results from the aforementioned publication, with the spikes in both variables around $r=2$ and the wave around $r=6$ being more accurately resolved. Additionally, the temperature jump around $r=2$ is more sharply resolved.
![\[fig:cylindrical-shock-=0003C1\]1D density profiles for the 2D Cylindrical Shock Test, comparing the GPR model with split solver (left) to the results from @barton_eulerian_2011 (right)](18_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A____the_GPR_Model_figs_Cylindrical_Shock____gpr.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}![\[fig:cylindrical-shock-=0003C1\]1D density profiles for the 2D Cylindrical Shock Test, comparing the GPR model with split solver (left) to the results from @barton_eulerian_2011 (right)](19_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A_____GPR_Model_figs_Cylindrical_Shock____barton.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}
![\[fig:cylindrical-shock-v\]1D velocity profiles for the 2D Cylindrical Shock Test, comparing the GPR model with split solver (left) to the results from @barton_eulerian_2011 (right)](20_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A_____the_GPR_Model_figs_Cylindrical_Shock_u_gpr.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}![\[fig:cylindrical-shock-v\]1D velocity profiles for the 2D Cylindrical Shock Test, comparing the GPR model with split solver (left) to the results from @barton_eulerian_2011 (right)](21_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A____e_GPR_Model_figs_Cylindrical_Shock_u_barton.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}
![\[fig:cylindrical-shock-=0003A3\]1D stress tensor profiles for the 2D Cylindrical Shock Test, comparing the GPR model with split solver (left) to the results from @barton_eulerian_2011 (right)](22_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A____the_GPR_Model_figs_Cylindrical_Shock____gpr.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}![\[fig:cylindrical-shock-=0003A3\]1D stress tensor profiles for the 2D Cylindrical Shock Test, comparing the GPR model with split solver (left) to the results from @barton_eulerian_2011 (right)](23_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A_____GPR_Model_figs_Cylindrical_Shock____barton.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}
![\[fig:cylindrical-shock-T\]1D temperature profiles for the 2D Cylindrical Shock Test, comparing the GPR model with split solver (left) to the results from @barton_eulerian_2011 (right)](24_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A_____the_GPR_Model_figs_Cylindrical_Shock_T_gpr.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}![\[fig:cylindrical-shock-T\]1D temperature profiles for the 2D Cylindrical Shock Test, comparing the GPR model with split solver (left) to the results from @barton_eulerian_2011 (right)](25_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A____e_GPR_Model_figs_Cylindrical_Shock_T_barton.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}
![\[fig:cylindrical-shock-2\]2D plots of density and speed for the Cylindrical Shock Test](26_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A_____the_GPR_Model_figs_Cylindrical_Shock____2d.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}![\[fig:cylindrical-shock-2\]2D plots of density and speed for the Cylindrical Shock Test](27_Users_hari_Git_private_phd_papers_Working_A____r_the_GPR_Model_figs_Cylindrical_Shock_u_2d.png "fig:"){width="50.00000%"}
Conclusions\[sec:Conclusions\]
==============================
In summary, a formulation for modeling power-law dilatants and pseudoplastics under the GPR model has been presented. A new numerical method - based on an operator splitting, combined with some analytical results - has also been presented for solving this version of the GPR model, and this numerical method has been applied also to the case of elastoplastic solids under a power-law plasticity model. It has been demonstrated through numerical simulation that the modified GPR formulation is able to accurately describe the evolution of non-Newtonian fluids, and the new numerical scheme has been shown to be an effective method by which to solve this system, and the existing corresponding system for elastoplastic solids.
Under circumstances in which the flow is compressed heavily in one direction relative to the other directions, it should be noted that the linearization assumption used to derive the approximate analytical solver may break down. As discussed in @jackson_fast_2017, this is due to the fact that one of the singular values of the distortion tensor will be much larger than the others, and the mean of the squares of the singular values will be distant to the geometric mean. The subsequent linearization of the ODE governing the mean of the singular values will then fail. It should be noted that none of the situations covered in this study presented problems for the approximate analytical solver, and situations which may be problematic are in some sense unusual. In any case, a stiff ODE solver can be used to solve the systems , if necessary, and so this method is still very much usable in these situations, albeit slightly slower.
As detailed in @leveque_study_1990, solvers based on a temporal splitting suffer from a lack of spatial resolution in evaluating the source terms. Thus, it should be noted that the operator splitting method presented here may suffer from the incorrect speed of propagation of discontinuities on regular, structured grids. This issue can be rectified, however, by the use of some form of shock tracking or mesh refinement, as noted in the cited paper. @dumbser_finite_2008 note that operator splitting-based methods can result in schemes that are neither well-balanced, nor asymptotically consistent. The extent to which these two conditions are violated by this method and the severity in practice of any potential violation is a topic of further research.
It should be noted that the new numerical scheme presented in this study is trivially parallelizable on a cell-wise basis. Thus, given a large number of computational cores, deficiencies in this method in terms of its order of accuracy may be overcome by utilizing a larger number of computational cells and cores. The number of grid cells that can be used scales roughly linearly with number of cores, at constant time per iteration.
References
==========
Acknowledgments
===============
The authors acknowledge financial support from the EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Computational Methods for Materials Science under grant EP/L015552/1.
[^1]: The concept of a *material element* corresponds to that of a fluid parcel from fluid dynamics, applied to both fluids and solids.
[^2]: Note that @dumbser_high_2015 denotes this variable by $\alpha$, which is avoided here due to a clash with a parameter of one of the equations of state used.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In order to understand the evolution of the interstellar medium (ISM) of a galaxy, we have analysed the gas and dust budget of the Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC). Using the [*Spitzer Space Telescope*]{}, we measured the integrated gas mass-loss rate across asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars and red supergiants (RSGs) in the SMC, and obtained a rate of 1.4$\times10^{-3}$. This is much smaller than the estimated gas ejection rate from type II supernovae (SNe) (2–4$\times10^{-2}$). The SMC underwent a an increase in starformation rate in the last 12Myrs, and consequently the galaxy has a relatively high SN rate at present. Thus, SNe are more important gas sources than AGB stars in the SMC. The total gas input from stellar sources into the ISM is 2–4$\times10^{-2}$. This is slightly smaller than the ISM gas consumed by starformation ($\sim$8$\times10^{-2}$). Starformation in the SMC relies on a gas reservoir in the ISM, but eventually the starformation rate will decline in this galaxy, unless gas infalls into the ISM from an external source. The dust injection rate from AGB and RSG candidates is 1$\times10^{-5}$. Dust injection from SNe is in the range of 0.2–11$\times10^{-4}$, although the SN contribution is rather uncertain. Stellar sources could be important for ISM dust ($3\times10^5$) in the SMC, if the dust lifetime is about 1.4Gyrs. We found that the presence of poly-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in the ISM cannot be explained entirely by carbon-rich AGB stars. Carbon-rich AGB stars could inject only 7$\times10^{-9}$ of PAHs at most, which could contribute up to 100 of PAHs in the lifetime of a PAH. The estimated PAH mass of 1800 in the SMC can not be explained. Additional PAH sources, or ISM reprocessing should be needed.'
author:
- |
M. Matsuura, Paul M. Woods, P.J. Owen\
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom\
bibliography:
- 'smc\_ext.bib'
date: Submitted
title: The global gas and dust budget of the Small Magellanic Cloud
---
\[firstpage\]
galaxies: evolution – galaxies: individual: the Magellanic Clouds – (ISM:) dust, extinction – stars: AGB and post-AGB – stars:mass-loss – (stars:) supernovae: general
Introduction
============
Stars and the interstellar medium (ISM) of galaxies experience a constant exchange of gas and dust. Stars are formed in molecular clouds in the ISM, and evolve. Elements are synthesised in stellar interior, and eventually they are ejected at the end of the stellar life. Gas ejected by stars is enriched with metals, in comparison to with the gas where the stars were initially formed. Dust grains are formed around evolved stars and supernovae (SNe) and they are injected into the ISM. They might be processed in the ISM, though that remains uncertain. Eventually, dust grains are destroyed by shocks generated by SN blast winds. The lifecycle of matter drives the evolution of the ISM, and ultimately, the evolution of galaxies.
The concept of the lifecycle of matter, in particular gas content, is well accepted and has been adopted in the chemical evolution models and stellar population models of galaxies [e.g. @Pagel:1998jm; @Bruzual:2003ck; @Kodama:1997vx]. However, it had been difficult to actually measure the gas and dust feedback from stars into the ISM in real terms. The [*Spitzer Space Telescope*]{} [@Werner:2004jt] has provided an opportunity to measure the gas feedback from stars in the Magellanic Clouds [@Matsuura:2009fs; @Srinivasan:2009bia; @Boyer:2012vu], delivering new constraints on chemical evolution models.
Dust is one of the important contents of galaxies. Dust absorbs energy emitted from stars within a galaxy, and re-emits it in the infrared to sub-mm wavelengths. The presence of dust controls the energy input and output from the ISM of galaxies, and affects the spectral shape of the galaxy and the underlining physics of the ISM [@Galliano:2005ei; @Dunne:2011fr].
Despite such an important role in the physics of the ISM and galaxies, it is still not well established how dust mass in the ISM evolves [@Sloan:2009ed; @Draine:2009ur; @Tielens:2005tb; @Calura:2008eg]. This requires detailed studies of the dust formation and destruction processes in stars and the ISM. Dust grains are considered to be formed in a wide range of objects, particularly stars in the late phase of evolution [e.g. @Gehrz:1989uy]. Such theoretical studies have been conducted [@Nozawa:2003fd; @Morgan:2003cq; @Ferrarotti:2006gj; @Zhukovska:2008bw; @Valiante:2009hg] but are poorly constrained by observations at present. Once grains are ejected from stars into the ISM, it has been proposed that dust grains are re-processed and destroyed. Dust grains might grow in the ISM, using stellar dust as seeds [e.g. @Tielens:2005tb; @Draine:2009ur], but it is more difficult to directly measure these processes. This paper focuses on establishing an understanding of what the contribution of stellar dust is to the evolution of dust in the ISM.
One of the important dust sources are asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars, low- and intermediate-mass (1–8${\mbox{${\rm M}_{\odot}$}}$) evolved stars. It has been well established that dust grains are formed in the AGB outflow [e.g. @Habing:1996wn]. However, it is challenging to make a quantitative analysis; namely to measure dust formed in evolved stars in entire populations across galaxies, and evaluate their contribution to dust in the ISM, because this requires a large survey of AGB stars in a galaxy. One of the pioneering studies was based on the IRAS survey of the solar neighbourhood [@Jura:1989br], and the Spitzer Space Telescope opened up a possibility for such studies beyond the Milky Way [@Matsuura:2009fs; @Srinivasan:2009bia].
High-mass stars are considered to form dust in various evolutionary stages, such as red supergiants (RSGs), Wolf-Rayet stars, luminous blue variables (LBVs), and supernova (SNe). Due to limited number of sample, the mass dust formed in high mass stars, and in particular, SNe, is uncertain. Recent [*Spitzer*]{} and [*Herschel*]{} studies of SNe and SN remnants (SNRs) show that type-II SNe can form dust, but the reported dust masses range from $10^{-4}$ to $\sim$1 [@BenEKSugerman:2006gb; @Meikle:2007gl; @Barlow:2010cz; @Matsuura:2011ij; @Gomez:2012fm]. Type-Ia SNe, which have an origin in low- and intermediate-mass binary stars, appear to form very small amounts of dust [@Gomez:2012jk].
The explosion of high mass stars creates expanding winds, which often have multiple velocity components [@Kjaer:2010wl]. When the fast blast wind collides with the ISM dust, ISM dust grains can be destroyed via sputtering and shattering processes [@Jones:1996bi]. The lifetime of dust is determined by its destruction by SN shocks. Assuming homogeneous gas and dust distributions, the lifetime of dust is estimated to be nearly 1Gyr [@Jones:1996bi]. Gas and dust are distributed inhomogenously in the ISM, so as it is very difficult to estimate a precise dust lifetime.
In this paper, we measure the gas and dust injection rate from AGB stars and RSGs in the Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC). This galaxy is only 56kpc away [@McCumber:2005jw] and is a molecular-poor galaxy, yet has some ongoing starformation. The measured gas and dust masses ejected from AGB stars and RSGs are compared with masses ejected from SNe, and with the starformation rate in the SMC. We discuss the current problems in understanding the gas and dust budget, and its evolution in these galaxies.
Mass-loss rates of AGB stars and red supergiants {#mass-loss-rate}
================================================
Mass-loss rates of AGB stars and red supergiants correlate well with infrared excess. Often near-infrared photometric points are used to represent the photospheric flux, while mid-infrared fluxes illustrate the emission from the dust thermal emission. Taking near- and mid-infrared colours is an indicator of mass-loss rates [@LeBertre:1998ty; @Whitelock:1994tl].
The correlation between colour and mass-loss rates have been established for LMC and SMC carbon-rich AGB stars ([@Matsuura:2009fs], who used the mass-loss measurements from [@Groenewegen:2007bi], and photometric data from @Meixner:2006eg and @Skrutskie:2006hl). The resultant relations were $$\label{eq-38}
\log\, {\mbox{$\dot{M_g}$}}= -6.20 / ( ([3.6]-[8.0])+0.83) -3.39$$ in the range of $1<[3.6]-[8.0]<9$ $$\label{eq-k8}
\log\, {\mbox{$\dot{M_g}$}}= -14.50 / ( (K_s-[8.0])+3.86) -3.62$$ in the range of $1<K_s-[8.0]<9$, where ${\mbox{$\dot{M_g}$}}$ is the gas mass-loss rate.
The relation for $K_s-[24]$ for the same data set is found to be $$\label{eq-k24}
log\, {\mbox{$\dot{M_g}$}}= -20.25 / ( (K_s-[24])+4.98) -3.47,$$
We further derive the relationship for oxygen-rich stars, using @Groenewegen:2009jq’s analysis of oxygen-rich AGB stars and red supergiants in the Magellanic Clouds. We correlate their photometric data with Spitzer and 2MASS data [@Gordon:2011jq]. The resultant correlation is found in Fig.\[Fig-mass-loss\], and the fits to these data are given as $$\label{eq-38-o}
\log\, {\mbox{$\dot{M_g}$}}= -18.97 / ( ([3.6]-[8.0])+2.698) -0.9954$$ in the range of $1<[3.6]-[8.0]<3$ $$\label{eq-k8-o}
\log\, {\mbox{$\dot{M_g}$}}= -12.28 / ( (K_s-[8.0])+2.297) - 2.888$$ in the range of $1<K_s-[8.0]<7$, and $$\label{eq-k24-o}
log\, {\mbox{$\dot{M_g}$}}= -38.96 / ( (K_s-[24])+4.903) -1.522,$$ in the range of $1<K_s-[24]<9$.
It is difficult to measure the mass-loss rates of stars with very little infrared excess and blue colour cut-offs. However, contributions from very low-mass loss rate stars are not important for the overall global gas and dust budget [@LeBertre:2001ho; @Matsuura:2009fs].
Object classifications
======================
The first step is to understand the infrared photometric survey and classify the point sources. Colour magnitude diagrams (CMDs) and colour-colour diagrams (CCDs) are commonly used to classify the point sources [e.g. @Blum:2006ib; @Ita:2008vl; @Woods:2010it]. In this work, we use the LMC objects to set object classifications based on a CMD and a CCD, and apply the classification method to SMC objects.
In our previous study, we focused on classification based on \[3.6\]$-$\[8.0\] v.s. \[8.0\] CMD to extract carbon-rich AGB stars [@Matsuura:2009fs]. We are going to revise this classification, and particularly optimise the classifications for high mass-loss rate AGB stars, which are dominant for the gas and the dust budget.
Cross-identifications
---------------------
We start the object classification process by cross-identifying the LMC photometric data with spectroscopically known objects in the LMC.
@Matsuura:2009fs have assembled the LMC objects with spectroscopical classifications and we use these sample: Sample of M-type giants and supergiants, carbon-rich stars, planetary nebulae are assembled from @Kontizas:2001ck, @Cioni:2001gq, @Sanduleak:1977wx, @Blanco:1980bu, @Westerlund:1981wi, @Wood:1983bh, @Wood:1985jm, @Hughes:1989cr and @Reid:1988vj. We added samples of Wolf Rayet (WR) stars [@Breysacher:1999tx] and SDor variables [Luminous Blue Variables (LBVs) ; @VanGenderen:2001kk], post-AGB stars [@Gielen:2009iw; @Volk:2011iw; @Matsuura:2011us], and planetary nebulae [@Woods:2010it; @Matsuura:2011us].
Object classifications
----------------------
### LMC colour-magnitude diagram
Figure\[Fig-38-8\] shows the \[3.8\]-\[8.0\] vs \[8.0\] CMDs of the LMC objects. This diagram was used for object classifications of carbon-rich AGB stars and oxygen-rich AGB stars/red supergiants in our previous study [@Matsuura:2009fs]. The black lines shows the separation of these two types. LMC Spitzer spectroscopic observations [@Kemper:2010bw] confirm that this classification is effective [@Woods:2010it].
This CMD classification is simple and largely correct. Actually, contamination of a small number of red objects (carbon-rich post-AGB stars and PNe and distant galaxies) into AGB stars and RSGs could potentially change the analysis of the global gas and dust budget, which is the final aim of this paper. The further and more severe problem is contamination of a few, but high mass-loss rate oxygen-rich AGB stars which fall into the carbon-rich AGB region at about \[3.6\]$-$\[8.0\]$\sim$2 and \[8.0\]$\sim$6mag. We introduce one more step in the analysis, as described in Sect.\[sect-CCD\], to minimise these contaminations.
Many point sources are found in the region between $2<[3.6]-[8.0]<4$ and $[8.0]<12$. This is associated with distant galaxies [@Koziowski:2009hp].
### LMC colour-colour diagram {#sect-CCD}
In order to improve object classifications further, we introduce another colour-colour diagram, the $K-[8.0]$ vs $K-[24]$ of the LMC objects, as plotted in Fig.\[Fig-K8-K24\] .
Prior to the plot, point sources associated with distant galaxies [@Koziowski:2009hp] were removed. We defined their distribution as $[3.6]-[8.0]>2.0$ and $[8.0]<10$ from Fig.\[Fig-38-8\]. These galaxies would appear approximately between $1.5< K-[8.0] <2.5$ and $5<K-[24]<7$ in the CCD, if they had been plotted.
We overlay the mass-loss vs colour relationship derived in Sect.\[mass-loss-rate\] on top of the CMD. There are two separate sequences for oxygen-rich and carbon-rich objects. The redder the colour, the higher the mass-loss rate, in general, as the equations show.
We use this CCD and the CMD to classify objects. We cross check the reliability of these classifications with SIMBAD. We found that the contaminations are not a big issue for the LMC gas and dust budget, but it does change slightly (10%) for the SMC. A cross-check with SIMBAD found that non-AGB red objects that contaminated the AGB stars are, if they have known identifications, PNe [@Henize:1955gp] and YSO candidates [@Bolatto:2007hh].
### SMC colour-magnitude diagram
Once we establish the object classifications using the LMC objects, we apply the same method to the SMC objects.
Figure\[Fig-38-8-smc\] shows the CMD of SMC point-sources extracted from the SAGE-SMC catalogue [@Gordon:2011jq]. The black lines show the separation between carbon-rich AGB stars and oxygen-rich AGB stars/red supergiants, which was derived from LMC objects, but are scaled by the difference of distance moduli between these two galaxies. The distance moduli of the LMC and the SMC are 18.5 and 18.9mag respectively [@Nikolaev:2000ex; @Westerlund:1990uh], so that the separation line was shifted by 0.4 magnitude fainter in \[8.0\] for the SMC objects.
There is a clear difference in LMC and SMC CMDs: fewer red stars are found in the SMC than the LMC. Similarly, there are only three carbon-rich candidates with very red colours (\[3.6\]$-$\[8.0\]$>$5.0), whereas there are 33 such stars in the LMC. We take into account the difference in the number of stars in these two galaxies. Taking the absolute $V$-band magnitude as a measure of number of stars in a galaxy, the SMC should have about 7 times fewer stars than the LMC [@Westerlund:1990uh]. The difference in the red carbon-rich AGB stars appears be slightly larger than the difference in the number in the stars, but this is not conclusive.
### SMC colour-colour diagram
Figure\[Fig-K8-K24-smc\] shows the same combination of CCD as Fig.\[Fig-K8-K24\], but for the Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC). There is a slight difference in the distributions of stars compared with the LMC diagram: the SMC has very few oxygen-rich AGB stars with colour redder than $K-[8.0]>1.8$. This corresponds to approximately a mass-loss rate higher than $10^{-6}$yr$^{-1}$.
The SMC CCD shows that there are a reasonable number of stars found in region (a), which are carbon-rich AGB candidates. Oxygen-rich AGB stars, represented by region (b), are relatively scarce. There are even fewer oxygen-rich AGB stars in the SMC than the LMC (Fig.\[Fig-K8-K24\]).
Gas and dust injection rate from evolved stars
==============================================
------------------------ ------------- ------------- ---------------- ------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Sources
($10^{-2}$) ($10^{-5}$) ($10^{-2}$) ($10^{-5}$)
Carbon-rich AGB stars 0.7 4 0.08 0.4
Oxygen-rich AGB + RSGs 0.8 4 0.06 0.3
Type II SNe 6–13 7–400 2–4 2-110
WR stars $\sim0.1 $ $\sim 0.01$
OB stars 0.1–1? $\sim$0.03-0.3
Star-formation rate 20–30 8
------------------------ ------------- ------------- ---------------- ------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
\[Table-injection\]
Integrated mass-loss rate from AGB stars and red supergiants
------------------------------------------------------------
Combining the information from object classifications and mass-loss rates from the previous sections, we can estimate the integrated gas and dust mass-loss rates from AGB stars and red supergiants. This is the total gas and dust mass injected from evolved stars into the ISM.
In order to estimate mass-loss rates of individual AGB stars and RSGs, we use the correlation of \[3.6\]$-$\[8.0\] with mass-loss rate. An alternative choice is $K_s-$\[8.0\], but some high mass-loss rate stars are not detected at 2MASS $K_s$-band, and these stars could contribute a significant fraction to the integrated mass-loss rate from evolved stars.
Object classification is based on \[8.0\] vs. \[3.6\]$-$\[8.0\] colour, and we supplementary use $K_s-$\[8.0\] vs $K_s-$\[24\] to remove the contamination of distant galaxies in the red carbon-rich AGB region, as well as high mass-loss rate oxygen-rich AGB stars and RSGs in the carbon-rich AGB region.
By integrating the mass-loss rates of individual AGB stars, we can estimate the total gas and dust inputs from AGB stars and red supergiants into the ISM of the SMC, as summarised in Table\[Table-budget\]. The contribution from oxygen-rich AGB stars and RSGs contribution is 0.06$\times10^{-2}$yr$^{-1}$, while carbon-rich AGB stars contribute 0.08$\times10^{-2}$yr$^{-1}$ in gas. The total gas injection rate from AGB stars and red supergiants is 0.1$\times10^{-2}$yr$^{-1}$ for the SMC.
The estimated total gas input from evolved stars is 2$\times10^{-2}$yr$^{-1}$ for LMC. This includes both oxygen-rich and carbon-rich AGB stars and RSGs. In our previous work on the LMC [@Matsuura:2009fs], the integrated mass-loss rate from oxygen-rich AGB stars and RSGS was a crude estimate based on previously known surveys before the SAGE. Tthe current estimation has a slightly higher value. The integrated mass-loss rate is added up, using the contribution from carbon-rich AGB stars (0.7$\times10^{-2}$yr$^{-1}$) and oxygen-rich AGB stars and RSGs (0.8$\times10^{-2}$yr$^{-1}$).
In the SMC, dust inputs, which are directly measured from mid-infrared observations, are 0.4$\times10^{-5}$yr$^{-1}$ for carbon-rich AGB and 0.3$\times10^{-5}$yr$^{-1}$ for oxygen-rich AGB and RSGs.
The gas-to-dust mass ratio is assumed to be 200 for all AGB stars and RSGs as in @Groenewegen:2007bi [@Groenewegen:2009jq]. This is the largest uncertainty in our estimate of the integrated gas mass-loss rate. The ratio of 200 is a widely assumed value for the Galactic AGB stars and RSGs, but it is not clear that this ratio is applicable to extra-Galactic evolved stars, where the metallicities of galaxies are different. The gas-to-dust ratio in the ISM and evolved stars is left for future investigations, such as ALMA observations.
@Boyer:2012vu has estimated that the total dust injection rate is $1\times10^{-7}$ from carbon-rich AGB stars, $6\times10^{-7}$ from “extreme-” AGB stars, which they expected to be mostly carbon-rich, and 0.7$\times10^{-8}$ from oxygen-rich AGB stars, and 3$\times10^{-8}$ from RSGs. We removed the ambiguity of “extreme” from @Boyer:2012vu’s classification. We found that the contribution from oxygen-rich AGB stars and red supergiants are much larger than their estimate. @Wood:1992ih found three OH/IR stars in the SMC. They have not estimated the mass-loss rate of these particular three objects, but the typical range of mass-loss rate of OH/IR stars are $3\times10^{-5}$–$3\times10^{-4}$[@Wood:1992ih] . @Wood:1992ih estimated these mass-loss rates based on infrared observations, and they adopted a gas-to-dust ratio of 200. The sum of the dust mass-loss rates from these three OH/IR stars alone is estimated to be $2\times10^{-7}$–$2\times10^{-6}$. @Groenewegen:2009jq analysed the mass-loss rates of AGB stars and RSGs in Magellanic Clouds, and 11 MSX named oxygen-rich SMC stars have a total dust mass loss rate of $4\times10^{-7}$. These values show that our estimates are reasonable. This does not affect @Boyer:2012vu’s overall conclusion that AGB stars and RSGs are not the dominant source of dust in the ISM, which we also found.
SN gas and dust injection rate
------------------------------
In order to estimate the average gas and dust injection rate from core-collapse SNe into the ISM, we need to estimate SN rates and the progenitor mass, as well as dust mass formed in the SNe themselves.
The SN rates have been estimated for both the LMC and the SMC, using the number and age of the supernova remnants (SNRs) in these galaxies as a starting point. In our previous LMC study [@Matsuura:2009fs], we used SN rates from @Mathewson:1983gk and @Filipovic:1998vm. The @Mathewson:1983gk estimate is a factor of two lower than @Filipovic:1998vm. @Filipovic:1998vm’s study is more recent, so we adopt this value here. Their rate includes both type Ia and II SNe. @Tsujimoto:1995wl estimated the ratio of type Ia over type II is 0.2–0.3 for both the LMC and the SMC. Combining the SN rate from @Filipovic:1998vm and type Ia and type II ratio from @Tsujimoto:1995wl, we obtain type SN II rate of one in every 125–143years in the LMC and one in every 438–500years in the SMC.
In our previous study of the LMC [@Matsuura:2009fs], we have used the average SN progenitor mass of 8 from SN progenitor surveys in the galaxies [@Smartt:2009ge]. Eight solar masses correspond to the lowest range of mass that ends their stellar evolution as SNe. One possibility is that this average progenitor mass might have some bias towards the lowest end of SN progenitors, because they are more numerous than higher mass stars and more frequently detected. We take this possibility into consideration.
A mean mass of high-mass stars is much higher than 8; if we take a mean mass of the initial mass function [@Kroupa:2001vq] with the high mass cut off of 50, the average mass of high-mass stars would be about 16. We take this to give a maximum possible mass of gas ejection rate per SN.
Considering the progenitor mass range and SN rate, the integrated gas inputs from type II SNe are approximately, 6–13$\times10^{-2}$yr$^{-1}$ for the LMC, and 2–4$\times10^{-2}$yr$^{-1}$ for the SMC.
SNe form dust in their ejecta, however, measured dust masses from SNe and SNRs have a wide range. Mid-infrared observations found the lower limit of dust mass to be about $\sim10^{-5}$ [@Meikle:2007gl], but up to $\sim10^{-2}$[@BenEKSugerman:2006gb; @Fox:2011kg]. Recently, the Herschel Magellanic Survey [HERITAGE; @Meixner:2010kj] found a large amount of dust in SN1987A [@Matsuura:2011ij], and its mass is about 0.3–0.7, showing SNe can form significant dust mass, following a measurements in Galactic SNR, CasA [0.08 of dust; @Barlow:2010cz; @Sibthorpe:2010bb]. It seems that the measured dust mass does not correlate with the progenitor mass [@Otsuka:2011gc; @Gall:2011hr]. In our estimate of the SN dust injection rate, we take two cases, $\sim10^{-2}$ as a conservative case, as taken in our previous study [@Matsuura:2009fs]. The other case is 0.5 per SNe. This assumes that the dust detected in SN1987A after 25 years from the explosion would not be destroyed in the later stage by the ISM and SN wind collisions. The dust mass per event brings the dust ejection rate to 7–400$\times10^{-5}$yr$^{-1}$ for the LMC, and 2–110$\times10^{-5}$yr$^{-1}$ for the SMC.
Other dust and gas sources
--------------------------
There are other possible sources which could contribute to the gas and dust budgets, such as Wolf-Rayet (WR) stars, luminous blue variables (LBVs), novae and OB stars. We briefly discuss their contributions to the budget.
Studies of Galactic WR stars show that late-type (WR9 and WC 10) stars form carbonaceous dust [@Williams:1987wj]. In the Magellanic Clouds, such late-type WR stars have not been found yet. Among known WR stars, the LMC WR star (HD 36402; WC 4) was detected at mid-infrared wavelength [@Williams:2011wr], and its mass is estimated to be $1.5\times10^{-7}$. It is not clear what the time scale of this dust formation and ejection rate is, but WR dust input is much smaller than that of AGB stars and SNe combined in the LMC. There is no report of dust formation in SMC WR, so far.
There are just over ten WR stars known in the SMC [@Pasemann:2011te]. Their mass loss is line driven, and the mass-loss rate decreases with metallicity [@Kudritzki:2002jd; @Crowther:2006go]. Assuming each WR star ejects approximately $1\times10^{-5}$ of gas [@Crowther:2000wr], WR stars eject is about $1\times10^{-4}$ of gas into the ISM in the SMC. The LMC WR catalog lists 134 stars [@Breysacher:1999tx] and about $1\times10^{-3}$ of gas is ejected from WR stars into the ISM in the LMC.
There are over 300 OB stars in the SMC [@Lamb:2011te]. If their mass-loss rate is typically about $10^{-8}$–$10^{-6}$ per star [@Prinja:1987uv], the total mass-loss rate is about $\sim3\times10^{-5}$–$\sim3\times10^{-3}$. In the LMC, the total mass-loss rate from approximately 1000 OB stars [@Bastian:2009ia] is about $\sim1\times10^{-4}$–$\sim1\times10^{-2}$.
Luminous blue variables (LBVs) could potentially make significant amounts of silicate dust [@Morris:1999du; @Gomez:2010gz]. Among the SDor star catalog of @VanGenderen:2001kk, three LBVs have an infrared excess in the LMC, which are R71, R127 and BAT 99-83 [@Bonanos:2009fk], indicating dust formation in these stars. In the SMC @Bonanos:2010jk found three LBVs that indicate an infrared excess. However, we found that solely IR data can not distinguish between RSGs and LBVs (Fig.\[Fig-38-8\]), so that LBVs are combined together with RSGs in the overall gas and dust budget.
Classical novae can form dust and observations of Galactic novae reported dust mass ranges between $10^{-10}$–$10^{-5}$ depending on the objects [@Gehrz:1998jk]. As far as we are aware, there is no report of dust formation in novae in the Magellanic Clouds, so that we do not include novae in the dust budget, at this moment.
@Kastner:2006hs found two LMC Be stars to have dust in discs. These are probably formed during occasional outbursts. The estimated mass-loss rate was $5\times10^{-4}$ giving the minimum mass injection rate from Be stars into the ISM of $10^{-3}$. @Bonanos:2010jk have cross correlated optical spectral surveys of massive stars in the SMC [@Evans:2004hm], and found that five B\[e\] stars have infrared excess. They could have contributed approximately $1\times10^{-5}$ of dust.
Two RCrB stars have an infrared excess. One is MSX LMC 439 [@Tisserand:2009kb] and the other is MSX LMC 1795 [@Soszynski:2009ua]. @Clayton:2011jw studied another LMC RCrB star, HV 2671. In our estimate, we integrate RCrB stars into carbon-rich AGB stars, as they can not be distinguished from IR data only (Fig.\[Fig-38-8\]).
AGB stars have one more chemical type, on top of oxygen-rich (M-type) and carbon-rich (C-type): S-type stars. They have a carbon-to-oxygen ratio almost equal to unity. Their dust composition is diverse: FeO, FeS, silicate [@Zijlstra:2004dga; @Smolders:2012to]. The number of S-type stars is small ($\sim$1% in the Galaxy) among AGB stars, so their contributions to the total gas and dust budget is negligible.
Discussions
===========
Global gas and dust budget of the SMC
-------------------------------------
In the SMC, the total gas injection rate from AGB stars, RSGs and SNe is 0.02–0.04yr$^{-1}$. This largely relies on the gas ejected from SNe.
We compare this gas injected from SNe and evolved stars into the ISM with gas consumed by star formation. @Kennicutt:1986bi estimated the current SMC starformation rate of 0.08yr$^{-1}$. In the SMC ISM, gas consumed by the starformation exceeds the gas injected from evolved stars and SNe (0.02–0.04yr$^{-1}$) into the ISM. This is similar to what has been found in the LMC, though the deficit in the LMC is much larger (about 0.1–0.2yr$^{-1}$).
The majority of the ISM gas in the SMC is present in the form of H[I]{} and its mass is $4\times10^8$[@Stanimirovic:1999kx; @Bolatto:2011et]. A large ISM reservoir could sustain the star formation, despite a deficit in the gas injection rate, at least on a few Gyr time scale. Unless there is a gas infall from an external source, the starformation rate will decline.
Similarly, SNe and AGB stars are important dust sources in the SMC. SNe could contribute to a dust injection of 2–110$\times10^{-5}$yr$^{-1}$ into the ISM, while AGB stars and RSGs contribute about 1$\times10^{-5}$yr$^{-1}$ of dust mass.
In the Milky Way, the lifetime of dust is estimated to be $6\times10^8$years and $4\times10^8$years for carbonaceous and silicate dust grains, respectively [@Jones:1996bi]. The lifetime of dust grains is constrained by their destruction by fast SN shocks and the dust lifetime correlates with the SN Ia+II rate per surface area [@Dwek:1998js]. The Galactic SN rate is estimated to be one in every 50 years [@Diehl:2006fr]. This rate includes type Ib/c and II, but in practice type II dominates. The type Ia rate in the Milky Way is about 0.3 per century [@Matteucci:2009ij], so that the total SN Ia and II rate is about one event in every 45 years in the Milky Way. The SMC has a rate of one event every 350 years, and in the LMC the rate is one event every 100 years [@Filipovic:1998vm]. To calculate the SN rate per surface area, we use the half-light radius ($r_{1/2}$) of a galaxy as a measure of the surface area, which we take from @Tolstoy:2009cl. The estimated dust lifetime would be $5\times10^8$years and $3\times10^8$years for carbonaceous and silicate dust grains, respectively in the LMC, and $17\times10^8$years and $11\times10^8$yeas in the SMC. In the SMC, the overall lifetime of the dust would be about 1.4Gyrs. This assumes an almost constant SN rate and starformation rate over such a long period, which will be discussed in Sect.\[LMC-SMC\]. In the SMC, about $4\times10^4$–$1\times10^6$ of dust has been accumulated over the 1.4Gyr history of the SMC.
The estimated dust mass in the SMC ISM is $3\times10^5$ [@Leroy:2007da]. If the dust lifetime in the SMC ISM is as long as 1.4Gyrs on average, dust present in the SMC ISM may mainly originate from stellar dust.
The obvious uncertainty in this estimate is the lifetime of dust. The half-light radius is an indicator of the galaxy size, but the LMC and the SMC are irregular galaxies, and the actual SN rate per volume would not be so simple to estimate. Furthermore, SNe might affect dust destruction in the SN vicinity only, and dust in the remaining regions might survive. The uneven distribution of dust could bring diverse life-time of dust. It seems that the dust lifetime largely depends on the local condition of the galaxies, and more sophisticated calculations are needed.
It has been proposed that dust condensation in molecular clouds could be a dominant source of ISM dust in the Milky Way or high-redshift galaxies [@Tielens:2006vv; @Draine:2009ur; @Mattsson:2011if]. These galaxies probably contain many molecular clouds within. The SMC is known to have a low molecular content [@Israel:1997tm], so that dust condensation in the molecular clouds may not be as high as in the Milky Way.
The key to understand the evolution of ISM dust is to understand the formation and destruction processes imposed by SNe. It is now pausible to determine dust formation and destruction in SNe, using the current missions/projects, such as Herschel, SOFIA and ALMA, but also future space missions [JWST and SPICA; @Tanaka:2012el]. Also we need to find constraints for grain growth in molecular clouds based on observations.
Comparison between the LMC and the SMC {#LMC-SMC}
--------------------------------------
In the SMC SNe are a more important gas source to the ISM than AGB stars and RSGs. The difference between them is a factor of 14–29. In the LMC SNe have higher gas feedback rates than AGB stars and RSGs but the difference is only by a factor of 4–9. AGB mass-loss rates have uncertainties of a factor of three at least [@Groenewegen:2007bi], and the gas-to-dust mass ratio could have a factor of three uncertainties [@vanLoon:2000wa]. The LMC difference is negligible, but the one in the SMC is not. There is a difference in the main gas sources in the LMC and SMC. The SMC has more gas feedback from high-mass stars than the LMC.
The initial mass function [@Kroupa:2001vq] shows that equivalent mass should be distributed to high-mass stars ($>$8) and low- and intermediate-mass stars (1–8). At the event of stellar death, high-mass stars could return most of their mass into the ISM. Many low- and intermediate-mass stars end their lives as white dwarfs, and their masses are about 0.6 , thus 40–92% of mass is returned to the ISM. During a constant starformation rate period, the ratio of ISM gas feedback from high-mass stars against low- and intermediate-mass stars should be about 3:2. The measured ratio shows that SMC has an excess of gas feedback from high-mass stars beyond the IMF.
The LMC and SMC have experienced more or less similar starformation histories [@Harris:2004tg; @Harris:2009bz], but the SMC has an enhanced starformation history by a factor of four in recent times in the last 12Myrs. That could result in a more efficient gas injection rate from SNe.
Additionally, the lower metallicity can cause lower dust driven winds, at least for oxygen-rich AGB stars and red supergiants [@Bowen:1991kd; @Marshall:2004ec]. The metallicities of the LMC and the SMC are about half and the quarter of Solar [@Monk:1988vc]. That could be another reason that there is a more efficient SN gas feedback in the SMC, because of the relatively smaller contribution of oxygen-rich AGB stars and red supergiants.
PAHs in the SMC
---------------
Carbon-rich AGB stars are considered to be the source of PAHs found the ISM [@1989ApJS...71..733A; @1992ApJ...401..269C]. PAHs are formed using C$_2$H$_2$ as a parent molecule in chemical reactions. In the circumstellar envelope of carbon-rich AGB stars, carbon atoms are tied up in CO first, and use up all oxygen. and the excess carbon formed carbonaceous dust and carbon-bearing molecules.
From our measured carbon-rich AGB gas injection rate, we can estimate the upper limit of PAH mass injected from carbon stars. The gas injection rate from carbon-rich AGB stars is 0.7$\times10^{-2}$yr$^{-1}$. The C$_2$H$_2$ fractional abundance is approximately $10^{-5}$ in the Milky Way [@1996MNRAS.282L..21H]. This can be has a factor of few higher, depending on how the metallicities of the galaxies affect the amount of excess carbon in the stars [@Matsuura:2005ej], and to be predicted to be about $10^{-4}$[@Woods:2012hh] in the Magellanic Clouds. The maximum PAH injection rate, if all C$_2$H$_2$ is eventually converted into PAHs, is 0.7$\times10^{-6}$yr$^{-1}$.
The average fractional abundance of PAHs in the SMC is 0.6% with respect to the total dust mass [@Sandstrom:2010ks]. The estimated PAH mass in the SMC to be about 1800.
The lifetime of PAHs is shorter than amorphous carbon. In the Milky Way, the estimated lifetime of PAHs is 1.4–1.6$\times 10^8$years [@Micelotta:2010dl]. In the SMC, the SN rate is lower, and the lifetime of PAHs can be as long as a few $10^8$years. The PAH injection rate from carbon-rich AGB stars is so low that the expected PAH mass from AGB stars would be much lower than 100. PAHs in the SMC require efficient in the ISM or in-falling into the SMC. PAH formation needs ISM processing.
Conclusions
===========
We have measured the total gas and dust injection rates from AGB stars, red supergiants, and also estimated these rates from supernovae. The total gas injection from stellar deaths is about 2–4$\times10^{-2}$ into the ISM. This is slightly smaller than the current gas consumption in the ISM by starformation, which is $\sim$8$\times10^{-2}$. The galaxy has a large gas reservoir the moment, so that it can sustain high starformation rate at present. Eventually the starformation rate is going to decline, unless an external source provides gas infall into the SMC.
AGB stars and red supergiants are important sources of dust in the SMC. Dust production in SNe is largely uncertain, so is the lifetime of dust. Within the current uncertainties in quantities, dust present in the ISM can be explained as being stellar in origin.
PAHs in the ISM can not be explained to have originated only from carbon-rich AGB stars. The lifetime of PAHs is too short, compared with the supply from carbon-rich AGB stars. PAHs require formation process in the ISM.
\[lastpage\]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'This work aims to constrain the physical nature of umbral dots (UDs) using high-resolution spectropolarimetry. Full Stokes spectra recorded by the spectropolarimeter on $Hinode$ of 51 UDs in a sunspot close to the disk center are analyzed. The height dependence of the temperature, magnetic field vector, and line-of-sight velocity across each UD is obtained from an inversion of the Stokes vectors of the two Fe I lines at 630 nm. No difference is found at higher altitudes ($-3 \le \log(\tau_{500}) \le -2$) between the UDs and the diffuse umbral background. Below that level the difference rapidly increases, so that at the continuum formation level ($\log(\tau_{500}) = 0$) we find on average a temperature enhancement of 570 K, a magnetic field weakening of 510 G, and upflows of 800 m s$^{-1}$ for peripheral UDs, whereas central UDs display an excess temperature of on average 550 K, a field weakening of 480 G, and no significant upflows. The results for, in particular, the peripheral UDs, including cuts of magnetic vector and velocity through them, look remarkably similar to the output of recent radiation MHD simulations. They strongly suggest that UDs are produced by convective upwellings.'
author:
- 'T. L. Riethmüller, S. K. Solanki, and A. Lagg'
title: Stratification of sunspot umbral dots from inversion of Stokes profiles recorded by $Hinode$
---
Introduction
============
The energy transport immediately below the solar surface is mainly determined by convective processes that are visible as granulation patterns in white-light images of the quiet photosphere. This convection is suppressed inside sunspot umbrae due to the strong vertical magnetic field, but some form of magnetoconvection [@Weiss2002] is needed to explain the observed umbral brightnesses. Umbral fine structure such as light bridges or umbral dots, dotlike bright features inside umbrae, may well be manifestations of magnetoconvection. Different models have been proposed to explain UDs, e.g., columns of field-free hot gas in between a bundle of thin magnetic flux ropes [@Parker1979; @Choudhury1986], or spatially modulated oscillations in a strong magnetic field [@Weiss1990]. Recent numerical simulations of three-dimensional radiative magnetoconvection [@Schuessler2006] reveal convective plumes that penetrate through the solar surface and look very much like UDs. Although recent broadband images may have spatially resolved UDs [@Sobotka2005; @Riethmueller2008 in preparation], spectropolarimetry is needed to learn more about their physical nature. Previous spectroscopic observations led to heterogeneous results. @Kneer1973 found that UDs exhibit upflows of 3 km s$^{-1}$ and a 50% weaker magnetic field compared to the nearby umbra, whereas @Lites1991 and @Tritschler1997 reported little field weakening. Finally, @SocasNavarro2004 observed a weakening of 500 G and upflows of a few 100 m s$^{-1}$. More details can be found in the reviews of umbral fine structure by @Solanki2003 and @Sobotka2006. One reason for the difference in results has been the influence of scattered light and variable seeing, which affect the different analyzed data sets to varying degrees. It therefore seems worthwhile to invert Stokes profiles obtained by the spectropolarimeter (SP) on the $Hinode$ spacecraft. The usefulness of $Hinode$ data for the study of UDs was demonstrated by @Bharti2007, who found that large UDs show dark lanes whose existence had been predicted by @Schuessler2006.
Observations and data reduction
===============================
The data employed here were acquired by the spectropolarimeter [@Lites2001] of the Solar Optical Telescope [SOT, @Suematsu2008] onboard $Hinode$. They are composed of full Stokes spectra in the Fe I line pair around 6302 [Å]{} and the nearby continuum of a sunspot of NOAA AR 10933 recorded from 12:43 to 12:59 UT on 2007 January 5 using the 0.16$^{\prime\prime}$x164$^{\prime\prime}$ slit. At this time the sunspot was located at a heliocentric angle of 4$^\circ$, i.e. very close to disk center. The observations covered the spectral range from 6300.89 to 6303.26 [Å]{}, with a sampling of 21 [mÅ]{} pixel$^{-1}$. The SP was operated in its normal map mode, i.e. both the sampling along the slit and the slit-scan sampling were 0.16$^{\prime\prime}$, so that the spatial resolution should be close to the diffraction limit of $1.22~\lambda/D = 0.32^{\prime\prime}$. The integration time per slit position was 4.8 s which reduced the noise level to $10^{-3}~I_c$.
The data were corrected for dark current, flat field, and instrumental polarization with the help of the SolarSoft package.[^1] A continuum intensity image (put together from the slit scan) of the chosen umbra is shown in Figure \[FigUmbra\]. Due to the large slit length we are always able to find a sufficiently extensive region of quiet Sun that is used to normalize intensities.
![Continuum intensity map of the sunspot NOAA 10933 as observed by the $Hinode$ SOT/SP on 2007 January 5. Heliocentric angle is $\theta$ = 4$^\circ$. Intensities are normalized to the intensity level of the quiet photosphere $I_{ph}$. The white line at (4,4) Mm marks the cut through an umbral dot (UD) that is discussed in greater detail.[]{data-label="FigUmbra"}](f1.eps){width="\linewidth"}
Data analysis
=============
To obtain atmospheric stratifications of temperature ($T$), magnetic field strength ($B$), and line-of-sight velocity ($v_{LOS}$) we use the inversion code SPINOR described by @Frutiger2000b. This code incorporates the STOPRO routines [@Solanki1987], which compute synthetic Stokes profiles of one or more lines upon input of their atomic data and one or more model atmospheres. Local thermodynamic equilibrium conditions are assumed and the Unno-Rachkovsky radiative transfer equations are solved. The inversions use an optical depth scale as the appropriate coordinate for radiative transfer problems. For reasons of comparability we use the optical depth at 500 nm ($\tau_{500}$). Starting with an initial guess model, the synthetic profiles were iteratively fitted to observed data using response functions (RFs) and the merit function $\chi^2$ [@RuizCobo1992; @Frutiger2000a] is minimized. With the help of the RFs we find that the Fe I line pair at 6302 [Å]{} is mainly formed within the $\log(\tau_{500})$ interval \[$-3,0$\], which corresponds to a height range of about 400 km under hydrostatic equilibrium conditions in the umbra. The free parameters are defined at the four nodes $-3$, $-2$, $-1$, and $0$ of the $\log(\tau_{500})$ grid. The atmospheric stratification is then interpolated using splines onto a 10 times finer $\log(\tau_{500})$ grid.
The first step of our analysis is the wavelength calibration required to determine line-of-sight (LOS) velocities. For every slit position we average the Stokes $I$ profiles of all locations along the slit whose total polarization $P = \int(Q^2 + U^2 + V^2)^{1/2}d\lambda$ is negligible, since those locations are assumed to represent the quiet Sun. This mean $I$ profile is used to fit Voigt profiles to the two Fe I lines from which the line center wavelengths are determined. The convective blueshift of 140 m s$^{-1}$ [see @MartinezPillet1997; @Dravins1981] is then removed.
The next step is to find an appropriate model atmosphere. Since we are interested in the atmospheric stratification of temperature, magnetic field strength, and LOS velocity within a UD, these three atmospheric parameters are assumed to be height dependent, whereas field inclination and azimuth angle, micro-turbulence, and macro-turbulence are assumed to be height independent. We experimented intensively with adding a second model component to represent the stray light, but the inversion results did not improve significantly, confirming the almost negligible stray light in the SP. Therefore, in the interests of a robust inversion, we forbore from adding a stray light component, thus reducing the number of free parameters.
Lastly, we have to find initial guesses for all free parameters. We use an initial temperature stratification according to the umbral core model L of @Maltby1986 and assume a vertical magnetic field of 2000 G and zero LOS velocity at all heights. Initial guesses for micro-turbulence and macro-turbulence are 0.1 and 2 km s$^{-1}$, respectively. Other initial guesses gave very similar results, except for a limited number of outliers. For these, repeating the inversion with an initial guess close to the final result of one of the neighboring pixels returned values consistent with those obtained for the other pixels.
Inversion results
=================
We analyzed a total of 51 UDs, which were identified by applying the multilevel tracking (MLT) algorithm [@Bovelet2001; @Riethmueller2008 in preparation]. For each UD the location of its core was identified, a cut was made through it, reaching to the neighboring diffuse background (DB), and the profiles from all the pixels along this cut were inverted. We first discuss the results for the UD marked in Figure \[FigUmbra\], chosen because of its brightness, which leads to particularly small error bars. A comparison of the measured profiles with the best-fit profiles resulted from the inversion can be seen in Figure \[FigProfileUdBright\] for the UD and in Figure \[FigProfileUdDark\] for the DB selected as the location of lowest continuum intensity in a 1.4 $\times$ 1.4 Mm$^2$ environment of the UD center. Due to the low signal in the dark background the measured DB profiles are much noisier than the UD center’s profiles, but in general, the Stokes spectra can be fitted remarkably well.
![Stokes $I$, $V$, $Q$ and $U$ profiles from the center of the UD marked in Figure \[FigUmbra\]. Red lines are the measured, blue lines the best-fit profiles, i.e. the inversion result. The bottom parts of each panel show the difference between the two on an expanded scale.[]{data-label="FigProfileUdBright"}](f2.eps){width="\linewidth"}
![The same as Figure \[FigProfileUdBright\], but for Stokes $I$, $V$, $Q$ and $U$ profiles of the diffuse background near the UD.[]{data-label="FigProfileUdDark"}](f3.eps){width="\linewidth"}
The stratification of the retrieved atmospheric parameters $T$, $v_{LOS}$, and $B$ in the center of the UD and in the DB are plotted in Figure \[FigSingleAtm\]. In the upper photosphere ($-3 \le \log(\tau_{500})
\le -2$) the error bars overlap; i.e. we find little significant difference between UD and DB. In the deeper photosphere, however, the inversions return strongly different stratifications. Thus, the UD temperature is higher than the DB temperature, consistent with the intensity enhancement of the UD in the continuum map. The LOS velocity (which is identical to the vertical velocity due to the small heliocentric angle) exhibits strong upflows in the UD center, whereas the DB is nearly at rest. The magnetic field strength is roughly 2 kG for the heights $-3 \le \log(\tau_{500}) \le -1$. Below $\log(\tau_{500}) = -1$ the field strength of the UD decreases strongly with depth, whereas the field strength of the DB increases moderately.
![Atmospheric stratification obtained from the Stokes profiles at the location of the UD’s center (red lines) and from the Stokes profiles of the diffuse background near the UD (blue lines). The formal errors of the inversion at the used optical depth nodes are indicated by bars. Negative LOS velocity values indicate upflows.[]{data-label="FigSingleAtm"}](f4.eps){width="\linewidth"}
The vertical cuts of magnetic field strength and LOS velocity through 13 pixels lying along the white line in Figure \[FigUmbra\] are shown in Figure \[FigVerticalCut\]. Jumps from one pixel to the next were smoothed through interpolation. There is clear evidence for a localized decrease in UD field strength in the low photosphere, co-located with an upflow that extends higher into the atmosphere and a weak downflow on at least one side. The magnetic fields are 4$^\circ$ more inclined in the UD than they are in the DB around the UD. Figure \[FigVerticalCut\] looks remarkably like Fig. 2 of @Schuessler2006, in spite of the fact that Figure \[FigVerticalCut\] is plotted on an optical depth scale in the vertical direction and is thus distorted by an unknown amount relative to a corresponding figure on a geometrical scale.
![Vertical cut through the UD marked in Figure \[FigUmbra\] in the direction indicated by the white line. Colors of the top panel indicate magnetic field strength. The bottom panel shows LOS velocity. Negative velocities are upflows.[]{data-label="FigVerticalCut"}](f5a.eps "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}\
![Vertical cut through the UD marked in Figure \[FigUmbra\] in the direction indicated by the white line. Colors of the top panel indicate magnetic field strength. The bottom panel shows LOS velocity. Negative velocities are upflows.[]{data-label="FigVerticalCut"}](f5b.eps "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}
Next we discuss all 51 analyzed UDs. In the literature we often find a separation into two UD regimes. For example, @Grossmann1986 differentiate between peripheral UDs (PUDs) and central UDs (CUDs), i.e. between UDs that are born close to the umbra-penumbra boundary and UDs that are born deep in the umbra. We follow this distinction and plot the obtained stratifications of the 30 PUDs (distance to umbra-penumbra boundary less than 2000 km) in the top panels of Figure \[FigMultipleAtms\], while the remaining 21 CUDs are represented in the bottom panels of Figure \[FigMultipleAtms\]. The results largely mirror those obtained for the UD discussed above. In the upper atmosphere UDs center and DB do not differ in their mean values of $T$, $v_{LOS}$, and $B$. On average, the CUDs are about 150 K cooler than the PUDs in the upper atmosphere, just as the DB around the CUDs is cooler than the DB around the PUDs. At $\log(\tau_{500}) = 0$ we find that PUDs are 570 K hotter than the local DB and CUDs are 550 K hotter than the DB in their vicinity. The magnetic field strength at $\log(\tau_{500}) = 0$ is weakened by about 510 G for PUDs and 480 G for CUDs, whereas only PUDs exhibit significant upflows of about 800 m s$^{-1}$. The mean LOS velocity shows no difference between CUD centers and DB. In order to make sure that an upflow is not being missed due to the lower S/N ratio of the CUD Stokes profiles, we have also averaged the Stokes profiles of all the CUDs. An inversion of there averaged Stokes profiles gave a result that agrees with the averaged stratifications ($green~line$) in the bottom panels of Figure \[FigMultipleAtms\] within the error bars. This suggests that any upflow velocity in CUDs is mostly restricted to layers below the surface or is too concentrated or too weak to be detected by the inversions. Finally, we find that the magnetic field of the PUDs is on average 4$^\circ$ more horizontal than for their DB. We see no inclination difference for CUDs.
![Atmospheric stratifications of peripheral umbral dots (top 3 panels) and central umbral dots (bottom 3 panels). The red lines show the stratification at the location of the UD’s center and the blue lines correspond to the nearby diffuse background. The green line is the weighted average of all red lines and the yellow line is the weighted average of all blue lines, where we used the reciprocal error bars as weighting factors.[]{data-label="FigMultipleAtms"}](f6.eps){width="\linewidth"}
Discussion
==========
We identified 30 peripheral and 21 central umbral dots in $Hinode$ spectropolarimetric data of a sunspot within 4$^\circ$ of disk center. With the help of Stokes profile inversions of the Fe I lines at 630 nm we determined the stratifications of temperature, magnetic field strength, and LOS velocity. The present work differs from that of @SocasNavarro2004 in the superior quality of the employed data with twice the spatial resolution and practically no scattered light. This allows a detailed determination of the atmospheric stratification. The higher spatial resolution of the $Hinode$ SP data also allows us to, for the first time, reconstruct both the horizontal and the vertical structure of UDs. We also extended the analysis to a more numerous statistical ensemble of 51 UDs.
Vertical cuts through UDs provide a remarkable confirmation of the results of MHD simulations of @Schuessler2006: both show that UDs differ from their surroundings mainly in the lowest visible layers, where the temperature is enhanced and the magnetic field is weakened. We found a temperature enhancement of 550 K and a magnetic field reduction of about 500 G (at optical depth unity). In addition, PUDs display upflow velocities of 800 m s$^{-1}$ on average, again in good agreement with the simulations. There are also some differences between our results and those of @Schuessler2006. Thus, according to our inversions the magnetic field strength of the DB is somewhat depth dependent. This was not the case for the MHD simulations due to the used periodic boundary conditions. Furthermore, although some of the UDs display a weak downflow bounding the strong central upflow (see Figure \[FigVerticalCut\]), these are neither as narrow nor as strong as the downflows at the ends of dark lanes as reported by @Schuessler2006, probably due to the limited spatial resolution of our data. We may also be missing some of the narrow downflows by considering only single cuts across individual UDs.
@SocasNavarro2004 reported 10$^\circ$ more inclined magnetic fields in PUDs. This result is qualitatively confirmed by our work; we find an inclination increase of 4$^\circ$ for PUDs but no increase for CUDs, which can be assumed as a further hint that the main part of the CUD structure is below the surface. These results can be interpreted in terms of the strong DB fields expanding with height and closing over the UD, as proposed by @SocasNavarro2004.
Bharti, L., Joshi, C. & Jaaffrey, S. N. A. 2007, ApJ, 669, L57
Bovelet, B., & Wiehr, E. 2001, Solar Phys., 201, 13
Choudhury, A. R. 1986, ApJ, 302, 809
Dravins, D., Lindegren, L., & Nordlund, [Å]{}. 1981, A&A, 96, 345
Frutiger, C. 2000, Inversion of Zeeman Split Stokes Profiles: Application to solar and stellar surface structures, Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Astronomy, ETH Zürich, No. 13896
Frutiger, C., Solanki, S. K., Fligge, M., & Bruls, J. H. M. J. 2000, A&A, 358, 1109
Grossmann-Doerth, U., Schmidt, W., & Schröter, E. H. 1986, A&A, 156, 347
Kneer, F. 1973, Solar Phys., 28, 361
Lites, B. W., Bida, T. A., Johannesson, A., & Scharmer, G. B. 1991, ApJ, 373, 683
Lites, B. W., Elmore, D. F., & Streander, K. V. 2001, in ASP Conf. Ser. 236, Advanced Solar Polarimetry, ed. M. Sigwarth (San Francisco: ASP), 33
Maltby, P., Avrett, E. H., Carlsson, M., Kjeldseth-Moe, O., Kurucz, R. L., et al. 1986, ApJ, 306, 284
Martínez Pillet, V., Lites, B. W. & Skumanich, A. 1997, ApJ, 474, 810
Parker, E. N. 1979, ApJ, 234, 333
Riethmüller, T. L., Solanki, S. K., Zakharov, V. & Gandorfer, A. 2008, A&A, 492, 233
Ruiz Cobo, B., & del Toro Iniesta, J. C. 1992, ApJ, 398, 375
Schüssler, M., & Vögler, M. 2006, ApJ, 641, L73
Sobotka, M. 2006, Dissertation for Doctor Scientiarum, Acad. Sci. Czech Republic
Sobotka, M., & Hanslmeier, A. 2005, A&A, 442, 323
Socas-Navarro, H., Martínez Pillet, V., Sobotka, M., & Vázquez, M. 2004 ApJ, 614, 448
Solanki, S. K. 1987, The Photospheric Layers of Solar Magnetic Fluxtubes, Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Astronomy, ETH Zürich, No. 8309
Solanki, S. K. 2003, A&A Rev., 11, 153
Suematsu, Y., Tsuneta, S., Ichimoto, K., Shimizu, T., Otsubo, M., et al. 2008, Solar Phys., in press
Tritschler, A., & Schmidt, W. 1997, A&A, 321, 643
Weiss, N. O. 2002, Astron. Nachr., 323, 371
Weiss, N. O., Brownjohn, D. P., Hurlburt, N. E., & Proctor, M. R. E. 1990, Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc., 245, 434
[^1]: See <http://www.lmsal.com/solarsoft>.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Taking a multidimensional time-homogeneous dynamical system and adding a randomly perturbed time-dependent deterministic signal to some of its components gives rise to a high-dimensional system of stochastic differential equations which is driven by possibly very low-dimensional noise. Equations of this type are commonly used in biology for modeling neurons or in statistical mechanics for certain Hamiltonian systems. Assuming that the signal depends on an unknown shape parameter $\theta$ and also has an unknown periodicity $T$, we prove Local Asymptotic Normality (LAN) jointly in $\theta$ and $T$ for the statistical experiment arising from (partial) observation of this diffusion in continuous time. The local scale turns out to be $n^{-1/2}$ for $\theta$ and $n^{-3/2}$ for $T$ which generalizes known results for simpler systems.'
author:
- 'Simon Holbach[^1]'
title: Local asymptotic normality for shape and periodicity of a signal in the drift of a degenerate diffusion with internal variables
---
Introduction of the model and the problem {#sect:intro}
=========================================
Let $U\subset{\mathbb R}^{N+L}$ be a $\sigma$-compact set and let $f\colon U \to {\mathbb R}^N$ and $g\colon U \to {\mathbb R}^L$ be locally Lipschitz continuous functions. Finally, let $S\colon[0,\infty)\to{\mathbb R}^N$ be a continuous periodic signal and consider the deterministic dynamical system $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:ODE}
\begin{split}
dX_t &= f(X_t,Y_t)dt + S(t)dt, \\
dY_t &= g(X_t,Y_t)dt.
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ This system is divided into two groups of variables: The $N$ components of $X$ whose dynamics depend directly on the signal and the $L$ components of $Y$ which are affected by the signal only indirectly through the influence of $X$. Intuitively speaking, we can think of as a dynamical system with no intrinsic time-inhomogeneity which then receives an additional time-dependent *external input* $S$ in some of its variables, while the remaining variables merely describe an interior mechanism. This is why we sometimes refer to $X$ as the *adjustable variable(s)* and $Y$ as the *internal variable(s)*. Note that the only source of time-inhomogeneity is indeed the signal – if the system receives constant external input $S\equiv c \in {\mathbb R}^N$ (or none at all, i.e. $c=0$), it is homogeneous in time. Systems of this kind frequently arise in the context of neuroscience and statistical mechanics (see Examples \[ex:HH\] and \[ex:rotors\] below).
We construct a stochastic model by following the idea that the signal is not actually received in its original shape, but is subject to random perturbations by external noise (i.e. noise that is independent of the rest of the system). To take account of this notion, it seems natural to substitute the signal term $S(t)dt$ in with the increment $dZ_t$ of a process taking values in a closed set $U'\subset{\mathbb R}^N$ and satisfying an SDE of the type $$dZ_t = [S(t)+b(Z_t)]dt + \sigma(Z_t)dW_t,$$ where $W$ is an $M$-dimensional standard Brownian Motion, while $b\colon U' \to {\mathbb R}^N$ and $\sigma\colon U' \to {\mathbb R}^{N\times M}$ are locally Lipschitz continuous drift and volatility functions. Note that this SDE can be viewed as a generalized Orstein-Uhlenbeck type process with time-dependent mean-reversion level (think of $b(Z_t)=-\beta Z_t$ with $\beta\in(0,\infty)$). A particularly prominent special case is the classical signal in noise model (take $M=N=1$, $b\equiv 0$, and $\sigma\equiv 1$, see for example [@Ibra Example I.7.3, Chapter III.5]), which arises in a wide variety of fields including communication, radiolocation, seismic signal processing, or computer-aided diagnosis and has been the subject of extensive study.
Perturbing $S(t)$ randomly in this way leads to the stochastic dynamical system $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:SDE}
\begin{split}
dX_t &= f(X_t,Y_t)dt + dZ_t, \\
dY_t &= g(X_t,Y_t)dt, \\
dZ_t &= [S(t)+b(Z_t)]dt + \sigma(Z_t)dW_t,
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ with state space $${\mathtt E}:=U \times U'\subset{\mathbb R}^{N+L+N}.$$ This system can be thought of as degenerate in the following sense: Firstly, the equation for $Y$ does not incorporate the driving Brownian Motion $W$ explicitly, making it rather unclear which effect noise has on these components. Secondly, the dimension $M$ of the driving Brownian Motion can (and will usually) be much lower than the dimension $N+L+N$ of the system. This is why we call a stochastic process satisfying a system of stochastic differential equations of the type a *degenerate diffusion with internal variables and randomly perturbed time-inhomogeneous deterministic input*.
We now have three groups of variables: The entirely autonomous external input governed by $dZ_t$ (the “noisy signal”), the components of $X$ that are directly adjusted by the noisy signal, and the components of the internal variable $Y$ whose dynamics are only indirectly affected by noise, since the respective differential equations incorporate neither $Z$ nor the driving Brownian Motion $W$ explicitly. Note that for this reason $Y$ is conditionally deterministic given $X$ and has continuously differentiable trajectories.
The system is a generalization of the one introduced in equation (18) of Section 4.1 of [@HLT2], which is a probabilistic version of a class of dynamical systems that are well-known in the mathematical modeling of neurons (see Example \[ex:HH\] below). In [@ICHHarris] (which can be viewed as a companion article to the present one), we study the model from a purely probabilistic standpoint and use methods from [@HLT3] to discuss sufficient conditions for the process $(X,Y,Z)$ to be positive Harris recurrent. Before we explain the focus of the current article, let us introduce two major examples.
\[ex:HH\] Let $N=1$, $L=3$, $U={\mathbb R}\times[0,1]^3$ and consider the coefficient functions $$f(x,y)=-36y_1^4(x+12)-120y_2^3y_3(x-120)-0.3(x-10.6)$$ and $$g(x,y)=\begin{pmatrix} \alpha_1(x)(1-y_1)-\beta_1(x)y_1 \\ \alpha_2(x)(1-y_2)-\beta_2(x)y_2 \\ \alpha_3(x)(1-y_3)-\beta_3(x)y_3 \end{pmatrix}$$ with $$\begin{array}{llllll}
\alpha_1(x) &=& \begin{cases} \frac{0.1-0.01x}{\exp(1-0.1x)-1}, & x\neq 10, \\ 0.1, & \text{else},\end{cases}& \beta_1(x)& = & 0.125\exp(-x/80), \vspace{3mm} \\
\alpha_2(x) &=& \begin{cases} \frac{2.5-0.1x}{\exp(2.5-0.1x)-1}, & x\neq 25, \\ 1, & \text{else},\end{cases}& \beta_2(x)& = & 4\exp(-x/18), \vspace{2.5mm} \\
\alpha_3(x) &=& 0.07\exp(-x/20),& \beta_3(x)& = & \frac{1}{\exp(3-0.1x)+1}. \\
\end{array}
$$ for all $(x,y)=(x,y_1,y_2,y_3)^\top\in U$. The corresponding dynamical system is known as the *Hodgkin-Huxley system* and it was first introduced by Hodgkin and Huxley in 1952 (see [@HoHu], note however that we use the slightly different model constants from [@Izhi]) with the aim of describing the initiation and propagation of action potentials in the cell membrane of a neuron in response to an external stimulus. While $X$ is the membrane potential itself (usually labeled $V$ in the literature), the internal variables $Y_1$, $Y_2$, and $Y_3$ (commonly denoted by $n$, $m$, and $h$) correspond to the ionic mechanism underlying its evolution. The two predominant ion currents in the cell membrane are import of sodium $Na^+$ and export of potassium $K^+$ through the membrane. Each of the internal variables signifies the probability that a specific type of gate in the respective ion channel is open at a given time. It is for this reason that $n$, $m$, and $h$ are often called gating variables. In the context of this model, the signal $S$ represents the dendritic input which the neuron receives from a large number of other neurons, transported by an even larger number of synapses located on the respective dendritic tree. The resulting “total dendritic input” can then be thought of as an average of interdependent and repeating similar currents, which is why $S$ is usually assumed to be periodic (or even constant). When modeling neurons, particular interest lies in the typical spiking behaviour of the membrane potential, a feature that is commonly agreed upon to be adequately described by the Hodgkin-Huxley model. For a more detailed modern introduction, interpretation, and an in-depth comparison with other neuron models, see for example [@Izhi] and [@Dest].
Adding noise in the sense of by choosing $\sigma\in C^\infty(U')$ and $b(Z_t)=- \beta Z_t$ with $\beta\in(0,\infty)$, we acquire the so-called *stochastic Hodgkin-Huxley model (with mean reverting Ornstein-Uhlenbeck type input)*. It was first introduced and studied by H[ö]{}pfner, L[ö]{}cherbach, and Thieullen in the series of the three papers [@HLT1], [@HLT2], and [@HLT3]. The constant $\beta$ is determined by the so-called time constant of the membrane which represents spontaneous voltage decay not related to the input. For many types of neurons, the time constant is known from experiments (see [@Ditlevsen]). A degree of freedom lies in the choice of the volatility $\sigma$ which reflects the nature of the influence of noise. In the past, mean reverting Ornstein-Uhlenbeck type equations with various volatilities have been used to model the membrane potential itself (see for example [@Lansky] or [@HoBio]), and in a sense our stochastic Hodgkin-Huxley model can be viewed as a refinement of this kind of model. If $\sigma$ is Lipschitz continuous, existence of a unique non-exploding strong solution taking values in ${\mathtt E}={\mathbb R}\times [0,1]^3\times U'$ follows from the same arguments as in [@HLT1 Proposition 1] and [@HLT2 Proposition 2].
Analogously, one can introduce stochastic versions of simpler neuron models such as the FitzHugh-Nagumo model (see [@Izhi equations (4.11) and (4.12)]) or the Morris-Lecar model (see [@Morris] or, for a modern version, [@Rinzel]).
\[ex:rotors\] Systems of coupled oscillators are particularly intuitive Hamiltonian systems and several different stochastic models have been subject to research in the past (see e.g [@Hairer], [@Cuneo2], [@Rey-Bellet], [@Rotoren2018]). The following example is inspired by the model from [@Cuneo] to which we add a time-inhomogeneity and the corresponding external variables.
Let us think of three rotors, each given by their angle $q_i(t)\in{\mathbb R}$ and momentum $p_i(t)\in{\mathbb R}$ at the time $t\in[0,\infty)$ for each $i\in\{1,2,3\}$. Assuming their respective masses to be all equal to $1$ and not taking into account units, the laws of classical mechanics imply $$\label{eq:rotors0}
\dot q_i = p_i \quad \text{for all $i\in\{1,2,3\}$.}$$ We suppose that these rotors are coupled in row, i.e. $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:rotors}
\begin{split}
\dot p_1 &= w_1(q_2-q_1)-u_1(q_1), \\
\dot p_2 &= -[w_1(q_2-q_1) + w_3(q_2-q_3)]-u_2(q_2), \\
\dot p_3 &= w_3(q_2-q_3)-u_3(q_3),
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$ where $w_1,w_2,w_3\colon{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb R}$ and $u_1,u_2,u_3\colon{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb R}$ are related to interaction potentials and pinning potentials, respectively. A classical model is the one that arises if we let one or both of the outer rotors receive external torques and interact with Langevin type heat baths. In order to give a mathematical description of this, we fix $i\in\{1,3\}$ for the remainder of this paragraph. Applying an external time-dependent torque $S_i\colon[0,\infty)\to{\mathbb R}$ to the $i$-th rotor means expanding the equation for $p_i$ to $$dp_i = \left[w_i(q_2-q_i)-u_i(q_i)\right]dt +S_i dt,$$ which turns and into a system like . On top of that, we want to add interaction with a heat bath, i.e. for a temperature $\tau_i\in(0,\infty)$ and a dissipation constant $\delta_i\in(0,\infty)$, the equation for $p_i$ is further expanded to $$\begin{aligned}
dp_i &= \left[w_i(q_2-q_i)-u_i(q_i)\right]dt + S_idt - \delta_i p_i dt + \sqrt{2\delta_i\tau_i}dW^{(i)}_t \\
&=\left[w_i(q_2-q_i)-u_i(q_i)-\delta_i p_i\right]dt + \left[S_i dt+ \sqrt{2\delta_i\tau_i}dW^{(i)}_t\right],
\end{aligned}$$ where the last term in parentheses is the total sum of external influences. Following the spirit of , we may replace this term with the increments of a more general random perturbation of the torque: We take $$dp_i =\left[w_i(q_2-q_i)-u_i(q_i)-\delta_i p_i\right]dt + dZ^{(i)}_t$$ with $$dZ^{(i)}_t=\left[S_i(t)+b_i(Z^{(i)}_t)\right]dt + \sigma_i(Z^{(i)}_t)dW^{(i)}_t$$ for some volatility $\sigma_i\colon{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb R}$ and a drift $b_i\colon{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb R}$. What we end up with is indeed a degenerate diffusion with internal variables and randomly perturbed time-inhomogeneous deterministic input as in . If only the first rotor in the chain receives an external input, the dimensions are $M=N=1$ and $L=5$, $U={\mathbb R}^6$, $U'={\mathbb R}$. If both of the outer rotors receive an external input, the dimensions are $M=N=2$ and $L=4$, $U={\mathbb R}^6$, $U'={\mathbb R}^2$.
In this article, we want to study a statistical model in which the deterministic signal $S$ depends on a set of parameters. More precisely, we assume that there is an open set $\Theta\subset{\mathbb R}^D$ such that $$S=S_{(\theta,T)} \quad \text{with $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$},$$ where $T$ is the signal’s periodicity and $\theta$ is a $D$-dimensional shape parameter. A natural goal is to estimate $\theta$ and $T$ simultaneously from continuous observation of the process. However, observing the process $(X,Y,Z)$ entirely may not make sense in many models: The external variable $Z$ can be of a rather abstract nature and, for example, in the Hodgkin-Huxley model from Example \[ex:HH\] the only variable that is arguably observable is the membrane potential $X$. In spite of that, Section \[sect:observe\] shows:
**Result 1.** As long as the initial configuration $(X_0,Y_0,Z_0)$ is deterministic and known, it does not matter whether we can observe the entire process $(X,Y,Z)$, only the adjustable variable $X$, or only the external variable $Z$.
This is the content of Remark \[rem:observe\] and Proposition \[prop:likelihoods\]. Since $Z$ is the most convenient process to handle statistically among all of these, our considerations in the sequel are confined to this external variable. Being able to relate statistical problems entirely to $Z$ means that as long as this variable fits our setting, we can treat any example of (including in particular those that were introduced in Examples \[ex:HH\] and \[ex:rotors\]). In Section \[sect:LAN\], we prove an LAN result for the external variable (Theorem \[thm:LAN\]), generalizing [@ICH Theorem 2.3] in which we only treated the case $M=N=1$. This can then be combined with the previous results in order to obtain:
**Result 2.** Under reasonable regularity conditions on the parametrization and under some non-degeneracy and ergodicity of the external variable $Z$, the sequence of statistical experiments corresponding to continuous observation of $(X,Y,Z)$ over growing time intervals $[0,n]$ for $n\to\infty$ has the LAN property. The local scales are identified as $n^{-1/2}$ for the shape and $n^{-3/2}$ for the periodicity.
The rigorous and precise corresponding statement is Theorem \[thm:LANX\]. It allows for application to simultaneous estimation of shape and periodicity, as under LAN we can use Hájek’s Convolution Theorem and the Local Asymptotic Minimax Theorem in order to establish optimality for estimators when the rescaled estimation errors are stochastically asymptotically equivalent to the central statistic of the experiment (see [@LeCam], [@Davies], [@Kut] or [@HoBo] for a detailed presentation of the relevant theory).
Main results and applications {#sect:results}
=============================
First, let us recall and collect the basic assumptions that were mentioned in the introduction.
- **Basic setting:** The state space is ${\mathtt E}=U\times U'$ where $U\subset{\mathbb R}^{N+L}$ is $\sigma$-compact and $U'\subset{\mathbb R}^N$ is closed. All of the coefficient functions $f$, $g$, $b$, $\sigma$ are locally Lipschitz continuous and the signal $S_{(\theta,T)}$ is continuous, $T$-periodic with $T\in(0,\infty)$ and depends on some parameter $\theta$ taken from an open set $\Theta\subset{\mathbb R}^D$.
Throughout this article, (A0) will be a tacit standing assumption.
Using the notation $\Phi_t=(X_t,Y_t,Z_t)$ for all $t\in[0,\infty)$ and incorporating the parameters, we rewrite the equation as $$\label{eq:SDEpar}
d\Phi_t=B_{(\theta,T)}(t,\Phi_t)dt+\Sigma(\Phi_t)dW_t,$$ where $$B_{(\theta,T)}\colon [0,\infty)\times {\mathtt E}\to {\mathbb R}^{N+L+N}, \quad (t,x,y,z)\mapsto \begin{pmatrix}
f(x,y) +S_{(\theta,T)}(t)+b(z)\\
g(x,y) \\
S_{(\theta,T)}(t)+b(z)
\end{pmatrix},$$ for each $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$, while $$\Sigma \colon {\mathtt E}\to {\mathbb R}^{(N+L+N)\times M}, \quad (x,y,z)\mapsto \begin{pmatrix}
\sigma(z)\\
0_{L\times M} \\
\sigma(z)
\end{pmatrix}.$$ We fix some probability space $(\Omega,{\mathcal F},{\mathbb P})$ and we consider the following assumptions about the SDE :
- **Unique solvability:** For all $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$ and all deterministic starting points $\Phi_0 \in {\mathtt E}$, the SDE has a unique strong solution $\Phi^{(\theta,T)}=\big(X^{(\theta,T)},Y^{(\theta,T)},Z^{(\theta,T)}\big)\colon[0,\infty)\to{\mathtt E}$ under ${\mathbb P}$.
- **Bounded diffusion matrix:** The mapping $\sigma\sigma^\top\colon U'\to{\mathbb R}^{N\times N}$ is uniformly bounded away from $0$ and from $\infty$ in the sense that there are $\sigma_0,\sigma_\infty\in(0,\infty)$ such that $$\sigma_0 {\left|x\right|}^2 \le x^\top \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(z)\right) x \le \sigma_\infty {\left|x\right|}^2 \quad \text{for all $x \in {\mathbb R}^N$ and $z\in U'$}.$$
- **Transition densities for the external variable:** For all $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$ and $t\ge s\ge0$, there is a measurable function $p^{(\theta,T)}_{s,t}\colon U' \times U'\to[0,\infty)$ such that $${\mathbb P}\left(Z^{(\theta,T)}_t\in B\,\middle|\, Z^{(\theta,T)}_s=z\right)=\int_B p^{(\theta,T)}_{s,t}(z,w)dw \quad \text{for all $z\in U'$ and measurable sets $B\subset U'$.}$$
- **Periodic recurrence of the external variable:** For all $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$ the grid chain $\big(Z^{(\theta,T)}_{nT}\big)_{n\in{\mathbb N}_0}$ is positive Harris recurrent.
1.) As we know from Linear Algebra, (A2) also yields that the inverse $\left(\sigma\sigma^\top(z)\right)^{-1}$ exists for all $z \in U'$, is symmetric and positive definite (and hence possesses a square root $\left(\sigma\sigma^\top(z)\right)^{-1/2}\in{\mathbb R}^{N\times N}$), and we have $$\label{eq:ellipticupperbound}
\sigma_\infty^{-1} {\left|x\right|}^2 \le x^\top \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(z)\right)^{-1} x \le \sigma_0^{-1} {\left|x\right|}^2 \quad \text{for all $x \in {\mathbb R}^N$}.$$
2.) Note that $\sigma^\top\left(\sigma\sigma^\top\right)^{-1}(z) \in {\mathbb R}^{M\times N}$ is a right inverse of $\sigma(z)$. Thus, the linear mapping $\sigma(z)\colon {\mathbb R}^M\to{\mathbb R}^N$ is surjective and hence $M\ge N$. In this sense, (A2) is a non-degeneracy condition on the external equation for $Z$. It is also “almost sufficient” for (A3) (it is sufficient e.g. in the case that $b$ and $\sigma$ are smooth with bounded derivatives of any order, compare [@HairerMalli]).
3.) Together with (A3), the recurrence assumption (A4) allows us to make use of certain variants of classical Limit Theorems (see [@HK2], [@HK3]) which we will need for Lemma \[lem:LAN\] below. Note that (A4) is weaker than the assertion that the entire process $\Phi^{(\theta,T)}$ is positive Harris-recurrent (compare [@ICHHarris]).
Let $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$. We define the probability measure $${\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}:={\mathcal L}\left([0,\infty)\ni t\mapsto \Phi^{(\theta,T)}_t\,\middle| \,{\mathbb P}\,\right)$$ on ${\mathcal B}\big(C([0,\infty);{\mathtt E})\big)$ such that for the canonical process $\pi=(\pi_t)_{t\in[0,\infty)}$ on $C([0,\infty);{\mathtt E})$ we have $${\mathcal L}\left(\pi\,\middle|\,{\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}\right)={\mathcal L}\left(\Phi^{(\theta,T)}\,\middle|\,{\mathbb P}\right).$$ Observing the process continuously then means working with the filtration given by $${\mathcal F}_t:=\bigcap_{r\in(t,\infty)} \sigma(\pi_s \,|\, s\in[0,r]) \subset {\mathcal B}\big(C([0,\infty);{\mathtt E})\big) \quad \text{for all $t\in[0,\infty)$}$$ and gives rise to the sequence of statistical experiments defined by $${\mathcal E}_{(X,Y,Z)}:=\left(C([0,\infty);{\mathtt E}), {\mathcal F}_n, \left\{ {\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal F}_n} \, \middle| \, (\theta,T) \in \Theta\times(0,\infty) \right\}\right)_{n \in {\mathbb N}}.$$ As is proved in Section \[sect:proofs\], for all $(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$ the corresponding log-likelihood ratios are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:loglikelihoodX}
\begin{split}
\log\frac{d{\mathbb P}^{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}|_{{\mathcal F}_t}}{d{\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal F}_t}}
=&\int_0^t \left((\sigma\sigma^\top(\pi^Z_s))^{-1/2}\big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)(s)\right)^\top dB^{(\theta,T)}_s \\
&- \frac{1}{2}\int_0^t \big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)^\top(s) \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(\pi^Z_s)\right)^{-1} \big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)(s)ds,
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where $B^{(\theta,T)}$ is a Brownian Motion and $\pi^Z=(\pi^{(N+L+1)},\ldots,\pi^{(N+L+N)})$. Examining its structure suggests that in order to find a suitable quadratic expansion for LAN we have to impose appropriate smoothness conditions on the signal with respect to the parameters. The following set of conditions (S1) - (S5) turns out to be sufficient:
1. **Basic regularity:** For each $\theta \in \Theta$ we have a 1-periodic function $$S_\theta=\begin{pmatrix}S_\theta^{(1)} \\ \vdots \\ S_\theta^{(N)}\end{pmatrix} \in C^2\big([0,\infty);{\mathbb R}^N\big)$$ such that $$S_\cdot(s) \in C^1\big(\Theta;{\mathbb R}^N\big) \quad \text{for every $s \in [0,\infty)$}$$ and $${\partial}_{\theta_i} S_\theta(\cdot) \in {\mathbb L}^2_{\mathrm{loc}}\big([0,\infty);{\mathbb R}^N\big) \quad \text{for every $\theta\in\Theta$ and $i\in\{1,\ldots,D\}$.}$$
2. **${\mathbb L}^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$-differentiability with respect to $(\theta,T)$:** The mapping $$\begin{aligned}
S \colon \Theta \times (0,\infty) &\to {\mathbb L}^2_{\mathrm{loc}}\big([0,\infty);{\mathbb R}^N\big), \\
(\theta,T) \quad&\mapsto S_{(\theta,T)}:=S_\theta\left(\frac{\cdot}{T}\right),
\end{aligned}$$ is ${\mathbb L}^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$-differentiable with the derivative $$\begin{aligned}
\dot{S} \colon \Theta \times (0,\infty) &\to {\mathbb L}^2_{\mathrm{loc}}\big([0,\infty);{\mathbb R}^{N\times(D+1)}\big), \\ (\theta,T) \quad &\mapsto \dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}:=\begin{pmatrix}{\partial}_{\theta_1}S^{(1)}_{(\theta,T)} & \cdots & {\partial}_{\theta_D}S^{(1)}_{(\theta,T)} & {\partial}_T S^{(1)}_{(\theta,T)} \\ \vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots \\{\partial}_{\theta_1}S^{(N)}_{(\theta,T)} & \cdots & {\partial}_{\theta_D}S^{(N)}_{(\theta,T)} & {\partial}_T S^{(N)}_{(\theta,T)} \end{pmatrix},
\end{aligned}$$ in the sense that for every $t\in(0,\infty)$ and $(\theta,T) \in \Theta \times (0,\infty)$ we have[^2] $$\int_0^t {\left|\frac{S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}(s)-S_{(\theta,T)}(s)- \dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}(s)\big((\tilde\theta,\tilde T)-(\theta,T)\big)}{{\left|(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)-(\theta, T)\right|}}\right|}^2\!\!ds \to 0, \text{ as } (\tilde\theta,\tilde T) \to (\theta,T).$$
3. **${\mathbb L}^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$-continuity of the $(\theta,T)$-derivative:** The mapping $\dot{S}$ is ${\mathbb L}^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$-continuous in the sense that for all $t\in(0,\infty)$ and $(\theta,T) \in \Theta \times (0,\infty)$ we have $$\int_0^t {\left|\dot{S}_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}(s)-\dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right|}^2ds \to 0, \text{ as } (\tilde\theta,\tilde T) \to (\theta,T),$$ where the notation ${\left|\,\cdot\,\right|}$ is used for the Frobenius norm of a matrix.
4. **${\mathbb L}^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$-H[ö]{}lder condition with respect to $T$ for the $\theta$-derivative:** For any fixed $\theta\in\Theta$ the mapping $$\begin{aligned}
(0,\infty) \ni T \mapsto D_\theta S_{(\theta,T)}:=\begin{pmatrix}{\partial}_{\theta_1}S^{(1)}_{(\theta,T)} & \cdots & {\partial}_{\theta_D}S^{(1)}_{(\theta,T)} \\ \vdots&\ddots&\vdots \\{\partial}_{\theta_1}S^{(N)}_{(\theta,T)} & \cdots & {\partial}_{\theta_D}S^{(N)}_{(\theta,T)} \end{pmatrix} \in {\mathbb L}^2_{\mathrm{loc}}\big([0,\infty);{\mathbb R}^{N\times D}\big)
\end{aligned}$$ satisfies the following local H[ö]{}lder condition: For each $T\in(0,\infty)$ there are $$\alpha \in (0,2] \quad \text{and} \quad \beta\in[0,1+3\alpha/2)$$ such that for suitable ${\varepsilon}>0$ and $t_0\in[0,\infty)$ we have $$\int_{t_0}^t {\left|D_\theta S_{(\theta,\tilde T)}(s) - D_\theta S_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right|}^2 ds \le Ct^\beta{\left|\tilde T-T\right|}^\alpha$$ for all $t>t_0$, $\tilde T \in (T-{\varepsilon},T+{\varepsilon})$, and for some constant $C\in(0,\infty)$ that does not depend on $\tilde T$ or $t$.
5. **Linearly independent derivatives:** For all $\theta\in\Theta$, the functions ${\partial}_{\theta_1}S_\theta, \ldots, {\partial}_{\theta_D}S_\theta, S'_\theta$ are linearly independent.
\[rem:signal\] 1.) If (S1) holds and $\dot S_{(\theta,T)}(s)$ is continuous (and thus also locally bounded) with respect to $\theta$, $T$, and $s$, (S2) and (S3) follow by dominated convergence. Note that in general, (S1) does not require that for example ${\partial}_{\theta_1}S_{(\theta,T)}(s)$ is continuous (or even locally bounded) in $T$ or $s$.
2.) Suppose that (S1) holds and that for every $\theta\in\Theta$ and $t\in(0,\infty)$ there are $\delta=\delta(\theta) \in (0,1]$ and $C(\theta,t) \le {\texttt{c{\!}s{\!}t}\,}t^\zeta$ with $\zeta \in [0,\delta/2)$ such that the mapping $$[0,\infty) \ni s \mapsto D_\theta S_\theta(s):= \begin{pmatrix}{\partial}_{\theta_1}S^{(1)}_\theta(s) & \cdots & {\partial}_{\theta_D}S^{(1)}_\theta(s) \\ \vdots&\ddots&\vdots \\{\partial}_{\theta_1}S^{(N)}_\theta(s) & \cdots & {\partial}_{\theta_D}S^{(N)}_\theta(s) \\ \end{pmatrix} \in {\mathbb R}^{N\times d}$$ is H[ö]{}lder-$\delta$-continuous on $[0,t]$ with H[ö]{}lder-constant $C(\theta,t)$. If $T\in(0,\infty)$, we get that for sufficiently small ${\varepsilon}>0$ and for all $\tilde T \in (T-{\varepsilon},T+{\varepsilon})$ $$\begin{aligned}
\int_0^{t} {\left|D_\theta S_{(\theta,\tilde T)}(s)-D_\theta S_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right|}^2ds & = \int_0^{t} {\left|D_\theta S_\theta\left(\frac{s}{\tilde T}\right)-D_\theta S_\theta\left(\frac{s}{T}\right)\right|}^2ds \\
&\le \sup_{T'\in(T-{\varepsilon},T+{\varepsilon})}C\left(\theta,\frac{t}{T'}\right)^2 \int_0^{t} {\left|\frac{s}{\tilde T}-\frac{s}{T}\right|}^{2\delta}ds \\
& \le {\texttt{c{\!}s{\!}t}\,}\left(\frac{t}{T-{\varepsilon}}\right)^{2\zeta} \left(\frac{{\left|\tilde T-T\right|}}{(T-{\varepsilon})^2}\right)^{2\delta} \int_0^ts^{2\delta}ds \\
& \le {\texttt{c{\!}s{\!}t}\,}t^{2\zeta+2\delta+1}{\left|\tilde T-T\right|}^{2\delta}.
\end{aligned}$$ Setting $\alpha:=2\delta$, we can choose $$\beta:=2(\delta+\zeta)+1 < 2\left(\delta+\frac{\delta}{2}\right)+1= 1+3\alpha/2,$$ and hence the H[ö]{}lder condition (S4) is fulfilled.
3.) As a consequence of the two preceding observations, all of the hypotheses (S1) - (S4) are fulfilled if the mapping $\Theta\times[0,\infty) \ni (\theta,s) \mapsto S_\theta(s)$ is in $C^2_b\big(\Theta\times[0,\infty);{\mathbb R}^N\big)$ and $1$-periodic with respect to $s$. Existence and boundedness of ${\partial}_sD_\theta S_\theta(s)$ ensure that we can choose $\delta=1$ and $\zeta=0$ above.
4.) Note that the choice of the matrix norm in (S3) and (S4) is of course arbitrary. We decided to go with the Frobenius norm, because it is commonly used and it is convenient to handle in our calculations.
The main result is the following one. For a detailed explanation and proof, as well as an explicit introduction of the Fisher Information, we refer to Section \[sect:proofs\].
\[thm:LANX\] Grant all of the hypotheses (A1) - (A4) and (S1) - (S5) and fix $(\theta,T) \in \Theta\times(0,\infty)$. Set $$\delta_n := \begin{pmatrix}
n^{-1/2} & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\
0 & \ddots &\ddots & \vdots \\
\vdots &\ddots&n^{-1/2}&0 \\
0 &\cdots&0& n^{-3/2} \\
\end{pmatrix}
\in {\mathbb R}^{(D+1)\times(D+1)} \quad \text{for all $n\in{\mathbb N}$,}$$ and fix any bounded sequence $(h_n)_{n \in {\mathbb N}} \subset {\mathbb R}^{D+1}$. Then ${\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}$-almost surely we have $$ \log\frac{d{\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)+\delta_n h_n}|_{{\mathcal F}_n}}{d{\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal F}_n}}=h_n^\top {\mathcal S}^{(\theta,T)}_n-\frac12 h_n^\top {\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}h_n + o_{{\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}}(1), \quad \text{as $n\to\infty$,}$$ with Fisher Information ${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}={\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(1)$ as introduced in and score $$ {\mathcal S}^{(\theta,T)}_n=\delta_n \int_0^n \left((\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1/2}(\pi^Z_s) \dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right)^\top d B^{(\theta,T)}_s \quad \text{for all $n\in{\mathbb N}$}$$ such that weak convergence $$ {\mathcal L}\left({\mathcal S}^{(\theta,T)}_n\middle|{\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}\right) \xrightarrow{n\to\infty} {\mathcal N}\left(0,{\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}\right)$$ holds.
The claim follows immediately from Theorem \[thm:LAN\] and (the proof of) Proposition \[prop:likelihoods\]. In particular, the assumptions (A2) and (S5) can in fact be replaced by the slightly weaker but more technical conditions (A2’) and (S5’) which are introduced in Section \[sect:proofs\] below and are discussed in Remark \[rem:Fischer\].
Note that other than the basic existence and uniqueness assumption (A1), the conditions for Theorem \[thm:LANX\] incorporate only the external variable and the deterministic signal. Before we proceed to the proof section, we would like to collect some comments on relevant examples in which these conditions are fulfilled.
\[ex:OU\] A simple yet important example for the external variable is the multidimensional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process with time-dependent mean reversion level $S_{(\theta,T)}$. This process corresponds to with $b(z)=-\beta z$ for all $z\in U'={\mathbb R}^N$ with some positive definite $\beta\in{\mathbb R}^{N\times N}$ and a constant volatility $\sigma\in{\mathbb R}^{N\times M}$ such that $\sigma\sigma^\top\in{\mathbb R}^{N\times N}$ is positive definite. Assumption (A2) is then trivially fulfilled, and in complete analogy to the case $M=N=1$ (see [@HK2 Example 2.3]), one can calculate explicitly its transition densities, yielding (A3). These can then be used to apply Theorem 3.2 and Theorem 4.6 (with $f\equiv 1$ and $V(z)={\left|z\right|}^2$) from [@MeynTweedie] in order to check (A4).
\[ex:signal0\] 1.) Let $S_\theta(s)=F(\theta,\phi(s))$, where $\phi \in C^2\big([0,\infty);{\mathbb R}^K\big)$ is $1$-periodic and $$F \colon \Theta\times{\mathbb R}^K \ni (\theta,\xi)=(\theta_1,\ldots,\theta_D,\xi_1,\ldots,\xi_K) \mapsto F(\theta,\xi)=\begin{pmatrix}F_1(\theta,\xi) \\ \vdots \\ F_N(\theta,\xi) \end{pmatrix} \in {\mathbb R}^N$$ is continuously differentiable with respect to $\theta\in\Theta$ and twice continuously differentiable with respect to $\xi\in{\mathbb R}^K$. Clearly, the property (S1) holds, and since $\dot S_{(\theta,T)}(s)$ is given by $$\begin{pmatrix}({\partial}_{\theta_1} F_1)(\theta,\phi(\frac{s}{T})) & \cdots & ({\partial}_{\theta_D} F_1)(\theta,\phi(\frac{s}{T})) & -sT^{-2} (\nabla_\xi F_1)(\theta,\phi(\frac{s}{T}))^\top \phi'(\frac{s}{T})\\ \vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots \\ ({\partial}_{\theta_1} F_N)(\theta,\phi(\frac{s}{T})) & \cdots & ({\partial}_{\theta_D} F_N)(\theta,\phi(\frac{s}{T})) & -sT^{-2} (\nabla_\xi F_N)(\theta,\phi(\frac{s}{T}))^\top \phi'(\frac{s}{T}) \end{pmatrix}$$ which is continuous with respect to $\theta$, $T$, and $s$, we also have (S2) and (S3). Moreover, we see that the H[ö]{}lder property from part 2.) of Remark \[rem:signal\] is fulfilled if it is fulfilled by the mapping $${\mathbb R}^K \ni \xi \mapsto \begin{pmatrix}({\partial}_{\theta_1} F_1)(\theta,\xi) & \cdots & ({\partial}_{\theta_D} F_1)(\theta,\xi)\\ \vdots&\ddots&\vdots \\ ({\partial}_{\theta_1} F_N)(\theta,\xi) & \cdots & ({\partial}_{\theta_D} F_N)(\theta,\xi) \end{pmatrix}.$$ In that case, all of the hypotheses (S1) - (S4) hold.
2.) If the signal has a product structure $S_\theta(s)=D(\theta)\phi(s)$ with $\phi \in C^2\big([0,\infty);{\mathbb R}^K\big)$ $1$-periodic and $G \in C^1\big(\Theta;{\mathbb R}^{N\times K}\big)$, we can treat it as a special case of the preceding example. As for all $s, \tilde s \in [0,\infty)$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\left|D_\theta S_\theta(s)-D_\theta S_\theta(\tilde s)\right|}^2 =& \sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{d=1}^D \left(\sum_{k=1}^K ({\partial}_{\theta_d} G_{n,k})(\theta) \big(\phi_k(s)-\phi_k(\tilde s)\big) \right)^2 \\
\le & \left(\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{d=1}^D \sum_{k=1}^K ({\partial}_{\theta_d} G_{n,k})^2(\theta)\right) {\left|\phi(s)-\phi(\tilde s)\right|}^2 \\
\le &\left(\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{d=1}^D \sum_{k=1}^K ({\partial}_{\theta_d} G_{n,k})^2(\theta)\right) {\left\|\phi'\right\|}_\infty^2 {\left|s-\tilde s\right|}^2 ,
\end{aligned}$$ no further conditions are needed to ensure the H[ö]{}lder property from part 2.) of Remark \[rem:signal\] to hold with $\delta=1$ and $\zeta=0$.
3.) In particular, the example above secures that (S1) - (S4) are fulfilled for signals of the form $$\label{eq:signalsin}
S_\theta(s)=\sum_{k=1}^K \big( \sin(2k\pi s) G_k(\theta)+ \cos(2k\pi s)H_k(\theta) \big) \quad \text{for all $s\in[0,\infty)$}$$ with $K \in {\mathbb N}$ and $G_k,H_k \in C^1\big(\Theta;{\mathbb R}^N\big)$ for all $k \in\{1,\ldots,K\}$.
4.) Taking $K=D$, $N=1$ and $G_k(\theta)=\theta_k$, $H_k(\theta)=0$ for all $\theta\in\Theta$ and $k \in\{1,\ldots,K\}$, the signal from clearly also satisfies (S5), als long as $0\notin\Theta$.
Proofs and supplementary results {#sect:proofs}
================================
Observing $(X,Y,Z)$, $X$, or $Z$ {#sect:observe}
--------------------------------
We start this section with a fundamental observation: If the starting point is known, observing only the adjustable variable $X$ is actually no restriction, since we can successively reconstruct the remaining variables $Y$ and $Z$. Let us explain this step for step in the following remark.
\[rem:observe\] Assume that the starting point $(X_0,Y_0,Z_0)\in{\mathtt E}$ is known. Fix a finite time horizon $t_0\in(0,\infty)$ and assume that the trajectory $(X_t)_{t\in[0,t_0]}$ has been observed and is thus also known. Then the function $(t,y) \mapsto g(X_t,y)$ is completely known, and given the structure of the internal equation in , the trajectory $(Y_t)_{t\in[0,t_0]}$ is now given as the solution to the ordinary differential equation $$\begin{aligned}
dY_t=g(X_t,Y_t)dt \quad \text{for all $t\in[0,t_0]$.}
\end{aligned}$$ Now we know both $(X_t)_{t\in[0,t_0]}$ and $(Y_t)_{t\in[0,t_0]}$, and by rearranging the first line of , this information allows us to calculate $$Z_t=Z_0+X_t-X_0-\int_0^t f(X_s,Y_s)ds \quad \text{for all $t\in[0,t_0]$.}$$ All in all, we have reconstructed every component of $(X_t,Y_t,Z_t)_{t\in[0,t_0]}$ just from $(X_t)_{t\in[0,t_0]}$ and the starting point $(X_0,Y_0,Z_0)$.
Remark \[rem:observe\] is the legitimation for us to work with the idealized assumption that we can in fact observe the entire process $(X,Y,Z)$ even in situations where realistically one could only observe the adjustable variable $X$. Next, we will describe the corresponding statistical experiment.
In order to make Proposition \[prop:likelihoods\] more apprehensible, we will do this very carefully and with much attention to measure-theoretic subtleties. A look at reveals that the drift coefficient depends on the parameter $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$, while the volatility does not. Hence, we can use [@HoBo Theorem 6.10][^3] in order to determine the log-likelihood ratios. Let $(t,x,y,z)\in[0,\infty)\times{\mathtt E}$. Comparing the drift coefficients of with different parameters $(\tilde\theta,\tilde T),(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$, we see that $$\begin{aligned}
\big(B_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-B_{(\theta,T)}\big)(t,x,y,z)= \Sigma\Sigma^\top(x,y,z) \Gamma(t,x,y,z),\end{aligned}$$ where $$\Gamma(t,x,y,z):=\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ \big(\sigma\sigma^\top\big)^{-1}(z)\big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)(t) \end{pmatrix} \in {\mathbb R}^{N+L+N}.$$ Thanks to (A2) and , $$\label{eq:A2ref}
\int_0^t \big(\Gamma^\top \Sigma\Sigma^\top \Gamma\big)(s,\pi_s) ds
\le \sigma_0^{-1}\int_0^t {\left|S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}(s)-S_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right|}^2ds <\infty,$$ because the signals are continuous. Thence, both conditions (+) and (++) of [@HoBo Theorem 6.10] are fulfilled. Writing $m^{\Phi,(\theta,T)}$ for the local martingale part of $\pi$ under ${\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}$, we can conclude that $$\log\frac{d{\mathbb P}^{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}|_{{\mathcal F}_t}}{d{\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal F}_t}}
=\int_0^t \Gamma(s,\pi_s)^\top dm^{\Phi,(\theta,T)}_s - \frac{1}{2}\int_0^t \left(\Gamma^\top \Sigma\Sigma^\top \Gamma\right)(s,\pi_s) ds.$$ Setting $\pi^Z:=\left(\pi^{(N+L+1)},\ldots,\pi^{(N+L+N)}\right)^\top$ and writing $m^{Z,(\theta,T)}$ for its local martingale part under ${\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}$, the expression for the log-likelihood ratio can be rewritten as $$\begin{aligned}
\int_0^t \Big( \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(\pi^Z_s)\right)^{-1} & \big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)(s) \Big)^\top dm^{Z,(\theta,T)}_s \\
&- \frac{1}{2}\int_0^t \big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)^\top(s) \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(\pi^Z_s)\right)^{-1} \big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)(s)ds.\end{aligned}$$ In order to eliminate the rather unintuitive integral with respect to $m^{Z,(\theta,T)}$, we introduce the local $\big({\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)},({\mathcal F}_t)_{t\in[0,\infty)}\big)$-martingale $B^{(\theta,T)}:=\big(B^{(\theta,T)}_t\big)_{t\in[0,\infty)}$ given by $$\label{eq:BMX}
B^{(\theta,T)}_t=\int_0^t (\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1/2}(\pi^Z_s) dm^{Z,(\theta,T)}_s \quad \text{for all $t\in[0,\infty)$.}$$ Its quadratic variation process is $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle \int_0^\cdot (\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1/2}(\pi^Z_s) dm^{Z,(\theta,T)}_s \right\rangle_t
= \int_0^t (\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1}(\pi^Z_s) d \left(\int_0^s\sigma\sigma^\top(\pi^Z_r)dr\right)
= t\cdot 1_{N\times N}\end{aligned}$$ for all $t\in[0,\infty)$, so L[é]{}vy’s Characterization Theorem [@Ikeda Theorem II.6.1] yields that $B^{(\theta,T)}$ is an $N$-dimensional $\big({\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)},({\mathcal F}_t)_{t\in[0,\infty)}\big)$-Brownian Motion. Incorporating this process, we can write $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:loglikelihoodX}
\begin{split}
\log\frac{d{\mathbb P}^{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}|_{{\mathcal F}_t}}{d{\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal F}_t}}
=&\int_0^t \left((\sigma\sigma^\top(\pi^Z_s))^{-1/2}\big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)(s)\right)^\top dB^{(\theta,T)}_s \\
&- \frac{1}{2}\int_0^t \big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)^\top(s) \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(\pi^Z_s)\right)^{-1} \big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)(s)ds.
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ We note immediately that the only component of $\pi$ that is featured explicitly in this expression is the $\pi^Z$-component. It seems plausible that we should get the same expression for the log-likelihood ratio in an experiment that does not even know that any variables other than $Z$ exist. Let us make this formally rigorous.
Let $\eta=(\eta_t)_{t\in[0,\infty)}$ be the canonical process on $C\big([0,\infty);U'\big)$, and write $${\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}:={\mathcal L}\left([0,\infty)\ni t\mapsto Z^{(\theta,T)}_t\,\middle| \,{\mathbb P}\,\right)$$ for the law on ${\mathcal B}\big(C\big([0,\infty);U')\big)$ of the unique strong solution $Z^{(\theta,T)}$ on $(\Omega,{\mathcal F})$ under ${\mathbb P}$ of $$\label{eq:ext}
dZ_t = [S_{(\theta,T)}(t)+b(Z_t)]dt + \sigma(Z_t)dW_t,$$ when issued from $Z_0\in{\mathbb R}^N$ with the parameter $(\theta,T)\in \Theta\times(0,\infty)$. For any $t\in[0,\infty)$ let $${\mathcal G}_t:=\bigcap_{r\in(t,\infty)} \sigma(\eta_s \,|\, s\in[0,r]) \subset {\mathcal B}\big(C\big([0,\infty);U'\big)\big)$$ and consider the sequence of experiments given by $$\label{eq:cE_Z}
{\mathcal E}_Z:=\left(C\big([0,\infty);U'\big), {\mathcal G}_n, \left\{ {\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal G}_n} \, \middle| \, (\theta,T) \in \Theta\times(0,\infty) \right\}\right)_{n \in {\mathbb N}}.$$ Using the same arguments as above and writing $\tilde m^{Z,(\theta,T)}$ for the local martingale part of $\eta$ under ${\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}$, we can again use [@HoBo Theorem 6.10] and conclude $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:loglikelihoodZ}
\begin{split}
\log\frac{d{\mathbb Q}^{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}|_{{\mathcal G}_t}}{d{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal G}_t}}
=&\int_0^t \left((\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1/2}(\eta_s)\big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)(s)\right)^\top d\tilde B^{(\theta,T)}_s \\
&- \frac{1}{2}\int_0^t \big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)^\top(s) \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(\eta_s)\right)^{-1} \big(S_{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)(s)ds,
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where the process $\tilde B^{(\theta,T)}:=\big(\tilde B^{(\theta,T)}_t\big)_{t\in[0,\infty)}$ given by $$\label{eq:BMZ}
\tilde B^{(\theta,T)}_t=\int_0^t (\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1/2}(\eta_s) d\tilde m^{Z,(\theta,T)}_s \quad \text{for all $t\in[0,\infty)$}$$ is again an $N$-dimensional $\big({\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)},({\mathcal G}_t)_{t\in[0,\infty)}\big)$-Brownian Motion.
We now have calculated the log-likelihood ratios for both ${\mathcal E}_{(X,Y,Z)}$ and ${\mathcal E}_Z$. Comparing them leads to the following result.
\[prop:likelihoods\] Grant assumptions (A1) and (A2). The sequences ${\mathcal E}_{(X,Y,Z)}$ and ${\mathcal E}_Z$ corresponding to continuous observation of $(X,Y,Z)$ or $Z$ respectively, with the same deterministic starting point $(X_0,Y_0,Z_0)\in{\mathtt E}$, are statistically equivalent in the sense that $$\label{eq:likelihoods}
{\mathcal L}\left( \left(\log\frac{d{\mathbb Q}^{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}|_{{\mathcal G}_t}}{d{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal G}_t}}\right)_{t\in[0,\infty)} \;\middle|\; {\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)} \right) = {\mathcal L}\left( \left(\log\frac{d{\mathbb P}^{(\tilde\theta,\tilde T)}|_{{\mathcal F}_t}}{d{\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal F}_t}}\right)_{t\in[0,\infty)} \;\middle|\; {\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)} \right)$$ for all $(\theta,T), (\tilde\theta,\tilde T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$. In particular, we have LAN for ${\mathcal E}_{(X,Y,Z)}$ if and only if we have it for ${\mathcal E}_Z$ with the same local scale, the same Fisher Information and an identically distributed Score.
Due to the definition of ${\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}$ and ${\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}$, we have $${\mathcal L}\big(\eta\,\big|\,{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}\big)={\mathcal L}\big(\pi^Z\,\big|\,{\mathbb P}^{(\theta,T)}\big),$$ and in view of , , , and , this implies from which the second statement of this Proposition follows immediately.
In view of Theorem \[thm:LANX\], Proposition \[prop:likelihoods\] is the justification for us to restrict ourselves to studying the simpler process $Z$ instead of the more complex $(X,Y,Z)$ in the following section.
Local Asymptotic Normality for $Z$ {#sect:LAN}
----------------------------------
This section centres around the sequence of statistical experiments defined by ${\mathcal E}_Z$ in which corresponds to continuous observation over growing time intervals of the $N$-dimensional diffusion $Z$ following the parameter-dependent SDE . As mentioned in Section \[sect:intro\], taking $M=N=1$, $b\equiv0$, and $\sigma\equiv1$ leads to the classical “signal in white noise” model. For this special case, Ibragimov and Khasminskii proved LAN with rate $n^{-3/2}$ for a smooth signal with known $\theta$ and unknown $T$, and discussed asymptotic efficiency for certain estimators (see [@Ibra Sections II.7 and III.5]). In [@Golubev], Golubev extended their approach with ${\mathbb L}^2$-methods in order to estimate $T$ at the same rate for unknown shape which in turn was the basis for Castillo, Lévy-Leduc and Matias for non-parametric estimation of the shape under unknown $T$ (see [@CLM]). For our more general diffusion , we will stay within the confines of parametric estimation. The main result of this section is LAN for the sequence of experiments ${\mathcal E}_Z$ with unknown $\theta$ and unknown $T$ (Theorem \[thm:LAN\]). For $M=N=1$ H[ö]{}pfner and Kutoyants had already solved this problem both for known $T$ with unknown $\theta$ (see [@HK1]) and for known $\theta$ with unknown $T$ (see [@HK3]). A result on LAN jointly in $\theta$ and $T$ was presented in [@ICH], but still only in dimension one. Theorem \[thm:LAN\] extends all of these results and allows for application to simultaneous estimation of the shape and the periodicity in any dimension.
In the context of this subsection, we replace the assumption (A1) with the following weaker analogue.
- **Unique solvability:** For all $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$ and all deterministic starting points $Z_0\in U'$, the SDE has a unique strong solution $Z^{(\theta,T)}\colon[0,\infty)\to U'$ under ${\mathbb P}$.
We also work with the following slight relaxation of (A2).
- **Uniform ellipticity:** The mapping $\sigma\sigma^\top\colon U'\to{\mathbb R}^{N\times N}$ is uniformly elliptic, i.e. there is some $\sigma_0\in(0,\infty)$ such that $$x^\top \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(z)\right) x \ge \sigma_0 {\left|x\right|}^2 \quad \text{for all $x \in {\mathbb R}^N$ and $z\in U'$}.$$
Note that so far, the only use of (A2) occured in , and there (A2’) would also suffice. Let us also give an equivalent reformulation of (A4) which incorporates the notation we introduced in the previous section.
- **Periodic recurrence of :** For all $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$ the grid chain $\left(\eta_{kT}\right)_{k\in{\mathbb N}_0}$ under ${\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}$ is positive Harris recurrent with invariant probability measure $\mu^{(\theta,T)}$.
Periodicity of the signal is the reason why (A4) even makes sense at all: Since $S_{(\theta,T)}$ and therefore the entire drift term of is $T$-periodic, the grid chain is a $U'$-valued time-homogeneous discrete-time Markov process. Another important process that is embedded in $\eta$ in a similar way is the $C([0,T];U')$-valued time-homogeneous *path segment chain* $\eta^{\mathbf{ps}}:=\left(\eta^{\mathbf{ps}}_k\right)_{k\in{\mathbb N}_0}$ defined by taking an arbitrary $\eta^{\mathbf{ps}}_0\in C\big([0,T];U'\big)$ with $\eta^{\mathbf{ps}}_0(T)=Z_0$ and then setting $$\eta^{\mathbf{ps}}_k:=\left([0,T]\ni t \mapsto \eta_{(k-1)T+t}\right) \quad \text{for all $k\in{\mathbb N}$.}$$ As we know from [@HK2 Theorem 2.1 (a)][^4], the path segment chain $\eta^{\mathbf{ps}}$ inherits positive Harris recurrence under ${\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}$ from the grid chain and its invariant distribution $m^{(\theta,T)}$ is the unique measure on ${\mathcal B}\big(C([0,T];U')\big)$ such that for all $l\in{\mathbb N}$, $0=t_0<t_1<\ldots<t_l=T$, and $B_0,\ldots,B_l\in{\mathcal B}\big(U'\big)$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:segmentinvariantmeasure}
\begin{split}
m^{(\theta,T)}( \eta_{t_i} \in B_i &\text{ for all $i \in \{0,\ldots,l\}$} ) = \int_{B_0} \mu^{(\theta,T)}(dx_0)\int_{B_1}Q^{(\theta,T)}_{t_0,t_1}(x_0,dx_1)\ldots \int_{B_l}Q^{(\theta,T)}_{t_{l-1},t_l}(x_{l-1},dx_l),
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where $\big(Q^{(\theta,T)}_{s,t}\big)_{t> s\ge 0}$ is the transition semi-group of $\eta$ under ${\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}$.
We will make use of the following strong law of large numbers for the path segment chain which we cite from [@HK2 Theorem 2.1 (b)].
\[prop:SLLN\] Let (A1’), (A3) and (A4) hold and fix some $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$. Assume that $\left(A_t\right)_{t\in[0,\infty)}$ is a $\big({\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)},({\mathcal G}_t)_{t\in[0,\infty)}\big)$-increasing process. If there is a non-negative function $F \in {\mathbb L}^1\big(m^{(\theta,T)}\big)$ such that $$A_{kT}=\sum_{j=1}^k F\left(\eta^{\mathbf{ps}}_j\right) \quad \text{${\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}$-almost surely for all $k \in {\mathbb N}$,}$$ then $$\frac{1}{t}A_t \xrightarrow{t \to \infty} \frac{1}{T} \int_{C([0,T];U')}F(\phi) m^{(\theta,T)}(d\phi) \quad \text{${\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}$-almost surely.}$$
See Section 2 of [@HK2].
Proposition \[prop:SLLN\] is the key to the following Lemma \[lem:LAN\] which is a slightly modified multi-dimensional version of Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2 from [@HK3].
\[lem:LAN\] Grant assumptions (A1’), (A3) and (A4). Further assume that the measurable mapping $G\colon U'\to{\mathbb R}^{N\times N}$ has values only in the set of symmetric matrices and is uniformly elliptic. We define the mapping $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Q}
\begin{split}
{\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_G\colon \big({\mathbb L}^2\big([0,1];{\mathbb R}^N\big)\big)^2&\;\to\;\hspace{1.1cm}{\mathbb R},\\
(u,v)\hspace{1.1cm}&\;\mapsto\; \int_0^1 u(s)^\top \Big(\mu^{(\theta,T)} Q^{(\theta,T)}_{0,sT}(G^{-1})\Big) v(s)ds,
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$ where $$\mu^{(\theta,T)} Q^{(\theta,T)}_{0,sT}(G^{-1})=\int_{U'}\mu^{(\theta,T)}(dz)\int_{U'} Q^{(\theta,T)}_{0,sT}(z,d\tilde z) G^{-1}(\tilde z) \in {\mathbb R}^{N\times N}$$ is understood as a matrix-valued integral. Then the following statements are true.
1. ${\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_G$ is a non-negative definite and symmetric bilinear form.
2. If we consider $u,v \in {\mathbb L}^2\big([0,1];{\mathbb R}^N\big)$ as 1-periodic functions on $[0,\infty)$, then for any $k\in{\mathbb N}_0$ we have $$\label{eq:lemLANconv}
\frac{k+1}{t^{k+1}}\int_0^t s^k u(s/T)^\top G^{-1}(\eta_s) v(s/T)ds \xrightarrow{t \to \infty} {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_G[u,v]$$ ${\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}$-almost surely.
For the sake of simplicity and as $(\theta,T)$ is fixed anyway, we drop all corresponding superscripts. First, we check that ${\mathbb B}_G$ is indeed a well-defined mapping with values in ${\mathbb R}$. Let the lower bound for the eigenvalues of $G(\cdot)$ be denoted by $G_0 \in (0,\infty)$. Recall that $G^{-1}(\cdot)$ always exists, is positive definite, and $G_0^{-1}$ is an upper bound for its eigenvalues. Then by linearity and contractivity of the operator $\mu Q_{0,sT}$, we can estimate $$0\le {\mathbb B}_G[u,u] = \int_0^1 \mu Q_{0,sT}\left( u(s)^\top G^{-1}(\cdot)u(s) \right)ds \le G_0^{-1}\int_0^1 {\left|u(s)\right|}^2ds <\infty.$$ Thanks to the symmetry of $G^{-1}$, we can polarize the integrand and thus the whole expression, which allows us to use the above in order to conclude that $${\left|{\mathbb B}_G[u,v]\right|}=\frac12 {\left| {\mathbb B}_G[u,u]+{\mathbb B}_G[v,v]-{\mathbb B}_G[u+v,u+v]\right|} < \infty,$$ and hence ${\mathbb B}_G$ is well-defined. It is then trivial to see that it is a non-negative definite and symmetric bilinear form, and the proof for (i) is complete.
We note that the left hand side of is bilinear in $u$ and $v$ as well. Thanks to this and (i), the proof of the second statement of the Lemma can be reduced to the case $u=v$, since the general case then follows by polarization.
Let us fix $u \in {\mathbb L}^2\big([0,1];{\mathbb R}^N\big)$ and define the process $A:=(A_t)_{t\in[0,\infty)}$ with $$A_t:=\int_0^t u(s/T)^\top G^{-1}(\eta_s) u(s/T)ds \quad \text{for all $t\in[0,\infty)$.}$$ Since $G^{-1}(\cdot)$ is positive definite, the integrand is non-negative, and therefore $A$ is an increasing process whose trajectories are obviously continuous. Note that the expression on the left hand side of can be rewritten as $$\frac{k+1}{t^{k+1}}\int_0^t s^k dA_s.$$ For $k=0$ this is simply $\frac{1}{t}A_t$, which we will handle with the help of Proposition \[prop:SLLN\]. The general statement then follows from this special case by elementary calculus (compare Lemma 3.17 of [@ICHDiss]).
In order to establish the functional relation between $A$ and $\eta$ that is needed in Proposition \[prop:SLLN\], we define the function $$F \colon C\big([0,T];U'\big) \to [0,\infty), \quad \phi \mapsto \int_0^T u(s/T)^\top G^{-1}(\phi(s)) u(s/T)ds,$$ which is bounded by $T G_0^{-1}{\left\|u\right\|}_{{\mathbb L}^2([0,1])}$, and thus it is integrable with respect to the probability measure $m$. Since $u$ is 1-periodic, we see that $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{j=1}^k F\left(\eta^{\mathbf{ps}}_j\right)&=\sum_{j=1}^k \int_0^T u(s/T)^\top G^{-1}(\eta_{(j-1)T+s}) u(s/T)ds
=\int_0^{kT} u(s/T)^\top G^{-1}(\eta_s) u(s/T)ds
=A_{kT}
\end{aligned}$$ for all $k \in {\mathbb N}$, and consequently Proposition \[prop:SLLN\] allows to deduce ${\mathbb Q}$-almost sure convergence $$\begin{aligned}
\lim_{t \to \infty} \frac{1}{t}A_t &= \frac{1}{T} \int_{C([0,T];U')} \int_0^T u(s/T)^\top G^{-1}(\phi(s)) u(s/T)ds \, m(d\phi) \\
&= \frac{1}{T} \int_0^T u(s/T)^\top \left( \int_{C([0,T];U')} G^{-1}(\phi(s))m(d\phi)\right) u(s/T)ds \\
&= \frac{1}{T} \int_0^T u(s/T)^\top \left(\int_{U'} G^{-1}(x) \mu Q_{0,s}(dx)\right) u(s/T)ds \\
&= {\mathbb B}_G[u,u],
\end{aligned}$$ where the use of Fubini’s Theorem in the second step is justified by the non-negativity of the integrand, and the third step makes use of . This completes the proof.
Using the notation from , for each $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$ and $t\in[0,\infty)$ we define the symmetric $(D+1)\times(D+1)$-dimensional block matrix $$\label{eq:matrix}
{\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(t):= \begin{pmatrix}
t \left({\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[ {\partial}_{\theta_i}S_\theta,{\partial}_{\theta_j}S_\theta]\right)_{i,j=1,\ldots,D} & -\frac{t^2}{2T^2} \left({\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[{\partial}_{\theta_i}S_\theta,S_\theta']\right)_{i=1,\ldots,D} \\
\cdots & \frac{t^3}{3T^4} {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[S_\theta',S_\theta']
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Its derivative with respect to $t$ is given by $${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}'(t)=\begin{pmatrix}
\left({\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[ {\partial}_{\theta_i}S_\theta,{\partial}_{\theta_j}S_\theta]\right)_{i,j=1,\ldots,D} & -tT^{-2}\left({\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[{\partial}_{\theta_i}S_\theta,S_\theta']\right)_{i=1,\ldots,D} \\
\cdots & t^2T^{-4}{\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[S_\theta',S_\theta']
\end{pmatrix}.$$ We make the following assumption.
- **Regularity of the signal with respect to ${\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}$:** For all $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$ and $t\in(0,\infty)$ we have $$\text{(i) ${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(t)$ is invertible,} \qquad\quad \text{(ii) ${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}'(t)$ is invertible.}$$
While part (ii) of (S5’) is merely needed for technical reasons (as will become clear in the proof of Theorem \[thm:LAN\] below), part (i) is of more general importance, since ${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(1)$ will turn out to be the Fisher Information. We will discuss these conditions in detail in the following remark.
\[rem:Fischer\] 1.) Note that ${\mathcal I}'_{(\theta,T)}(t)$ is the Gramian matrix of ${\partial}_{\theta_1}S_\theta,\ldots,{\partial}_{\theta_D}S_\theta,-tT^{-2}S_\theta'$ with respect to the non-negative definite symmetric bilinear form ${\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}$. Hence, it is non-negative definite. The same is true for ${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(t)$, since it is “almost a Gramian matrix”. Indeed, setting $$u_1:=t^{1/2}{\partial}_{\theta_1}S_\theta, \,\ldots,\, u_D:=t^{1/2}{\partial}_{\theta_D}S_\theta, \,u_{D+1}:= -\frac{t^{3/2}}{2T^2}S'_\theta,$$ we can write $$\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.6}
{\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(t) = \begin{pmatrix}
{\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[u_1,u_1] & \cdots & \cdots & {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[u_1,u_{D+1}] \\
\vdots &\ddots & & \vdots\\
\vdots & & {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[u_D,u_D] & {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[u_D,u_{D+1}]\\
{\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[u_{D+1},u_1] & \cdots & {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[u_{D+1},u_D] & \frac43 {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[u_{D+1},u_{D+1}]\end{pmatrix},
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1}$$ and we see that for all $x\in{\mathbb R}^{D+1}$ $$\begin{aligned}
x^\top {\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(t) x &= \sum_{i,j=1}^{D+1} x_i {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[u_i,u_j] x_j + \frac13 x^2_{D+1} {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[u_{D+1},u_{D+1}]
\ge {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}\left[\sum_{i=1}^{D+1}x_iu_i,\sum_{j=1}^{D+1}x_ju_j\right]
\end{aligned}$$ which is non-negative.
2.) In particular, 1.) implies that ${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(t)$ and ${\mathcal I}'_{(\theta,T)}(t)$ are invertible if and only if they are positive definite.
3.) If ${\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}$ is positive definite (and hence an inner product), the same reasoning as in 1.) yields that linear independence of ${\partial}_{\theta_1}S_\theta, \ldots, {\partial}_{\theta_D}S_\theta, S'_\theta$ is equivalent to invertibility of ${\mathcal I}'_{(\theta,T)}(t)$, and sufficient for invertibility of ${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(t)$.
4.) If (A2) holds, for all $u\in{\mathbb L}^2\big([0,1];{\mathbb R}^N\big)$ we can use and estimate $${\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[u,u] = \int_0^1 \mu^{(\theta,T)} Q^{(\theta,T)}_{0,sT}\left( u(s)^\top \big(\sigma\sigma^\top\big)^{-1}(\cdot)u(s) \right)ds \ge \sigma_\infty^{-1} \int_0^1 {\left|u(s)\right|}^2ds,$$ i.e. ${\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}$ is positive definite (in fact even coercive). Thus, (A2) and (S5) together imply (S5’).
5.) A very simple and seemingly natural sufficient condition for (S5’) is orthogonality of the functions ${\partial}_{\theta_1}S_\theta, \ldots, {\partial}_{\theta_D}S_\theta, S'_\theta$ with respect to ${\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}$ (without assuming this bilinear form to be positive definite). This is equivalent to both ${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(t)$ and ${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}'(t)$ being diagonal matrices with non-vanishing diagonal entries and as such they are invertible. However, this is not a very likely scenario, since $S_\theta$ has $D$ degrees of freedom, determines the $D$ functions ${\partial}_{\theta_1}S_\theta, \ldots, {\partial}_{\theta_D}S_\theta$, and then $S'_\theta$ – while adding no further degree of freedom – would have to be orthogonal to these as well.
\[ex:signal\] 1.) If the signal is of the form $$ S_\theta=\sum_{i=1}^D \theta_i \phi_i,$$ where $\phi_1,\ldots,\phi_D \in {\mathbb L}^2\big([0,\infty);{\mathbb R}^N\big)$ are $1$-periodic and orthonormal with respect to ${\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}$, we have $${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(t)=\begin{pmatrix}
t \cdot 1_{D\times D} & -\frac{t^2}{2T^2}\left(\sum_{j=1}^D\theta_j {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[\phi_i,\phi_j']\right)_{i=1,\ldots,D} \\
\cdots & \frac{t^3}{3T^4}\sum_{i,j=1}^D\theta_i\theta_j {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[\phi_i',\phi_j']
\end{pmatrix}$$ which is invertible for all $t\in(0,\infty)$ whenever $$\label{eq:exsignal1}
\frac43 \sum_{i,j=1}^D\theta_i\theta_j {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[\phi_i',\phi_j'] \neq \sum_{i=1}^D\left( \sum_{j=1}^D \theta_j {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[\phi_i,\phi_j']\right)^2.$$ Similarly, $${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}'(t)=\begin{pmatrix}
1_{D\times D} & -tT^{-2}\left(\sum_{j=1}^D\theta_j {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[\phi_i,\phi_j']\right)_{i=1,\ldots,D} \\
\cdots & t^2 T^{-4}\sum_{i,j=1}^D\theta_i\theta_j {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[\phi_i',\phi_j']
\end{pmatrix}$$ is invertible for all $t\in(0,\infty)$ whenever $$\label{eq:exsignal2}
\sum_{i,j=1}^D\theta_i\theta_j {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[\phi_i',\phi_j'] \neq \sum_{i=1}^D\left( \sum_{j=1}^D \theta_j {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[\phi_i,\phi_j']\right)^2.$$ If ${\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}$ is positive definite, part 3.) of Remark \[rem:Fischer\] gives the condition $$ S_\theta'=\sum_{i=1}^D\theta_i\phi_i' \neq \sum_{i,j=1}^D \theta_j {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[\phi_i,\phi_j']\phi_i$$ for invertibility of both ${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(t)$ and ${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}'(t)$.
2.) For $M=N$ let $\sigma\equiv 1_{N\times N}$, then ${\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}$ is just the standard ${\mathbb L}^2$-inner product with respect to Lebesgue’s measure. If $N=1$, $D=2d$ with $d\in{\mathbb N}$, and the signal has a finite Fourier expansion $$S_\theta(s)=\sum_{k=1}^d \sqrt{2}\left( \theta_k\sin(2k\pi s) + \theta_{d+k}\cos(2k\pi s) \right) \quad \text{for all $s\in[0,\infty)$,}$$ it is both of the type from the first part of this example and of the type introduced in part 3.) of Example \[ex:signal0\] (so in particular it satisfies (S1) - (S4)). Elementary calculations show that the conditions and then become $$\sum_{k=1}^dk(\theta_k^2+\theta_{k+d}^2) \neq \alpha \sum_{k=1}^dk^2\theta_{k+d}^2 \quad \text{for all $\alpha\in\{3,4\}$.}$$ If for example there are no $\cos$-terms involved, i.e. $\theta_{d+1}= \ldots=\theta_D=0$, these inequalities are valid for all $(\theta_1,\ldots,\theta_d) \neq 0$.
Having introduced all relevant objects and assumptions, and having illustrated them by examples, we can now give the main result of this section.
\[thm:LAN\] Grant all of the hypotheses (A1’), (A2’), (A3), (A4), (S1) - (S4) and (S5’) and fix $(\theta,T) \in \Theta\times(0,\infty)$. Set $$\delta_n := \begin{pmatrix}
n^{-1/2} & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\
0 & \ddots &\ddots & \vdots \\
\vdots &\ddots&n^{-1/2}&0 \\
0 &\cdots&0& n^{-3/2} \\
\end{pmatrix}
\in {\mathbb R}^{(D+1)\times(D+1)} \quad \text{for all $n\in{\mathbb N}$,}$$ and fix any bounded sequence $(h_n)_{n \in {\mathbb N}} \subset {\mathbb R}^{D+1}$. Then ${\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}$-almost surely we have $$\label{eq:thmLAN1}
\log\frac{d{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)+\delta_n h_n}|_{{\mathcal G}_n}}{d{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal G}_n}}=h_n^\top {\mathcal S}^{(\theta,T)}_n-\frac12 h_n^\top {\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}h_n + o_{{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}}(1), \quad \text{as $n\to\infty$,}$$ with Fisher Information $${\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}=\begin{pmatrix}
\left({\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[ {\partial}_{\theta_i}S_\theta,{\partial}_{\theta_j}S_\theta]\right)_{i,j=1,\ldots,D} & -\frac12T^{-2} \left({\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[{\partial}_{\theta_i}S_\theta,S_\theta']\right)_{i=1,\ldots,D} \\
\cdots & \frac13T^{-4} {\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}[S_\theta',S_\theta']
\end{pmatrix}.$$ and score $$ {\mathcal S}^{(\theta,T)}_n=\delta_n \int_0^n \left((\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1/2}(\eta_s) \dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right)^\top d\tilde B^{(\theta,T)}_s \quad \text{for all $n\in{\mathbb N}$}$$ such that weak convergence $$ {\mathcal L}\left({\mathcal S}^{(\theta,T)}_n\middle|{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}\right) \xrightarrow{n\to\infty} {\mathcal N}\left(0,{\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}\right)$$ holds.
We fix $(\theta,T)\in\Theta\times(0,\infty)$, and in order to reduce notational complexity we drop corresponding indices whenever there is no risk of ambiguity: We write ${\mathbb Q}:={\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}$, $\tilde B:=\tilde B^{(\theta,T)}$ (see ), ${\mathcal S}_n:={\mathcal S}^{(\theta,T)}_n$, ${\mathcal I}:={\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}$, ${\mathcal I}(t):={\mathcal I}_{(\theta,T)}(t)$ for all $t\in[0,\infty)$ (see ), and ${\mathbb B}:={\mathbb B}^{(\theta,T)}_{\sigma\sigma^\top}$ (see ). Moreover, we set $$\label{eq:thetan}
(\theta_n,T_n):=(\theta,T)+\delta_n h_n \quad \text{for all $n\in{\mathbb N}$.}$$ We now proceed to give the proof, divided into several steps.
1.) The main idea is to introduce a time step size $t\in(0,\infty)$ into the log-likelihood ratio and then interpret $$\left(\log\frac{d{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)+\delta_n h_n}|_{{\mathcal G}_{tn}}}{d{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal G}_{tn}}}\right)_{t\in[0,\infty)}, \quad n \in {\mathbb N},$$ as a sequence of continuous-time stochastic processes. Splitting them into several parts and applying Lemma \[lem:LAN\] together with tools from continuous-time martingale theory will eventually lead to the desired quadratic expansion. Indeed, adding and subtracting the term $\dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}(s)\delta_n h_n$ to the difference of the signals yields $$\begin{aligned}
\log\frac{d{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)+\delta_n h_n}|_{{\mathcal G}_{tn}}}{d{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}|_{{\mathcal G}_{tn}}}
&= \int_0^{tn} \big((\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1/2}(\eta_s)\big(S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)(s)\big)^\top d\tilde B_s \\
&\quad - \frac{1}{2}\int_0^{tn} \big(S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)^\top(s) \big(\sigma\sigma^\top(z)\big)^{-1} \big(S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}\big)(s)ds \\
&= h_n^\top \left(\delta_n \int_0^{tn} \big((\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1/2}(\eta_s) \dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}(s)\big)^\top d\tilde B_s\right) \\
& \quad - \frac12 h_n^\top \left( \delta_n \int_0^{tn} \dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}(s)^\top \big(\sigma\sigma^\top(\eta_s)\big)^{-1} \dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}(s) ds \, \delta_n \right)h_n \\
& \quad + \int_0^{tn}\left((\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1/2}(\eta_s)\big(S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}-\dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}\delta_n h_n\big)(s)\right)^\top d\tilde B_s \\
& \quad - \frac12\int_0^{tn} \big(S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}-\dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}\delta_n h_n\big)^\top (s) \big(\sigma\sigma^\top(\eta_s)\big)^{-1} \\
&\hspace{75mm}\big(S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}-\dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}\delta_n h_n\big)(s) ds \\
& \quad - \int_0^{tn} \big(S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}-\dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}\delta_n h_n\big)^\top (s) \big(\sigma\sigma^\top(\eta_s)\big)^{-1} \big(\dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}\delta_n h_n \big) ds \\
&=: h_n^\top {\mathcal S}_n(t)-\frac12 h_n^\top {\mathcal I}_n(t)h_n+R_n(t)-\frac12 U_n(t)-V_n(t),
\end{aligned}$$ and in order to prove the Theorem, we will study convergence in distribution of ${\mathcal S}_n(t)$ for $n \to \infty$ and show almost sure convergence of ${\mathcal I}_n(1)$ to ${\mathcal I}={\mathcal I}(1)$. Finally, we show that $R_n(t)$, $U_n(t)$, and $V_n(t)$ converge to zero in probability.
2.) For any fixed $n\in{\mathbb N}$ the process $$M_n:=({\mathcal S}_n(t))_{t\in[0,\infty)}=\Big(\delta_n \int_0^{tn}\big((\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1/2}(\eta_s) \dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}(s)\big)^\top d\tilde B_s\Big)_{t\in[0,\infty)}$$ is obviously an ${\mathbb R}^{D+1}$-valued local martingale with respect to ${\mathbb Q}$. In order to determine its weak limit for $n \to \infty$ in the Skorohod space ${\mathcal D}\big([0,\infty);{\mathbb R}^{D+1}\big)$, we study its quadratic variation process $\langle M_n\rangle:=(\langle M_n\rangle_t)_{t\in[0,\infty)}$ with $$\langle M_n\rangle_t:=\begin{pmatrix}
{\left\langleM_n^{(1)},M_n^{(1)}\right\rangle}_t & \cdots & {\left\langleM_n^{(1)},M_n^{(D+1)}\right\rangle}_t \\
\vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
{\left\langleM_n^{(D+1)},M_n^{(1)}\right\rangle}_t & \cdots & {\left\langleM_n^{(D+1)},M_n^{(D+1)}\right\rangle}_t
\end{pmatrix}
\in {\mathbb R}^{(D+1)\times(D+1)}.$$ As follows from basic stochastic calculus, $\langle M_n\rangle$ is equal to $({\mathcal I}_n(t))_{t\in[0,\infty)}$. Consequently, for $i,j \in \{1,\ldots,D\}$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\left\langleM_n^{(i)},M_n^{(j)}\right\rangle}_t &= \frac{1}{n} \int_0^{tn} \left({\partial}_{\theta_i}S_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right)^\top \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(\eta_s)\right)^{-1} {\partial}_{\theta_j}S_{(\theta,T)}(s)ds \\
&= t \cdot \frac{1}{tn} \int_0^{tn} \left({\partial}_{\theta_i}S_\theta(s/T)\right)^\top \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(\eta_s)\right)^{-1} {\partial}_{\theta_j}S_\theta(s/T)ds,
\end{aligned}$$ and due to the periodicity of $S_\theta$ and by part (ii) of Lemma \[lem:LAN\] with $g=\sigma\sigma^\top$ and $k=0$, this expression converges to $$t\cdot {\mathbb B}[ {\partial}_{\theta_i}S_\theta,{\partial}_{\theta_j}S_\theta] = {\mathcal I}_{i,j}(t)$$ ${\mathbb Q}$-almost surely for $n \to \infty$. Since $$\label{eq:Tderivative}
{\partial}_T S_{(\theta,T)}(s)={\partial}_T S_\theta(s/T)=-sT^{-2}S'_\theta(s/T) \quad \text{for all $s \in(0,\infty)$},$$ the same argument with $k=1$ yields $$\begin{aligned}
{\left\langleM_n^{(i)},M_n^{(D+1)}\right\rangle}_t&={\left\langleM_n^{(D+1)},M_n^{(i)}\right\rangle}_t \\
&= \frac{1}{n^2} \int_0^{tn} \left({\partial}_{\theta_i}S_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right)^\top \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(\eta_s)\right)^{-1} {\partial}_T S_{(\theta,T)}(s)ds \\
&= \frac{-t^2}{2T^2} \cdot \frac{1}{\frac12(tn)^2} \int_0^{tn} s \cdot \left({\partial}_{\theta_i}S_\theta(s/T)\right)^\top \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(\eta_s)\right)^{-1} S'_\theta(s/T)ds \\
& \xrightarrow{n \to \infty} \frac{-t^2}{2T^2}\cdot {\mathbb B}[ {\partial}_{\theta_i}S_\theta,S'_\theta] ={\mathcal I}_{i,{D+1}}(t)= {\mathcal I}_{{D+1},i}(t)
\end{aligned}$$ ${\mathbb Q}$-almost surely, and analogously (with $k=2$) $$\begin{aligned}
{\left\langleM_n^{(D+1)},M_n^{(D+1)}\right\rangle}_t &= \frac{1}{n^3} \int_0^{tn} \left({\partial}_T S_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right)^\top \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(\eta_s)\right)^{-1} {\partial}_T S_{(\theta,T)}(s)ds \\
&= \frac{t^3}{3T^4} \cdot \frac{1}{\frac13(tn)^3} \int_0^{tn} s^2 \cdot S'_\theta(s/T)^\top \left(\sigma\sigma^\top(\eta_s)\right)^{-1} S'_\theta(s/T) ds \\
& \xrightarrow{n \to \infty} \frac{t^3}{3T^4} \cdot {\mathbb B}[ S'_\theta,S'_\theta] ={\mathcal I}_{D+1,D+1}(t)
\end{aligned}$$ ${\mathbb Q}$-almost surely. In other words, $$\langle M_n\rangle_t \xrightarrow{n \to \infty} {\mathcal I}(t) \quad \text{${\mathbb Q}$-almost surely for all $t\in[0,\infty)$,}$$ and hence the Martingale Convergence Theorem [@Jacod Corollary VIII.3.24] implies weak convergence $$\label{eq:weakconvergence}
{\mathcal L}(M_n|{\mathbb Q}) \xrightarrow{n\to\infty} {\mathcal L}(M|{\mathbb Q}) \quad \text{in ${\mathcal D}\big([0,\infty);{\mathbb R}^{D+1}\big)$}$$ to some limit martingale $M=(M(t))_{t\in[0,\infty)}$ with quadratic variation process $\langle M\rangle=({\mathcal I}(t))_{t\in [0,\infty)}$.[^5] As noted in Remark \[rem:Fischer\], ${\mathcal I}'(t)$ is symmetric and non-negative definite, so it possesses a square root $\sqrt{{\mathcal I}'(t)} \in {\mathbb R}^{(D+1)\times(D+1)}$. By (S5’), ${\mathcal I}'(t)$ is invertible and hence $\sqrt{{\mathcal I}'(t)}$ is invertible as well. Thus, the Representation Theorem [@Ikeda Theorem II.7.1] yields that $M$ can be expressed as $$M(t)=\int_0^t \sqrt{{\mathcal I}'(s)} dB'_s \quad \text{for all $t\in[0,\infty)$}$$ with some $(D+1)$-dimensional Brownian Motion $B'$. Together with , this also implies weak convergence $${\mathcal L}(M_n(t)|{\mathbb Q}) \xrightarrow{n\to\infty} {\mathcal L}(M(t)|{\mathbb Q})={\mathcal N}\left(0,\int_0^t {\mathcal I}'(s)ds\right)={\mathcal N}\left(0,{\mathcal I}(t)\right)$$ for all $t\in[0,\infty)$. In particular, choosing $t=1$ yields weak convergence of the score $${\mathcal L}({\mathcal S}_n|{\mathbb Q})={\mathcal L}(M_n(1)|{\mathbb Q}) \xrightarrow{n\to\infty} {\mathcal N}(0,{\mathcal I}(1))={\mathcal N}(0,{\mathcal I}),$$ which completes this step of the proof.
3.) In the second step, we have shown on the fly that $${\mathcal I}_n(1) = \langle M_n\rangle_1 \xrightarrow{n\to\infty} \langle M\rangle_1={\mathcal I}(1)$$ ${\mathbb Q}$-almost surely.
4.) It remains to show convergence to zero in ${\mathbb Q}$-probability of the remainder terms $R_n(t)$, $U_n(t)$, and $V_n(t)$ introduced at the very beginning of this proof. Therefore, we consider the sequence $(R_n)_{n\in{\mathbb N}}$ of the local ${\mathbb Q}$-martingales $$(R_n(t))_{t\in[0,\infty)}=\left(\int_0^{tn}\Big((\sigma\sigma^\top)^{-1/2}(\eta_s)\big(S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}-\dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}\delta_n h_n\big)(s)\Big)^\top d\tilde B_s\right)_{t\in[0,\infty)}.$$ Their quadratic variation processes are obviously given by $(U_n(t))_{t\in[0,\infty)}$. Exploiting the uniform ellipticity assumption (A2’), we can estimate the quadratic variation by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:ABC}
\begin{split}
\langle R_n \rangle_t &= \int_0^{tn} \big(S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}-\dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}\delta_n h_n\big)^\top (s) \big(\sigma\sigma^\top(\eta_s)\big)^{-1} \big(S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}-\dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}\delta_n h_n\big)(s) ds \\
&\le \sigma_0^{-1} \int_0^{tn} {\left|S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}-\dot{S}_{(\theta,T)}\delta_n h_n \right|}^2 ds\\
&=\sigma_0^{-1} \int_0^{tn} {\left|S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}-S_{(\theta,T)}-D_\theta S_{(\theta,T)}(\theta_n-\theta)- {\partial}_T S_{(\theta,T)}(s) (T_n-T)\right|}^2 ds.
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$ Note that this upper bound is entirely deterministic. In order to prove that it in fact converges to zero, we will separate the dependence on the parameters $\theta$ and $T$ in such a way that we can use the periodicity and (S1) - (S4) efficiently. This can be achieved by continuing the inequality with $$\begin{aligned}
\langle R_n \rangle_t &\le 3 \sigma_0^{-1} \bigg( \int_0^{tn} {\left|S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}(s)-S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)- D_\theta S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)(\theta_n-\theta)\right|}^2ds \\
& \hspace{11,3mm} + \int_0^{tn} {\left|\big(D_\theta S_{(\theta,T_n)}-D_\theta S_{(\theta,T)}(s)\big)(\theta_n-\theta)\right|}^2ds \\
& \hspace{11,3mm} + \int_0^{tn} {\left|S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)-S_{(\theta,T)}(s)-{\partial}_T S_{(\theta,T)}(s) (T_n-T)\right|}^2ds \bigg) \\
& =: 3 \sigma_0^{-1} (A_n+B_n+C_n).
\end{aligned}$$ We will treat convergence of $A_n$, $B_n$, and $C_n$ step for step. For this purpose, set $H:=\sup_{n\in{\mathbb N}}{\left|h_n\right|}$ and note that due to we have $${\left|\theta_n-\theta\right|} \le H n^{-1/2} \quad \text{and} \quad {\left|T_n-T\right|} \le H n^{-3/2}$$ for all $n\in{\mathbb N}$.
Starting with $A_n$, we observe that for sufficiently large $n\in{\mathbb N}$ we have $T_n\in[T/2,2T]$ and thus $$\begin{aligned}
A_n &\le \left(\frac{tn}{T_n}+1\right)\int_0^{T_n} {\left|S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}(s)-S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)- D_\theta S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)(\theta_n-\theta)\right|}^2ds \\
&= \left(\frac{tn}{T_n}+1\right) {\left|\theta_n-\theta\right|}^2 \int_0^{T_n}\!{\left|\frac{S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}(s)-S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)-D_\theta S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)(\theta_n-\theta)}{{\left|\theta_n-\theta\right|}} \right|}^2\! ds \\
&\le \left(\frac{tn}{T/2}+1\right) H^2n^{-1}\int_0^{2T} \!{\left|\frac{S_{(\theta_n,T_n)}(s)-S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)-D_\theta S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)(\theta_n-\theta)}{{\left|\theta_n-\theta\right|}} \right|}^2\! ds,
\end{aligned}$$ where the factor in front of the integral is obviously convergent. Using the ${\mathbb L}^2$-continuity condition (S3) and a simple application of the mean value theorem (compare Lemma 3.18 of [@ICHDiss]), one sees that the integral itself tends to zero.
Next, using the H[ö]{}lder condition (S4), we obtain for sufficiently large $n\in{\mathbb N}$ that $$\begin{aligned}
B_n &\le {\left|\theta_n-\theta\right|}^2 \int_0^{tn} {\left|D_\theta S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)-D_\theta S_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right|}^2ds \\
&\le H^2n^{-1} \left(\int_0^{t_0} {\left|D_\theta S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)-D_\theta S_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right|}^2ds + C (tn)^\beta {\left|T_n-T\right|}^\alpha \right) \\
&\le H^2n^{-1} \int_0^{t_0} {\left|\dot S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)-\dot S_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right|}^2ds + C H^{2+\alpha} t^\beta n^{\beta-(1+3\alpha/2)}.
\end{aligned}$$ The particular conditions on $\alpha$ and $\beta$ from (S4) make the second summand vanish for $n\to\infty$, while the first summand converges to zero because of (S3).
In order to estimate $C_n$, we make explicit use of the $C^2$-property (S1) which is readily translated into the condition that the mapping $$(0,\infty)\ni T \mapsto S_{(\theta,T)}(s)$$ is twice continuously differentiable for any fixed $s\in(0,\infty)$. Consequently, for every $s \in (0,\infty)$ and any $i\in\{1,\ldots,N\}$ Taylor expansion with the Lagrange form of the remainder provides a $\rho_i=\rho_i(s,\theta,T,T_n,h_n)$ between $T$ and $T_n$ such that for sufficiently large $n \in {\mathbb N}$ we can infer that $$\begin{aligned}
{\left|S_{(\theta,T_n)}(s)-S_{(\theta,T)}(s)-(T_n-T) {\partial}_T S_{(\theta,T)}(s)\right|}^2
&= \sum_{i=1}^N \left(\frac12(T_n-T)^2 {\partial}_T^2S^{(i)}_{(\theta,T)}(s)_{|_{T=\rho_i}}\right)^2 \\
&=\frac14 \left(T_n-T\right)^4\sum_{i=1}^N\left(\frac{s^2}{\rho_i^4} \left(S_\theta^{(i)}\right)''(s/\rho_i)+\frac{2s}{\rho_i^3} \left(S_\theta^{(i)}\right)'(s/\rho_i)\right)^2 \\
&\le \frac14 H^4 n^{-6} 2N \left[\left( s^2\frac{{\left\|S_\theta''\right\|}_\infty}{(T-n^{-3/2}H)^4}\right)^2 +\left(s\frac{2{\left\|S_\theta'\right\|}_\infty}{(T-n^{-3/2}H)^3}\right)^2\right] \\
&\le {\texttt{c{\!}s{\!}t}\,}n^{-6}(s^4+s^2)
\end{aligned}$$ for some positive constant not depending on $s$ or $n$. Integrating yields $$C_n \le {\texttt{c{\!}s{\!}t}\,}n^{-6}\int_0^{tn}(s^4+s^2)ds$$ and hence $C_n$ vanishes for $n \to \infty$.
So far, we have shown that the sequence of random variables $(U_n(t))_{n\in{\mathbb N}}$ not only vanishes in probability under ${\mathbb Q}$ for $n \to \infty$, but is even bounded by a deterministic sequence which goes to zero. Therefore, $$\label{eq:remaindertozero}
{\mathbb E}_{\mathbb Q}[ R_n(t)^2] = {\mathbb E}_{\mathbb Q}[\langle R_n\rangle_t] = {\mathbb E}_{\mathbb Q}[U_n(t)] \xrightarrow{n \to \infty} 0,$$ and in particular, $R_n(t)$ also vanishes in probability under ${\mathbb Q}$ for $n \to \infty$. Finally, the same is true for the last remainder variable $V_n(t)$, as by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality we get that $$\label{eq:remaindertozero2}
{\left|V_n(t)\right|}^2\le U_n(t) h_n^\top {\mathcal I}_n(t)h_n \le U_n(t) H^2 {\left|{\mathcal I}_n(t)\right|}\xrightarrow{n \to \infty} 0,$$ since ${\mathcal I}_n(t)$ converges and $U_n(t)$ goes to zero. Taking $t=1$ completes the proof.
The convergence in probability for $n\to\infty$ of the remainder terms $R_n(t)$, $U_n(t)$, and $V_n(t)$ (which determine the term $o_{{\mathbb Q}^{(\theta,T)}}(1)$ in ) is in fact even uniform with respect to $t\in[0,t_0]$ for every $t_0\in(0,\infty)$. For $U_n(t)$ this is clear, since it only increases with $t$. Using the Burkholder-Davis-Gundy inequality, the estimation can be improved to $${\mathbb E}_{\mathbb Q}\Big[ \sup_{t\in[0,t_0]} {\left|R_n(t)\right|}^2\Big] \le 4 {\mathbb E}_{\mathbb Q}[\langle R_n\rangle_{t_0}] = 4 {\mathbb E}_{\mathbb Q}[ U_n(t_0)] \xrightarrow{n \to \infty} 0,$$ which also takes care of $R_n(t)$. For $V_n(t)$ we notice that the bound given in only depends on $t$ via ${\mathcal I}_n(t)$ and $U_n(t)$ which are both non-decreasing with respect to $t$.
In the one-dimensional case $M=N=1$, variants of Theorem \[thm:LAN\] are already known in the literature, where shape and periodicity are treated separately and one of them is assumed to be known. A detailed contextualization is provided in Remark 2.6 and Examples 2.7 and 2.8 of [@ICH].
**Acknowledgements.** The author would like to thank Reinhard H[ö]{}pfner for fruitful discussions and helpful remarks and suggestions.
[Lm]{} <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">I. Castillo, C. Lévy-Leduc, C. Matias</span>: Exact Adaptive Estimation of the Shape of a Periodic Function with Unknown Period Corrupted by White Noise. In: *Mathematical Methods of Statistics* Vol. 15 (2006), pp. 1-30. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">N. Cuneo, J. P. Eckmann</span>: Non-Equilibrium Steady States for Chains of Four Rotors. In: *Communications in Mathematical Physics* Issue 1 (2016), pp. 185-221. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">N. Cuneo, J. P. Eckmann, M. Hairer, L. Rey-Bellet</span>: Non-equilibrium steady states for networks of oscillators. In: *Electronic Journal of Probability* Vol. 23 (2018), no. 55, pp. 1-28. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">N. Cuneo, J. P. Eckmann, C. Poquet</span>: Non-equilibrium steady state and subgeometric ergodicity for a chain of three coupled rotors. In: *Nonlinearity* Vol. 28 (2015), pp. 2397-2421. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">R. Davies</span>: Asymptotic Inference When the Amount of Information Is Random. In: *Proceedings of the Berkeley Symposium in Honour of J. Neyman and J. Kiefer* Vol. II, Wadsworth, 1985. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">A. Destexhe</span>: Conductance-based integrate and fire models. In: *Neural Computation* Vol. 9 (1997), pp. 503-514. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">S. Ditlevsen, P. L[á]{}nsk[ý]{}</span>: Estimation of the input parameters in the Feller neuronal model. In: *Physical Review E* Vol. 73 (2006), 061910. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">G. Golubev</span>: Estimating the Period of a Signal of Unknown Shape Corrupted by White Noise. In: *Problems in Information Transmission* Vol. 24 (1988), pp. 38-52. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">M. Hairer</span>: On Malliavin’s proof of H[ö]{}rmander’s Theorem. In: *Bulletin des Sciences Math[é]{}matiques* Vol. 135 (2011), pp. 650-666. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">M. Hairer, J. C. Mattingly</span>: Slow energy dissipation in anharmonic oscillator chains. In: *Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics* Vol. 62 (2009), pp. 999-1032. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">A. L. Hodgkin, A. F. Huxley</span>: A Quantitative Description of Membrane Current And Its Application to Conduction And Excitation in Nerve. In: *Journal of Physiology* Vol. 117 (1952), pp. 500-544. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">S. Holbach</span>: Local asymptotic normality for shape and periodicity in the drift of a time inhomogeneous diffusion. In: *Statistical Inference for Stochastic Processes* Vol. 21 (2018), pp- 527-538. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">S. Holbach</span>: Positive Harris recurrence for degenerate diffusions with internal variables and randomly perturbed time-periodic input. arXiv:1907.13585 \[math.PR\]. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">S. Holbach</span>: Recurrence and parameter estimation for degenerate diffusions with internal variables and randomly perturbed time-inhomogeneous deterministic input. Dissertation, Johannes Gutenberg-Universit[ä]{}t Mainz, 2018, available online at http://publications.ub.uni-mainz.de/theses/volltexte/2018/100002300/pdf/100002300.pdf <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">R. H[ö]{}pfner</span>: Asymptotic Statistics with a View to Stochastic Processes. de Gruyter, 2014. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">R. H[ö]{}pfner</span>: On a set of data for the membrane potential in a neuron. In: *Mathematical Biosciences* Vol. 207 (2007), pp. 275-301. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">R. H[ö]{}pfner, Y. A. Kutoyants</span>: On LAN for Parametrized Continuous Periodic Signals in a Time Inhomogeneous Diffusion. In: *Statistics & Decisions* Vol. 27 (2009), pp. 309-326. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">R. H[ö]{}pfner, Y. A. Kutoyants</span>: Estimating Discontinuous Periodic Signals in a Time Inhomogeneous Diffusion. In: *Statistical Inference for Stochastic Processes* Vol. 13 (2010), pp. 193-230. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">R. H[ö]{}pfner, Y. A. Kutoyants</span>: Estimating a Periodicity Parameter in the Drift of a Time Inhomogeneous Diffusion. In: *Mathematical Methods of Statistics* Vol. 20 (2011), pp. 58-74. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">R. H[ö]{}pfner, E. L[ö]{}cherbach, M. Thieullen</span>: Ergodicity for a Stochastic Hodgkin-Huxley Model Driven by Ornstein-Uhlenbeck Type Input. In: *Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré* Vol. 1 (2016), pp. 483-501. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">R. H[ö]{}pfner, E. L[ö]{}cherbach, M. Thieullen</span>: Strongly degenerate time inhomogeneous SDEs: densities and support properties. Application to a Hodgkin-Huxley system with periodic input. In: *Bernoulli* Vol. 23(4A) (2017), 2587-2616. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">R. H[ö]{}pfner, E. L[ö]{}cherbach, M. Thieullen</span>: Ergodicity and Limit Theorems for Degenerate Diffusions with Time Periodic Drift. Application to a Stochastic Hodgkin-Huxley Model. In: *ESAIM P&S* Vol. 20 (2016), pp. 527-554. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">I. A. Ibragimov, R. Z. Khasminskii</span>: Statistical Estimation. Springer, 1981. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">N. Ikeda, S. Watanabe</span>: Stochastic Differential Equations and Diffusion Processes. North-Holland Library, 2nd edition, 1989. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">E. M. Izhikevich</span>: Dynamical Systems in Neuroscience. The MIT Press, 2007. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">J. Jacod, A. Shiryaev</span>: Limit Theorems for Stochastic Processes. Springer, 2nd edition, 2002. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">M. Kirszbraun</span>: [Ü]{}ber die zusammenziehende und Lipschitzsche Transformationen. In: *Fundamenta Mathematicae* Vol. 22 (1935), pp. 77-108. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Y. A. Kutoyants</span>: Statistical Inference for Ergodic Diffusion Processes. Springer, 2004. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">P. L[á]{}nsk[ý]{}, L. Sacerdote, F. Tomassetti</span>: On the Comparison of Feller and Ornstein-Uhlenbeck Models for Neural Activity. In: *Biological Cybernetics* Vol. 73 (1995), pp. 457-465. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">L. LeCam, G. Yang</span>: Asymptotics in Statistics. Some Basic Concepts. Springer, 1990. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">S. Meyn, R. Tweedie</span>: Stability of Markovian processes I: criteria for discrete-time chains. In: *Advances in Applied Probability* Vol. 24 (1992), pp. 542-574. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">C. Morris, H. Lecar</span>: Voltage oscillations in the barnacle giant muscle fiber. In: *Biophysical Journal* Vol. 35 (1981), pp. 193-213. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">L. Rey-Bellet, L. E. Thomas</span>: Exponential convergence to non-equilibrium stationary states in classical statistical mechanics. In: *Communications in Mathematical Physics* Vol. 225 (2002), pp. 309-329. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">J. Rinzel, B. Ermentrout</span>: Analysis of neural excitability and oscillations. In: *Methods in neuronal modeling: from ions to networks, 2nd edition* (1998), pp. 251-291.
[^1]: Fakult[ä]{}t f[ü]{}r Mathematik, Universit[ä]{}t Bielefeld, Postfach 10 01 31, 33501 Bielefeld, Germany, e-mail: sholbach$@$math.uni-bielefeld.de. This article features results from the author’s PhD thesis [@ICHDiss] at Johannes Gutenberg-Universit[ä]{}t Mainz.
[^2]: In the context of vector operations, we often write $(\theta,T)$ instead of the formally correct but awkward $(\theta^\top, T)^\top$.
[^3]: Note that we do not assume – as in this Theorem – that $B$ and $\Sigma$ are defined on the entire euclidean space and are globally Lipschitz continuous. By our assumptions, ${\mathtt E}=U\times U'$ is $\sigma$-compact and hence we can find a sequence $(K_n)_{n\in{\mathbb N}}$ of compact sets increasing to ${\mathtt E}$. Using Kirszbraun’s Theorem ([@Kirsz Hauptsatz I]), the restriction to each $K_n$ of $B(t,\cdot)$ and $\Sigma$ can be extended to globally Lipschitz continuous functions on ${\mathbb R}^{N+L+N}$ (which also satisfy a linear growth condition). Hence, the proof of [@HoBo Theorem 6.10] needs only a slight adjustment to work in our case: Using the notation from there, the stopping time $\rho_n$ has to be replaced by $\rho_n \wedge \inf\{t>0\,|\, \eta_t \notin K_n\}$ and in equation ($\mathrm{II}^{(n)}$) and thereafter the coefficients $b$, $\sigma$ and $c$ have to be altered in analogy to $\gamma$. The rest of the proof then needs no further changes.
[^4]: Note that even though this Theorem is only explicitly stated for ${\mathbb R}$-valued processes, the authors remark at the beginning of the section that it remains valid for any polish state space, in particular for the cloed set $U'\subset{\mathbb R}^N$.
[^5]: To be exact, $M$ is actually defined on some arbitrary probability space, but in order to avoid making things more complicated than necessary, we assume without loss of generality that $M$ is in fact defined on (a standard extension of) the same probability space as the sequence $(M_n)_{n\in{\mathbb N}}$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We consider discrete cocompact isometric actions $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}}X$ where $X$ is a locally compact Hadamard space[^1], and $G$ belongs to a class of groups (“admissible groups”) which includes fundamental groups of $3$-dimensional graph manifolds. We identify invariants (“geometric data”) of the action $\rho$ which determine, and are determined by, the equivariant homeomorphism type of the action $G\stackrel{\geo\rho}{{\curvearrowright}}\geo X$ of $G$ on the ideal boundary of $X$. Moreover, if $G\stackrel{\rho_i}{{\curvearrowright}}X_i$ are two actions with the same geometric data and $\Phi:X_1{\rightarrow}X_2$ is a $G$-equivariant quasi-isometry, then for every geodesic ray $\ga_1:[0,\infty){\rightarrow}X_1$, there is a geodesic ray $\ga_2:[0,\infty){\rightarrow}X_2$ (unique up to equivalence) so that $\lim_{t{\rightarrow}\infty}\frac{1}{t}d_{X_2}(\Phi\circ\ga_1(t),
\ga_2([0,\infty)))=0$. This work was inspired by (and answers) a question of Gromov in [@asyinv p. 136].
author:
- |
Christopher B. Croke[^2]\
Bruce Kleiner[^3]
bibliography:
- 'refs.bib'
title: The geodesic flow of a nonpositively curved graph manifold
---
Introduction
------------
As a consequence of the Morse lemma on quasi-geodesics, geodesic flows are especially simple and well understood in the Gromov hyperbolic
a\. If $\phi:M_1{\rightarrow}M_2$ is a homotopy equivalence between closed negatively curved manifolds, then there is an orbit equivalence $\hat\phi:SM_1{\rightarrow}SM_2$ between the unit sphere bundles, which covers $\phi$ up to homotopy [@3remarks].
b\. If $G$ is a hyperbolic group, $G\stackrel{\rho_i}{{\curvearrowright}}X_i$ is a discrete, cocompact, isometric action on a Hadamard space $X_i$ for $i=1,\,2$, and $\Phi:X_1{\rightarrow}X_2$ is a $G$-equivariant quasi-isometry, then $\Phi$ maps each geodesic $\ga_1\subset X_1$ to a subset at uniformly bounded Hausdorff distance from a geodesic $\ga_2\subset X_2$. Moreover, $\Phi$ induces an equivariant homeomorphism $\geo\Phi:\geo X_1{\rightarrow}\geo X_2$ between ideal boundaries, [@hypgps].
c\. When $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}}X$ is a discrete, cocompact action of a hyperbolic group on a Hadamard space $X$, then the induced action $G\stackrel{\geo\rho}{{\curvearrowright}}\geo X$ of $G$ on the boundary of $X$ is a finitely presented dynamical system, [@hypgps; @codepa].
Naturally one may ask if properties b and c hold without the assumption of Gromov hyperbolicity. It turns out that they do not: one can readily produce examples of pairs of discrete, cocompact, isometric actions $G{\curvearrowright}X_1$, $G{\curvearrowright}X_2$ where $G$-equivariant quasi-isometries $X_1{\rightarrow}X_2$ do not induce boundary homeomorphisms[^4] (this was observed independently by Ruane [@ruane]). In [@asyinv] Gromov asked whether two actions $G{\curvearrowright}X_i$ induce $G$-equivariantly homeomorphic boundary actions $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X_i$. The answer to this is also no: S. Buyalo [@buy] and the authors independently found pairs of actions which induce inequivalent boundary actions[^5]. Finally, we remark that the boundary action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$ is finitely presented if and only if $G$ is hyperbolic[^6].
In this paper we examine actions $G{\curvearrowright}X$ where $G$ belongs to a class of groups which generalize fundamental groups of $3$-dimensional graph manifolds. We develop a kind of “coding” for geodesic rays in $X$, which allows us to understand the boundary action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$ and the Tits metric on $\geo X$. Before stating our main result in complete generality, we first formulate it for nonpositively curved $3$-dimensional graph manifolds.
By the theorem of [@schroeder], when $M$ is a $3$-dimensional graph manifold with a nonpositively curved Riemannian metric, then $M$ has the following structure. There is a collection $M_1,\ldots,M_k$ of compact nonpositively curved $3$-manifolds with nonempty totally geodesic boundary (the geometric Seifert components of $M$), and Seifert fibrations $M_i\stackrel{p_i}{{\rightarrow}}N_i$ where the metric on $M_i$ has local product structure compatible with the fibration $p_i$, and the $N_i$ are nonpositively curved orbifolds; $M$ is obtained from the disjoint union ${\amalg}_i \,M_i$ by gluing boundary components isometrically in pairs via gluing isometries which are incompatible with the boundary fiberings. In what follows we will only consider graph manifolds whose Seifert fibered components have orientable fiber. Note that for each $1\leq i\leq k$, the universal cover of $M_i$ is isometric to a Riemannian product $\tilde N_i\times{\mathbb R}$; the action of $\pi_1(M_i)$ on $\tilde M_i$ preserves this product structure and so there is an induced action of $\pi_1(M_i)$ on the ${\mathbb R}$ factor by translations. Hence we get a homomorphism $\tau_i:\pi_1(M_i){\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}$ for each $i$. We may also define a class function $MLS_i:\pi_1(M_i){\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ by taking the minimum of the displacement function for the induced action $\pi_1(M_i){\curvearrowright}\tilde N_i$, i.e. $MLS_i(g)=\inf\{d_{\tilde N_i}(gx,x)\mid x\in\tilde N_i\}$; this corresponds to the marked length spectrum of the nonpositively curved orbifold $N_i$.
Now suppose $M$ and $M'$ are graph manifolds as above, and $f:M{\rightarrow}M'$ is a homotopy equivalence. Embedded incompressible tori in Haken manifolds are determined up to isotopy by their fundamental groups up to conjugacy [@laudenbach], so we may assume after isotoping $f$ that it is a homeomorphism which induces homeomorphisms $ f_i:M_i{\rightarrow}M_i'$ from the Seifert components of $M$ to the Seifert components of $M'$ (and hence isomorphisms on the corresponding fundamental groups). We may then use the maps $ f_i$ to compare the invariants $\tau_i,\,\tau_i'$ and $MLS_i,\,MLS_i'$.
\[graphmfldcase\] The following are equivalent:
1\. The functions $MLS_i$ and $\tau_i$ are preserved up to scale by $f_i$: for $i=1,\ldots,k$ there are constants $a_i$ and $b_i$ so that $MLS_i=a_if^*(MLS_i')$ and $\tau_i=b_if^*(\tau_i')$.
2\. Any lift $\tilde f:\tilde M{\rightarrow}\tilde M'$ of $f$ extends continuously to a map $\bar f:M\cup\geo M{\rightarrow}M'\cup\geo M'$ between the standard compactifications.
3\. If $\tilde f:\tilde M{\rightarrow}\tilde M'$ is any lift of $f$, then $\tilde f$ maps geodesic rays to geodesic rays, up to uniform sublinear error: there is a function $\th:{\mathbb R}_+{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ with $\lim_{r{\rightarrow}\infty}\th(r)=0$ so that if $\ga:[0,\infty){\rightarrow}\tilde M$ is a unit speed geodesic ray, then there is a ray $\ga':[0,\infty){\rightarrow}\tilde M'$ where $d(\tilde f\circ\ga(t),\ga'([0,\infty)))<(1+t)\th(t)$.
4\. If we identify $\pi_1(M)$ with $\pi_1(M')$ via $f$, then the induced boundary actions $\pi_1(M){\curvearrowright}\geo\tilde M$ and $\pi_1(M){\curvearrowright}\geo\tilde M'$ are equivariantly homeomorphic (by a unique equivariant homeomorphism).
If 1 holds and in addition the constants $a_i$ and $b_i$ are independent of $i$, then the unique equivariant homeomorphism $\geo\tilde M{\rightarrow}\geo\tilde M'$ in 4 is an isometry with respect to Tits metrics.
In general (see Lemma \[constants\]) the structure of $\pi_1(M)$ forces the $a_i$’s and $b_i$’s in condition 1 to satisfy $\#\{a_1,\ldots,a_k,b_1,\ldots,b_k\}\leq 2$, and except in special circumstances they all coincide. The condition $MLS_i=a_if^*(MLS_i')$ means that the homotopy equivalence $N_i{\rightarrow}N_i'$ induced by $f_i$ preserves the marked length spectrum of the nonpositively curved orbifolds up to the scale factor $a_i$. Although closed nonpositively curved surfaces with the same marked length spectrum are isometric by [@croke; @otal; @croke-fathi-feldman], compact nonpositively curved surfaces with geodesic boundary can have the same marked length spectrum without being isometric:
\[bikini\] Let $N$ be a pair of pants with a (constant curvature $-1$) hyperbolic metric where the boundary components are geodesics with length $L$, and let $\{c_1,c_2\}\subset N$ be the fixed point set of the order $3$ isometry of $N$. If $L$ is sufficiently large (so that $N$ looks like a bikini) then a closed geodesic in $N$ cannot pass near $\{c_1,c_2\}$. This means that one can change the metric near $\{c_1,c_2\}$ without disturbing the marked length spectrum of $N$. Note that one can modify this example slightly so that the metric is flat in a neighborhood of the boundary geodesics.
Suppose $M$ is a nonpositively curved graph manifold with a Seifert component $M_i$ isometric to $N\times S^1$, where $N$ is as in the example. One can change the metric on the $N$ factor as in example \[bikini\] to get a Riemannian manifold $M'$ so that the conditions of Theorem \[graphmfldcase\] hold (with $f=id$), but $M'$ is not isometric to $M$.
In section \[examplesection\] we give an example to show that the uniform sublinear divergence estimate in condition 3 cannot be improved to a bounded distance estimate as in the Gromov hyperbolic case.
We now sketch some of the main points in the proof of Theorem \[graphmfldcase\].
First consider a single nonpositively curved graph manifold $M$ with geometric Seifert components $M_1,\ldots,M_k$. The universal cover $\tilde M_i$ is isometric to $\tilde N_i\times {\mathbb R}$ – a nonpositively curved $3$-manifold with a countable collection of totally geodesic boundary components isometric to ${\mathbb E}^2$. The universal cover $\tilde M$ of $M$ is tiled by a countable collection of copies of the universal covers $\tilde M_i$ for $i=1,\ldots k$; we call these subsets [*vertex spaces*]{}. We refer to boundary components of vertex spaces as [*edge spaces*]{}. Two vertex spaces are either disjoint, or intersect along an edge space. Let $T$ be the incidence graph for the collection of vertex spaces: $T$ is the graph which has one vertex for each vertex space, and an edge joining two vertices whenever the corresponding vertex spaces intersect. $T$ is isomorphic to the Bass-Serre tree of the graph of groups associated with the decomposition ${\amalg}_i M_i{\rightarrow}M$ (see section \[basicbassserre\]). If $v\in V\defeq Vertex(T)$ (resp. $e\in E\defeq Edge(T)$) we will use the notation $\tilde M_v$ (resp. $\tilde M_e$) for the vertex space (resp. edge space) associated with $v$ (resp. $e$); and we let $\tilde M_v\simeq \tilde N_v\times{\mathbb R}$ be the Riemannian product decomposition of $\tilde M_v$. It is not difficult to check (Lemma \[fixedinbdy\]) that if $G_v\defeq Stabilizer(\tilde M_v)\subset G\equiv \pi_1(M)$, then the center $Z(G_v)$ of $G_v$ is isomorphic to ${\mathbb Z}$, and the fixed point set of $Z(G_v)$ in $\geo\tilde M$ is just $\geo \tilde M_v$; similarly, if $\tilde M_e$ is an edge space then the fixed point set of ${\mathbb Z}^2\simeq G_e\defeq Stabilizer(\tilde M_e)\subset G$ in $\geo \tilde M$ is $\geo \tilde M_e$.
Let $p\in \tilde M$ be an interior point of a vertex space, pick $\xi\in\geo M$, and let $\ol{p\xi}$ denote the geodesic ray starting at $p$ which is asymptotic to $\xi$. The ray $\ol{p\xi}$ encounters a (possibly finite) sequence of vertex and edge spaces called the [*itinerary*]{} of $\ol{p\xi}$. The convexity of vertex and edge spaces forces the itinerary $v_0,e_1,v_1,e_2,\ldots$ of $\ol{p\xi}$ to be the sequence of successive vertices and edges of a geodesic segment or ray in $T$. In order to understand the rays with itinerary $v_0,e_1,v_1,e_2,\ldots$, we construct a piecewise flat complex ${{\cal T}}$ – a [*template*]{} – in $\tilde M$ as follows. First let $\ga_i\subset \tilde M_{v_i}$ be a shortest geodesic from $\tilde M_{e_{i}}$ to $\tilde M_{e_{i+1}}$ for $i>0$, and let $\ga_0$ be a shortest path from $p\in\tilde M_{v_0}$ to $\tilde M_{e_1}$. For $i\geq 0$ define ${{\cal S}}_i\subset \tilde M_{v_i}$ to be the flat strip which is the union of the geodesics in $\tilde M_{v_i}$ which are parallel to the ${\mathbb R}$-factor of $\tilde M_{v_i}$ and which pass through $\ga_i$. We define ${{\cal T}}$ to be the union of the edge spaces $\{\tilde M_{e_i}\}$ with the strips $\{{{\cal S}}_i\}$; then ${{\cal T}}$ is a Hadamard space with respect to the induced path metric. A key technical step in the proof of Theorem \[graphmfldcase\] is Theorem \[shadthm\], which shows that for any geodesic ray $\ol{p\zeta}$ in the Hadamard space ${{\cal T}}$, there is a unique geodesic ray $\ol{p\zeta'}$ in $\tilde M$ with the property that for all $x\in \ol{p\zeta}$, $$d_{\tilde M}(x,\ol{p\zeta'})\leq
\th(d_{{\cal T}}(x,p))(1+d_{{\cal T}}(x,p))$$ for some function $\th:[0,\infty){\rightarrow}[0,\infty)$ with $\lim_{r{\rightarrow}\infty}\th(r)=0$ which is independent of the choice of itinerary. Using Theorem \[shadthm\] one finds that the set of boundary points $\zeta\in\geo\tilde M$ for which the ray $\ol{p\zeta}$ has a given infinite itinerary $v_0,e_1,\ldots$ is homeomorphic to the set boundary points $\zeta'\in{{\cal T}}$ so that the ${{\cal T}}$-ray $\ol{p\zeta'}$ passes through $\tilde M_{e_i}$ for every $i$. One sees (Proposition \[interval\]) that the latter is either a single point or is homeomorphic to a closed interval, depending on the geometry of ${{\cal T}}$ (which depends, in turn, on the choice of itinerary and the geometry of $M$).
We now consider a second nonpositively curved $3$-manifold $M'$, and use primes to denote the vertex spaces, edge spaces, etc for $M'$. Let $f:M{\rightarrow}M'$ be a homeomorphism as in Theorem \[graphmfldcase\], and identify the deck groups $G\defeq \pi_1(M)\simeq\pi_1(M')$ via a lift $\tilde f$ of $f$. Then $\tilde f$ maps vertex (resp. edge) spaces of $M$ homeomorphically to vertex (resp. edge) spaces of $M'$, so we may use $\tilde f$ to identify the incidence tree $T'$ with $T$. Suppose $\phi:\geo\tilde M{\rightarrow}\geo\tilde M'$ is a $G$-equivariant homeomorphism. Using the remarks about fixed point sets made above, it follows that $\phi(\geo\tilde M_v)=\geo\tilde M'_v$ and $\phi(\geo\tilde M_e)=\geo\tilde M'_e$ for every $v\in V$ and every $e\in E$. Also, if $p\in \tilde M_{v_0}$, and $v_0,e_1,v_1,e_2,\ldots$ is an infinite itinerary, then $\phi(S)=S'$ where $S\subset\geo \tilde M$ and $S'\subset\geo\tilde M'$ are the subsets corresponding to the itinerary $v_0,e_1,v_1,e_2,\ldots$ (Corollary \[preslabelling\]); in particular, either $S$ and $S'$ are both points or they are both intervals. By considering all possible infinite itineraries and exploiting this correlation, we are able to see (section \[recovering\]) that the invariants $MLS_i,\,MLS_i'$ and $\tau_i,\,\tau_i'$ must agree as in condition 1 of Theorem \[graphmfldcase\]. Conversely, if condition 1 holds and $p\in \tilde M$, one shows (section \[samedata\]) that for each itinerary the corresponding templates in $\tilde M$ and $\tilde M'$ have sufficiently similar geometry that their geodesics are “similar”; and this implies that $\tilde f$ extends to the compactifications as in 2 of Theorem \[graphmfldcase\].
Our main result generalizes Theorem \[graphmfldcase\] and applies to [*admissible groups*]{}, a class of (fundamental groups of) graphs of groups, see section \[admissible\] for the precise definition. When an admissible group $G$ acts discretely and cocompactly on a Hadamard space $X$ then we associate geometric data to each vertex group $G_v\subset G$ consisting of a class function $MLS_v:G_v{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}^+$ and a homomorphism $\tau_v:G_v{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}$ (see section \[sectionvertexandedge\]).
\[main\] Let $G{\curvearrowright}X$ be a discrete, cocompact, isometric action of an admissible group on a Hadamard space $X$. Then for every vertex $v$, $MLS_v$ and $\tau_v$ are determined up to scale factors $a_v$ and $b_v$ by the topological conjugacy class of the boundary action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$, and vice-versa. If $G{\curvearrowright}X'$ is another such action, then the following are equivalent:
1\. $G{\curvearrowright}X$ and $G{\curvearrowright}X'$ have the same geometric data up to scale.
2\. $G$-equivariant quasi-isometries $X{\rightarrow}X'$ extend canonically to the compactifications $X\cup\geo X{\rightarrow}X'\cup\geo X'$.
3\. The boundary actions $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$ and $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X'$ are $G$-equivariantly homeomorphic (by a unique[^7] $G$-equivariant homeomorphism).
4\. If $f:X{\rightarrow}X'$ is a $G$-equivariant quasi-isometry, then there is a function $\th:{\mathbb R}_+{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ with $\lim_{r{\rightarrow}\infty}\th(r)=0$ so that for every unit speed geodesic ray $\ga:[0,\infty){\rightarrow}X$ there is a ray $\ga':[0,\infty){\rightarrow}X'$ with $d(f\circ\ga(t),\ga'(t))<(1+t)\th(t)$.
Furthermore, if there is a single scale factor $s$ so that $MLS_v'=sMLS_v$ and $\tau_v'=s\tau_v$ for every vertex $v$, then the unique $G$-equivariant homeomorphism $\geo X{\rightarrow}\geo X'$ is an isometry with respect to the Tits metrics.
The authors proved theorem \[main\] while attempting to digest the negative answer to Gromov’s question about boundary actions. A key factor in our example was the (unanticipated) presence of intervals in the Tits boundary. After the examples and their properties had been announced, similar structure was found in other manifolds, [@humsch]. The paper [@buysch] also contains some discussion of the Tits boundary of universal covers of nonpositively curved graph manifolds.
The results in this paper raise a number of questions. First of all, for each group $G$ one may ask for a generalization of Theorem \[main\], where the geometric data $MLS_v$ and $\tau_v$ are replaced with suitable substitutes. Our methods actually yield more information about the behavior of geodesics than is stated in Theorem \[main\] alone. We are able to give a good description of all the geodesic rays in the Hadamard space $X$ in terms of concrete geometric information; it seems likely that other classes of groups are amenable to a similar treatment. The fundamental groups of the real-analytic manifolds considered in [@humsch] are natural candidates for this, as they have structure similar to graph manifold groups. Here are two other questions:
1\. What determines the (non-equivariant) homeomorphism type of $\geo X$, when $X$ is a Hadamard space with an action $G{\curvearrowright}X$ by an admissible group $G$?
2\. Does part 4 of Theorem \[main\] have an analog where rays are replaced by complete geodesics? This seems within reach.
Preliminaries
-------------
### Coarse geometry
Let $X$ and $X'$ be metric spaces, and let $\Phi:X{\rightarrow}X'$ be a map.
1\. $\Phi$ is [*$(L,A)$-Lipschitz*]{} if for all $x_1,x_2\in X$, $$d(\Phi(x_1),\Phi(x_2))\leq Ld(x_1,x_2)+A.$$ $\Phi$ is [*coarse Lipschitz*]{} if it is $(L,A)$-Lipschitz for some $L,\,A>0$.
2\. $\Phi$ is an [*$(L,A)$-quasi-isometric embedding*]{} if it is $(L,A)$-Lipschitz and for all $x_1,x_2\in X$, $$d(\Phi(x_1),\Phi(x_2))\geq L^{-1}d(x_1,x_2)-A.$$ The constants $(L,A)$ will often be suppressed. A [*quasi-geodesic*]{} (respectively [*segment/ray*]{}) is a quasi-isometric embedding $\Phi:{\mathbb R}{\rightarrow}X$ (respectively $\Phi:[a,b]{\rightarrow}X$, $\Phi:[0,\infty){\rightarrow}X$). We sometimes refer to the image of a quasi-geodesic as a quasi-geodesic.
3\. $\Phi$ is an [*$(L,A)$-quasi-isometry*]{} if it is an $(L,A)$-quasi-isometric embedding and for all $x'\in X'$, $d(x',\Phi(X))<A$.
4\. $\Phi$ is a [*$D$-Hausdorff approximation*]{} if it is a $(1,D)$-quasi-isometry.
We will use the following well-known lemma:
If $G{\curvearrowright}X$ is a discrete, cocompact, isometric action of a group $G$ on a length space $X$, then there is a $G$-equivariant quasi-isometry $\Phi:Cayley(G){\rightarrow}X$, where $Cayley(G)$ is any Cayley graph of $G$.
### Hadamard spaces {#basichadamard}
We refer the reader to [@ballmann] for the material recalled here.
Let $X$ be a locally compact Hadamard space. If $p,\,q\in X$ then $\ol{pq}\subset X$ denotes the segment from $p$ to $q$. If $p,x,y\in X$ and $p\not\in\{x,y\}$, then $\cangle_p(x,y)$ (respectively $\angle_p(x,y)$) denotes the comparison angle (respectively angle) of the triangle $\De pxy$ at $p$. We will use $\geo X$ to denote the set of asymptote classes of geodesic rays in $X$, with the cone topology. If $p\in X$ and $\xi\in\geo X$, then $\ol{p\xi}$ denotes the ray leaving $p$ in the asymptote class of $\xi$. $\bar X\defeq X\cup\geo X$ denotes the usual compactification: a sequence $x_i\in\bar X$ converges if and only if for any basepoint $p\in X$ the sequence of geodesic segments/rays $\ol{px_i}$ converges in the compact open topology. We denote the Tits angle between $\xi_1,\xi_2\in\geo X$ by $\tangle(\xi_1,\xi_2)$, and ${\partial_{T}}X$ denotes the underlying set of $\geo X$ equipped with the Tits angle metric (which usually induces a topology different from the one defined above). The metric space ${\partial_{T}}X$ is a $CAT(1)$ space with respect to this metric. When $\xi_1,\xi_2\in {\partial_{T}}X$ and $\tangle(\xi_1,\xi_2)<\pi$ then there is a segment between $\xi_1$ and $\xi_2$ in ${\partial_{T}}X$, which we denote by $\ol{\xi_1\xi_2}\subset{\partial_{T}}X$. This segment is the limit set in $\bar X$ of any sequence of segments $\ol{x_1^kx_2^k}$ where $x_i^k$ tends to infinity along a ray asymptotic to $\xi_i$. We will not use the Tits path metric. We recall that $\geo$ and ${\partial_{T}}$ behave nicely with respect to products: $\geo (X_1\times X_2)=\geo X_1\circ\geo X_2$ and ${\partial_{T}}(X_1\times X_2)={\partial_{T}}X_1\circ{\partial_{T}}X_2$ where in the first case $\circ$ represents the topological join and in the second the $\frac \pi 2$-metric join. We will use this in the case where $X_2={\mathbb R}$.
We will let $N_R(C)$ be the closed metric tubular neighborhood of radius $R$ of a subset $C\subset X$. A closed convex subset $C\subset X$ is also a locally compact Hadamard space as is $N_R(C)$, since it is also convex.
Standard comparison arguments show the following.
\[prebdyconvex\] Let $X$ be a locally compact Hadamard space, and let $C\subset X$ be a closed convex subset. Then for any $R>0$, $\xi\in \geo N_RC$, and $z\in C$ we have $\ol{z\xi_\infty}\subset C$. In particular, $\geo C=\geo N_RC$.
One consequence is:
\[bdyconvex\] Let $X$ be a locally compact Hadamard space, and let $C\subset X$ be a closed convex subset. If $p\in X$, $\xi_i\in\geo X$, and $\xi_i{\rightarrow}\xi_\infty$, $\ol{p\xi_i}\cap C\neq\emptyset$ for all $i$, then either $\ol{p\xi_\infty}\cap C\neq\emptyset$ or $\xi_\infty\in\geo C$.
Pick $x_i\in\ol{p\xi_i}\cap C$. If $\liminf d(x_i,p)<\infty$ then a subsequence of $x_i$ converges to $x_\infty\in C\cap\ol{p\xi_\infty}$. On the other hand, if $\liminf d(x_i,p)=\infty$ then for some subsequence $\ol{px_i}{\rightarrow}\ol{p\xi_\infty}$. By the convexity of $N_R(C)$, $\ol{p\xi_\infty}
\subset N_R(C)$ for $R=d(p,C)$ and hence Lemma \[prebdyconvex\] yields the result.
\[sublinearbending\] Let $\Phi:X{\rightarrow}X'$ be a quasi-isometric embedding, and assume there is a point $x\in X$ and a function $\th:{\mathbb R}_+{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ with $\lim_{r{\rightarrow}\infty}\th(r)=0$ so that for every $y\in X$, $z\in\ol{xy}$, we have $$\label{bendingest}
d_{X'}(\Phi(z),\ol{\Phi(x)\Phi(y)})\leq
(1+d_X(z,x))\th(d_X(z,x)).$$ Then there is a unique extension $\bar\Phi:\bar X{\rightarrow}\bar X'$ of $\Phi$ which is continuous at $\geo X$, and $\geo\Phi\defeq
\bar\Phi{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\geo X}$ is a topological embedding.
Let $\Phi$ be an $(L,A)-$quasi isometric embedding, and $\xi\in\geo X$, and $y_k\in X$ be such that $\ol{xy_k}$ converges to $\ol{x\xi}$. By the convergence we can choose $R_k{\rightarrow}\infty$ so that for all $k\geq n$ we have $d(y_k,x)\geq R_n$ and $y_{kn}\defeq \ol{xy_k}\cap S(x,R_n)
\subset N_1(\ol{x\xi})$. Note that the point on $\xi$ closest to $y_{kn}$ lies in $\xi([R_n-1,R_n+1])$, hence by the triangle inequality $d(y_{kn},y_{ln})\leq 4$ for $k,l\geq n$. Using (\[bendingest\]), for every $k\geq n$ choose $y_{kn}'\in\ol{\Phi(x)\Phi(y_k)}$ with $d_{X'}(y_{kn}',\Phi(y_{kn}))\leq (1+R_n)\th(R_n)$. Then for every $k,l\geq n$ we have $d_{X'}(\Phi(y_{kn}),\Phi(y_{ln}))
\leq 4L+A$, and so $d_{X'}(y_{kn}',y_{ln}')\leq 2(1+R_n)\th(R_n)
+4L+A$. This, along with the fact that $d(\Phi(x),y'_{kn})\geq L^{-1}R_n-A-(1+R_n)\th(R_n)$, forces $\cangle_{\Phi(x)}(y_{kn}',y_{ln}')$ to zero as $n{\rightarrow}\infty$. This in turn forces $\ol{\Phi(x)\Phi(y_k)}$ to converge to a ray $\ol{\Phi(x)\Phi(\xi)}$ since for each $R>0$ we have for large enough $k$ that the sequence $\{\ol{\Phi(x)\Phi(y_k)}\cap S(\Phi(x),R)\}$ is Cauchy and hence converges. This proves that $\Phi$ has a unique extension $\bar\Phi:\bar X{\rightarrow}\bar X'$ which is continuous at $\geo X$. The map $\geo \Phi\defeq \bar\Phi{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\geo X}$ clearly has the property that for all $\xi\in\geo X$ and all $y\in x\xi$, $$\label{stillsublinear}
d(\Phi(y),\ol{\Phi(x)\geo\Phi(\xi)})\leq
(1+d(x,y))\th(d(x,y)).$$ When $\xi_1,\xi_2\in\geo X$ are distinct, the rays $\ol{x\xi_i}$ diverge linearly, and hence $\Phi(\ol{x\xi_1})$ and $\Phi(\ol{x\xi_2})$ diverge linearly since $\Phi$ is a quasi isometric embedding. Now if $\geo \Phi(\xi_1)=\geo \Phi(\xi_2)$ then (\[stillsublinear\]) would imply that $\Phi(\ol{x\xi_1})$ and $\Phi(\ol{x\xi_2})$ would each diverge sublinearly from $\ol{\Phi(x)\geo \Phi(\xi_1)}$ and hence diverge sublinearly from each other. Thus we conclude that $\geo \Phi(\xi_1)\neq\geo \Phi(\xi_2)$.
### Groups acting on Hadamard spaces. {#groupsonx}
Let $X$ be a Hadamard space. We denote the displacement function of an isometry $g:X{\rightarrow}X$ by $d_g$, and the infimum of $d_g$ by $\de_g$. When $g$ is axial, we let $Minset(g)$ denote the convex subset where $d_g$ attains its minimum. We recall that $Minset(g)$ splits as a metric product $C\times{\mathbb R}$ where $C$ is convex and $g$ acts trivially on the $C$ factor and by translation on the ${\mathbb R}$ factor.
Let $G{\curvearrowright}X$ be a discrete, cocompact, isometric action of a group $G$ on a Hadamard space $X$. If $H\subset G$ is a subgroup isomorphic to ${\mathbb Z}^k$, we let $Minset(H)\defeq \cap_{h\in H}Minset(h)$. We recall that $Minset(H)=\cap_{h\in S} Minset(h)$ for any generating set $S\subset H$, and that $Minset(H)$ splits isometrically as a metric product $C\times{\mathbb E}^k$ so that $H$ acts trivially on the $C$ factor, and as a translation lattice on the ${\mathbb E}^k$ factor. The centralizer $Z(H,G)$ of $H$ in $G$ preserves $\de_h$ for every $h\in H$, and hence also $Minset(H)$. If $S\subset H$ is a finite generating set, then the function $\sum_{h\in S}\de_h:X{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}$ descends to a proper function on $X/Z(H,G)$; in particular, $Minset(H)/Z(H,G)$ is compact.
### Gromov hyperbolic groups and spaces {#basichyperbolic}
For background on the material in this section see [@hypgps], [@delaharpe], and [@codepa]. Some standard facts that we will use: If a Gromov hyperbolic group $G$ acts cocompactly on a Hadamard space $X$ then (since $X$ is then quasi-isometric to $Cayley(G)$ and Gromov hyperbolicity is a quasi isometry invariant) $X$ is Gromov hyperbolic (i.e. $\delta$-hyperbolic for some $\delta$). Further $\geo X$ is homeomorphic to $\geo G$, and all infinite order elements $g\in G$ are axial. The Tits metric ${\partial_{T}}X$ is the discrete metric with any two distinct points having distance $\pi$.
In this section we make use of the Morse lemma for quasi-geodesic segments (see [@hypgps; @codepa]):
(Morse Lemma) \[qgmorse\] Given $\delta>0$, $L>0$ and $A\geq 0$ there is a constant $C=C(\delta,L,A)$ such that if $\ga_1$ and $\ga_2$ are $(L,A)$-quasi-geodesic segments with the same endpoints sitting in a $\de$-hyperbolic space, then their Hausdorff distance satisfies ${d_{\cal H}}(\ga_1,\ga_2)<C$.
Two geodesics $\ga_1$ and $\ga_2$ in a Hadamard space $X$ are [*parallel*]{} if they stay a bounded distance apart. The parallel set $P(\ga)\subset X$ of a geodesic $\ga$ is the union of all geodesics parallel to $\ga$. By the flat strip theorem, $P(\ga)$ is a convex subset of $X$, and is isometric to $C_\ga\times{\mathbb R}$ where $C_\ga\subset X$ is convex. A bounded convex set $C$ always contains a unique circumcenter: the center of the smallest metric ball containing $C$.
\[geodesicunion\] Let $X$ be a $\de$-hyperbolic Hadamard space. Then
1\. If $\ga\subset X$ is a geodesic and $P(\ga)\simeq C_\ga\times{\mathbb R}$ is its parallel set, then $Diam(C_\ga)<\de$. In particular $P(\ga)$ contains a canonical geodesic $z\times{\mathbb R}\subset C_\ga\times{\mathbb R}$ where $z\in C_\ga$ is the circumcenter of $C_\ga$.
2\. If $\ga_1,\,\ga_2\subset X$ are geodesics, $x_i\in \ga_i$, then $\ga_1\cup\ol{x_1x_2}\cup \ga_2$ is $2\de$-quasi-convex[^8].
3\. Suppose $\ga_1,\,\ga_2\subset X$ are geodesics with $\geo\ga_1\cap\geo\ga_2=\emptyset$, and let $\eta$ a minimal geodesic segment between $\ga_1$ and $\ga_2$. Then any geodesic segment running from $\ga_1$ to $\ga_2$ will pass within distance $D=D(\ga_1,\ga_2)$ of both endpoints of $\eta$; when $d(\ga_1,\ga_2)>4\de$ then we may take $D=2\de$.
1 follows from the fact that a $\de$-hyperbolic Euclidean strip has width at most $\de$. 2 and 3 follow from repeated application of the $\de$-thinness property of geodesic triangles.
In the following lemma is a slight variation on results from [@hypgps]. It shows that discrete isometric actions on Gromov hyperbolic spaces behave like free group actions on trees.
\[almostfree\] Let $X$ be a $\de$-hyperbolic Hadamard space, and let $\star\in X$. Suppose $(g_i)_{i\in{\mathbb Z}}$ is a periodic sequence of axial isometries of $X$ with period $k$ (i.e. $g_{i+k}=g_i$ for all $i$; and in particular $g_{0}=g_{k}$ and $g_{-1}=g_{k-1}$), and let the attracting (respectively repelling) fixed point of $g_i$ be $\xi_i^+\in\geo X$ (respectively $\xi_i^-\in\geo X$). If for every $i$ we have $\xi_i^-\neq\xi_{i+1}^+$, then there are constants $L$, $A$, $N$, and $D$ with the following property.
1\. If $(m_i)_{i\in{\mathbb Z}}$ is a sequence with $m_i>N$, then the broken geodesic with vertices $$\label{brokengeodesic}
\ldots,v_{-2}=
(g_{-1}^{-m_{-1}}g_{-2}^{-m_{-2}})(\star),\,v_{-1}= g_{-1}^{-m_{-1}}(\star),\,v_0=\star,\,
v_1= g_0^{m_0}(\star),\,v_2= (g_0^{m_0}g_1^{m_1})(\star),\,\ldots$$ is an $(L,A)$ quasi-geodesic, and $$\label{expecteddist}
|d(v_i,v_{i+l})-\sum_{j=i}^{i+l-1}m_j\de_{g_j}|<lD$$
2\. If $(m_i)_{i\in{\mathbb Z}}$ is a sequence with $m_i>N$ and period $k$, then $g\defeq g_0^{m_0}\ldots g_{k-1}^{m_{k-1}}$ is an axial isometry with an axis $\ga$ within Hausdorff distance $D$ of the $g$-invariant broken geodesic with vertices (\[brokengeodesic\]), and the minimal displacement of $g$ satisfies $$\label{dispest}
|\de_g-(m_0\de_{g_0}+\ldots+m_{k-1}\de_{g_{k-1}})|<D.$$ Furthermore, as $m_0{\rightarrow}\infty$ (respectively $m_{k-1}{\rightarrow}\infty$), the attracting (respectively repelling) fixed point of $g$ tends to $\xi_0^+$ (respectively $\xi_{k-1}^-$).
Since $\xi_i^-\neq\xi_{i+1}^+$ for all $i\in{\mathbb Z}$, there are constants $L_1$, $A_1$, and $N_1$, so that when $m_\pm>N_1$ then for any $i$ the broken geodesic with vertices $g_i^{-m_-}(\star)$, $\star$, $g_{i+1}^{m_+}\star$ is an $(L_1,A_1)$ quasi-geodesic segment. Let $(m_i)_{i\in{\mathbb Z}}$ be a sequence, and let $\eta:{\mathbb R}{\rightarrow}X$ be the broken geodesic with vertices (\[brokengeodesic\]). By the local characterization of quasi-geodesics given in [@codepa Chapitre 3], we get constants $L=L(L_1,A_1,\de)$, $A=A(L_1,A_1,\de)$, and $N_2=N_2(L_1,A_1,\de,\{g_i\}_{i\in{\mathbb Z}})\geq N_1$ so that $\eta$ is an $(L,A)$ quasi-geodesic provided $m_i\geq N_2$ for all $i$.
We now assume that $m_i\geq N_2$ for all $i$. By the Morse lemma there is a $D_1=D_1(L,A,\de)$ so that there is a geodesic at Hausdorff distance at most $D_1$ from $\eta({\mathbb R})$, and any geodesic $\ga\subset X$ with $\geo\ga=\geo\eta$ has Hausdorff distance at most $D_1$ from $\eta$. Fix such a geodesic $\ga\subset X$, and for each $i\in {\mathbb Z}$ let $w_i\in\ga$ be the point in $\ga$ nearest $v_i$. By the triangle inequality we have $$\label{disterror1}
|d(v_i,v_{i+1})-d(w_i,w_{i+1})|\leq 2D_1.$$ Choose $c_1=c_1(\star,\{g_i\})$ so that the distance from $\star$ to the nearest axis of $g_i$ is less than $c_1$; then for all $i\in {\mathbb Z}$ $$\label{dispest0}
|d(v_i,v_{i+1})-m_i\de_{g_i}|=|d(\star,g_i^{m_i}(\star))-m_i\de_{g_i}|<2c_1.$$ Since for each $i$, the broken segment with vertices $v_{i-1},\,v_i,\,v_{i+1}$ is an $(L_1,A_1)$ quasi-geodesic, the Morse Lemma gives $$\label{triangleqn}
d(v_{i-1},v_{i+1})\geq d(v_{i-1},v_i)+d(v_i,v_{i+1})-2D_1.$$ This gives $$\label{forw's}
d(w_{i-1},w_{i+1})\geq d(w_{i-1},w_i)+d(w_i,w_{i+1})-8D_1.$$ Therefore there is an $N=N(\star,\{g_i\})\geq N_2$ so that if $m_i\geq N$ then $w_i$ lies between $w_{i-1}$ and $w_{i+1}$ for all $i$. So when $m_i\geq N$ we have $$|d(v_i,v_{i+l})-\sum_{j=i}^{j+l-1}m_j\de_{g_j}|
\leq 2D_1+|d(w_i,w_{i+l})-\sum_{j=i}^{j+l-1}m_j\de_{g_j}|$$ $$\label{internalest}
\leq 2D_1+\sum_{j=i}^{j+l-1}|d(w_j,w_{j+1})-m_j\de_{g_j}|
\leq 2D_1(l+1)+2lc_1.$$ We now set $D\defeq (2k+4)D_1+2kc_1$, and note that we have proved 1. When the sequence $(m_i)$ has period $k$, $m_i\geq N$ for all $i$, and $g\defeq
g_0^{m_0}\ldots g_k^{m_{k-1}}$, then we may take $\ga$ to be an axis for $g$. We have $\de_g=d(w_0,w_k)$, and (\[dispest\]) follows from (\[internalest\]). The last assertion follows immediately from the fact that as $m_0{\rightarrow}\infty$ and $m_{k-1}{\rightarrow}\infty$, the segments $\ol{\star g_0^{m_0}(\star)}$ and $\ol{\star g_{k-1}^{-m_{k-1}}(\star)}$ converge to the rays $\ol{\star\xi_0^+}$ and $\ol{\star\xi_{k-1}^-}$ respectively.
\[hyplemmas\] Let $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}} X$ be a discrete, cocompact isometric action of a hyperbolic group $G$ on a Hadamard space $X$. There is a constant $D=D(\de,\rho)$ so that for every $x_1,x_2\in X$ there is a $g\in G$ and an axis $\ga$ for $g$ with $d(x_i,\ga)<D$ for $i=1,2$, and $d(g(x_1),x_2)<D$.
If $G$ is elementary, then either $G$ is finite (in which case the result holds trivially) or there is a hyperbolic element $g\in G$ with an axis $\ga$ so that $X=N_R(\ga)$ for some $R$; this implies 2 in this case. So we may assume that $G$ is nonelementary, and hence $G$ does not fix any $\xi\in\geo X$.
Pick $\star\in X$ and a finite generating set $\Si\subset G$. Fix $\si_0\in \Si$, let $\Si'=\{\si_0\}\cup \{\si\si_0|\si\in \Si\}$, and let $C(\Si')=\min\{d(\star,\si'(\star))|\si'\in \Si\}$.
We note that by the cocompactness of the action it is sufficient to prove the theorem when $x_1$ is $\star$; for then (with a larger $D$) if $g_1(x_i)$ is near $\star$ (within the diameter of the fundamental domain) and $g$ is the solution for $\star$ and $g_1(x_2)$ then $g_1^{-1}gg_1$ works for $x_1$ and $x_2$ (since $g_1^{-1}(\ga_g)$ is an axis for $g_1^{-1}gg_1$).
If not, there is a sequence $g_k\in G$ with $d(g_k(\star),\star){\rightarrow}\infty$, so that for every $\si'\in\Si'$ the broken geodesic with vertices $(g_k\si')^{-1})(\star),\,\star,\,(g_k\si')(\star)$ is not a $(k,k)$-quasi-geodesic. This clearly implies that after passing to a subsequence (which works for all $\si'$), the segments $\ol{\star[(g_k\si')(\star)]}$, $\ol{\star[(g_k\si')^{-1}(\star)]}$ converge to some ray $\ol{\star\xi(\si')}$. But since $d(g_k(\star),(g_k\si')(\star))\leq C(\Si') $ we see $(g_k)(\star)$ converges to $\xi(\si')$, so $\xi(\si')=\xi$ is independent of $\si'$. The fact that $(g_k\si')^{-1}(\star)$ converges to $\xi$ tells us (by applying $\si'$ to the sequence) that $g_k^{-1}(\star)$ converges to $\si'(\xi)=\xi'$ which is again independent of the choice of $\si'$. Thus $\si'(\xi)=\xi'$ for all $\si'\in \Si$, and hence for every $\si\in\Si$, $\si(\xi')=(\si\si_0)\si_0^{-1}(\xi')=\xi'$, which is a contradiction.
By the claim and an application of [@codepa Chapitre 3] as in the proof of Lemma \[almostfree\], we see that there are constants $L$, $A$, and $D_1$ so that if $g\in G$ and $d(g(\star),\star)>D_1$, then there is a $\si'\in\Si'$ so that the broken geodesic with $i^{th}$ vertex $(g\si')^i(\star)$ is an $(L,A)$-quasi-geodesic. By the Morse Lemma and Lemma \[geodesicunion\], $(g\si')$ has an axis at distance $<D_2(L,A,\de)$ from $\star$ and $(g\si')(\star)$. Since $d((g\si')(\star),g(\star))=d(\si'(\star),\star)\leq C(\Si')$, the lemma clearly follows.
\[preservinggeodesics\] Consider two discrete, cocompact, isometric actions $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}} X$, $G\stackrel{\rho'}{{\curvearrowright}} X'$ where $X$ and $X'$ are $\de$-hyperbolic Hadamard spaces. Assume that the minimum displacement of any $g\in G$ in $X$ is the same as the minimal displacement in $X'$. Then any $G$-equivariant $(L,A)$-quasi-isometry $\Phi:X{\rightarrow}X'$ maps unit speed geodesics $\ga$ to within $D=D(L,A,\delta,\rho,\rho')$ of a unit speed geodesic $\ga'$, that is $d(\Phi(\ga(t)),\ga'(t))\leq D$.
By the Morse lemma on quasi-geodesics, it suffices to show that $\Phi$ is a $D_1=D_1(L,A,\delta,\rho,\rho')$ Hausdorff approximation. Let $D_5=\max\{D_4(\delta,\rho),D_4(\delta,\rho')\}$ where the $D_4$’s come from Lemma \[hyplemmas\]. For $x_1,x_2\in X$ (resp. $\Phi(x_1),\Phi(x_2)\in X'$) let $g\in G$ (resp $g'\in G$) be the elements guaranteed by Lemma \[hyplemmas\]. Since $x_1$ is $D_5$ close to an axis of $g$ we know that $2D_5+\delta_g\geq d(x_1,g(x_1))\geq \delta_g$ and hence $3D_5+\delta_g\geq d(x_1,x_2)\geq \delta_g-D_5$. Now $$d(\Phi(x_1),\Phi(x_2))\geq d(\Phi(x_1),\Phi(g(x_1)))-
d(\Phi(g(x_1)),\Phi(x_2))\geq$$$$\geq \delta_g-LD_5-A\geq d(x_1,x_2)-(L+3)D_5-A$$ and similarly $$d(x_1,x_2)\geq d(x_1,g'(x_1))-d(g'(x_1),x_2)\geq$$ $$\geq \delta_{g'}-LD_5-A\geq d(\Phi(x_1),\Phi(x_2))-(L+3)D_5-A.$$ Hence we can take $D_1=(L+3)D_5+A$.
\[discreteaxis\] Let $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}} X$ be a discrete, cocompact isometric action on a $\de$-Hyperbolic Hadamard space $X$.
1\. If $\{\ga_g|g\in S\subset G\}$ is a collection of distinct axis of distinct elements $g\in G$ such that $\{\de_g\}$ is bounded then $\{\ga_g\}$ forms a discrete set of geodesics.
2\. If two axial elements $g_1,g_2\in G$ have a common fixed point in $\geo X$ then they have a common axis (i.e. they have both fixed points in common).
Assume some sequence $\ga_{g_i}$ converges to a geodesic $\ga$ and let $\star \in \ga$ then the boundedness of $\{\de_{g_i}\}$ says that there is a $C$ such that $d(\star,g_i(\star))<C$ but this cannot be true for infinitely many distinct $g_i$.
To see the second statement we can assume that the attracting and repelling fixed points satisfy $\xi^+_1=\xi^+_2$ and $\xi^-_1\not=\xi^-_2$ (the other cases are similar). In this case $\{g_1^{-k}g_2g_1^{k}\}$ are distinct since they have distinct fixed point sets $\{\xi_1^+,g_1^{-k}(\xi_2^-)\}$ in $\geo X$ while the axes converge (after taking a subsequence) to an axis of $g_k$. But again there is a $C$ such that $d(\star,g_1^{-k}g_2g_1^{k}(\star))<C$ giving the desired contradiction.
### Graphs of groups and their Bass-Serre trees {#basicbassserre}
For the remainder of the paper, all group actions on simplicial trees will be assumed to be simplicial actions which do not invert edges, and geodesic segments/rays in simplicial trees will be unions of edges.
References for the material in this section are [@serre; @scottwall; @dundicks].
A [*graph of groups*]{} is a connected graph ${\cal G}$ together with a group $G_\si$ labeling each $\si\in Vertex({\cal G})\cup Edge({\cal G})$, and a monomorphism $G_e{\rightarrow}G_v$ for each pair $(e,v)$ consisting of an oriented edge $e$ entering a vertex $v$. An isomorphism of two graphs of groups is an isomorphism of labeled graphs which is compatible with edge monomorphisms.
Let $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}} T$ be an action of a group $G$ on a simplicial tree $T$. We can define an associated graph of groups ${\cal G}$ as follows. We let the graph underlying ${\cal G}$ be $G/T$. For each $\si\in Vertex({\cal G})\cup Edge({\cal G})$ we may label $\si$ with the stabilizer of a lift $\hat\si\subset T$ of $\si$. An for each pair $(e,v)$, where $e\subset T/G$ is an oriented edge with terminus $v\in T/G$, we can define an edge monomorphism $G_e{\rightarrow}G_v$ by composing the inclusion $G_e\defeq G_{\hat e}{\rightarrow}G_{g{\hat v}}$ ($g{\hat v}\in T$ is the terminus of $\hat e$) with the isomorphism $G_{g{\hat v}}{\rightarrow}G_{\hat v}=G_v$ induced by conjugation by $g^{-1}$. We refer to this as the [*graph of groups associated with the action $G{\curvearrowright}T$*]{}.
If ${\cal G}$ is a graph of groups, then there is a group $G$, a simplicial tree $T$, and an action $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}}T$ so that:
1\. If $\bar {\cal G}$ is the graph of groups associated with the action $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}}T$, then $\bar{\cal G}\simeq{\cal G}$.
2\. If $G'\stackrel{\rho'}{{\curvearrowright}}T'$ is another action on a simplicial tree satisfying 1, then there is an isomorphism $G'\simeq G$ so that the actions $\rho$ and $\rho'$ become simplicially isomorphic.
The (isomorphism class of the) group $G$ is the [*fundamental group of ${\cal G}$*]{}, and the tree $T$ (or really the action $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}}T$) is called the Bass-Serre tree of ${\cal G}$. We note that if $v$ is a vertex of $T$ and $G_v$ is its stabilizer, then the $G_v$-orbits of $Link(v)$ correspond bijectively to the elements of $Link(\bar v)$ where $\bar v\in {\cal G}$ is the corresponding vertex of $G/T\simeq {\cal G}$, and the stabilizer of $\xi\in Link(v)$ is just $G_e$ where $e$ is the edge associated with $\xi$.
Let ${\cal G}$ be a graph of groups and let $\bar e$ be an edge of ${\cal G}$ with endpoints $\bar v_1$ and $\bar v_2$. We let ${\cal G}'$ be the graph of groups determined by $\bar e$. The fundamental group of ${\cal G}'$ is a free product with amalgamation if $\bar e$ is embedded in ${\cal G}$ and an $HNN$ extension if $\bar e$ is a loop. Choose a lift $e=\ol{v_1v_2}\subset T$ of $\bar e$ to the Bass-Serre tree $T$. We may identify $G_{\bar v_i}$ with $G_{v_i}$ and $G_{\bar e}$ with $G_e$ in a fashion compatible with the edge inclusions $G_{\bar e}{\rightarrow}G_{\bar v_i}$, $G_e{\rightarrow}G_{v_i}$. When $\bar e$ is a loop we may choose $t\in G=\pi_1({\cal G})$ so that $t(v_1)=v_2$ and the composition $G_e{\rightarrow}G_{v_1}\stackrel{t(\cdot)t^{-1}}{{\longrightarrow}}
G_{v_2}$ agrees with the edge monomorphism $G_e{\rightarrow}G_{v_2}$. Set $G'\defeq {\langle}G_{v_1},G_{v_2}{\rangle}$ when $\bar e$ is embedded and set $G'\defeq {\langle}G_{v_1},t{\rangle}$ when $\bar e$ is a loop. Then the orbit $T'\defeq G'(e)\subset T$ is a $G'$-invariant subtree of $T$, and the action $G'{\curvearrowright}T'$ is the Bass-Serre action for ${\cal G}'$. When $\bar e$ is embedded we choose subsets $\Si_i\subset G_{v_i}$ which intersect each right coset of $G_e$ exactly once; then any $g\in G'$ can be written uniquely in the form $$\label{amalgform}
s_1\ldots s_kr$$ where $r\in G_e$, $s_i\not\in G_e$, and the $s_i$’s belong alternately to $\Si_1$ and $\Si_2$. The combinatorial distance from the edge $g(e)$ to $e$ is $k$ and $e_i=s_1\ldots s_i(e)$ is the sequence of edges along the path from $e$ to $g(e)$. When $\bar e$ is a loop, we choose a cross-section $\Si_1\subset G_{v_1}$ (respectively $\Si_{-1}$) of the right cosets of $G_e$ (respectively $t^{-1}G_e t$). Then any $g\in G'$ can be written uniquely in the form $$\label{hnnform}
s_1t^{\eps_1}s_2t^{\eps_2}\ldots s_kt^{\eps_k}r$$ where for $i=1,\ldots,k$, $\eps_i=\pm 1$, $s_i\in \Si_{\eps_i}$, $r\in G_{v_1}$, and if $s_i\in G_e$ then $\eps_{i-1}=-\eps_i$.
Graphs of groups and the structure of Hadamard spaces on which they act
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
### Admissible groups and actions {#admissible}
\[admissibledef\]
A graph of groups ${\cal G}$ is [*admissible*]{} if
1\. ${\cal G}$ is a finite graph with at least one edge.
2\. Each vertex group $\bar G_v$ has center $Z(\bar G_v)\simeq {\mathbb Z}$, $\bar H_v\defeq \bar G_v/Z(\bar G_v)$ is a nonelementary hyperbolic group, and every edge subgroup $\bar G_e$ is isomorphic to ${\mathbb Z}^2$.
3\. Let $e_1,\,e_2$ be distinct directed edges entering a vertex $v$, and for $i=1,2$ let $K_i\subset \bar G_v$ be the image of the edge homomorphism $\bar G_{e_i}{\rightarrow}\bar G_v$. Then for every $g\in \bar G_v$, $gK_1g^{-1}$ is not commensurable with $K_2$, and for every $g\in \bar G_v-K_i$, $gK_ig^{-1}$ is not commensurable with $K_i$.
4\. For every edge group $\bar G_e$, if ${\alpha}_i:\bar G_e{\rightarrow}\bar G_{v_i}$ are the edge monomorphisms, then the subgroup generated by ${\alpha}_1^{-1}(Z(\bar G_{v_1}))$ and $
{\alpha}_2^{-1}(Z(\bar G_{v_2}))$ has finite index in $G_e\simeq {\mathbb Z}^2$.
A group $G$ is [*admissible*]{} if it is the fundamental group of an admissible graph of groups.
Let $G$ be the fundamental group of an admissible graph of groups ${\cal G}$, and let $G{\curvearrowright}T$ be the action of $G$ on the associated Bass-Serre tree. We let $V\defeq Vertex(T)$ and $E\defeq Edge(T)$ denote the vertex and edge sets of $T$, and when $\si\in V\cup E$ we let $G_\si\subset G$ denote corresponding stabilizer. Properties 1-4 of definition \[admissibledef\]
\[admissiblebassserre\] 1. $T$ is an unbounded tree with infinite valence at each vertex, and $G$ acts on $T$ with quotient ${\cal G}$.
2\. Each vertex group $ G_v$ has center $Z(G_v)\simeq {\mathbb Z}$, $ H_v\defeq G_v/Z( G_v)$ is a nonelementary hyperbolic group, and every edge subgroup $ G_e$ is isomorphic to ${\mathbb Z}^2$.
3\. If $e_1,\,e_2$ are distinct edges emanating from $v\in V$, then $G_{e_1}$ is not commensurable with $G_{e_2}$. In particular, $Z(G_v)\subset G_{e_i}$ since $g\in Z(G_v)$ implies $G_{e_i}=gG_{e_i}g^{-1}
=G_{ge_i}$ forcing $ge_i=e_i$, i.e. $g\in G_{e_i}$.
4\. If $e\in E$ has endpoints $v_1,\,v_2\in V$, then $(Z(G_{v_1})\cup Z(G_{v_2}))\subset G_e$ generates a finite index subgroup of $G_e$.
Most of the time we will work with the action $G{\curvearrowright}T$ and ignore the graph of groups that produced it.
Examples of admissible groups:
1\. (Graph manifolds) Let $M$ be a $3$-dimensional nonpositively curved graph manifold as in Theorem \[graphmfldcase\], and let $M_i$, $i=1,\ldots k$ be the geometric Seifert components of $M$. Let ${\cal G}$ be the graph of groups which has one vertex labeled with $\pi_1(M_i)$ for each $i$, and an edge labeled by ${\mathbb Z}^2$ for each pair of totally geodesic boundary tori in the disjoint union $\cup_i M_i$ which are glued to form $M$. The edge monomorphisms come from the two different embeddings of a gluing torus into Seifert components.
2\. (Torus complexes) Let $T_0,\,T_1,\,T_2$ be flat two-dimensional tori. For $i=1,2$, we choose primitive closed geodesics $a_i\subset T_0$ and $b_i\subset T_i$ with $length(a_i)=length(b_i)$, and we glue $T_i$ to $T_0$ by identifying $a_i$ with $b_i$ isometrically. We assume that $a_1$ and $a_2$ lie in distinct free homotopy classes, and intersect at an angle ${\alpha}\in (0,\frac{\pi}{2}]$. Let ${\cal G}$ be the graph of groups associated with the decomposition $(T_0\cup T_1){\amalg}(T_0\cup T_1){\rightarrow}\cup T_i$. Note that $T_0\cup T_1$ is homeomorphic to $S^1 \times (S^1\wedge S^1)$, so $\pi_1(T_0\cup T_i)={\mathbb Z}\times F_2$ where $F_2$ is the free group on two generators.
\[basicgroup\] 1. If $e_1,\,e_2\in E$ are distinct edges incident to $v\in V$, then $Z(G_v)\simeq{\mathbb Z}$ is a finite index subgroup of $G_{e_1}\cap G_{e_2}$. In particular $G_{e_1}\cap G_{e_2}\simeq {\mathbb Z}$.
2\. If $v_1,v_2\in V$ are the endpoints of an edge $e\in E$, then $Z(G_{v_1})\cap Z(G_{v_2})=\{id\}$.
Note that $G_{e_1}\cap G_{e_2}$ has infinite index in each $G_{e_i}$, for otherwise the $G_{e_i}\simeq{\mathbb Z}^2$ would be commensurable, contradicting 3 of Lemma \[admissiblebassserre\]. Thus $G_{e_1}\cap G_{e_2}\simeq {\mathbb Z}$. Also by 3 of Lemma \[admissiblebassserre\] we have $Z(G_v)\subset
G_{e_1}\cap G_{e_2}$, so both are rank $1$ free abelian groups and 1 follows.
2 follows immediately from 4 of Lemma \[admissiblebassserre\], since the $Z(G_{v_i})$ are rank $1$ subgroups of $G_e\simeq {\mathbb Z}^2$ which generate a finite index subgroup of $G_e$.
\[vertexintersections\] If $v_1,\,v_2\in V$, then
1\. If $d(v_1,v_2)>2$ then $G_{v_1}\cap G_{v_2}=\{ id\}$.
2\. If $d(v_1,v_2)=2$ and $v\in V$ is the vertex between them, then $Z(G_v)$ is a finite index subgroup of $G_{v_1}\cap G_{v_2}$.
3\. If $d(v_1,v_2)=1$, then $G_{v_1}\cap G_{v_2}=G_e$ where $e=\ol{v_1v_2}$.
We will prove the assertions in reverse order. Part 3 is immediate since the action $G{\curvearrowright}T$ does not invert edges, see section \[basicbassserre\]. To prove 2 we let $e_i$ be the edge between $v_i$ and $v$. Clearly $G_{v_1}\cap G_{v_2}=G_{e_1}\cap G_{e_2}$, which by Lemma \[basicgroup\] contains $Z(G_v)$ as a subgroup of finite index. To prove 1, let $e_1,e,e_2\in E$ be three consecutive edges of the segment $\ol{v_1v_2}$, and let $w_1,\,w_2\in V$ be the endpoints of $e$. Then by 1 of Lemma \[basicgroup\], $Z(G_{w_i})$ ($\simeq {\mathbb Z}$) has finite index in $G_{e_i}\cap G_e$ ($\simeq {\mathbb Z}$), so we have $(G_{e_1}\cap G_e)\cap (G_e\cap G_{e_2})=\emptyset$ since otherwise $Z(G_{w_1})\cup Z(G_{w_2})$ would generate a cyclic group in $G_e$ ($\simeq {\mathbb Z}^2$) contradicting 4 of Lemma \[admissiblebassserre\]. Since $$G_{v_1}\cap G_{v_2}\subset (G_{e_1}\cap G_e)\cap (G_e\cap G_{e_2})$$ 1 follows.
\[actionproperties\] For $v\in V$, the fixed point set of $Z(G_v)$ is the closed star $\ol{Star(v)}$. For $e\in E$, the fixed point set of $G_e$ is $e$. In particular, for any $\sigma\in V\cup E$, $G_\sigma$ leaves no point in $\geo T$ fixed. Further, if $\ol{Star(v)}$ is invariant under $Z(G_\sigma)$ then $\sigma \in \ol{Star(v)}$.
Fix a vertex $v$. Since $Z(G_v)\subset G_e$ for all $e$ in the star it is clear that the closed star is in the fixed point set of $Z(G_v)$. On the other hand 1 of Lemma \[vertexintersections\] says we need only consider vertices $v_1$ such that $d(v,v_1)=2$. Let $w$ be the vertex between $v$ and $v_1$. Now 2 of Lemma \[vertexintersections\] says that $Z(G_w)$ is a finite index subgroup of $G_{v}\cap G_{v_1}$, while 2 of Lemma \[basicgroup\] says that $Z(G_v)\cap Z(G_w)=\emptyset$. Thus $Z(G_v)\cap G_{v_1}=\emptyset$ and the first statement follows.
For an edge $e=\ol{v_1v_2}$ the first part (since $G_{{v_i}}\subset G_e$) says that the fixed point set of $G_e$ is contained in $\ol{Star(v_1)}\cap\ol{Star(v_2)}=e$. So the second statement follows.
The last two statements follow from the first two.
\[properdisp\] If $v\in V$ then the centralizer of $Z(G_v)$ in $G$ is just $G_v$. If $e\in E$ the centralizer of $G_e$ in $G$ is $G_e$.
By Lemma \[actionproperties\], the fixed point set of $Z(G_v)$ in $T$ is just the closed star of $v$ in $T$. Hence any $g\in G$ which commutes with $Z(G_v)$ must take the star of $v$ to itself and hence fix $v$.
If $e\in E$ and $e=\ol{v_1v_2}$, then a finite index subgroup $G_e$ is generated by $Z(G_{v_1})\cup Z(G_{v_2})$. So the centralizer of $G_e$ in $G$ is a subgroup of the intersection of the centralizers of $Z(G_{v_1})$ and $Z(G_{v_2})$, i.e. $G_{v_1}\cap
G_{v_2}$ which is $G_e$ itself.
(Uniqueness of decomposition) \[uniquedecomp\] Let $G{\curvearrowright}T$ and $G'{\curvearrowright}T'$ be the Bass-Serre actions associated with two admissible graphs of groups, and suppose $G\stackrel{\phi}{{\rightarrow}} G'$ is an isomorphism. Then after identifying $G$ with $G'$ via $\phi$, the trees $T$ and $T'$ become $G$-equivariantly isomorphic.
We will use primes to denote the vertex and edge set of $T'$. Pick $v\in V$.
Let $g\in Z(G_v)$ be a generator. If $Fix(g,T')$ is empty, then $g$ translates a unique geodesic $\ga\subset T'$, and since $g\in Z(G_v)$ the whole vertex group $G_v$ must preserve $\ga$, and act on it by translations. The signed translation distance yields a homomorphism $G_v{\rightarrow}{\mathbb Z}$ with nontrivial kernel. But then $Ker(G_v{\rightarrow}{\mathbb Z})$ fixes $\ga$ pointwise, which contradicts 1 of Lemma \[vertexintersections\]. Consequently $Fix(g,T')$ is nonempty, and by 1 of Lemma \[vertexintersections\] this is a subcomplex of $T'$ with diameter at most $2$. So $G_v$ must fix the center of $Fix(g,T')$. It can fix nothing more, since no edge stabilizer can contain the nonabelian $G_v$. Thus we have proved the claim.
Now consider the $G$-equivariant map $f:V{\rightarrow}V'$ which assigns to each $v\in V$ the unique vertex in $T'$ fixed by $G_v$; and define a map $f':V'{\rightarrow}V$ by reversing the roles of $T$ and $T'$. For all $v\in V$, $G_v$ fixes $f'\circ f(v)$, so we must have $f'\circ f(v)=v$; similar reasoning applies to $f\circ f'$, and we see that $f$ and $f'$ are inverses. The maps $f$ and $f'$ are adjacency preserving since two vertices are adjacent iff their stabilizers intersect in a subgroup isomorphic to ${\mathbb Z}^2$. It is now straightforward to see that $f$ defines a $G$-equivariant isomorphism $T{\rightarrow}T'$.
Lemma \[uniquedecomp\] justifies use of the phrase “$G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}}T$ is the Bass-Serre tree of the admissible group $G$.”
### Vertex spaces, edge spaces, and geometric data for admissible actions {#sectionvertexandedge}
\[admissibleactiondef\] We say that $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}} X$ is an [*admissible action*]{} if $G$ is an admissible group, $X$ is a Hadamard space, and the action is discrete, cocompact, and isometric.
For the remainder of this section $G{\curvearrowright}X$ will be a fixed admissible action. In particular, all constants depend on $G{\curvearrowright}X$ (i.e. the group $G$, the Riemannian manifold $X$, and the action) in addition to other explicitly mentioned quantities. By Lemma \[uniquedecomp\] there is an essentially unique admissible graph of groups associated with $G$, and we will let $G{\curvearrowright}T$ be the corresponding Bass-Serre tree.
We refer the reader to section \[groupsonx\] for properties of Minsets that we use here. For each $v\in V$ we let $Y_v\defeq
Minset(Z(G_v))\defeq\cap_{g\in Z(G_v)}Minset(g)$ (this will be the $Minset$ of a generator), and for every $e\in E$ we let $Y_e\defeq Minset(G_e)\defeq\cap_{g\in G_e}
Minset(g)$.
$Minset(\alpha)$ is a convex subset of $X$, invariant under the centralizer of $\alpha$, which is a metric product of ${\mathbb R}$ with a Hadamard space. If $\alpha$ belongs to a group of isometries that acts cocompactly on $X$ then the centralizer of $\alpha$ acts cocompactly on $Minset(\alpha)$ (see section \[groupsonx\]). Thus $Y_v$ is the product of ${\mathbb R}$ with a Hadamard space $\bar{Y_v}$. $Z(G_v)$ acts by translation on the ${\mathbb R}$ factor and the induced action of $H_v$ on $\bar{Y_v}$ is discrete and cocompact. $Y_e$ is the product of ${\mathbb R}^2$ with a compact Hadamard space $\bar{Y_e}$, and $G_e = {\mathbb Z}^2$ acts by translations on the ${\mathbb R}^2$ factor (section \[groupsonx\]).
Note that the assignments $v\mapsto Y_v$ and $e\mapsto Y_e$ are $G$-equivariant with respect to the natural $G$ actions. The minimal displacement of a generator of $Z(G_v)$ is the same as that of a generator of $Z(G_{g(v)})=gZ(G_v)g^{-1}$. By the finiteness of $\cal{G}$ there is a number $C$ such that for all $v\in V$ the minimal displacement of a generator of $Z(G_v)$ is less than C.
\[geometricdatadef\] Let $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}}X$ be an admissible action, and let $T$ be the Bass-Serre tree for $G$. For each $v\in V$ we choose a generator $\zeta_v\in Z(G_v)$ in a $G$-equivariant way. We have an isometric splitting $Y_v\simeq \bar Y_v\times{\mathbb R}$, which is preserved by $G_v$. The choice of generator $\zeta_v$ defines an orientation of the ${\mathbb R}$ factor of $Y_v$. We have a map $MLS_v:G_v{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ which assigns to each $g\in G_v$ the minimum displacement of the induced isometry $\bar Y_v{\rightarrow}\bar Y_v$. $MLS_v$ descends to $G_v/Z(G_v)\simeq
H_v$ since $Z(G_v)$ acts trivially on $\bar Y_v$. We define a homomorphism $\tau_v:G_v{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}$ by sending $g\in G_v$ to the signed distance that $g$ translates the ${\mathbb R}$ factor of $Y_v\simeq \bar Y_v\times{\mathbb R}$. The collections of functions $MLS_v$ and $\tau_v$ constitute the [*geometric data*]{} of the action. Both $MLS_v$ and $\tau_v$ descend to functions of the vertex groups of the graph of groups ${\cal G}$ defining $G$; we will sometimes find it more convenient to think of the geometric data in this way.
We remark that it follows from the discreteness of the action $H_v{\curvearrowright}\bar Y_v$ that $g\in G_v$ then $MLS_v(g)=0$ iff $g$ projects to an element of finite order in $H_v$.
\[yslocallyfinite\] The collections $\{ Y_v\}_{v\in V}$ and $\{Y_e\}_{e\in E}$ are locally finite. More precisely, for every $R$ there is an $N$ so that if $x\in X$ then there are at most $N$ elements $\si\in V\cup E$ so that $Y_\si\cap B(x,R)\neq\emptyset$.
Suppose $v\in V$ and $p\in Y_v$. Then $p$ has displacement $<C$ under the generators of $Z(G_v)$. Therefore if $p\in B(x,R)$, then $x$ has displacement $<2R+C$ under the generators of $Z(G_v)$. But there are only finitely many $g\in G$ with $d(g\cdot x,x)<2R+C$; since $Z(G_{v_1})\cap Z(G_{v_2})=\{e\}$ when $v_1\neq v_2$, the local finiteness of $\{ Y_v\}_{v\in V}$ follows. Similar reasoning proves the local finiteness of $\{ Y_e\}_{e\in E}$. The fact that $N$ can be chosen independent of $x$ follows from the cocompactness of the $G$ action.
The lemma implies that for any $D$, the collection of $D$-tubular neighborhoods of the $Y_\cdot$’s is locally finite. We also have the following consequences:
\[finitepairs\] For every $D$ there are only finitely many pairs $(\si_1,\,\si_2)\in (V\cup E)\times (V\cup E)$ – modulo the diagonal action of $G$ – with $N_D(Y_{\si_1})\cap N_D(Y_{\si_2})\neq
\emptyset$.
By the finiteness of $[V\cup E]/G$ we need only show that for fixed $\sigma$ there are only finitely many $\sigma_2$ modulo $G_\sigma$ such that $N_D(Y_{\si})\cap N_D(Y_{\si_2})\neq
\emptyset$. This follows from Lemma \[yslocallyfinite\], since $G_\si$ acts cocompactly on $N_D(Y_\si)$ and hence for some $g\in G_\si$ $N_D(Y_{\si})\cap (N_D(Y_{g(\si_2)})$ intersects a fixed ball.
\[actscocompactly\] For $\si_1,\,\si_2\in V\cup E$, $G_{\si_1}\cap G_{\si_2}$ acts cocompactly on the intersection $N_D(Y_{\si_1})\cap N_D(Y_{\si_2})$. Thus, in particular, the diameter of $N_D(Y_{\si_1})\cap
N_D(Y_{\si_2})/[G_{\si_1}\cap G_{\si_2}]$ is uniformly bounded by a function of $D$.
This follows from the local finiteness of the family $\{Y_\si\}_{\si\in V\cup E}$ and the discreteness of the cocompact action $G{\curvearrowright}X$. Pick $D>0$ and $\si_1,\,\si_2\in V\cup E$. If $x_k\in N_D(Y_{\si_1})\cap N_D(Y_{\si_2})$, we may choose a sequence $g_k\in G_{\si_1}$ such that $g_k(x_k){\rightarrow}x_\infty$ for some $x_\infty\in N_D(Y_{\si_1})$. Then $g_k(\si_2)$ lies in a finite subset of $V\cup E$ (since $g_k(N_D(Y_{\si_2}))$ intersects some ball $B(x_\infty,R)$ for all $k$) so after passing to a subsequence if necessary we may assume that $g_k\si_2$ is constant. Then $g_1^{-1}g_k\in G_{\si_1}\cap G_{\si_2}$ and $(g_1^{-1}g_k)(x_k){\rightarrow}g_1^{-1}(x_\infty)$. Thus $G_{v_1}\cap G_{v_2}$ acts cocompactly. The second statement now follows from Lemma \[finitepairs\].
\[separatingys\] For every $D$ there is a $D'$ (depending only on D) such that if $\si\in
V\cup E$ separates $\si_1\in V\cup E$ from $\si_2\in V\cup E$, then $N_D(Y_{\si_1})\cap N_D(Y_{\si_2})\subset N_{D'}(Y_\si)$. In particular, if $T_1$ and $T_2$ are the closures of distinct connected components of $T-\si$ then $$[\cup_{\hat\si\subset T_1}N_D(Y_{\hat\si})]\cap [\cup_{\hat\si\subset T_2}N_D(Y_{\hat\si})]\subset
N_{D'}(Y_\si).$$
Pick $D>0$. Suppose $(\si_1,\si_2,\si)$ is a triple with $\si_i,\,\si\in V\cup E$, $\si$ separates $\si_1$ from $\si_2$ in $T$, and $N_D(Y_{\si_1})\cap N_D(Y_{\si_2})\neq\emptyset$. Then $G_{\si_1}\cap G_{\si_2}\subset G_\si$ and $G_{\si_1}\cap
G_{\si_2}$ acts cocompactly on $N_D(Y_{\si_1})\cap N_D(Y_{\si_2})$ by Lemma \[actscocompactly\]; hence $d(Y_\si,\cdot)$ is bounded on $N_D(Y_{\si_1})\cap N_D(Y_{\si_2})$. By Lemma \[finitepairs\] there are only finitely many such triples $(\si_1,\si_2,\si)$ modulo $G$, so the lemma follows.
\[vertexspaces\] Since $G$ acts cocompactly on $X$ we can now fix a $D$ so that $\cup_{v\in V}N_D(Y_v)
=\cup_{e\in E}N_D(Y_e)=X$. We define $X_v\defeq N_D(Y_v)$ for all $v\in V$. Let $D'$ denote the constant in the previous lemma, $D''=\max (D,D')$, and set $X_e\defeq N_{D''}(Y_e)$ for all $e\in E$. We will refer to the $X_v$’s and $X_e$’s as [*vertex spaces*]{} and [*edge spaces*]{} respectively.
We note that Lemma \[prebdyconvex\] implies that for any $\sigma\in V\cup E$ we have $\geo X_\sigma = \geo Y_\sigma$. We summarize the properties of vertex and edge spaces:
\[propsofvespaces\] There is a constant $C_1$ with the following property.
1\. $\cup_{v\in V}X_v=\cup_{e\in E}X_e=X$.
2\. If $\hat{e}\in E$ and $T_1$ and $T_2$ are the distinct connected components of $T-Int(\hat{e})$, then $[\cup_{v\in T_1}X_v]-X_{\hat{e}}$ and $[\cup_{v\in T_2}X_v]-X_{\hat{e}}$ are disjoint closed and open subsets of $X-X_{\hat{e}}$; and $\cup_{e\in T_1}X_e-N_{C_1}(X_{\hat e})$ and $\cup_{e\in T_2}X_e-N_{C_1}(X_{\hat e})$ are disjoint closed and open subsets of $X-N_{C_1}(X_{\hat e})$.
3\. If $\si_1,\,\si_2\in V\cup E$ and $X_{\si_1}\cap X_{\si_2}\neq\emptyset$ then $d_T(\si_1,\si_2)<C_1$.
1 and 2 follow from the definition of vertex/edge spaces and Lemma \[separatingys\]. By Lemma \[finitepairs\] we can choose $C_1$ so that 3 holds.
\[titscaptits\] For any $v\in V$, ${\partial_{T}}X_v$ is isometric to the metric suspension of an uncountable discrete space, and for every $e\in E$, ${\partial_{T}}X_e$ is isometric to a standard circle. Pick $v_1,\,v_2\in V$.
1\. If $d(v_1,v_2)>2$, then ${\partial_{T}}X_{v_1}\cap{\partial_{T}}X_{v_2}=\emptyset$.
2\. If $d(v_1,v_2)=2$ and $v$ is the vertex in between $v_1$ and $v_2$, then ${\partial_{T}}X_{v_1}\cap{\partial_{T}}X_{v_2}={\partial_{T}}\ga$ where $\ga\subset
Y_v$ is a geodesic of the form $\{p\}\times{\mathbb R}\subset \bar Y_v\times {\mathbb R}=Y_v$; i.e. ${\partial_{T}}X_{v_1}\cap{\partial_{T}}X_{v_2}$ is the pair of suspension points of ${\partial_{T}}X_v$.
3\. If $d(v_1,v_2)=1$, then ${\partial_{T}}X_{v_1}\cap{\partial_{T}}X_{v_2}={\partial_{T}}X_e\simeq S^1$, where $e\defeq\ol{v_1v_2}$.
Since $Y_v\simeq\bar Y_v\times{\mathbb R}$, we have ${\partial_{T}}X_v={\partial_{T}}Y_v=\Si({\partial_{T}}\bar Y_v)$, and since $\bar Y_v$ admits a discrete cocompact action by the non-elementary hyperbolic group $H_v\defeq G_v/Z(G_v)$, ${\partial_{T}}Y_v$ is a discrete set with the cardinality of ${\mathbb R}$. For all $e\in E$, $Y_e\simeq\bar Y_e\times{\mathbb R}^2$ where $\bar Y_e$ is compact, so ${\partial_{T}}X_e={\partial_{T}}Y_e\simeq{\partial_{T}}{\mathbb R}^2$, and the latter is the standard circle.
Pick $v_1,\,v_2\in V$, and choose $R$ large enough that $Z\defeq N_R(X_{v_1})\cap N_R(X_{v_2})\neq\emptyset$. Then ${\partial_{T}}X_{v_1}\cap {\partial_{T}}X_{v_2}={\partial_{T}}Z$. The lemma now follows from Lemmas \[vertexintersections\] and \[actscocompactly\].
\[findingz’s\] There is a constant $C_2$ with the following property. Suppose $v,\,v'\in V$, $e_1,\ldots,e_n\in E$ are the consecutive edges of the segment $\ol{vv'}\subset T$, $x\in X_v$ and $y\in X_{v'}$. Then for $1\leq i\leq n$ we can find points $z_i\in\ol{xy}$ such that
1\. $d(z_i,X_{e_i})<C_2$
2\. For all $1\leq i\leq j\leq n$ we have $d(z_i,x)\leq d(z_j,x)$.
3\. For every $p\in X$ we have $\#\{z_i\in B(p,1)\}<C_2$.
Pick $v,\,v'\in V$, $x\in X_v$, and $y\in X_{v'}$. Suppose $\hat e\in E$ and let $T_1$ and $T_2$ be the two connected components of $T-Int(\hat e)$. If $\ol{xy}\cap N_{C_1}(X_{\hat e})=\emptyset$ (hence in particular $\ol{xy}\cap X_{\hat e}=\emptyset$) then by the first part of 2 of Lemma \[propsofvespaces\], $\ol{xy}$ is contained in one of the two disjoint open sets $(\cup_{e\subset T_i}X_e)-N_{C_1}(X_{\hat e})$ for $i=1$ or $i=2$ . It follows that $\ol{xy}\cap N_{C_1}(X_{e_i})$ is nonempty for every $1\leq i\leq n$. Let $w_i\in \ol{xy}$ be the point in $\ol{xy}\cap N_{C_1}(X_{e_i})$ closest to $x$. Let $z_1=w_1$, and let $z_i$ be the element of $\{ w_i,\ldots,w_n\}$ closest to $x$. So we have either $z_i=w_i$, or $z_i=w_{i'}$ for some $i'>i$. In the latter case $\ol{xz_i}\subset \cup_{e\subset T'}X_e$ (hence in particular $z_i=w_{i'}
\in \cup_{e\subset T'}X_e$) where $T'\subset T$ is the component of $T-Int(e_i)$ containing $e_1$, so by Lemma \[separatingys\] we have $z_i\in N_{D'}(X_{e_i})$ where $D'$ depends only on $C_1$. If $p\in X$ and $z_i\in B(p,1)$, then $X_{e_i}\cap B(p,1+D')\neq
\emptyset$ and thus $Y_{e_i}\cap B(p,1+D'+D'')\neq
\emptyset$ so by Lemma \[yslocallyfinite\] we have $\#\{z_i\in B(p,1)\}<N$ where $N$ depends only on $D'$. Setting $C_2\defeq \max\{D',N\}$, the lemma follows.
### Itineraries {#itinsection}
Our next objective is to associate an itinerary to any ray $\ol{p\xi}\subset X$ which is not contained in a finite tubular neighborhood of a single vertex space; the itinerary of $\ol{p\xi}$ is a ray in $T$ which (roughly speaking) records the sequence of vertex spaces visited by $\ol{p\xi}$.
Let $\rho:X{\rightarrow}V\subset T$ be a $G$-equivariant coarse Lipschitz map from the Hadamard space $X$ to the vertex set of the tree $T$ with the property that for every $x\in X$ we have $x\in X_{\rho(x)}$. Such a $\rho$ may be constructed as follows. Let $\Si\subset X$ be a set theoretic cross-section for the free action $G{\curvearrowright}X$; define $\rho_0:\Si{\rightarrow}T$ so that $\si\in X_{\rho_0(\si)}$ for every $\si\in\Si$, and then extend $\rho_0$ to an equivariant map $X{\rightarrow}T$. Let $L$ be such that $N_{2D}(Y_{v_1})\cap
N_{2D}(Y_{v_2})\neq \emptyset$ implies $d(v_1,v_2)<L$, which exists by Corollary \[finitepairs\]. In particular if $d(x,y)< 2D$ then $d(\rho(x),\rho(y))\leq L$. In general, by dividing $\ol{xy}$ into less than $\frac {d(x,y)} {2D}+1$ segments of length less than $2D$ and adding the previous estimates we see that $\rho$ will be coarse Lipschitz; i.e. $d(\rho (x),\rho (y))\leq \frac L{2D}\ d(x,y)+L$.
If $\ga:[0,\infty){\rightarrow}X$ is a geodesic, then $\rho\circ\ga:[0,\infty){\rightarrow}T$ has the bounded backtracking property[^9].
Let $e\in E$ be an edge in $T$, and let $T_1,\,T_2\subset T$ be the connected components of $T-Int(e)$. Suppose $\rho\circ\ga(t_1)\in T_1$, and $\rho\circ\ga(t_2)\in T_2-N_{C_1}(e)$, where $t_2>t_1$. By Lemma \[separatingys\] we have $$[\cup_{v\in T_1}X_v]\cap [\cup_{v\in T_2}X_v]\subset
X_e.$$ Therefore there is a $t_3\in [t_1,t_2)$ such that $\ga(t_3)\in X_e$. Since $d(\rho\circ\ga(t_2),e)\geq {C_1}$, the choice of ${C_1}$ and lemma \[propsofvespaces\] implies that $\ga(t_2)\not\in X_e$. Hence the convexity of $X_e$ gives $\ga([t_2,\infty))\subset X- X_e$, which forces $\rho\circ
\ga([t_2,\infty))\subset T_2$. This property clearly implies uniformly bounded backtracking.
\[itindichotomy\] If $\ga:[0,\infty){\rightarrow}X$ is a geodesic ray, then one of the following holds:
1\. $\rho\circ\ga:[0,\infty){\rightarrow}T$ is unbounded, and $\rho\circ\ga([0,\infty))$ lies in a uniform tubular neighborhood of a unique geodesic ray, $\tau$, in $T$ starting at $\rho(\ga(0))$. The geodesic $\ga$ intersects $X_e$ for all but finitely many edges $e$ of $\tau$.
2\. $\rho\circ\ga:[0,\infty){\rightarrow}T$ is bounded, and $\ga$ eventually lies in $N_{D'}(Y_v)$ (where $D'$ comes from Definition \[vertexspaces\]) for some $v\in V$. In this case there is a subcomplex $T_\ga\subset T$ defined by the property that for each simplex $\si$ in $T$, $\si\in T_\ga$ if and only if $\ga$ is asymptotic to $X_\si$ . The possibilities for $T_\ga$ are: a single vertex $v\in V$, a single edge $e\in E$ along with its vertices, or the closed star $\ol{Star(v)}$ for some $v\in V$.
Pick $v\in V$. By the convexity of $N_{D'}(Y_v)$, either $\ga$ is eventually contained in $N_{D'}(Y_v)$, or $\ga$ is eventually contained in $X-N_{D'}(Y_v)$. In the latter case $\rho\circ\ga$ eventually remains in a unique component of $T-v$, by Lemma \[separatingys\].
If for every $v\in V$ the ray $\ga$ eventually lies in $X-N_{D'}(Y_v)$, then clearly $\rho\circ\ga$ is unbounded and hence it must lie within uniform distance of a ray in $T$ by the bounded backtracking property. So we may assume that $\ga$ is eventually contained in $N_{D'}(Y_v)$ for some $v\in V$. We note that if $e\in T_\ga$ then any vertex $v'$ of $e$ must also be in $T_\ga$ since $Y_e\subset Y_{v'}$. Also if $v,v'\in V$ and $d(v,v')> 2$ then part 1 of Lemma \[vertexintersections\] along with Lemma \[actscocompactly\] says that for any $K$, $N_KX_v\cap N_KX_{v'}$ is compact so $\ga\not\in N_KX_v\cap N_KX_{v'}$ and hence at most one of $v$ and $v'$ can be in $T_\ga$.
If there are vertices $v_1$ and $v_2$ in $T_\ga$ with $d(v_1,v_2)=2$ and $v$ is the vertex between them then part 1 of Lemma \[vertexintersections\] along with Lemma \[actscocompactly\] says that $Z(G_v)$ acts cocompactly on $N_KX_{v_1}\cap N_KX_{v_2}$ which contains $\ga$ for some $K$, and hence there is a $K'$ such that for all $t>0$ there is a $g_t\in Z(G_v)$ such that $d(\ga(t),g_t(\ga(0))<K'$ and hence $\ga$ stays a distance at most $K'+d(\ga(0),Y_v)$ from a geodesic in the ${\mathbb R}$ direction of $Y_v=\bar Y_v\times {\mathbb R}$ (since $Z(G_v)$ translates the ${\mathbb R}$ direction). Thus for every $e$ with $v$ as a vertex we have $\ga$ is asymptotic to a geodesic in $Y_e$ and hence $e\in T_\ga$. Thus $\ol{Star(v)}\subset T_\ga$. But since vertices in $T_\ga$ are at most distance 2 apart we see that $\ol{Star(v)}= T_\ga$.
The only cases left for $T_\ga$ are the two mentioned and the case of two vertices a unit distance apart. But in the final case a similar argument shows that if $e$ is the edge between them then $\ga$ stays a bounded distance from $Y_e$ and hence $e$ must also be in $T_\ga$.
\[itindef\] Let $\ga$ be a geodesic ray in $X$. If case 1 of Lemma \[itindichotomy\] applies then we will say that $\gamma$ has [*itinerary*]{} $\tau$, and otherwise we say that the itinerary of $\ga$ is the subtree $T_\ga\subset T$ described in case 2 of the lemma. In either case we denote the itinerary of $\ga$ by ${{\cal I}}(\ga)$.
One immediate consequence of the proof of Lemma \[itindichotomy\] is
\[staritin\] If ${{\cal I}}(\ga)=\ol{Star(v)}$ then $\ga$ is asymptotic to either the positive or the negative ${\mathbb R}$ direction in the decomposition $Y_v=\bar Y_v\times {\mathbb R}$.
\[asympitin\] If $\ol{p_1\xi},\,\ol{p_2\xi}\subset X$ are asymptotic geodesic rays, then either both ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p_1\xi})$ and ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p_2\xi})$ are finite subtrees, in which case they agree, or both ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p_1\xi})$ and ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p_2\xi})$ are rays, in which case $\geo{{\cal I}}(\ol{p_1\xi})=\geo{{\cal I}}(\ol{p_2\xi})$. In other words, ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p_1\xi})$ is a ray in $T$ if and only if ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p_2\xi})$ is a ray in $T$ asymptotic to ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p_1\xi})$.
$\ol{p_1\xi}$ lies in a tubular neighborhood of some $Y_v$ if and only if $\ol{p_2\xi}$ does, thus the case where ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p_1\xi})$ (or ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p_2\xi})$) is finite follows. Thus $\ol{p_1\xi}$ has itinerary a ray $\tau_1$ if and only if $\ol{p_2\xi}$ has itinerary $\tau_2$ for some ray $\tau_2\subset T$. But the sets $\rho(\ol{p_1\xi})$ and $\rho(\ol{p_2\xi})$ are at finite Hausdorff distance from one another since $\rho$ is coarse Lipschitz; hence the $\tau_i$ are asymptotic.
By the lemma we have a well-defined $G$-equivariant map from $\geo X$ to the union $$\geo T\cup (\mbox{finite subsets of $T$})$$ which assigns to each $\xi\in \geo X$ either $\geo {{\cal I}}(\ol{p\xi}), \,p\in X$ if ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p\xi})$ is a ray or ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p\xi})$ otherwise; we will also denote this map by ${{\cal I}}$. If $\eta\in\geo T$, we use $\geo^\eta X$ to denote the corresponding subset: $\geo^\eta X\defeq
{{\cal I}}^{-1}(\eta)\subset\geo X$. We will say that $\geo^\eta X$ is [*trivial*]{} if $\geo^\eta X$ is a point or [*nontrivial*]{} otherwise; (in the latter case we will see that $\geo^\eta X$ is homeomorphic to a closed interval and is in fact an interval in the Tits metric.).
In particular $\geo X=(\cup_{v\in V}\geo X_v)\cup (\cup_{\eta\in \geo T}\geo^\eta X)$, where $\cup_{v\in V}\geo X_v$ is disjoint from $\cup_{\eta\in \geo T}\geo^\eta X$.
The cone topology and Tits metric on $\geo X_v=\geo Y_v=\geo (\bar Y_v\times {\mathbb R})$ is described in sections \[basichadamard\] and \[basichyperbolic\]. We see that in the cone topology $\geo X_v$ is just the suspension $\Sigma (\geo H_v)$ and is independent of the metric on $X$. The Tits metric is just the metric suspension of the discrete metric.
We now study the dynamics of the action of $G$ on $\geo X$.
\[fixedinbdy\] 1. For every $v\in V$, the fixed point set of $Z(G_v)$ in $\geo X$ is $\geo X_v$; this set is homeomorphic to the suspension of $\geo H_v$ where $H_v$ is the nonelementary hyperbolic group $G_v/Z(G_v)$.
2\. For every $e\in E$, $Fix(G_e,\geo X)=\geo X_e$ which is homeomorphic to a circle.
Let $\xi\in \geo X$ be fixed by $Z(G_v)$ and $p\in Y_v$. If ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p\xi})$ is a ray then by Lemma \[asympitin\] $\geo {{\cal I}}(\ol{p\xi})$ is fixed by $Z(G_v)$. But this can not happen since by Lemma \[actionproperties\] $Z(G_v)$ leaves no point in $\geo T$ fixed. So ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p\xi})$ is a finite subtree which by Lemma \[asympitin\] is invariant under $Z(G_v)$. Thus by Lemma \[itindichotomy\] and Lemma \[actionproperties\] $v\in {{\cal I}}(\ol{p\xi})$. Thus $\ol{p\xi}\subset Y_v$ and hence $\xi\in \geo X_v=\geo Y_v$. On the other hand geodesics rays $\ol{p\xi}$ in $Y_v$ are translated by a fixed amount by elements $g\in G_v$, so $g(\ol{p\xi})$ is asymptotic to $\ol{p\xi}$ and so $\xi$ is fixed by $g$. The rest of part 1 follows from sections \[basichadamard\] and \[basichyperbolic\] as above.
Let $\xi$ be fixed by $G_e$ and $p\in Y_e$. Again since $G_e$ leaves no point in $\geo T$ fixed, by Lemma \[actionproperties\] ${{\cal I}}(\ol{p\xi})$ is a finite subtree that is invariant under $G_e$ and hence by Lemma \[itindichotomy\] and Lemma \[actionproperties\] must contain $e$. Hence we see $\ol{p\xi}\subset Y_e$ and $\xi \in \geo Y_e=\geo X_e$. Again, since $G_e$ acts by translations on $Y_e$, we see that if $\xi\in \geo X_e=\geo Y_e$ then it is left fixed by $G_e$. Since $Y_e={\mathbb R}^2\times \ol{Y_e}$ where $\ol{Y_e}$ is compact, $\geo Y_e=\geo {\mathbb R}^2$ is homeomorphic to a circle.
Templates and the behavior of their geodesics
---------------------------------------------
### Templates {#subsectemplates}
In this section we study “Templates”. These are piecewise Euclidean Hadamard spaces (which can be embedded in ${\mathbb R}^3$) which approximate certain subspaces of the spaces we are studying, and carry much of the information about the spaces at infinity.
A [*template*]{} is a Hadamard space ${{\cal T}}$ obtained from a disjoint collection of Euclidean planes $\{W\}_{W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}}$ (called [*walls*]{}) and directed Euclidean strips[^10] $\{{{\cal S}}\}_{{{\cal S}}\in Strip_{{\cal T}}}$ by isometric gluing[^11] subject to the following conditions:
1\. The boundary geodesics of each strip ${{\cal S}}\in Strip_{{\cal T}}$, which we will refer to as [*singular geodesics*]{}, are glued isometrically to distinct walls in $Wall_{{\cal T}}$.
2\. Each wall $W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ is glued to at most two strips, and the gluing lines are not parallel.
3\. ${{\cal T}}$ is connected.
One can think of ${{\cal T}}$ as sitting in ${\mathbb R}^3$ so that its walls are parallel planes and the strips meet the walls orthogonally. Two walls $W_1,\,W_2\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ are [*adjacent*]{} if there is a strip ${{\cal S}}\in Strip_{{\cal T}}$ with $S\cap W_i\neq\emptyset$. The incidence graph $Graph({{\cal T}})$ of ${{\cal T}}$ – the graph with vertex set $Wall_{{\cal T}}$ and one edge for each pair of incident walls – is a graph isomorphic to a connected subcomplex of ${\mathbb R}$ with the usual triangulation (where the vertices are the integers). A wall is an [*interior wall*]{} if it is incident to two strips, and a strip is an [*interior strip*]{} if it is incident to two interior walls; $Wall^o_{{\cal T}}$ and $Strip^o_{{\cal T}}$ denote the interior walls and strips respectively. For every interior wall $W\in Wall^o_{{\cal T}}$ we have a distinguished point $o_W\defeq W\cap {{\cal S}}_1\cap {{\cal S}}_2$, where ${{\cal S}}_i\in Strip_{{\cal T}}$, $i=1,\,2$, are the strips incident to $W$. Let $Strip^+_{{\cal T}}$ be the collection of oriented interior strips; an orientation of a strip ${{\cal S}}\in Strip_{{\cal T}}$ combines with the direction of ${{\cal S}}$ to give an orientation of the interval factor of ${{\cal S}}\simeq {\mathbb R}\times I$, and also an ordering of the two incident walls. We can define a function $\eps:Strip^+_{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}$ as follows: if $W_-,\,W_+$ are incident to ${{\cal S}}^+\in Strip^+_{{\cal T}}$ and $W_-<W_+$ with respect to the ordering defined by $S^+$, then $\eps({{\cal S}}^+)\in{\mathbb R}$ is defined to be the signed distance that $o_{W_+}$ lies “above” $o_{W_-}$ in the strip ${{\cal S}}^+$. We also have a strip width function $l:Strip_{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}(0,\infty)$ and an angle function ${\alpha}:Wall^o_{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}(0,\pi)$ which give the angle between the oriented lines $W\cap {{\cal S}}_i$ where ${{\cal S}}_1,\,{{\cal S}}_2$ are incident to $W$.
We will sometimes enumerate the consecutive walls and strips of ${{\cal T}}$ so that $Wall_{{\cal T}}=\{W_i\}_{a<i<b}$ and $Strip_{{\cal T}}=\{{{\cal S}}_i\}_{a<i<b-1}$ where $a\in\{-\infty,0\}$ and $b\in{\mathbb N}\cup\{\infty\}$. We then define $L_i^-\defeq
W_i\cap{{\cal S}}_{i-1}$ for $a+1<i<b$ and $L_i^+\defeq W_i\cap{{\cal S}}_i$ for $a<i<b-1$.
An [*equivalence*]{} between two templates ${{\cal T}}_1$ and ${{\cal T}}_2$ is an isometry $\psi:{{\cal T}}_1{\rightarrow}{{\cal T}}_2$ which respects strip directions. Two templates are equivalent if and only if there is an incidence preserving bijection $Wall_{{{\cal T}}_1}\cup
Strip_{{{\cal T}}_1}{\rightarrow}Wall_{{{\cal T}}_2}\cup Strip_{{{\cal T}}_2}$ which respects the functions $l,\eps$, and ${\alpha}$. We will call a template [*uniform*]{} if there is a $\frac \pi 2 \geq \beta>0$ so that the angle function ${\alpha}:Wall^o_{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}(0,\pi)$ satisfies $\pi-\beta\geq \alpha\geq \beta$, and if the strip widths are bounded away from zero. We are mostly interested in uniform templates. A template ${{\cal T}}$ is [*full*]{} if $Graph({{\cal T}})\simeq{\mathbb R}$, [*half*]{} if $Graph({{\cal T}})\simeq {\mathbb R}_+$, and [*finite*]{} if $|Wall_{{\cal T}}|<\infty$.
If $W\in Wall^o_{{\cal T}}$ and ${{\cal S}}_1,\,{{\cal S}}_2$ are the incident strips, then the oriented lines $W\cap {{\cal S}}_1$ and $W\cap {{\cal S}}_2$ divide the plane $W$ into four sectors which we call [*Quarter Planes*]{} and which we label as $Q_I$, $Q_{II}$, $Q_{III}$, and $Q_{IV}$ as usual. If we are given a choice $Q_W$ of quarter planes in $W$ for each $W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ then there is an isometric immersion ${\cal
D}:[\cup_{W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}}Q_W]\cup[\cup_{{{\cal S}}\in Strip_{{\cal T}}}{{\cal S}}]{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}^2$ (the development) which takes any geodesic ray $\ga\subset {{\cal T}}$ such that $\ga\cap W\subset Q_W$, to a Euclidean ray (see Figure \[scale\] in section \[selfsimsec\] for an example of the developement of a special kind of template).
When ${{\cal T}}$ is a half template we will be primarily interested in geodesic rays $\gamma\subset{{\cal T}}$ that start at a given base point and intersect all but finitely many walls of ${{\cal T}}$. From the separation properties of walls it is clear that such a ray intersects the walls $W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ in order. We let $\geo^\infty {{\cal T}}$ (resp. ${\partial_{T}}^\infty {{\cal T}}$) denote the corresponding subset of $\geo{{\cal T}}$ (resp. ${\partial_{T}}{{\cal T}}$). In section \[pointorinterval\] we will show that ${\partial_{T}}^\infty
{{\cal T}}$ is isometric to either a point, in which case ${{\cal T}}$ is called trivial, or an interval of length $<\pi$.
One can show directly that any two half templates such that corresponding angles agree, and both corresponding strip widths and displacements differ by a bounded amount will have $\geo^\infty$’s with the same Tits length. We will only need a weaker version (that will follow from Theorem \[shadthm\]) in this paper so we will not digress to prove it here.
### Templates associated with itineraries in $T$ {#templatesection}
We now return to the setting of our paper: $G$ is an admissible group with a discrete cocompact isometric action on a Hadamard space $X$. We now want to associate a template with each geodesic segment/ray in $T$; these templates capture the asymptotic geometry of geodesic segments/rays in $X$ which pass near the corresponding edge spaces.
We first choose, in a $G$-equivariant way, a plane $F_e\subset Y_e$ for each edge $e\in E$. Then for every pair of adjacent edges $e_1,e_2$ we choose, again equivariantly, a minimal geodesic from $F_{e_1}$ to $F_{e_2}$; by the convexity of $Y_v=\bar Y_v\times {\mathbb R}$, $v\defeq e_1\cap e_2$, this geodesic determines a Euclidean strip[^12] ${{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}\defeq \gamma_{e_1,e_2}
\times {\mathbb R}$ for some geodesic segment $\gamma_{e_1,e_2} \subset \bar Y_v$; note that ${{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}\cap F_{e_i}$ is an axis of $Z(G_v)$. Hence if $e,\,e_1,\,e_2\in E$, $e_i\cap e=v_i\in V$ are distinct vertices, then the angle between the geodesics ${{\cal S}}_{e_1,e}\cap F_{e}$ and ${{\cal S}}_{e_2,e}\cap F_e$ is bounded away from zero (since only finitely many angles show up). We also note that Definition \[vertexspaces\] tells us that $d_H(F_e,X_e)$ is bounded by $D''+Diam(\bar Y_e)$ which, since there are only finitely many $e$ up to the action of $G$, is uniformly bounded.
The significance of the strips ${{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}$ can be seen in the next two lemmas.
\[wallstripwallqconvex\] There is a constant $C_3$ so that if $e_1=\ol{vv_1}$ and $e_2=\ol{vv_2}$ are adjacent edges, then $X_{e_1}\cup{{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}\cup X_{e_2}$ and $X_{v_1}\cup{{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}\cup X_{v_2}$ are $C_3$-quasi-convex.
Since the Hausdorff distance $d_H(X_{\hat e},F_{\hat e})$ is uniformly bounded for $\hat e\in E$, it suffices to show that there is a constant $C$ so that the unions $F_{e_1}\cup{{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}\cup F_{e_2}$ are $C$-quasi-convex for all pairs of adjacent edges. But if $e_1,\,e_2\in E$ are adjacent then $F_{e_1}\cup{{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}\cup F_{e_2}
\subset Y_v\simeq \bar Y_v\times{\mathbb R}$, and we are reduced to showing that $\bar F_{e_1}\cup \ga_{e_1,e_2}\cup \bar F_{e_2}\subset\bar Y_v$ is uniformly quasi-convex, where $\bar F_{e_i}$ is the image of $F_{e_i}$ under the projection $Y_v\simeq \bar Y_v\times{\mathbb R}{\rightarrow}\bar Y_v$. This follows from Lemma \[geodesicunion\]. This gives the first statement.
The interesting part of the second statement is when we consider $\ol{xy}$ when $x\in X_{v_1}$ and $y\in X_{v_2}$. In this case Lemma \[findingz’s\] gives us $z_1\in N_{C_2}X_{e_1}$ and $z_2\in N_{C_2}X_{e_2}$ on $\ol{xy}$. Now the first statement along with the convexity of $N_{C_2+D''}(X_{v_i})$ (note $z_i\in N_{C_2}X_{e_i}\subset N_{C_2+D''}X_{v_i}$) yields the second statement.
\[templateqconvexity\] There is a constant $C_4$ so that if $e_1,\ldots,e_n\in E$ is a geodesic edge path in $T$ with initial vertex $v_1$ and terminal vertex $v_n$, then $$Z\defeq X_{e_1}\cup {{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}\cup X_{e_2}\cup\ldots
\cup X_{e_{n-1}}\cup {{\cal S}}_{e_{n-1},e_n}\cup X_{e_n}$$ and $$Z'\defeq X_{v_1}\cup {{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}\cup X_{e_2}\cup\ldots
\cup X_{e_{n-1}}\cup {{\cal S}}_{e_{n-1},e_n}\cup X_{v_n}$$ are $C_4$-quasi-convex.
Pick $x,\,y\in Z$. We may assume without loss of generality that $x\in X_{e_1}\cup{{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}\cup X_{e_2}\subset X_v$ where $v=e_1\cap e_2$, and $y\in X_{e_{n-1}}\cup{{\cal S}}_{e_{n-1},e_n}\cup X_{e_n}
\subset X_{v'}$ where $v'=e_{n-1}\cap e_n$. Applying Lemma \[findingz’s\] we get points $z_i\in\ol{xy}\,\cap N_{C_2}(X_{e_i})$ for $2\leq i\leq n-1$, with $d(z_i,x)\leq d(z_j,x)$ when $i\leq j$. If $C_4\defeq C_2+C_3$, then by Lemma \[wallstripwallqconvex\] we have $\ol{xz_2}\subset
N_{C_4}(X_{e_1}\cup{{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}\cup X_{e_2})$, $\ol{z_iz_{i+1}}\subset N_{C_4}(X_{e_i}\cup{{\cal S}}_{e_i,e_{i+1}}\cup
X_{e_{i+1}})$ for $i=2,\ldots n-1$, and $\ol{z_{n-1}y}\subset
N_{C_4}(X_{e_{n-1}}\cup{{\cal S}}_{e_{n-1},e_n}\cup X_{e_n})$.
We omit the proof that $Z'$ is quasi-convex, as it is similar.
Lemma \[templateqconvexity\] suggests that we will understand the geodesic geometry of $X$ if the geometry of the sets $Z$ (as in the lemma) can be easily modeled. To this end, we “approximate” $Z$ with a template.
\[ktemplate\] Suppose $\ga\subset T$ is a geodesic segment or ray. Let ${{\cal T}}$ be a template with walls $\{W\}_{W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}}$ and strips $\{{{\cal S}}\}_{{{\cal S}}\in Strip_{{\cal T}}}$, let $f:Wall_{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}E$ be an adjacency preserving bijection between the walls of ${{\cal T}}$ and the edges of $\ga$, and let $\phi:{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}X$ be a (not necessarily continuous) map. Then the triple $({{\cal T}}, f,\phi)$ is a [*$K$-template*]{} for $\ga$ if for all $W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ we have $\phi(W)\subset N_K(X_{f(W)})$ and $X_{f(W)}\subset N_K(\phi(W))$ and the following conditions are met for every ${{\cal S}}\in Strip_{{\cal T}}$.
1\. $Width({{\cal S}})\geq 1$.
2\. If ${{\cal S}}$ is incident to $W_1,\,W_2\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ and $x,\,y\in W_1\cup{{\cal S}}\cup W_2$ then we have $|d_X(\phi(x),\phi(y))-d_{{\cal T}}(x,y)|<K$ and if $\ga_1:[0,1]{\rightarrow}\ol{xy}$ and $\ga_2:[0,1]{\rightarrow}\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)}$ are constant speed parameterizations, then $d(\phi\circ\ga_1(t),\ga_2(t))<K$ for all $t\in [0,1]$.
3\. If $W_1,\,W_2\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ are adjacent to ${{\cal S}}$ then the Hausdorff distance $d_H((X_{f(W_1)}\cup{{\cal S}}_{f(W_1),f(W_2)}\cup
X_{f(W_2)}),\phi(W_1\cup{{\cal S}}\cup W_2))<K$.
Often when the value of $K$ is not relevant we will refer to the triple $({{\cal T}}, f,\phi)$ as a template for $\ga$, by which we mean a $K$-template for some $K$.
Let ${{\cal T}}'$ be another template such that the angles on corresponding walls agree with those of ${{\cal T}}$ and such that the other data (strip widths and displacements) differ from ${{\cal T}}$ by a bounded amount. Then there is a natural (discontinuous) map $F:{{\cal T}}'\to {{\cal T}}$ which is an isometry on each wall and simply stretches the width of the strips. It is easy to check that using $\phi'=\phi\circ F$ that we get a $K'$ template $({{\cal T}}',f,\phi')$ for $\ga$ (see step 3 of the proof of Lemma \[itinscaleinvariant\]).
For a suitably large $K$ we describe a construction that gives a $K$-template for any geodesic segment or geodesic ray $\ga\subset{{\cal T}}$. We will refer to these $K$-templates as [*standard $K$-templates*]{}. We begin with a disjoint collection of walls $W_e$ and an isometry $\phi_e: W_e{\rightarrow}F_e$ for each edge $e\subset\ga$. For every pair $e,\,e'$ of adjacent edges of $\ga$, we let $\hat{{\cal S}}_{e,e'}$ be a strip which is isometric to ${{\cal S}}_{e,e'}\subset X$ if $Width({{\cal S}}_{e,e'})\geq 1$, and isometric to ${\mathbb R}\times[0,1]$ otherwise; we let $\phi_{e,e'}:\hat{{\cal S}}_{e,e'}{\rightarrow}{{\cal S}}_{e,e'}$ be an affine map which respects product structure ($\phi_{e,e'}$ is an isometry if $Width({{\cal S}}_{e,e'})\geq 1$ and compresses the interval otherwise). We construct ${{\cal T}}$ by gluing the strips and walls so that the maps $\phi_e$ and $\phi_{e,e'}$ descend to continuous maps on the quotient.
The above construction yields
\[kbetaexist\] There is a constant $K=K(X)$ such that for every geodesic segment or ray, $\ga\subset T$, there is a $K$-template for $\ga$.
There is a $\beta=\beta(X)>0$ such that for any $K$-template the angle function ${\alpha}:Wall^o_{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}(0,\pi)$ satisfies $0<\beta\leq{\alpha}\leq\pi-\beta<\pi$.
We check that each condition of Definition \[ktemplate\] holds for the standard template described above, for sufficiently large $K$.
First, since ${d_{\cal H}}(F_e,X_e)$ is uniformly bounded and $F_{f(W)}=\phi(W)$ for every $W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$, we have $\phi(W)\subset N_K(X_{f(W)})$ and $X_{f(W)}\subset N_K(\phi(W))$ for all $W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ for large enough $K$.
Conditions 1 and 3 follow immediately from the description of standard templates.
We now verify condition 2. Pick adjacent walls $W,W'\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ and set $e\defeq f(W)$, $e'\defeq
f(W')$, and $v\defeq e\cap e'$. Recall that $F_e\cup{{\cal S}}_{e,e'}\cup F_{e'}\subset Y_v$ and $Y_v$ splits isometrically as $Y_v=\bar Y_v\times {\mathbb R}$ where $\bar Y_v$ is Gromov hyperbolic. Furthermore, $\phi$ induces a map $W_e\cup\hat{{\cal S}}_{e,e'}\cup W_{e'}
{\rightarrow}F_e\cup {{\cal S}}_{e,e'}\cup F_{e'}$ which is compatible with the product structure. Hence condition 2 follows from part 3 of Lemma \[geodesicunion\] (and triangle inequalities) when $d(F_e,F_{e'})\geq 4\de$ (where $\de$ is the maximum of the hyperbolicity constants of the $\bar Y_v$’s); modulo $G$ there are only finitely many cases when $d(F_e,F_{e'})<4\de$ (Lemma \[finitepairs\]), and each of these is also settled by part 3 of Lemma \[geodesicunion\].
For any $K$ template $({{\cal T}}, f,\phi)$ for a $\ga$ containing an interior edge $e=\ol{v'v}$ we claim that the wall $W$ with $f(W)=e$ will have the same angle, up to taking supplements (i.e. $\alpha$ might be replaced by $\pi-\alpha$), as the angle $\alpha$ between the ${\mathbb R}$ factors of $Y_{v'}=\bar Y_{v'}\times {\mathbb R}$ and $Y_{v}=\bar Y_{v}\times {\mathbb R}$ in $Y_e = Y_v\cap Y_{v'}$. The fact that these angles are positive and the finiteness of edges modulo $G$ will yield the result. We note that $\alpha$ is the Tits angle between the ${\mathbb R}$ factors.
To see this we first note that Property 2 of Definition \[ktemplate\] says that the angle for $W$, i.e. the angle between the gluing lines $L'$ and $L$, is the same as the comparison angle $\lim_{t\to\infty}\tilde \angle_{\phi(o)}\phi(L'(t)),\phi(L(t))$. Also Property 2 of Definition \[ktemplate\] says that there are geodesic rays $\sigma=\lim_{i\to \infty} \ol{p\phi(L(t_i))}$ where $t_i\to \infty$ and $p\in Y_e$. Since $\phi(W)\subset N_KX_e$ we see that $\phi(L)\subset N_KX_e$ and hence $e\in {{\cal I}}(\sigma)$. Now if we let $e'$ be the other edge incident to $v$ in $\ga$ then the intersection of the wall $f^{-1}(e')$ with the strip between $W$ and $f^{-1}(e')$, is a line parallel to L and hence, again by 2 of Definition \[ktemplate\], $\phi(L)$ stays in a uniform neighborhood of $X_{e'}$ so $e'\in {{\cal I}}(\sigma)$. but $e,e'\in {{\cal I}}(\sigma)$ implies by Lemma \[itindichotomy\] that ${{\cal I}}(\sigma)=\ol{Star(v)}$ and hence by Corollary \[staritin\] any such $\sigma$ is asymptotic to the ${\mathbb R}$ factor of $Y_{v}=\bar Y_{v}\times {\mathbb R}$. Since $p\in Y_e\subset Y_v$, $\sigma$ is a half line of such an ${\mathbb R}$ and we assume without loss of generality that it points in the positive direction. A similar argument works for $\phi(L')$. Thus $\angle(L',L)= \lim_{t\to\infty}\tilde \angle_{\phi(o)}\phi(L'(t)),\phi(L(t))\leq \alpha$. Also the same arguments applied to $-L'$ and $L$ yield $\angle(-L',L)=\leq \pi-\alpha$. Thus we get equality and the result.
The next proposition and Proposition \[templatetoambientpath\] are technical results that compare template geometry with ambient geometry.
\[ambienttotemplatepath\] Suppose $K>0$. There is a constant $C_5$ depending only on $K$ and the geometry of $X$ with the following property. Suppose $\ga\subset T$ is a geodesic segment or geodesic ray in $T$ with $i^{th}$ edge $e_i$, and set $Z\defeq[\cup_{e\subset\ga}X_{e}]\cup
[\cup_{e,e'\subset\ga}{{\cal S}}_{e,e'}]$. If $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ is a $K$-template for $\ga$, and $x,\,y\in Z$, then there is a continuous map ${\alpha}:\ol{xy}{\rightarrow}{{\cal T}}$ so that
1\. $d(\phi\circ{\alpha},id{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\ol{xy}})<C_5$
2\. For all $p,\,q\in \ol{xy}$ we have $$\label{phidistortion}
d_X(p,q)-kC_5\leq d_{{\cal T}}({\alpha}(p),{\alpha}(q))\leq length({\alpha}{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\ol{pq}})
\leq d_X(p,q)+kC_5$$ where the segment $\ol{{\alpha}(p){\alpha}(q)}\subset {{\cal T}}$ intersects at most $k-1$ strips and walls in ${{\cal T}}$. In particular there are constants $(L,A)$ depending only on $K$ and $X$ so that $\phi$ is an $(L,A)$ quasi-isometric embedding for every $K$-template $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$.
By the standard properties of Hadamard spaces we may reduce to the case that $x\in Y_{e_x}\cup {{\cal S}}_{e_x,e_x'} \subset X_{v_x}$ ($v_x=e_x\cap e_x'$) and $y\in {{\cal S}}_{e_y,e_y'}\cup Y_{e_y'}\subset X_{v_y}$ since the original $x$ and $y$ are within a bounded distance of such. Let $W_i\defeq f^{-1}(e_i)\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ for $e_i$ $1\leq i\leq n$ the edges between $v_x$ and $v_y$. We may apply Lemma \[findingz’s\] to the pair $x,\,y$ obtaining points $z_i\in\ol{xy}$. We let $z_0=x$ and $z_{n+1} =y$. After making a small perturbation of the $z_i$’s if necessary, we may assume that they satisfy $d_X(z_i,x)<d(z_j,x)$ when $i<j$. For $1\leq i\leq n$ pick $w_i\in{{\cal T}}$ with $w_i\in W_i\subset{{\cal T}}$ with $d(z_i,\phi(w_i))\leq 1+\inf\{d(z_i,\phi(w))\mid w\in W_i\}\leq C_2+1$. By Definition \[ktemplate\] part 3 we can also choose $w_0\in W_0\cup {{\cal S}}\cup W_1$ and such that $d_X(x,\phi(w_0))\leq K$ and similarly choose $w_{n+1}$. Now define ${\alpha}$ by the condition that ${\alpha}(z_i)=w_i$, and ${\alpha}$ is a constant speed geodesic on the segment $\ol{z_iz_{i+1}}$.
[*Proof of 1.*]{} Apply Definition \[ktemplate\] to see that the constant speed parameterization $[0,1]{\rightarrow}\ol{\phi(w_i)\phi(w_{i+1})}$ is at uniformly bounded distance from the composition of the constant speed parameterization $[0,1]{\rightarrow}\ol{w_iw_{i+1}}\subset{{\cal T}}$ with $\phi:{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}X$. Since $d(\phi(w_i),z_i)$ is uniformly bounded, we know that the constant speed parameterizations $[0,1]{\rightarrow}\ol{\phi(w_i)\phi(w_{i+1})}$ and $[0,1]{\rightarrow}\ol{z_iz_{i+1}}$ are also at uniformly bounded distance from one another, so there is a constant $c_1$ depending on $K$ so that $d(\phi\circ{\alpha},id{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\ol{xy}})<c_1$.
[*Proof of 2.*]{} Assume $p\in \ol{z_{j-1}z_j}-z_{j-1}$ and $q\in\ol{z_{j'}z_{j'+1}}-z_{j'+1}$ for $j\leq j'$. By Definition \[ktemplate\] we have, for $c_2=2c_1+K$ $$|length({\alpha}{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\ol{pz_j}})-d_X(p,z_j)|<c_2$$ $$|length({\alpha}{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\ol{z_iz_{i+1}}})-d_X(z_i,z_{i+1})|<\mbox{$c_2$ for every $i=1,\ldots n-1$}$$ $$|length({\alpha}{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\ol{z_{j'}q}})-d_X(z_{j'},q)|<c_2.$$ Hence there is a $c_3=c_3(K)$ so that $$length({\alpha}_{\ol{pq}})=length({\alpha}{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\ol{pz_j}})+\ldots
+length({\alpha}{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\ol{z_{j'}q}})$$ $$\leq d_X(p,z_j)+\ldots +d_X(z_{j'},q)+(j'-j+2)c_2$$ $$\leq d_X(p,q)+kc_2.$$ To prove the remaining inequality of (\[phidistortion\]) we break up the ${{\cal T}}$-geodesic $\ol{{\alpha}(p){\alpha}(q)}$ into at most $k$ subsegments $\ol{u_iu_{i+1}}$ so that each subsegment lies in $W_i\cup{{\cal S}}_i\cup W_{i+1}$ for some $i$. Then by definition \[ktemplate\] we have $|d_X(\phi(u_i),\phi(u_{i+1}))-d_{{\cal T}}(u_i,u_{i+1})|<K$ so $$d_X(p,q)\leq 2c_1+d_X(\phi\circ{\alpha}(p),\phi\circ{\alpha}(q))$$ $$\leq 2c_1+\sum d_X(\phi(u_i),\phi(u_{i+1}))$$ $$\leq 2c_1+kc_2+d_{{\cal T}}({\alpha}(p),{\alpha}(q))$$ $$\leq d_{{\cal T}}({\alpha}(p),{\alpha}(q))+kc_3.$$
where $c_3\defeq 2c_1+c_2$.
To see the quasi-isometry property of $\phi$, let $x',y'\in {{\cal T}}$, $x=\phi(x')$, $y=\phi(y')$, and let $\alpha$ be the map defined above where we choose $w_0=x$ and $w_1=y$ (i.e $\alpha(x)=x'$ and $\alpha(y)=y'$). Now \[phidistortion\] applied to $p=x$ and $q=y$ along with $k\leq d_{{{\cal T}}}(x',y')+1$ (since strips have width at least 1) and $k\leq const_1 d_X(p,q)+const_2$ (as in the proof of the coarse lipschitz property of $\rho$ - see section \[itinsection\]) yields the quasi-isometry property of $\phi$. This completes the proof of Proposition \[ambienttotemplatepath\].
\[templatetoambientpath\] Pick $K>0$. There is a constant $C_6=C_6(K,X)$ so that the following holds. If $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ is a $K$-template for $\ga\subset T$, and $x,\,y\in{{\cal T}}$, then there is a continuous map ${\alpha}:\ol{xy}{\rightarrow}X$ where
1\. $d({\alpha},\phi{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\ol{xy}})<C_6$.
2\. For all $p,\,q\in\ol{xy}$ we have
$$d_{{\cal T}}(p,q)-kC_6\leq d_X({\alpha}(p),{\alpha}(q))\leq length({\alpha}{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\ol{pq}})
\leq d_{{\cal T}}(p,q)+kC_6$$
where the segment $\ol{pq}\subset{{\cal T}}$ intersects at most $(k-1)$ strips and walls in ${{\cal T}}$.
This is similar to the proof of Proposition \[ambienttotemplatepath\], so we omit it.
\[phidistortion2\] If $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ is a $K$-template and $C_6=C_6(K)$ is the constant from Proposition \[templatetoambientpath\], then for any $x,\,y\in{{\cal T}}$ we have $$d_{{\cal T}}(x,y)-kC_6\leq d_X(\phi(x),\phi(y))\leq d_{{\cal T}}(x,y)+kC_6$$ where $\ol{xy}\subset{{\cal T}}$ meets at most $k-1$ strips and walls.
Shadowing {#shadowingsection}
---------
In this section we show that geodesic segments in a $K$-template are sublinearly shadowed by ambient geodesic segments, and vice-versa.
\[shadthm\] There is a function $\th:{\mathbb R}_+{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ depending on $K$ and the geometry of $X$ (sometimes denoted $\theta_{(X,K)}$) with $\lim_{R{\rightarrow}\infty}\th(R)=0$ so that if $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ is a $K$-template for a geodesic segment/ray $\ga\subset T$, then the following hold.
1\. If $x,\,y\in {{\cal T}}$, $z\in\ol{xy}$ and $R\defeq d(z,x)$, then $d(\phi(z),\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)})\leq
(1+R)\th(R)$.
2\. If $x,\,y\in {{\cal T}}$, $z\in\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)}$ and $R\defeq d(z,\phi(x))$ then $d(z,\phi(\ol{xy}))\leq (1+R)\th(R)$.
3\. Let $\bar{{\cal T}}\defeq {{\cal T}}\cup\geo {{\cal T}}$ and $\bar X\defeq X\cup\geo X$ be the usual compactifications. Then there is a unique topological embedding $\geo\phi:\geo{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}\geo X$ so that $$\bar\phi\defeq \phi\cup\geo\phi:\bar{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}\bar X$$ is continuous at every $\xi\in\geo{{\cal T}}\subset\bar{{\cal T}}$.
4\. The image of $\geo\phi$ is $$[\cup_{W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}}(\geo X_{f(W)})]\cup[\geo^{\geo\ga}X],$$ and when $\ga$ is a ray with $\geo\ga=\eta$ then $\geo\phi(\geo^\infty{{\cal T}})=\geo^\eta X$ (see section \[itinsection\] for the definition of $\geo^\eta X$).
5\. $\geo\phi{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}}:\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}\geo^\eta X$ is an isometric embedding with respect to the Tits metric.
The proof of the theorem breaks up into two pieces. We first show in Proposition \[wallcluster\] that a geodesic segment (in a template or in $X$) running through a sequence of consecutive walls has to be “close” to any point $p$ which lies close to sufficiently many walls in the sequence. We then show in Theorem \[almostsqrtthm\] that a segment in a template (resp. in $X$) which doesn’t meet too many walls (i.e. encounters at most $Const\,\log R$ walls in the segment $\ol{px}$, $d(p,x)=R$) is well shadowed by a geodesic segment in $X$ (resp. in the template). These two arguments are combined in section \[actualshadowing\] to prove Theorem \[shadthm\].
### Paths in a template which are close to a cluster of walls
We begin with a result about templates. It estimates the excess length of a path $\eta$ which connects two walls $W,\,W'$ while remaining outside a ball which intersects $W,\,W'$, and all walls between them.
\[clusterprop\] Let ${{\cal T}}$ be a template with angle function ${\alpha}:Wall^o_{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}(0,\pi)$ satisfying $0<\beta\leq{\alpha}\leq\pi-\beta<\pi$. Then there are positive constants $N_1=N_1(\beta),$ ($N_1\approx \frac{Const}{\beta}$), $C_1=C_1(\beta)$, and $C_2=C_2(\beta)$ with the following property. Let $W_{n_0},\ldots,W_{n_1}\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ be a sequence of consecutive walls, and suppose $W_i\cap B(p,R)\neq\emptyset$ for some $p\in{{\cal T}}$, $R>0$ and every $n_0\leq i\leq n_1$. Then for any $R'\geq N_1R$ and any path $c:[0,1]{\rightarrow}{{\cal T}}-B(p,R')$ with $c(0)\in W_{n_0}$ and $c(1)\in W_{n_1}$ we have $$length(c)\geq d_{{\cal T}}(c(0),c(1))+C_1(n_1-n_0-C_2)R'.$$
Let ${{\cal S}}_i$ be the strip incident to $W_i$ and $W_{i+1}$ for $i=n_0,\ldots,n_1-1$, set $L_i^-\defeq {{\cal S}}_{i-1}\cap W_i$ for $i=n_0+1,\ldots n_1$, and set $L_i^+\defeq{{\cal S}}_i\cap W_i$ for $i=n_0,\ldots,n_1-1$.
We prove the proposition with the help of some lemmas.
\[3walls\] There is a constant $c_1\approx\frac{Const}{\beta}$ so that if $p\in{{\cal T}}$ and $d(p,W_j)<R$ for $j=i\pm 1$ then $d(p,o_i)<c_1R$.
By joining $\ol{x_{i-1}p}$ to $\ol{px_{i+1}}$ for appropriate choices of $x_{i-1}\in W_{i-1}$ and $x_{i+1}\in W_{i+1}$ we get a path $\ga:[0,1]{\rightarrow}{{\cal T}}$ of length at most $2R$ joining $W_{i-1}$ to $W_{i+1}$. Therefore there is a segment $[a,b]\subset[0,1]$ with $\ga(a)\in L_i^-$ and $\ga(b)\in L_i^+$. So $$d(p,o_i)\leq R+\min(d(\ga(a),o_i),d(\ga(b),o_i))$$ $$\leq R+\frac{d(\ga(a),\ga(b))}{2\sin(\frac{\beta}{2})}\leq c_1R.$$
We now define $N_1\defeq\max (2c_1,[\frac{\pi}{\beta}]+2)$.
Consider a path $\eta:[0,1]{\rightarrow}{{\cal T}}-B(p,R')$ where $R'>N_1R$. The ball $B(p,R')\subset {{\cal T}}$ is convex, so clearly ${{\cal T}}-B(p,R')$ is complete and locally compact with respect to the induced path metric. Therefore we may assume that $c$ is a constant speed minimizing path from $c(0)$ to $c(1)$ in ${{\cal T}}-B(p,R')$. Since $\ol{B(p,R')}$ is a convex subset of the Hadamard space ${{\cal T}}$, the nearest point projection ${{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}\ol{B(p,R')}$ is distance non increasing; it follows that the set $c^{-1}(\ol{B(p,R')})$ is either empty or a closed subinterval $[a,b]\subset [0,1]$. $c{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{[0,a]}$ and $c{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{[b,1]}$ are constant speed geodesic segments in the Hadamard space ${{\cal T}}$, and since $R'>c_1R$ these segments lie in ${{\cal T}}-\{o_i\}_{n_0<i<n_1}$ by Lemma \[3walls\].
$$c([0,a])\subset \left [\cup_{i=n_0}^{n_0+N_1}W_i\right ]\cup
\left [\cup_{i=n_0}^{n_0+N_1-1}{{\cal S}}_i\right ]$$ and $$c([b,1])\subset \left [\cup_{i=n_1-N_1}^{n_1}W_i\right ]\cup
\left [\cup_{i=n_1-N_1}^{n_1-1}{{\cal S}}_i\right ].$$
We prove the first assertion; the proof of the second is similar. If the lemma were false, we would have $c(t)\in {{\cal S}}_{n_0+N_1}$ for some $t\in[0,a]$. Therefore $c([0,t])$ must cross every strip ${{\cal S}}_i$ for $n_0\leq i<n_0+N_1$, and for every $n_0<i\leq n_0+N_1$ it must enter $W_i$ through $L_i^-$ and exit through $L_i^+$. Since $c([0,a])$ is disjoint from $\{o_i\}_{n_0<i<n_1}$ there is a flat convex strip $Y\subset{{\cal T}}$ containing $c([0,a])$ in its interior. Using $Y$ we can define co-orientations for the segments $c([0,a])\cap {{\cal S}}_i$ and $c([0,a])\cap W_i$ for $n_0\leq i\leq n_0+N_1$. If two of the origins $o_i\in W_i$ for $n_0<i\leq n_0+N_1$ lie on opposite sides of the corresponding segments $c([0,a])\cap W_i$ with respect to the co-orientations then the geodesic between them (of length less than $2c_1R$ by lemma \[3walls\]) will intersect $c([0,a])$ and hence $d(o_i,c([0,a]))<c_1R$ for some $n_0<i\leq n_0+N_1$, and thus $d(p,c([0,a])<2c_1R$. But this cannot happen since $d(p,c([0,a])\geq R'>2c_1R$. Thus all the origins $o_i\in W_i$ for $n_0<i\leq n_0+N_1$ lie on the same side of the corresponding segments $c([0,a])\cap W_i$ with respect to the co-orientations. It follows that the angle between $c([0,a])$ and $L_i^-$ increases by at least $\beta$ each time $c([0,a])$ passes through a wall. Hence $(N_1-1)\beta<\pi$, contradicting the definition of $N_1$.
Let $[a',b']\subset[a,b]\subset[0,1]$ be the inverse image of $$[\cup_{i=n_0+N_1+1}^{n_1-N_1-1}W_i]\cup[\cup_{n_0+N_1}^{n_1-N_1-1}{{\cal S}}_i]$$ under $c$. We know that $c([a',b'])$ remains in the sphere $S(p,R')$ while it passes through all the walls $W_i$ for $n_0+N_1<i<n_1-N_1$. So for every $n_0+N_1<i<n_1-N_1$, $c([a',b'])$ joins $L_i^-$ to $L_i^+$ outside $B(p,R')\supset B(o_i,R'-c_1R)$. Hence $length(c([a',b'])\geq \beta(R'-c_1R)(n_1-n_0-(2N_1+2))\geq \frac \beta 2R'(n_1-n_0-(2N_1+2))$ while $d_{{\cal T}}(c(a'),c(b'))\leq 2R'$ so $length(c[a',b'])\geq d_{{\cal T}}(c(a'),c(b'))+ \frac \beta 2(n_1-n_0-(2N_1+2)-\frac 4 \beta)R'$ and hence $$length(c)\geq d_{{\cal T}}(c(0),c(1))+C_1(n_1-n_0-C_2)R'$$ where $C_1,\,C_2$ depend only on $\beta$.
\[clustercorollary\] Let ${{\cal T}}$, $N_1$, $C_1$, $C_2$, $W_{n_0},\ldots,W_{n_1}$, $p$, $R$ be as in Proposition \[clusterprop\]. If $n_1-n_0>C_2$, then any geodesic segment from $W_{n_0}$ to $W_{n_1}$ must pass through $B(p,N_1R)$.
The result corresponding to Corollary \[clustercorollary\] in the space $X$ is:
\[wallcluster\] There are constants $N_2=N_2(X),\,R_0=R_0(X)$ with the following property. If $n\geq N_2$, $e_1,\ldots e_n\in E$ are the consecutive edges of a geodesic segment, $\ga$, in the tree $T$, $p\in X$, $R\geq R_0$, and $X_{e_i}\cap B(p,R)\neq\emptyset$ for $1\leq i\leq n$; then for any $C\geq 0$, and any segment $\ol{xy}\subset X$ with $\ol{xy}\cap N_C(X_{e_i})\neq \emptyset$ for $i=1$ and $i=n$, we have $\ol{xy}\cap B(p,N_2R+2C)\neq\emptyset$.
Let $e_1,\ldots,e_n$, $p$, $X_{e_i}$ be as in the statement of the proposition. If $\ol{xy}\cap N_C(X_{e_i})\neq\emptyset$ for $i=1$ and $i=n$, then we have $x_0\in X_{e_1}$ and $y_0\in X_{e_n}$ with $d(x_0,\ol{xy}),d(y_0,\ol{xy})\leq C$. By convexity of the distance function $d_X$ it suffices to show that $\ol{x_0y_0}\cap B(p,N_2R)\neq\emptyset$.
Let $K$ and $\beta$ be as in Lemma \[kbetaexist\] and $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ be a $K$ template for $\ga$ whose angles are bounded by $\beta$. Let $\alpha:\ol{x_0y_0}\to {{\cal T}}$ be the map guaranteed by Proposition \[ambienttotemplatepath\]. So $Length(\alpha)\leq d(x_0,y_0)+nC_5$. By part 3 of definition \[ktemplate\] there is a $p'\in {{\cal T}}$ be such that $d(p,\phi(p'))<R+K$ and hence (since $X_{e_i}\subset N_K\phi(W_i)$) $d(\phi(p'),\phi(W_i))<2R+2K$. Since, by Proposition \[ambienttotemplatepath\], $\phi$ is an $(L,A)$-quasi isometric embedding we have $B(p',R_2)\cap W_i\neq \emptyset$ for $R_2= L(2R+2K)+A$. We will choose $R_0$ and $N_2$ large enough so that for $n>N_2$ and $R\geq R_0$ we will have $nC_5<C_1(n-C_2)N_1R_2$ for the $N_1(\beta)$, $C_1(\beta)$ and $C_2(\beta)$ of Proposition \[clusterprop\]. Thus Proposition \[clusterprop\] forces $\alpha$ to intersect $B(p',N_1R_2)$. So we conclude (again using Proposition \[ambienttotemplatepath\]) that $d(\ol{x_0y_0},p)<C_5+d(\phi(\alpha),\phi(p'))+R+K\leq C_5+LN_1R_2+A+R+K$. The proposition now follows by taking $N_2$ and $R_0$ large enough.
### Paths with small length distortion
\[almostsqrtthm\] Pick $M>0$ and ${\alpha}\in(\frac{1}{2},1]$. Then there is a constant $C=C(M,{\alpha})$ so that if $1\leq A\leq B$, $\eta:[A,B]{\rightarrow}X$ is a (not necessarily continuous) map to a Hadamard space $X$, and for all $A\leq t_1\leq t_2\leq B$ we have $$\label{logdistortion}
|d_X(\eta(t_1),\eta(t_2))-(t_2-t_1)|\leq M(1+log(\frac{t_2}{t_1}))$$ then $$\label{almostsqrt}
d(\eta(t),z)\leq C(1+t^{\alpha})$$ where $z\in\ol{\eta(A)\eta(B)}$ is the point with $d(z,\eta(A))=\frac {t-A}{B-A}d(\eta(A),\eta(B))$. Similarly, if $A\geq 1$ and $\eta:[A,\infty){\rightarrow}X$ satisfies (\[logdistortion\]) for all $A\leq t_1\leq t_2$, then there is a unique unit speed geodesic ray $\ga:[A,\infty){\rightarrow}X$ with $\ga(A)=\eta(A)$ such that $$d_X(\eta(t),\ga(t))\leq C(1+t^{\alpha})$$ for all $t\in[A,\infty)$.
First note that we may assume that $A=1$, since the map $\eta_1:[1,B-A+1]{\rightarrow}X$ given by $\eta_1(t)\defeq \eta(t+A-1)$ will satisfy the hypotheses of the proposition, and the conclusion of the proposition applied to $\eta_1$ will imply (\[almostsqrt\]) for $\eta$.
[*Step 1: When $1\leq s_1\leq s_2\leq 2s_1\leq B$ and $s_1$ is sufficiently large then the comparison angle $\cangle_{\eta(1)}(\eta(s_1),\eta(s_2))\leq Const\, s_1^{{\alpha}-1}$.*]{}
We will make use of the following lemma that follows from standard comparisons.
\[excesslemma\] Let $X$ be a Hadamard space, $x,\,y,\,z\in X$. Set $L\defeq d(x,z)$, and the excess $E\defeq d(x,y)+d(y,z)-d(x,z)$. Then $$d(y,\ol{xz})\leq \frac{\sqrt{2LE}}{2}\sqrt{1+\frac{E}{2L}}$$ $$\label{simpleest}
\leq \sqrt{LE} \mbox{ if $E\leq 2L$.}$$
Triangle comparison.
Take $1\leq s_1\leq s_2\leq B$, and consider the triple $\eta(1),\,\eta(s_1),\,\eta(s_2)$. The excess for the triple is $$\leq M(1+\log s_2)+M(1+\log s_1)+M(1+\log(\frac{s_2}{s_1}))= 3M(1+\log s_2).$$ Since $d(\eta(1),\eta(s_2))\geq (s_2-1)-M(1+\log s_2)$ when $s_2> c_1= c_1(M)$, then the excess is $\leq 2d(\eta(1),\eta(s_2))$. Thus since $d(\eta(1),\eta(s_2))\leq (s_2-1)+M(1+\log s_2)$ applying (\[simpleest\]) we get $$d(\eta(s_1),\ol{\eta(1)\eta(s_2)})\leq \sqrt{[(s_2-1+M(1+\log s_2))][3M(1+\log s_2)]}$$ $$\label{firstexcess}
\leq
c_2(1+s_2^{\alpha})$$ where $c_2=c_2(M,{\alpha})$. Therefore the comparison angle $\cangle_{\eta(1)}(\eta(s_1),\eta(s_2))$ satisfies $$\sin(\cangle_{\eta(1)}(\eta(s_1),\eta(s_2)))\leq \frac{c_2(1+s_2^{\alpha})}{d(\eta(1),\eta(s_1))}
\leq \frac{c_2(1+s_2^{\alpha})}{[(s_1-1)-M(1+\log s_1)]}.$$ So there are constants $c_3=c_3(M,{\alpha})$ and $c_4=c_4(M,{\alpha})$ so that if $c_3\leq s_1\leq s_2\leq 2s_1\leq B$ then $$\sin(\cangle_{\eta(1)}(\eta(s_1),\eta(s_2)))\leq \frac{2c_2(1+s_2^{\alpha})}{s_1}
\leq\frac{c_4}{2}s_2^{{\alpha}-1}$$ and $$\label{sinest}
\cangle_{\eta(1)}(\eta(s_1),\eta(s_2))\leq c_4s_2^{{\alpha}-1}.$$
[*Step 2: Estimating $d(\eta(t),\ol{\eta(1)\eta(B)})$.*]{} Now pick $t_0\in [1,B]$ with $t_0\geq c_3$ . Let $t_i=2^it_0$ for $i=0,\ldots,n$ where $n$ is the integer part of $\frac{\log B}{\log 2}$, and $t_{n+1}=B$. Then $\frac{B}{t_n}<2$. Applying the estimate (\[sinest\]) with $u_i\defeq \eta(t_i)$ we have for $i=1,\ldots,n+1$: $$\cangle_{\eta(1)}(u_{i-1},u_i)\leq c_4t_i^{{\alpha}-1}$$ since $\frac{t_i}{t_{i-1}}\leq 2$ and $t_i\geq c_3$. Either $n=0$, in which case we have $$d(\eta(t_0),\ol{\eta(1)\eta(B)})\leq c_2(1+t_1^{\alpha})\mbox{\quad by (\ref{firstexcess})}$$ $$\leq c_2(1+2^{\alpha}t_0^{\alpha})\leq c_5(1+t_0^{\alpha})$$ where $c_5=c_5(M,{\alpha})$. Otherwise, if $t_0>c_6=c_6(M,{\alpha})$, $$d(\eta(1),u_0)\leq (t_0-1)+M(1+\log t_0)$$ $$\leq (t_i-1)-M(1+\log t_i)\leq d(\eta(1),u_i).$$ So for $0\leq i\leq n+1$ we may pick $v_i\in\ol{\eta(1)u_i}$ with $d(\eta(1),v_i)=d(\eta(1),u_0)=:R_0$. By triangle comparison we have $$d(v_{i-1},v_i)\leq R_0\cangle_{\eta(1)}(v_{i-1},v_i)\leq R_0\cangle_{\eta(1)}(u_{i-1},u_i)$$ $$\leq R_0c_4t_i^{{\alpha}-1}$$ so $$d(u_0,\ol{\eta(1)\eta(B)})=d(u_0,\ol{\eta(1)u_{n+1}})\leq d(u_0,v_{n+1})$$ $$\leq \sum_{i=1}^{n+1}d(v_{i-1},v_i)\leq R_0c_4\sum_{i=1}^{n+1}t_i^{{\alpha}-1}$$ $$\leq R_0c_7t_0^{{\alpha}-1}$$ for $c_7=c_7(M,{\alpha})$ (independent of $n$). We have $R_0\leq t_0-1+M(1+\log t_0)\leq 2t_0$ when $t_0$ is sufficiently large, so when $t_0\geq c_8=c_8(M,{\alpha})$ $$d(u_0,\ol{\eta(1)\eta(B)})\leq c_9t_0^{\alpha}$$ where $c_9=c_9(M,{\alpha})$.
[*Step 3: Estimating $d(\eta(t),z)$ where $z\in\ol{\eta(1)\eta(B)}$ satisfies $d(z,\eta(1))=\frac {t-1}{B-1}d(\eta(1),\eta(B))$.*]{} Let $x\in\ol{\eta(1)\eta(B)}$ be the point nearest $\eta(t)$. Then for $t\geq c_{10}$ we have $$d(\eta(t),z)\leq d(\eta(t),x)+d(x,z)$$ $$= d(\eta(t),x)+|d(x,\eta(1))-(t-1)\frac {d(\eta(1),\eta(B))}{B-1}|$$ $$\leq d(\eta(t),x)+[d(x,\eta(t))+\frac {(t-1)}{B-1}M(1+\log B)+M(1+\log t)]\leq 3c_9t^{\alpha}.$$
Thus the result holds for large $t$, but by choosing $C$ large enough we get the result for all $t$.
For the ray case we redo step 3 above when $d(\eta(1),\eta(B))>t$ for $z_1\in\ol{\eta(1)\eta(B)}$ the point which satisfies $d(z_1,\eta(1))=t$. Let $x\in\ol{\eta(1)\eta(B)}$ be the point nearest $\eta(t)$. Then for $t\geq c_{11}$ we have $$d(\eta(t),z_1)\leq d(\eta(t),x)+d(x,z_1)$$ $$= d(\eta(t),x)+|d(x,\eta(1))-(t-1)|$$ $$\leq d(\eta(t),x)+[d(x,\eta(t))+M(1+\log t)]\leq 3c_9t^{\alpha}.$$
Now choose $\ga$ as a limit of a subsequence of $\ol{\eta(1),\eta(B)}$ as $B$ goes to $\infty$ (the result will in fact imply that the sequence itself converges). Since none of the constants depended on $B$ the above estimate for $d(\eta(t),z_1)$ gives the result for rays.
### The proof of Theorem \[shadthm\] {#actualshadowing}
Let $\beta=\beta(X)$ be the minimum angle between singular geodesics of a template for $X$ defined in Lemma \[kbetaexist\], and let $C_2(\beta),\,N_1(\beta)$ be the constants from Corollary \[clustercorollary\]. Let $N_2,\,R_0$ be the constants from Proposition \[wallcluster\]; we will assume that $N_2\geq \max(C_2(\beta),N_1(\beta))$.
For every $\psi>0$ , we will say that $z\in\ol{xy}$ is a [*$\psi$-cluster point*]{} if the segment $\ol{B(z,\psi d(z,x))}\cap\ol{xy}$ intersects at least $N_2$ walls of ${{\cal T}}$, or if $z\in\{x,y\}$. We will let $P_\psi\subset\ol{xy}$ represent the set of $\psi$-cluster points.
[*Proof of 1.*]{} Let $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$, $x$, $y$, be as in the statement of part 1 of the theorem. We begin with two lemmas.
\[mustcrosswall\] There is a constant $c_1$ depending on $K$ such that if $\ol{xy}$ intersects a wall $W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$, then $\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)}\cap N_{c_1}(X_{f(W)})\neq\emptyset.$
If $\{x,y\}\cap W\neq\emptyset$ this is immediate since $\phi(W)\subset N_K(X_{f(W)})$ by definition \[ktemplate\]. Otherwise $x$ and $y$ must lie in distinct components of ${{\cal T}}-W$ because each component is convex. Say $x\in W_1\cup {{\cal S}}_1\cup W_1'$ and $y\in W_2\cup{{\cal S}}_2\cup W_2'$ where $W_i$ is adjacent to $W_i'$. Set $v\defeq f(W_1)\cap f(W_1')$ and $v'\defeq f(W_2)\cap f(W_2')$. Applying Lemma \[findingz’s\] the lemma follows.
\[smalldistapplies\] Suppose $p_1,\,p_2\in\ol{xy}$, $d(p_1,x)\leq d(p_2,x)$, and $\ol{p_1p_2}\cap P_{\psi}\subset \{p_1,p_2\}$. Set $A\defeq 1+d(p_1,x)$, $B\defeq 1+d(p_2,x)$. Let $\eta_0:[A,B]{\rightarrow}{{\cal T}}$ be the unit speed parameterization of $\ol{p_1p_2}$. Then the composition $\eta\defeq\phi\circ\eta_0:[A,B]{\rightarrow}X$ satisfies the hypotheses of Proposition \[almostsqrtthm\] with $M=M(K,\psi)$.
Pick $A\leq t_1<t_2\leq B$. By Corollary \[phidistortion2\] we have $$\label{distortionestimate}
|d_X(\eta(t_1),\eta(t_2))-(t_2-t_1)|\leq kC_6$$ where $\ol{\eta_0(t_1)\eta_0(t_2)}$ intersects at most $(k-1)$ walls and strips of ${{\cal T}}$. For each $z\in\ol{\eta_0(t_1)\eta_0(t_2)}$, the segment $\ol{B(z,\psi d(z,x))}\cap\ol{xy}$ intersects at most $N_2-1$ walls. We can cover $\ol{\eta_0(t_1)\eta_0(t_2)}-B(x,1)$ with at most $Const\,\log(\frac{t_2}{t_1})$ such segments, and $\ol{B(x,1)}\cap \ol{\eta_0(t_1)\eta_0(t_2)}$ intersects at most $2$ walls (since strips have width at least 1), so the lemma follows from (\[distortionestimate\]).
Suppose $z\in P_\psi$. Then $\ol{xy}\cap B(z,\psi R)$ intersects at least $N_2$ consecutive walls $W_1,\ldots,W_n$ of ${{\cal T}}$. By definition \[ktemplate\] and the fact that $\phi:{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}X$ is a quasi-isometric embedding (Proposition \[ambienttotemplatepath\]) there is a constant $c_2=c_2(K)$ so that $d_X(\phi(z),X_{f(W_i)})\leq c_2(1+\psi R)$ for $i=1,\ldots n$. By Lemma \[mustcrosswall\] and Proposition \[wallcluster\], we conclude that $\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)}\cap B(\phi(z),N_2c_2(1+\psi R)+2c_1)\neq
\emptyset$ provided $c_2(1+\psi R)\geq R_0$. So there are positive constants $r_0=r_0(K,\psi), \,c_3=c_3(K,\beta)$ so that if $z\in P_\psi$ and $R\defeq d(z,x)\geq r_0$, then $$\label{psiclusterclose}
d(\phi(z),\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)})\leq c_3\psi R.$$ Hence for any $z\in P_\psi$ $$\label{psiclusterclose1}
d(\phi(z),\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)})\leq c_3\psi R+Lr_0+A=c_3\psi R+c_4$$ where $(L,A)$ are the quasi-isometric embedding constants of $\phi$, and $c_4\defeq Lr_0+A=c_4(K,\psi)$.
[*Step 2: Estimating $d(\phi(z),\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)})$ when $z\not\in P_\psi$.*]{} Pick $z\not\in P_\psi$. There are points $p_1,\,p_2\in \ol{xy}$ so that $z\in\ol{p_1p_2}$, $d(p_1,x)\leq d(p_2,x)$, and either $\ol{p_1p_2}\cap P_\psi
=\{p_1,\,p_2\}$ or one or both of $p_1=x$ or $p_2=y$ hold. Each step of the argument below holds in the special cases $p_1=x$ or $p_2=y$ (often for easier reasons) so we will ignore them. By (\[psiclusterclose1\]) we have $$\label{pixsmall}
d(\phi(p_i),\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)})\leq c_3\psi d(p_i,x)+c_4$$ for $i=1,2$. Since $p_1,\,p_2$ satisfy the conditions of Lemma \[smalldistapplies\], we may apply Proposition \[almostsqrtthm\] with $\alpha = \frac 3 4$ to get that for the $w\in \ol{\phi(p_1)\phi(p_2)}$ with $d(w,\phi(p_1))=\frac {d(z,p_1)}{d(p_1,p_2)}d(\phi(p_1),\phi(p_2))$ we have $$\label{closetop1p2}
d(\phi(z),w)\leq C(1+[d(z,x)]^{\frac{3}{4}})\leq \psi d(z,x) +c_6.$$ Where $c_6=c_6(K,\psi)$.
On the other hand for $\zeta=\frac {d(w,\phi(p_1))}{d(\phi(p_1),\phi(p_2))}=\frac {d(z,p_1)}{d(p_1,p_2)}$ the convexity of the distance function $d(*,\ol {\phi(x)\phi(y)})$ and \[pixsmall\] says that $$\label{wclose}
d(w,\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)})\leq c_3\psi ( (1-\zeta)d(p_1,x)+ \zeta d(p_2,x))+c_4
= c_3\psi d(z,x) +c_4$$
Combining (\[wclose\]) and (\[closetop1p2\]) we get $$\label{noncluster}
d(\phi(z),\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)})\leq c_7\psi d(z,x)+c_8$$ for $c_7=c_7(K)$ and $c_8=c_8(K,\psi)$. Thus (\[psiclusterclose1\]) and (\[noncluster\]) together imply that for every choice of $\psi>0$ there are constants $c_9(K,\beta)$ and $c_{10}(K,\psi)$ such that for all $z$ $$d(\phi(z),\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y)})\leq c_9\psi R+c_{10}.$$ The fact that $c_9$ does not depend on $\psi$ allows us to pick $\theta(R)$ which decays to 0 as $R\to \infty$ such that for each $R$ there is a $\psi=\psi(R)>0$ (for example choose $\psi(R)$ decaying to 0 such that $c_{10}(\psi)<R^{-\frac 1 2}$) so that $$c_9\psi R+c_{10}(\psi)\leq (1+R)\theta (R)$$ This implies part 1 of Theorem \[shadthm\].
We omit this, as it is similar to the proof of 1.
Part 3 follows directly from part 1 and Lemma \[sublinearbending\].
Part 2 along with reasoning similar to the proof of Lemma \[sublinearbending\] shows that if $x,\,y_k\in{{\cal T}}$, $\xi\in \geo X$, and $\ol{\phi(x)\phi(y_k)}{\rightarrow}\ol{x\xi}$, then $\ol{xy_k}$ converges to some ray $\ol{x\xi'}\subset{{\cal T}}$. Hence $\geo\phi$ is a homeomorphism from $\geo {{\cal T}}$ onto the limit set of $\phi({{\cal T}})\subset X$, which we denote by $\geo\phi({{\cal T}})$. It follows immediately from this that $\geo\phi$ maps $\geo{{\cal T}}-\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}=\cup_{W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}}\geo W$ homeomorphically onto $\cup_{W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}}\geo X_{f(W)}$. This implies 4 when $\ga\subset T$ is a geodesic segment, so we now assume that $\ga$ is a geodesic ray, and we need only show that $\geo \phi(\geo^\infty{{\cal T}})=\geo^\eta X$ where $\eta=\geo\ga\in\geo T$. We will let $W_k\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ be the $k^{th}$ wall of ${{\cal T}}$.
We first show $\geo\phi(\geo^\infty{{\cal T}})\subset\geo^\eta X$. Suppose $\xi\in\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}$, $z_k\in\ol{x\xi}\cap W_k$, and $d(z_k,x){\rightarrow}\infty$. Thus $\ol{\phi(x)\phi(z_k)}{\rightarrow}\ol{\phi(x)
\geo\phi(\xi)}$. By lemma \[findingz’s\] part 1, for any $l$ we have $\ol{\phi(x)\phi(z_k)}\cap N_c(X_{f(W_l)})\neq
\emptyset$ for sufficiently large $k$. So by Lemma \[bdyconvex\] either $\geo\phi(\xi)\in\geo N_c(X_{f(W_l)})
=\geo X_{f(W_l)}$ or $\ol{\phi(x)\geo\phi(\xi)}\cap N_c(X_{f(W_l)})
\neq\emptyset$. The former case is impossible since we already know that $(\geo\phi)^{-1}(\geo X_{f(W_l)})
=\geo W_l$. So $\ol{\phi(x)\geo\phi(\xi)}\cap N_c(X_{f(W_l)})\neq
\emptyset$ for every $W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$, forcing ${{\cal I}}(\ol{\phi(x)\geo\phi(\xi)})=\ga$. So $\geo\phi(\geo^\infty{{\cal T}})\subset\geo^\eta X$.
We now show $\geo^\eta X\subset\geo\phi(\geo^\infty{{\cal T}})$. Suppose $x\in W_1\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ and $\xi\in\geo^\eta X$. Then from the definition of itineraries \[itindef\] and Lemma \[itindichotomy\] there are $z_k\in\ol{\phi(x)\xi}\cap N_C(X_{e_k})$ for $e_k\in T$ so that $d_T(e_k,f(W_1)){\rightarrow}\infty$ and $d_T(e_k,\ga)$ is uniformly bounded. So for all but finitely many $W$, $f(W)$ separates $e_k$ from $f(W_1)$ for sufficiently large $k$, so by Lemma \[findingz’s\] $$\ol{\phi(x)z_k}\cap N_c(X_{f(W)})\neq \emptyset$$ for sufficiently large $k$. Hence $\xi$ belongs to the limit set of $\cup_{W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}}X_{f(W)}$, which is the same as $\geo(\phi({{\cal T}}))=\geo\phi(\geo{{\cal T}})$. Therefore $\xi\in(\geo\phi)(\geo{{\cal T}}-\cup_{W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}}
\geo W)=(\geo\phi)(\geo^\infty{{\cal T}})$.
Pick $x\in {{\cal T}}$ and $\xi\in\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}$. Suppose there is a sequence $z_k\in\ol{x\xi}$ with $\lim_{k{\rightarrow}\infty}(z_k,x)=\infty$ so that $z_k$ is a $\psi_k$-cluster point $\ol{x\xi}$ where $\psi_k{\rightarrow}0$. Set $R_k\defeq d(z_k,x)$. Applying Corollary \[clustercorollary\] to each $z_k$, we see that if $\xi'\in\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}$, then for sufficiently large $k$ the intersection $\ol{x\xi'}\cap B(z_k,N_1\psi_kR_k)$ is nonempty, and this clearly forces $\ol{x\xi'}=\ol{x\xi}$. In this case we have $\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}=\{\xi\}$, and 5 is immediate. So we may assume that for every $\xi_1,\,\xi_2\in\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}$ there is a $\psi>0$ such that $\ol{x\xi_1}$ and $\ol{x\xi_2}$ contain no $\psi$-cluster points. Let $\bar\eta_i:[1,\infty){\rightarrow}{{\cal T}}$ be the unit speed parameterization of $\ol{x\xi_i}$, and let $\eta_i:[1,\infty){\rightarrow}X$ be the composition $\phi\circ\bar\eta_i
:[1,\infty){\rightarrow}X$. Then by Lemma \[smalldistapplies\] the $\eta_i$ satisfy the hypotheses of Proposition \[almostsqrtthm\] for a suitable $M$; so we have unit speed geodesic rays $\ga_i:[1,\infty){\rightarrow}X$ with $\ga_i(1)=\eta_i(1)$ and $d_X(\eta_i(t),\ga_i(t))\leq C(1+t^{\frac{3}{4}})$. Now, for sufficiently large $k$, choose $t^i_k$ so that $\bar\eta_i(t_k^i)$ lies in the $k^{th}$ wall of ${{\cal T}}$. By definition \[ktemplate\] $$|d_X(\eta_1(t_k^1),\eta_2(t_k^2))-d_{{\cal T}}(\bar\eta_1(t_k^1),
\bar\eta_2(t^2_k))|<K.$$ Thus $$\tangle
(\ga_1,\ga_2)=\lim_{k{\rightarrow}\infty}
\cangle_{\eta_1(1)}(\eta_1(t^1_k),\eta_2(t^2_k))=\lim_{k{\rightarrow}\infty}
\cangle_x(\bar\eta_1(t^1_k),\bar\eta_2(t^2_k))={\partial_{T}}(\xi_1,\xi_2).$$ This proves 5.
### Applications of Theorem \[shadthm\]
Theorem \[shadthm\] has a number of corollaries:
\[geoetadetection\] Let $G$ be the fundamental group of an admissible graph of groups ${\cal G}$, and let $G{\curvearrowright}T$ be the Bass-Serre tree of ${\cal G}$. Let $\ga\subset T$ be a geodesic ray with $i^{th}$ edge $e_i\subset T$, and set $\eta\defeq\geo \ga\in\geo T$. Then for any admissible action $G{\curvearrowright}X$, the subset $\geo^\eta X\subset\geo X$ defined in section \[itinsection\] is precisely the set of limit points of the sequence of subsets $\geo X_{e_k}\subset\geo X$.
Let $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ be a template for $\ga\subset T$. By parts 3 and 4 of Theorem \[shadthm\], $\geo\phi:\geo{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}\geo X$ is a homeomorphism onto $(\cup_k\,\geo X_{e_k})\cup(\geo^\eta X)$. Therefore it suffices to show that $\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}\subset\geo{{\cal T}}$ is the set of limit points of the sequence $\geo f^{-1}(e_k)\subset\geo{{\cal T}}$. To see this, observe that any geodesic segment $\ol{px}\subset{{\cal T}}$ which arrives at a wall $W\in Wall_{{\cal T}}$ via a strip ${{\cal S}}\in Strip_{{\cal T}}$ may be prolonged by a geodesic ray contained in $W$; this implies that every $\xi\in\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}$ is a limit of a sequence $\xi_k\in\geo f^{-1}(e_k)$. On the other hand, if $\xi_k\in\geo f^{-1}(e_k)$ converges to $\xi\in\geo{{\cal T}}$, then Lemma \[bdyconvex\] implies that either $\xi\in\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}$, or $\xi$ belongs to $\geo f^{-1}(e_k)$ for all sufficiently large $k$, which is absurd.
Let $G{\curvearrowright}X$, $T$, $\ga$, and $\eta$ be as in Corollary \[geoetadetection\]. When $X$ is a $3$-dimensional Hadamard manifold, then $\geo X\simeq S^2$ and there is an alternate characterization of $\geo^\eta X$ which uses little more than the definition of itineraries. For each $i$, $\geo X_{e_i}\subset \geo X\simeq S^2$ determines two closed disks by the Jordan separation theorem; let $D_i$ be the one which contains $\geo X_{e_j}$ for all $j\geq i$. Then $\geo^\eta X=\cap_i D_i$. To see this note that if $F\subset X$ is a flat totally geodesic plane and $p\in X-F$, then the two components of $\geo X-\geo F$ are $\{\xi\in\geo X\mid \ol{p\xi}\cap F\neq
\emptyset\}$ and $\{\xi\in\geo X\mid \ol{p\xi}\cap F=\emptyset\}$.
\[preslabelling\] Let $G{\curvearrowright}X$ and $G{\curvearrowright}X'$ be admissible actions, let $G{\curvearrowright}T$ be the Bass-Serre tree of $G$, and let $V,\,E$ be the sets of vertices and edges of $T$, respectively. If $\Phi:\geo X{\rightarrow}\geo X'$ is any $G$-equivariant homeomorphism, then
1\. $\Phi$ maps $\geo X_\si$ homeomorphically to $\geo X_\si '$ for all $\si\in V\cup E$.
2\. $\Phi$ maps $\geo^\eta X$ homeomorphically to $\geo^\eta X'$ for all $\eta\in\geo T$.
Part 1 follows from the characterization of $\geo X_\si$ as a fixed point set which is stated in Lemma \[fixedinbdy\]. Part 2 follows from part 1 and Corollary \[geoetadetection\].
\[structuretits\] Let $G{\curvearrowright}X$ be an admissible action, and $G{\curvearrowright}T$ be the Bass-Serre action for $G$. Then
1\. The union $\cup_{v\in V}\,{\partial_{T}}X_v\subset{\partial_{T}}X$ is a $CAT(1)$ space with respect to the induced metric, and may be described metrically as follows. First, ${\partial_{T}}X_v$ is a metric suspension of an uncountable discrete $CAT(1)$ space for each $v\in V$, and ${\partial_{T}}X_e$ is isometric to the standard circle for every $e\in E$. Take the disjoint union $\amalg_{v\in V}\,{\partial_{T}}X_v$, and for each edge $e=\ol{v_1v_2}\in E$, glue ${\partial_{T}}X_{v_1}$ to ${\partial_{T}}X_{v_2}$ isometrically by identifying the copies of ${\partial_{T}}X_e\subset {\partial_{T}}X_{v_i}$; the result is isometric to $\cup_{v\in V}\,{\partial_{T}}X_v\subset {\partial_{T}}X$.
2\. The union $\cup_{v\in V}\,{\partial_{T}}X_v$ forms a connected component of ${\partial_{T}}X$. The remaining components are contained in the subsets ${\partial_{T}}^\eta X$ for $\eta\in \geo T$. We will show in Lemma \[interval\] that each ${\partial_{T}}^\eta X$ is either a point or isometric to an interval of length $<\pi$.
To prove 1, we first observe that if $e_1,\ldots,e_n$ is an edge path in $T$ with initial vertex $v_1$ and terminal vertex $v_n$, $\xi_1\in{\partial_{T}}X_{v_1}$, $\xi_n\in{\partial_{T}}X_{v_n}$, and $\tangle(\xi_1,\xi_n)<\pi$, then the Tits segment $\ol{\xi_1\xi_n}\subset {\partial_{T}}X$ is contained in $\cup_{i=1}^n \,{\partial_{T}}X_{v_i}$. To see this, pick $\xi
\in\ol{\xi_1\xi_n}$. Recall that for a given base point $x$, $\ol{x\xi}$ may be obtained as the limit of a sequence $\ol{xy_k}$ where $y_k$ lies on a segment $\ol{x_1^kx_2^k}$ and $x_i^k\in\ol{x\xi_i}$ is a sequence tending to infinity. The quasi-convexity property of Lemma \[templateqconvexity\] (applied in sucession to $\ol{x\xi_i}$, $\ol{x_1^kx_2^k}$, and then $\ol{xy_k}$) implies that $\ol{xy_k}\subset N_C(\cup_{i=1}^n
X_{v_i})$ for some $C$, and the convexity of the $N_C(X_{v_i})$’s implies that $\xi\in{\partial_{T}}X_{v_i}$ for some $i\in\{1,\ldots n\}$. Part 1 now follows from Corollary \[titscaptits\].
Before proving 2, we recall that open balls of radius $\frac{\pi}{2}$ in $CAT(1)$ spaces are geodesically convex, so two points in a $CAT(1)$ space belong to the same connected component iff they can be joined by a unit speed path.
Suppose $\eta\in\geo T$ and $\xi\in{\partial_{T}}^\eta X$. Fix $v\in V$, $p\in X_v$, and let $e_k\in E$ denote the $k^{th}$ edge of the ray $\ol{v\eta}\subset T$. Part 1 of Lemma \[itindichotomy\] implies that $\ol{p\xi}\cap X_{e_k}\neq\emptyset$ for all but finitely many $k$. If $c:[0,L]{\rightarrow}{\partial_{T}}X$ is a unit speed path starting at $\xi$, then by Lemma \[bdyconvex\], we find that either $c([0,L])\subset{\partial_{T}}^\eta X$ or for all sufficiently large $k$ there is a $t_k\in [0,L]$ so that $\ol{pc(t_k)}\in{\partial_{T}}X_{e_k}$. But part 1 shows that when $e,\,e'\in E$ and $d(e,e')\geq 2$, then $d({\partial_{T}}X_e,{\partial_{T}}X_{e'})$ is bounded away from $0$, which gives a contradiction. Therefore $c([0,L])\subset{\partial_{T}}^\eta X$ and we have shown that the connected component of $\xi$ is contained in ${\partial_{T}}^\eta X$.
Finally, we note that $\cup_{v\in V}\,{\partial_{T}}X_v$ is connected: if $v_1,\ldots,v_k$ are the consecutive vertices of a geodesic segment in $T$, then ${\partial_{T}}X_{v_i}\cap{\partial_{T}}X_{v_{i+1}}
={\partial_{T}}X_{\ol{v_iv_{i+1}}}\neq\emptyset$.
Geometric data and equivariant quasi-isometries {#samedata}
-----------------------------------------------
Throughout this section, $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}} X$ and $G\stackrel{\rho'}{{\curvearrowright}} X'$ will denote admissible actions of an admissible group $G$ on Hadamard spaces $X$ and $X'$, and we let $MLS_v,\,\tau_v$ and $MLS_v',\,\tau_v'$ denote their respective geometric data (see Definition \[geometricdatadef\]). The main result in this section is Theorem \[equivdatasublinear\], which shows that a $G$-equivariant quasi-isometry $\Phi:X{\rightarrow}X'$ induces an equivariant homeomorphism $\geo\Phi:\geo X{\rightarrow}\geo X'$ provided $\rho$ and $\rho'$ have [*equivalent*]{} geometric data.
\[geomdataequiv\] We say that $\rho$ and $\rho'$ have [*equivalent*]{} geometric data if there are functions $\la:V{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ and $\mu:V{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ so that for every $v\in V$ $$MLS_v'=\la(v)MLS_v\mbox{\quad and \quad}\tau_v'=\mu(v)\tau_v.$$ It follows from the $G$-invariance of the geometric data that $\la$ and $\mu$ will be $G$-invariant.
The structure of $G$ strongly restricts the possibilities for the functions $\la$ and $\mu$:
\[constants\] Suppose the geometric data for the actions $G{\curvearrowright}X$ and $G{\curvearrowright}X'$ are equivalent, and let $\la:V{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ and $\mu:V{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ be as in Definition \[geomdataequiv\]. Then either
1\. $\la\equiv\mu\equiv a$, for some $a>0$.
or
2\. There are constants $a$ and $b$, $a\not= b$, so that $\la(V)=\{a,b\}=\mu(V)$. Moreover, for any pair $v_1,\,v_2$ of adjacent vertices in $T$, $\la(v_1)=\mu(v_2)$, $\la(v_2)=\mu(v_1)$, and the ${\mathbb R}$ directions of $Y_{v_i}\simeq \bar Y_{v_i}\times{\mathbb R}$ determine orthogonal directions in $Y_e$, where $e\defeq\ol{v_1v_2}$. In particular, there is a $G$-equivariant $2$-coloring of $V$ (i.e. a two coloring of the finite graph ${\cal G}=T/G$) such that $\la$ and $\mu$ are functions of the vertex color.
Pick $e=\ol{v_1v_2}\in E$, and consider $G_e\otimes{\mathbb R}\simeq
{\mathbb Z}^2\otimes{\mathbb R}\simeq {\mathbb R}^2$. For $i=1,2$ we have subspaces $Z_i\defeq (Z(G_{v_i})\cap G_e)\otimes{\mathbb R}\simeq {\mathbb Z}\otimes{\mathbb R}\simeq{\mathbb R}$ determined by the centers of the $G_{v_i}$’s. The action $G_e{\curvearrowright}Y_e$ induces an inner product $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$ on $G_e\otimes{\mathbb R}$ by letting, for $g\in G_e$, $\langle g,g \rangle=\delta_g^2$. (For $p\in Y_e$ there is an embedded Euclidean plane ${\mathbb R}^2\subset Y_e$ invariant under the action of $G_e{\curvearrowright}Y_e$ on which $G_e$ acts by translations of $\delta_g$. So our metric is naturally related to the metric on this ${\mathbb R}^2$). We can extend the maps $\tau_i:G_e\to R$ to linear maps $\hat\tau_i:G_e\otimes{\mathbb R}\to R$. For $g\in G_e$ we see that $\tau_i(g)$ is just the change in the $i$-vertical component from $y$ to $g(y)$. So for $x\in G_e\otimes{\mathbb R}$, $\hat \tau_i(x)$ is just the length of the orthogonal projection of $x$ onto $Z_i$. In particular, for $x\in Z_i$ we have $\langle x,x\rangle=\hat \tau_i(x)^2$, and $Ker(\hat \tau_i)$ is $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$ perpendicular to $Z_i$. Similarly $\hat {MLS}_i(x)$ corresponds to the length of the projection of $x$ perpendicular to $Z_i$ (i.e. to $Ker(\tau_i)$). In general $Z_1$ and $Z_2$ are not perpendicular but they are always linearly independent (see figure \[twoscales\].
(100,100) (0,0)[(100,100)]{}
(50,0)[(0,1)[100]{}]{} (0,70)[(5,-2)[100]{}]{} (45,90)[(0,0)[$Z_1$]{}]{} (5,75)[(0,0)[$Z_2$]{}]{} (0,50)[(1,0)[100]{}]{} (30,0)[(2,5)[40]{}]{} (100,55)[(0,0)[$Ker(\hat \tau_1)$]{}]{} (90,90)[(0,0)[$Ker(\hat \tau_2)$]{}]{}
Similarly, using the action $G_e{\curvearrowright}Y_e'$, we get an induced inner product $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle'$ and linear maps $\hat \tau_1'$ and $\hat \tau_2'$. By assumption $\hat\tau_i'=
\mu(v_i)\hat\tau_i$, hence $Ker(\hat\tau_i)
=Ker(\hat\tau_i')$. So the space perpendicular to $Z_1$ (resp. $Z_2$) with respect to $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$ is the same as that with respect to $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle'$. Hence, by the independence of $Z_1$ and $Z_2$, either $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle'=a\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$ for some $a>0$ or $Z_1$ and $Z_2$ are perpendicular in both metrics so $Ker(\hat\tau_1)=Ker(\hat\tau_1')=Z_2$ and $Ker(\hat\tau_2)=Ker(\hat\tau_2')=Z_1$. In the latter case, choosing $x\in Z_2$ we have $\langle x, x\rangle'=(\hat {MLS}_1(x))^2=\mu(v_2)^2(\hat {MLS}_1(x))^2=\mu(v_2)^2\langle x,x\rangle$ and $\langle x,x\rangle'=
(\tau_2'(x))^2=\la(v_1)^2(\tau_2(x))^2=
\la(v_1)^2\langle x,x\rangle$ so $\la(v_1)=\mu(v_2)$; similarly $\la(v_2)=\mu(v_1)$.
We now fix a $G$-equivariant $(L,A)$-quasi-isometry $\Phi:X{\rightarrow}X'$ for the rest of this section. The constants defined will depend on the geometry of $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}} X$ and $G\stackrel{\rho'}{{\curvearrowright}} X'$ as well as any other explicitly stated quantities.
\[sigmaspacespreserved\] There is a constant $D_1=D_1(L,A)$ so that for every $\si\in V\cup E$, the Hausdorff distance $d_H(\Phi(X_\si),X_\si')$ is at most $D_1$.
For $g\in G$ let $d_g$ and $d_g'$ denote the displacement functions for $g$ in $X$ and $X'$ respectively. In particular $d_g'(x)\leq L d_g(x) +A$.
For any $v\in V$, if $g\in Z(G_v)$ is a generator of the center $Z(G_v)$ then (see section \[groupsonx\]) $d_g$ is proper on $X/Z(Z(G_v),G)=X/G_v$ (by Lemma \[properdisp\]) and hence $d_g$ (resp $d_g'$) grows with the distance from $X_v$ (resp $X_v'$). This (along with the fact that there are only finitely many $\sigma$ modulo $G$) implies the lemma when $\si\in V$. If $e\in E$, and $g_1,\,g_2\in G_e$ are a basis for $G_e$ then $\max\{d_{g_1},d_{g_2}\}$ (resp $\max\{d_{g_1}',d_{g_2}'\}$) grows with the distance from $X_e$ (resp $X_e'$). This implies the lemma when $\si\in E$.
We now assume for the remainder of this section that $\rho$ and $\rho'$ have equivalent geometric data, and we let $\la:V{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ and $\mu:V{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ be as in Definition \[geomdataequiv\]. For each $v\in V$, we have nearest point projections $p_v:X{\rightarrow}Y_v$ and $p_v':X'{\rightarrow}Y_v'$. Modulo renormalization of the metrics on the spaces $Y_v$, the equivariant quasi-isometry $\Phi$ restricts to a Hausdorff approximation:
\[closetoprod\] For every $v\in V$, the $G_v$-equivariant quasi-isometry $\Phi_v\defeq p_v'\circ\Phi{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{Y_v}:Y_v{\rightarrow}Y_v'$ has the following properties:
1\. It is at distance $<D_2=D_2(L,A)$ from a $G_v$-equivariant map $\Psi_v:Y_v{\rightarrow}Y_v'$ which respects the product structures $Y_v\simeq \bar Y_v\times{\mathbb R}$ and $Y_v'\simeq \bar Y_v'\times{\mathbb R}$.
2\. If we stretch the metric on the $\bar Y_v$ factor of $Y_v$ by $\la(v)$, and the metric on the ${\mathbb R}$ factor by $\mu(v)$, then $\Phi_v$ becomes a $D_3=D_3(L,A)$-Hausdorff approximation, and maps unit speed geodesic segments to within $D_3$ of unit speed geodesic segments.
We first prove part 1. The ${\mathbb R}$ fibers of $Y_v$ and $Y_v'$ are within uniform Hausdorff distance of $Z(G_v)$-orbits, so $G_v$-equivariance implies that $\Phi_v$ takes ${\mathbb R}$ fibers of $Y_v$ to within uniform Hausdorff distance (say $C_1$) of ${\mathbb R}$ fibers of $Y_v'$. The $\bar Y_v$ fibers of $Y_v$ are within uniform Hausdorff distance of sets of the form $\{ g(p)\mid \mbox{$p\in Y_v$,$g\in G_v$, $|\tau_v(g)|<C$}\}$ for sufficiently large $C$, and a similar characterization of the $\bar Y_v'$ fibers of $Y_v'$ holds. We now define the product map $\Psi_v=\bar\Psi_v\times\Psi_v^{\mathbb R}:\bar Y_v\times{\mathbb R}{\rightarrow}\bar Y_v'\times{\mathbb R}$. Fix a basepoint $p\in Y_v$. We may assume that the ${\mathbb R}$ factor of $p$ and $\Phi_v(p)$ are $0$ and take $\Psi_v^{\mathbb R}(t)=\mu(v)t$. We let $S\subset \bar Y_v$ be a (set theoretical) cross section for the $H_v$ action. For $s\in S$ choose a $g\in G_v$ such that $|\tau_v(g)|<C$ and $d(g(p),(s,0))\leq C_1$. Now, since $|\tau'_v(g)|<\mu(v)C$, we can choose a point $\bar\Psi_v(s)$ such that $d(g(\Phi(p)),(\bar\Psi_v(s),0))\leq \mu(v)C$. We note that $$d(\Psi((s,0)),\Phi((s,0)))\leq d((\bar\Psi_v(s),0),\Phi(g(p))) + LC_1+A\leq \mu(v)C + LC_1+A$$ Extend this to an $H_v$ equivariant map $\bar\Psi_v:\bar Y_v\to \bar Y_v'$. Thus, along with the fact that $\tau'(g)=\mu(v)\tau(g)$, we see that $\Psi_v$ is a $G_v$-equivariant map. Now for every $q\in Y_v$ there is a $g\in G_v$ such that $g(q)=(s,t)$ for some $s\in S$ and some $-C<t<C$. Now $d(\Psi(q),\Phi(q))=$ $$d(\Psi((s,t)),\Phi((s,t)))\leq 2C\mu(v)+d(\Psi((s,0)),\Phi((s,0)))\leq 3\mu(v)C + LC_1+A$$ This proves 1.
Part 2 follows from part 1 if we can show that $\bar\Psi_v$ and $\Psi_v^{\mathbb R}$ carry unit speed geodesics to within uniform distance of unit speed geodesics. The map $\Psi_v^{\mathbb R}$ clearly does, because the translation distance in the ${\mathbb R}$-direction is measured by $\tau_v$ (resp. $\tau_v'$) and these have ratio $\mu(v)$. Recall that $H_v\defeq G_v/Z(G_v)$ acts discretely and cocompactly on the hyperbolic metric spaces $\bar Y_v$ and $\bar Y_v'$. Since $MLS_v'=\la(v)MLS_v$, if we renormalize the metric on $\bar Y_v$ by $\la(v)$ we can apply Lemma \[preservinggeodesics\] to see that $\bar\Psi_v:\bar Y_v{\rightarrow}\bar Y_v'$ preserves unit speed geodesics up to uniform error. This proves 2.
We may now use our quasi-isometry $\Phi:X{\rightarrow}X'$ to transport standard $K$-templates for $X$ to templates for $X'$ (see section \[templatesection\]). Start with a standard $K$-template $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ for some segment or ray $\ga\subset T$. Recall that the walls of ${{\cal T}}$ come from flats $F_e\subset Y_e\subset X_e$. To produce the new template ${{\cal T}}'$ distort the metric on ${{\cal T}}$ by an affine change as follows. For each $v\in V$, we think of scaling the metric on $\bar Y_v$ by $\la(v)$ and the ${\mathbb R}$-factor of $Y_v$ by $\mu(v)$; and then we distort the flats $F_e=F_{\ol{vv'}}\subset F_v\cap F_{v'}$ and strips ${{\cal S}}_{ee'}\subset Y_{e\cap e'}$ used to build ${{\cal T}}$ accordingly. Lemmas \[sigmaspacespreserved\] and \[closetoprod\] imply that $({{\cal T}}',f,\Phi\circ\phi)$ is a $K'$-template for $\ga$ where $K'=K'(L,A)$. Notice (using Lemma \[constants\]) that the identity map ${{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}{{\cal T}}'$ is an affine map (i.e. maps constant speed geodesics to constant speed geodesics), and is a homothety when $\la=\mu=a\in{\mathbb R}$.
\[equivdatasublinear\] Let $G\stackrel{\rho}{{\curvearrowright}} X$ and $G\stackrel{\rho'}{{\curvearrowright}} X'$ be admissible actions of an admissible group G on Hadamard spaces $X$ and $X'$ such that $\rho$ and $\rho'$ have equivalent geometric data, and let $\Phi:X\to X'$ be a $G$-equivariant $(L,A)$-quasi-isometry. Then there is a function $\th:{\mathbb R}_+{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ (depending on K,L, A and the geometry of X and X’) with $\lim_{r{\rightarrow}\infty}\th(r)=0$ so that for every $x,y\in X$, $z\in\ol{xy}$, we have $$\label{shadowtwice}
d_{X'}(\Phi(z),\ol{\Phi(x)\Phi(y)})\leq
(1+d_X(z,x))\th(d_X(z,x)).$$ Consequently, by Lemma \[sublinearbending\], $\Phi$ extends to a unique map $\bar\Phi:\bar X{\rightarrow}\bar X'$ which is continuous at $\geo X\subset\bar X$. Setting $\geo\Phi\defeq\bar\Phi{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\geo X}:
\geo X{\rightarrow}\geo X'$, we obtain a $G$-equivariant homeomorphism. If $\la=\mu=a\in{\mathbb R}$, then $\geo\Phi$ is an isometry with respect to Tits metrics.
Pick $x,y\in X$, and then find a segment $\ga\subset T$ so that $x\in X_{e_1}$, $y\in X_{e_n}$, and the $i^{th}$ edge of $\ga$ is $e_i$. Now let $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ be the standard $K$-template for $\ga$, and define the $K'$-template $({{\cal T}}',f,\phi')$ as in the paragraph preceding the statement of the Theorem. We may assume, after moving $x$ and $y$ a uniformly bounded distance if necessary (see part 3 of definition \[ktemplate\]), that $x=\phi(x_1)$, $y=\phi(y_1)$ for some $x_1,\,y_1\in{{\cal T}}$. We get (\[shadowtwice\]) by applying Theorem \[shadthm\] twice – once to $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ and once to $({{\cal T}}',f,\phi')$. Specifically, Since $z\in \ol{\phi(x_1)\phi(y_1)}$ an application of Theorem \[shadthm\] part 2 gives $$d_X(z,\phi(\ol{x_1y_1}))\leq (1+d_X(z,x))\theta_{(X,K)}(d_X(z,x)).$$ So there is a $z_1\in \ol{x_1y_1}$ with $d_X(z,\phi (z_1))\leq (1+d_X(z,x))\theta_{(X,K)}(d_X(z,x)).$ Hence we see $$d_{X'}(\Phi(z),\phi'(z_1))\leq L(1+d_X(z,x))\theta_{(X,K)}(d_X(z,x))+A.$$ Now an application of Theorem \[shadthm\] part 1 to $\phi'$ gives $$d_{X'}(\phi'(z_1),\ol{\Phi(x)\Phi(y)})=d_{X'}(\phi'(z_1),
\ol{\phi'(x_1)\phi'(y_1)})\leq (1+d_{{{\cal T}}'}(x_1,z_1))\theta_{(X',K')}(d_{{{\cal T}}'}(x_1,z_1)).$$ We thus need to bound $d_{{{\cal T}}'}(x_1,z_1)$ linearly from above by $d_X(z,x)$. But this follows since $d_{{{\cal T}}'}(x_1,z_1)\leq L'd_{X'}(\phi'(x_1),\phi'(z_1))+A'$ (where $L'$ and $A'$ come from Proposition \[ambienttotemplatepath\] and depend only on $K'$ and the geometry of $X'$), $d_{X'}(\phi'(x_1),\phi'(z_1))\leq Ld_X(\phi(x_1),\phi(z_1))+A$, and $d_X(\phi(x_1),\phi(z_1))\leq d_X(x,z)+d_X(z,\phi(z_1))\leq d_X(x,z)+(1+d_X(z,x))\theta_{(X,K)}(d_X(z,x))$. Equation (\[shadowtwice\]) will thus follow for an appropriate choice $\theta_{(K,L,A,X,X')}$ that will depend only on $L$, $A$, $K$, and the geometry of $X$ and $X'$. Lemma \[sublinearbending\] then applies to $\Phi$, so we get an induced embedding $\geo\Phi:\geo X
{\rightarrow}\geo X'$ which is automatically $G$-equivariant.
Now suppose $\la=\mu=a$. Pick $\eta\in\geo T$, and a geodesic ray $\ga\subset T$ with $\geo \ga=\eta$. Then the identity map ${{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}{{\cal T}}'$ between the associated templates $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ and $({{\cal T}}',f,\phi')$ constructed as above is a homothety, and so part 5 of Theorem \[shadthm\] applied to $\geo\phi{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}}$ and $\geo\phi'{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}'}$ then shows that $\geo\Phi{\mbox{\Large \(|\)\normalsize}}_{\geo^\eta X}$ induces an isometry ${\partial_{T}}^\eta X{\rightarrow}{\partial_{T}}^\eta X'$. By Corollary \[structuretits\] it remains only to show that $\geo\Phi$ induces an isometry ${\partial_{T}}X_v{\rightarrow}{\partial_{T}}X_v'$. But Lemma \[closetoprod\] part 2 implies that $\Phi_v:Y_v{\rightarrow}Y_v'$ is at finite distance from a product of Hausdorff approximations (up to rescaling of $X'$ by $\frac{1}{a}$) and so $\Phi_v$ induces an isometry ${\partial_{T}}X_v{\rightarrow}{\partial_{T}}X_v'$.
Recovering the geometric data from the action on the ideal boundary {#recovering}
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In this section we will prove the remaining implication of Theorem \[main\]: for any admissible action $G{\curvearrowright}X$, the topological conjugacy class of the action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$ determines the functions $MLS_v:G_v{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ and $\tau_v:G_v{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}$ up to a multiplicative factor, for every vertex $v\in{\cal G}$. Our strategy for proving this is as follows. Using Lemma \[fixedinbdy\] and Corollary \[geoetadetection\], for any ideal boundary point $\eta$ of the Bass-Serre tree $T$, we may detect the subset $\geo^\eta X\subset\geo X$; specifically, the action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$ determines the set of boundary points $\eta\in\geo T$ for which $|\geo^\eta X|=1$. To extract useful information from this, we consider a special class of geodesic rays $\ga\subset T$ (see Definition \[specialrays\]) which admit templates $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ where ${{\cal T}}$ is asymptotically self-similar: there is a (non-surjective) map ${{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}{{\cal T}}$ which stretches distances by a factor of $2$. These templates have two key properties: their geometry relates directly to the geometric data $MLS_v$ and $\tau_v$, and at the same time we can tell explicitly when (in terms of the geometry) we have $|\geo^{\geo\ga}{{\cal T}}|=1$ (see section \[selfsimsec\]). Putting all this together we able to recover the geometric data from the action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$.
### ${\partial_{T}}^\infty{{\cal T}}$ is either a point or an interval {#pointorinterval}
\[embedsin0pi\] Let $X$ be a Hadamard space, $p\in X$, and $\ga_i\subset X$ a sequence of geodesics with $\lim_{i{\rightarrow}\infty}d(p,\ga_i)=\infty$. Set $$S\defeq\{ \xi\in{\partial_{T}}X\mid \mbox{$\ol{p\xi}\cap \ga_i\neq\emptyset$
for all $i$}\}.$$ Then $S$ embeds isometrically in the interval $[0,\pi]$.
Pick $x,\,y,\,z\in S$, and for each $i$ choose $x_i\in
\ol{px}\cap\ga_i$, $y_i\in \ol{py}\cap\ga_i$, $z_i\in \ol{pz}\cap\ga_i$. After passing to a subsequence and reordering $x,\,y,\,z$ we may assume that $y_i$ lies between $x_i$ and $z_i$ on $\ga_i$, or that it coincides with $x_i$ or $z_i$. Then it follows that $$\cangle_p(x_i,y_i)+\cangle_p(y_i,z_i)\leq \cangle_p(x_i,z_i).$$ Taking the limit as $i{\rightarrow}\infty$, we get $$\tangle(x,y)+\tangle(y,z)\leq \tangle(x,z).$$ Hence $(\{x,y,z\},\tangle)\subset{\partial_{T}}X$ embeds isometrically in $[0,\pi]$.
If $|S|=1$ the lemma is immediate, so assume $|S|\geq 2$, and construct a map $f:S{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}$ as follows. Pick distinct points $x_0,\,x_1\in S$ and for $i=0,\,1$ choose $f(x_i)\in{\mathbb R}$ so that $d(x_0,x_1)=d(f(x_0),f(x_1))$. Now define $f$ uniquely by the condition that $d(f(s),f(x_i))=d(s,x_i)$ for all $s\in S$ and $i=0,\,1$. Clearly $f$ is an isometric embedding, and its image lies in an interval of length at most $\pi$.
\[leqbeta\] Let ${{\cal T}}$ be a half template with walls $W_0,W_1,\ldots$. For $i\geq 1$ set ${\alpha}_i\defeq {\alpha}(W_i)$ where ${\alpha}:Wall_{{\cal T}}^0{\rightarrow}(0,\pi)$ is the angle function, and assume $\min\{\alpha_i,\pi-\alpha_i\}\geq\beta$ for all $i\geq 1$. Then
1\. The diameter of ${\partial_{T}}^\infty{{\cal T}}$ with respect to the Tits metric is at most $\pi-\beta$.
2\. For $p\in W_0$ and every $i>0$ there is an $R_i$, depending only on $\beta$ and $d(o_i,p)$, so that if $q\in L_i^+$ then $\ol{pq}\cap L_i^-\subset B(o_i,R_i)$.
Pick $p\in W_0\subset{{\cal T}}$, and distinct points $x,\,y\in{\partial_{T}}^\infty{{\cal T}}$. Let $x_i^-\in L_i^-$ (resp. $x_i^+\in L_i^+$) be the point where the ray $\ol{px}$ enters (resp. exits) the wall $W_i$; define $y_i^-,\,y_i^+$ similarly. Since $x\neq y$, there is an $i_0>0$ so that $x_i^-\neq y_i^-$ when $i\geq i_0$. Pick $i\geq i_0$, and assume that $d(x_i^-,o_i)\geq d(y_i^-,o_i)$ (the case when $d(y_i^-,o_i)\geq d(x_i^-,o_i)$ is similar). Clearly (see figure \[anglei\]) we have $$\angle_{x_i^-}(x_i^+,o_i)=\angle_{x_i^-}(x_i^+,y_i^-)\leq
\max\{\alpha_i,\pi-\alpha_i\}\leq \pi-\beta.$$ Now this implies 1 since by standard properties of Tits angles $$\tangle(x,y)=\left
[\lim_{i{\rightarrow}\infty}(\angle_{x_i^-}(y_i^-,x)+\angle_{y_i^-}(x_i^-,y))\right
]-\pi
\leq \max\{\alpha_i,\pi-\alpha_i\}\leq \pi-\beta.$$ It also implies 2 by applying triangle comparison to the angle at $x_i$ of the triangle with vertices $p$, $o_i$, and $x_i$.
(100,100) (-50,55)[(3,-1)[200]{}]{} (-50,45)[(3,1)[200]{}]{} (-40,55) (40,25)[(-1,2)[21]{}]{} (40,25)[(0,0)]{} (35,10) (42,28) (100,5)[(0,0)]{} (90,-5) (70,17) (100,5)[(1,5)[19]{}]{} (19,66)[(0,0)]{} (15,75) (119,100)[(0,0)]{} (110,106) (150,-10) (150,110) (-20,47)
\[interval\] Let ${{\cal T}}$ be a uniform half template with $\min\{\alpha_i,\pi-\alpha_i\}\geq
\beta$ for all $i$. Then ${\partial_{T}}^\infty{{\cal T}}$ is isometric to an interval $[0,\theta]$ where $\theta\in [0,\beta]$.
Applying Lemma \[embedsin0pi\] with $\ga_i=L_i^-$ and Lemma \[leqbeta\] we get that ${\partial_{T}}^\infty{{\cal T}}$ is isometric to a subset of $[0,\beta]$. We need only show that ${\partial_{T}}^\infty{{\cal T}}$ is connected. Suppose $x,\,y\in {\partial_{T}}^\infty{{\cal T}}$, and pick a point $z$ lying on the Tits interval $\ol{xy}\subset{\partial_{T}}{{\cal T}}$. Let $p, \,x_i^-,\,y_i^-$ be as in the proof of Lemma \[leqbeta\]. Then $\lim_{i{\rightarrow}\infty}\cangle_p(x_i^-,y_i^-)=\tangle(x,y)$, so we can choose a sequence $z_i\in\ol{x_i^-y_i^-}\subset L_i^-$ so that $\lim_{i{\rightarrow}\infty}\cangle_p(x_i^-,z_i)=\tangle(x,z)$ and $\lim_{i{\rightarrow}\infty}\cangle_p(z_i^-,y_i)=\tangle(z,y)$. The segments $\ol{pz_i}$ converge to the ray $\ol{pz}$. Since for any $j>0$ the segment $\ol{pz_i}$ crosses $L_j^+$ for sufficiently large $i$, by Lemma \[leqbeta\] part 2 we get $$\ol{pz_i}\cap L_j^-\subset B(o_j,R_j)$$ and we conclude that $\ol{pz}\cap L_j^-\neq \emptyset$. Hence $z\in {\partial_{T}}^\infty{{\cal T}}$.
The $\theta$ in the above proposition is referred to as the Tits angle of ${{\cal T}}$ and is denoted $\theta({{\cal T}})$.
### Self-similar Templates {#selfsimsec}
In this section we study a special class of full templates called [*self-similar templates*]{}.
\[selfsimdef\] Let ${{\cal T}}$ be a full template with $Wall_{{\cal T}}=\{W_i\}_{i\in{\mathbb Z}}$ and $Strip_{{\cal T}}=\{{{\cal S}}_i\}_{i\in{\mathbb Z}}$, and set ${\alpha}_i\defeq{\alpha}(W_i)$, $l_i\defeq l({{\cal S}}_i)$, and $\eps_i\defeq \eps({{\cal S}}_i)$ (we define $\eps$ using the strip orientation compatible with the strip directions and the usual ordering on ${\mathbb Z}$). Then ${{\cal T}}$ is a [*self-similar template*]{} if for all $i,\,j\in{\mathbb Z}$ we have ${\alpha}_i={\alpha}_j$, $l_{i+2j}=2^jl_i$, and $\eps_{i+2j}=2^j\eps_i$. In this case we say that ${{\cal T}}$ has data $(\beta;l_0,\eps_0,l_1,\eps_1)$ where $\beta={\alpha}_i$ for all $i\in{\mathbb Z}$.
Note that by the definition, if we rescale the metric on a self-similar template ${{\cal T}}$ by a factor of $2$, then we get a template equivalent to ${{\cal T}}$, i.e. there is a homothety $\Phi: {{\cal T}}\to {{\cal T}}$ which preserves strip directions, stretches distances by a factor of $2$, and which shifts wall and strip indices by $2$. A self-similar template is determined up to equivalence by $\beta$ and the data $\{l_0,\eps_0,l_1,\eps_1\}$.
${{\cal T}}$ contains one point $v$ which is not on any wall or strip (since the union of the walls and strips is not complete). The point $v$ is the limit of the Cauchy sequence $\{o_{-i}|i=0,1,2,...\}$. On the other hand, for each $j\in {\mathbb Z}$ the half template, ${{\cal T}}_j$, given by the union of planes $W_i$ and strips ${{\cal S}}_i$ for $i\geq j$ is uniform (and complete). The images of the embeddings $\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}_i{\rightarrow}\geo{{\cal T}}$ and ${\partial_{T}}^\infty{{\cal T}}_i{\rightarrow}{\partial_{T}}{{\cal T}}$ are independent of $i$, and we use $\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}$ (respectively ${\partial_{T}}^\infty{{\cal T}}$) to denote this common subspace. We will say that ${{\cal T}}$ is [*trivial*]{} if $|\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}|=1$ and [*nontrivial*]{} if $|\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}|>1$.
We note that if $r$ is a geodesic ray parameterized by arclength then $\Phi \circ r$ is a geodesic ray parameterized by twice arclength. So $\Phi$ and $\Phi^{-1}$ take rays to rays. Since $\Phi$ is a homothety it preserves the Tits angles between rays.
If ${\cal R}_i$ represents the space of geodesic rays starting at $o_i$ and intersecting $W_j$ for all $j\geq i$, then the above shows $\Phi^{-1}
({\cal R}_i)={\cal R}_{i-2}$ and that $\Phi^{-1}$ acts as a Tits isometry on ${\partial_{T}}^\infty {{\cal T}}$. In particular since ${\partial_{T}}^\infty {{\cal T}}$ is isometric to an interval, $\Phi$ leaves the midpoint fixed, and $\Phi^2$ acts as the identity. Thus by repeated applications of $\Phi^{-1}$ we see that we can represent ${\partial_{T}}^\infty {{\cal T}}$ as the set rays, ${\cal R}_{-\infty}$, that start at $v$ and are invariant under $\Phi^2$. Further, the middle ray is invariant under $\Phi$.
We will show in the lemma below that all rays in ${\cal R}_{-\infty}$ are $\Phi$ invariant. In particular any such ray that intersects an $o_i$ must intersect all $o_{i+2n}$ for $n\in {\mathbb Z}$, and hence there are at most two such rays, $r_{even}$ and $r_{odd}$, in ${\cal R}_{-\infty}$.
Each choice $N\in \{I,II,III,IV\}$ determines a choice of quarter planes $Q^N_i\subset W_i$ as follows: for all $k\in{\mathbb Z}$, $Q^N_{2k}=Q_N\subset W_{2k}$ while $Q^N_{2k+1}=-Q_N\subset W_{2k+1}$. Straightforward Euclidean geometry shows that the corresponding development map, ${\cal D}_N$, with ${\cal D}_N(v)=0$ has the property that ${\cal D}_N\circ\Phi \circ
{\cal D}_N^{-1}$ is multiplication by 2 wherever (and however) it is defined (see Figure \[scale\]). (The easiest way to see this is to first develop $Q^N_0$, ${{\cal S}}_0$, $Q^N_1$, ${{\cal S}}_1$, and $Q^N_2$ into the plane, then shift the origin $(0,0)$ so that it lies on the line through ${\cal
D}(o_0)$ and ${\cal D}(o_2)$ and such that ${\cal D}(o_0)$ lies between $(0,0)$ and ${\cal D}(o_2)$ and such that the distance from $(0,0)$ to ${\cal D}(o_2)$ is twice the distance to ${\cal D}(o_0)$. We note that ${\cal D}(Q^N_2)=2{\cal D}(Q^N_0)$. We can now define a map ${\cal D}$ uniquely so that ${\cal D}\circ\Phi \circ {\cal D}^{-1}$ is multiplication by 2. It is easy to check that this map is a development and hence by uniqueness is ${\cal D}_N$ - up to an element of $O(2)$.) There are rays $r_{even}$ and $r_{odd}$ from the origin such that ${\cal D}_N(o_{2i})\in r_{even}$ and ${\cal D}_N(o_{2i+2})\in
r_{odd}$. (We can fix ${\cal D}_N$ completely if desired by taking $r_{even}$ to be the positive $x$-axis and to make $r_{odd}$ point in the upper half plane.)
(400,200) (0,0)[(400,200)]{} (0,100)[(0,0)]{}
(24,106)[(1,-4)[26]{}]{} (24,106)[(-1,-4)[24]{}]{} (23,110)[(0,0)[$o_0$]{}]{} (24,55)[(0,0)[I]{}]{} (23,102)[(1,0)[2]{}]{} (22,98)[(1,0)[4]{}]{} (21,94)[(1,0)[6]{}]{} (20,90)[(1,0)[8]{}]{} (19,86)[(1,0)[10]{}]{} (18,82)[(1,0)[12]{}]{} (17,78)[(1,0)[14]{}]{} (16,74)[(1,0)[16]{}]{} (15,70)[(1,0)[18]{}]{} (14,66)[(1,0)[20]{}]{} (13,62)[(1,0)[22]{}]{} (12,58)[(1,0)[24]{}]{} (11,54)[(1,0)[26]{}]{} (10,50)[(1,0)[28]{}]{} (9,46)[(1,0)[30]{}]{} (8,42)[(1,0)[32]{}]{} (7,38)[(1,0)[34]{}]{} (6,34)[(1,0)[36]{}]{} (5,30)[(1,0)[38]{}]{} (4,26)[(1,0)[40]{}]{} (3,22)[(1,0)[42]{}]{} (2,18)[(1,0)[44]{}]{} (1,14)[(1,0)[46]{}]{} (0,10)[(1,0)[48]{}]{} (0,6)[(1,0)[49]{}]{} (0,2)[(1,0)[50]{}]{}
(48,112)[(1,-4)[28]{}]{} (48,112)[(-1,-4)[28]{}]{} (48,116)[(0,0)[$o_2$]{}]{} (48,58)[(0,0)[I]{}]{} (46,104)[(1,0)[4]{}]{} (44,96)[(1,0)[8]{}]{} (42,88)[(1,0)[12]{}]{} (40,80)[(1,0)[16]{}]{} (38,72)[(1,0)[20]{}]{} (36,64)[(1,0)[24]{}]{} (34,56)[(1,0)[28]{}]{} (32,48)[(1,0)[32]{}]{} (30,40)[(1,0)[36]{}]{} (28,32)[(1,0)[40]{}]{} (26,24)[(1,0)[44]{}]{} (24,16)[(1,0)[48]{}]{} (22,8)[(1,0)[52]{}]{}
(96,124)[(1,-4)[31]{}]{} (96,124)[(-1,-4)[31]{}]{} (96,128)[(0,0)[$o_4$]{}]{} (96,64)[(0,0)[I]{}]{} (92,108)[(1,0)[8]{}]{} (88,92)[(1,0)[16]{}]{} (84,76)[(1,0)[24]{}]{} (80,60)[(1,0)[32]{}]{} (76,44)[(1,0)[40]{}]{} (72,26)[(1,0)[48]{}]{} (68,10)[(1,0)[56]{}]{}
(192,148)[(1,-4)[37]{}]{} (192,148)[(-1,-4)[37]{}]{} (192,152)[(0,0)[$o_6$]{}]{} (192,76)[(0,0)[I]{}]{} (184,116)[(1,0)[16]{}]{} (176,84)[(1,0)[32]{}]{} (168,52)[(1,0)[48]{}]{} (160,20)[(1,0)[64]{}]{}
(384,196)[(1,-4)[15]{}]{} (384,196)[(-1,-4)[49]{}]{} (384,98)[(0,0)[I]{}]{} (368,132)[(1,0)[32]{}]{} (352,68)[(1,0)[48]{}]{} (336,4)[(1,0)[64]{}]{}
(32,92)[(1,4)[27]{}]{} (32,92)[(-1,4)[27]{}]{} (34,88)[(0,0)[$o_1$]{}]{} (34,144)[(0,0)[III]{}]{} (31,96)[(1,0)[2]{}]{} (30,100)[(1,0)[4]{}]{} (29,104)[(1,0)[6]{}]{} (28,108)[(1,0)[8]{}]{} (27,112)[(1,0)[10]{}]{} (26,116)[(1,0)[12]{}]{} (25,120)[(1,0)[14]{}]{} (24,124)[(1,0)[16]{}]{} (23,128)[(1,0)[18]{}]{} (22,132)[(1,0)[20]{}]{} (21,136)[(1,0)[22]{}]{} (20,140)[(1,0)[24]{}]{} (19,144)[(1,0)[26]{}]{} (18,148)[(1,0)[28]{}]{} (17,152)[(1,0)[30]{}]{} (16,156)[(1,0)[32]{}]{} (15,160)[(1,0)[34]{}]{} (14,164)[(1,0)[36]{}]{} (13,168)[(1,0)[38]{}]{} (12,172)[(1,0)[40]{}]{} (11,176)[(1,0)[42]{}]{} (10,180)[(1,0)[44]{}]{} (9,184)[(1,0)[46]{}]{} (8,188)[(1,0)[48]{}]{} (7,192)[(1,0)[50]{}]{} (6,196)[(1,0)[52]{}]{}
(64,84)[(1,4)[29]{}]{} (64,84)[(-1,4)[29]{}]{} (64,80)[(0,0)[$o_3$]{}]{} (64,140)[(0,0)[III]{}]{} (62,92)[(1,0)[4]{}]{} (60,100)[(1,0)[8]{}]{} (58,108)[(1,0)[12]{}]{} (56,116)[(1,0)[16]{}]{} (54,124)[(1,0)[20]{}]{} (52,132)[(1,0)[24]{}]{} (50,140)[(1,0)[28]{}]{} (48,148)[(1,0)[32]{}]{} (46,156)[(1,0)[36]{}]{} (44,164)[(1,0)[40]{}]{} (42,172)[(1,0)[44]{}]{} (40,180)[(1,0)[48]{}]{} (38,188)[(1,0)[52]{}]{} (36,196)[(1,0)[56]{}]{}
(128,68)[(1,4)[33]{}]{} (128,68)[(-1,4)[33]{}]{} (128,64)[(0,0)[$o_5$]{}]{} (128,132)[(0,0)[III]{}]{} (124,84)[(1,0)[8]{}]{} (120,100)[(1,0)[16]{}]{} (116,116)[(1,0)[24]{}]{} (112,132)[(1,0)[32]{}]{} (108,148)[(1,0)[40]{}]{} (104,164)[(1,0)[48]{}]{} (100,180)[(1,0)[56]{}]{} (96,196)[(1,0)[64]{}]{}
(256,36)[(1,4)[41]{}]{} (256,36)[(-1,4)[41]{}]{} (256,32)[(0,0)[$o_7$]{}]{} (256,116)[(0,0)[III]{}]{} (248,68)[(1,0)[16]{}]{} (240,100)[(1,0)[32]{}]{} (232,132)[(1,0)[48]{}]{} (224,164)[(1,0)[64]{}]{} (216,196)[(1,0)[80]{}]{}
(197,200)[(1,-4)[5]{}]{} (212,140)[(1,-4)[5]{}]{} (227,80)[(1,-4)[5]{}]{} (242,20)[(1,-4)[5]{}]{} (218,100)
(183,200)[(-1,-4)[5]{}]{} (168,140)[(-1,-4)[5]{}]{} (153,80)[(-1,-4)[5]{}]{} (138,20)[(-1,-4)[5]{}]{} (158,100)
(0,100)[(4,1)[400]{}]{} (0,100)[(4,-1)[400]{}]{} (320,170)[(0,0)[$r_{even}$]{}]{} (320,30)[(0,0)[$r_{odd}$]{}]{}
\[sitemplates\] Let ${{\cal T}}$ be a nontrivial self-similar template. Then there is a choice $N\in \{I,II,III,IV\}$ such that for $r\in {\cal R}_{-\infty}$, $r\cap
W_i\subset Q^N_i$. Each $r\in {\cal R}_{-\infty}$ is $\Phi$ invariant, and $r_{even}$ and $r_{odd}$ are the ${\cal D}_N$ images of the boundary rays of ${\cal R}_{-\infty}$ as a closed interval. In particular the set of $r\in {\cal R}_{-\infty}$ span a space isometric, via ${\cal D}_N$ to a convex cone in $R^2$.
The fact that ${\cal R}_{-\infty}$ is a closed interval follows from Proposition \[interval\]. If $r_1,r_2\in {\cal R}_{-\infty}$ then their invariance under the homothety $\Phi^2$ implies that $\angle
_T(r_1,r_2)=\angle_v(r_1,r_2)$, and hence the rays between $r_1$ and $r_2$ span a space isometric to a convex cone in $R^2$. In particular, no ray between $r_1$ and $r_2$ can intersect an origin $o_i$. Thus the middle ($\Phi$ invariant) ray $r_m$ determines $N,M\in\{I, II, III, IV\}$ such that $r_m\cap W_{2n}\subset
Q_N$, and $r_m\cap W_{2n+1} \subset Q_{M}$. The above says that for any interior ray, $r$, $r\cap W_{2n}\subset Q_N$, and $r\cap W_{2n+1}
\subset Q_{M}$. Consider the development map ${\cal D}$ determined by this choice of quarter planes. We will assume that ${\cal D}(v)$ is the origin, so in particular ${\cal D}(Q_i)$ and ${\cal D}({{\cal S}}_i)$ miss the origin. Now ${\cal D}\circ\Phi^2 \circ {\cal D}^{-1}$ is defined when restricted to the image of each strip or quarter plane. It is clearly just multiplication by 4, since that is what it does to each ray in the $\cal D$ image of ${\cal R}_{-\infty}$.
We assume that $N=I$ (the other cases are similar) and must prove that $M=III$. If $M=II$ (resp. $M=IV$) then for $i=1$ (resp. $i=0$), ${\cal
D}(Q_i)\cup{\cal D}({{\cal S}}_i)\cup {\cal D}(Q_{i+1})$ will contain a half plane which in turn contains one of ${\cal D}(Q_i)$ or ${\cal
D}(Q_{i+1})$. But this cannot happen since any ray entering that half plane will never leave it. If $M=I$ then for $k\geq max\{\frac {\pi}
{\beta},\frac {\pi} {\pi-\beta}\}$ we have $\cup_{i=1}^k ({\cal
D}(Q_i)\cup {\cal D}{{\cal S}}_i)$ contains a half plane which in turn contains one of the quarter planes and the same argument works. Thus we conclude that $M=III$, and $Q_i=Q^N_i$.
We know that ${\cal D}_N\circ\Phi \circ {\cal D}_N^{-1}$ is just multiplication by 2. This means in particular that all rays in ${\cal R}_{-\infty}$ are invariant under $\Phi$. Now since at least one ray between $r_{even}$ and $r_{odd}$ hits every ${\cal D}_N(Q_i)$ this is true of all such rays, hence all are ${\cal D}_N$ of a ray in ${{\cal T}}$. This gives a 1-1 correspondence between rays in ${{\cal T}}$ and rays in the plane between $r_{even}$ and $r_{odd}$ completing the lemma.
The argument in the last proof shows that a self-similar template is nontrivial if and only if there is an $N \in \{I,II,III,IV\}$ such that some (and hence any) ray between the corresponding $r_{even}$ and $r_{odd}$ intersects every ${\cal D}_N(Q^N_i)$. But by self-similarity this will be true if and only if the line segment from ${\cal
D}_N(o_0)$ to ${\cal D}_N(o_2)$ intersects ${\cal D}_N(Q^N_1)$. This leads to the following lemma:
We will use the notation ${\mathbb R}^4_0=\{(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)\subset
{\mathbb R}^4\mid x_1,\, x_3>0\}$.
Let $A_\beta$ be: $$\{(x,y)\in (-\frac \pi 2,\frac \pi 2)\times (-\frac \pi 2,\frac \pi
2)\mid\mbox{$x+\beta \geq y\geq x-\beta$ and $\ -x+(\pi-\beta)\geq y \geq
-x-(\pi-\beta)$}\}.$$
See Figure \[figureab\].
(110,110)
(5,5)
(100,100) (0,0)[(100,100)]{} (0,60)[(1,1)[40]{}]{} (60,0)[(1,1)[40]{}]{} (0,60)[(1,-1)[60]{}]{} (40,100)[(1,-1)[60]{}]{} (0,50)[(1,0)[100]{}]{} (50,0)[(0,1)[100]{}]{}
(50,10)[(1,0)[20]{}]{} (40,20)[(1,0)[40]{}]{} (30,30)[(1,0)[60]{}]{} (20,40)[(1,0)[80]{}]{} (10,50)[(1,0)[80]{}]{} (0,60)[(1,0)[80]{}]{} (10,70)[(1,0)[60]{}]{} (20,80)[(1,0)[40]{}]{} (30,90)[(1,0)[20]{}]{}
(55,5)[(1,0)[10]{}]{} (45,15)[(1,0)[30]{}]{} (35,25)[(1,0)[50]{}]{} (25,35)[(1,0)[70]{}]{} (15,45)[(1,0)[80]{}]{} (5,55)[(1,0)[80]{}]{} (5,65)[(1,0)[70]{}]{} (15,75)[(1,0)[50]{}]{} (25,85)[(1,0)[30]{}]{} (35,95)[(1,0)[10]{}]{}
(10,0)[(0,0)\[t\][-$\frac \pi 2$]{}]{} (110,0)[(0,0)\[t\][$\frac \pi 2$]{}]{} (70,0)[(0,0)\[t\][$\beta$-$\frac \pi 2$]{}]{} (0,105)[(0,0)[$\frac \pi 2$]{}]{} (0,0)[(0,0)\[b\][-$\frac \pi 2$]{}]{}
\[goodset\] Fix $\pi>\beta>0$ and let ${\cal A}_\beta$ be the set of $(l_0,\eps_0,l_1,\eps_1)\subset {\mathbb R}^4_0$ such that the self-similar template with data $(\beta;l_0, \eps_0, l_1, \eps_1)$ is trivial. Then $${\cal A}_\beta = \{(l_0,\eps_0,l_1,\eps_1)\in {\mathbb R}^4_0\mid (arctan(\frac {\eps_0}
{l_0}),arctan(\frac {\eps_1}{l_1}))\in A_\beta\}$$
Let $\psi_i=arctan(\frac {\eps_i}
{l_i})$. The proof follows once we show that $R^4-{\cal A}_\beta$ consists of 4 components given in order for $N$=$I$, $II$, $III$, and $IV$ by: $$\psi_0>\psi_1+\beta,\ \ \ -\psi_1-(\pi-\beta)>\psi_0,\ \ \
\psi_1-\beta>\psi_0,\ \ \ {\rm and}\ \ \psi_0>-\psi_1+(\pi-\beta).$$
Here we do the case $N=I$, i.e. the line segment from ${\cal D}_I(o_0)$ to ${\cal D}_I(o_2)$ intersects ${\cal D}_I(Q^I_1)$ . The cases $N=II,III,
{\rm and}\ IV$ are similar.
Let $\pi>\theta_0>0$ be the angle between the line segment from ${\cal
D}_I(o_1)$ to ${\cal D}_I(o_0)$ and the “incoming” edge of ${\cal
D}_I(Q^I_1)$ (see Figure \[figure8.6\]). Here the “incoming” edge is the ${\cal D}_I$ image of the negative half line of $L_1^-$ (since $Q^I_1$ is of type $III$). Similarly let $\theta_2$ be the angle between the line segment from ${\cal D}_I(o_1)$ to ${\cal D}_I(o_2)$ and the “outgoing” edge of ${\cal D}_I(Q^I_1)$. $\theta_1$ will be the angle at ${\cal D}_I(o_1)$ of the sector ${\cal D}_I(Q^I_1)$ (which in our case is just $\beta$). It is easy to see that our condition is equivalent to $$\pi> \theta_0 + \theta_1 + \theta_2.$$ The rest of the argument is just that the definitions (being careful about how the sign of $\eps_i$ and the orientation of the strips interact) give us, when $N=I$, $$\theta_0=\frac \pi 2 - arctan(\frac{\eps_0} {l_0})\ \ \ {\rm and} \ \
\theta_2=\frac \pi 2 - arctan(\frac{-\eps_1} {l_1})$$ which completes the argument.
(100,100) (0,0)[(100,100)]{} (40,0)[(0,1)[60]{}]{} (15,30)[(0,1)[70]{}]{} (15,30)[(-1,2)[15]{}]{} (40,60)[(1,-2)[30]{}]{} (80,50)[(-1,2)[25]{}]{} (80,50)[(0,1)[50]{}]{} (40,10)[(0,1)[0]{}]{} (65,9)[(-1,2)[0]{}]{}
(8,80)[(0,0)[$I$]{}]{} (72,80)[(0,0)[$I$]{}]{} (50,20)[(0,0)[$III$]{}]{}
(15,90)[(-1,0)[15]{}]{} (15,80)[(-1,0)[15]{}]{} (15,70)[(-1,0)[15]{}]{} (15,60)[(-1,0)[15]{}]{} (15,50)[(-1,0)[10]{}]{} (15,40)[(-1,0)[5]{}]{}
(40,10)[(1,0)[25]{}]{} (40,20)[(1,0)[20]{}]{} (40,30)[(1,0)[15]{}]{} (40,40)[(1,0)[10]{}]{} (40,50)[(1,0)[5]{}]{}
(80,60)[(-1,0)[5]{}]{} (80,70)[(-1,0)[10]{}]{} (80,80)[(-1,0)[15]{}]{} (80,90)[(-1,0)[20]{}]{}
(40,60)[(-5,-6)[15]{}]{} (40,60)[(4,-1)[15]{}]{}
(25,20)[(-1,0)[9]{}]{} (30,20)[(1,0)[9]{}]{} (70,45)[(2,1)[10]{}]{} (62,41)[(-2,-1)[10]{}]{} (28,20)[(0,0)[$l_0$]{}]{} (66,43)[(0,0)[$l_1$]{}]{}
(20,47)[(0,1)[13]{}]{} (20,42)[(0,-1)[13]{}]{} (71,58)[(1,-2)[5]{}]{} (69,62)[(-1,2)[5]{}]{} (20,45)[(0,0)[$\epsilon_0$]{}]{} (70,60)[(0,0)[$\epsilon_1$]{}]{}
(34,41)[(0,0)[$\theta_0$]{}]{} (45,41)[(0,0)[$\theta_1$]{}]{} (52,50)[(0,0)[$\theta_2$]{}]{}
(10,50)[(0,0)[$\beta$]{}]{} (75,70)[(0,0)[$\beta$]{}]{}
We extract the information we need with the following elementary (but somewhat non-trivial):
\[geodata\] Pick $a_i>0$ for $i=1,\ldots,4$, $b_1>0$, $b_2\in{\mathbb R}$, and a subset ${\cal B}\subset {\mathbb R}^4_0$. Suppose there is a ${\beta}\in(0,\pi)$ so that ${\cal B}$ is precisely the set of $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)\in {\mathbb R}^4_0$ for which $$(a_1x_1+b_1,a_2x_2+b_2,a_3x_3,a_4x_4)\in {\cal A}_\beta.$$ Then $\beta$, $\frac {b_1} {a_1}$, and $\frac {b_2} {a_2}$ are uniquely determined by ${\cal B}$. If this unique ${\beta}$ is not $\frac \pi 2$ then $\frac {b_1} {a_2}$ and $\frac {b_2} {a_1}$ are also determined by ${\cal B}$.
We consider the map $$\Psi(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)=(arctan(\frac
{a_2x_2+b_2}{a_1x_1+b_1}),arctan(\frac {a_4x_4}{a_3x_3}))\eqdef
(\psi_0(x_1,x_2),\psi_1(x_3,x_4)).$$ the previous lemma along with our assumption says that for $a_1x_1+b_1>0$ and $x_3>0$ $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)\in {\cal B}\Longleftrightarrow
\Psi(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)\in A_\beta$. $\Psi$ maps $\{(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)|a_1x_1+b_1>0\ {\rm and}\ x_3>0\}$ onto $(-\frac \pi
2,\frac \pi 2)\times (-\frac \pi 2,\frac \pi 2)$.
[*Step 1: $\beta$ is determined by ${\cal B}$.*]{} We notice that $(x,y^0)\in A_\beta$ for all $\frac \pi 2 -\epsilon
<x<\frac \pi 2$ if and only if $y^0=\frac \pi 2-\beta$. Similarly $(x^1,y)\in A$ for all large $\frac \pi 2 -\epsilon <y<\frac \pi 2$ if and only if $x^1=\frac \pi 2 -\beta$. Thus $(1,x_2,x^0_3,x^0_4)\in {\cal
B}$ for all sufficiently large $x_2$ if and only if $\psi_1((x^0_3,x^0_4)) = \frac \pi 2-\beta$, while $(x^1_1,x^1_2,1,x_4)\in {\cal B}$ for all sufficiently large $x_4$ if and only if $\psi_0((x^1_1,x^1_2)) = \frac \pi 2-\beta$. Fix such an $(x^1_1,x^1_2)$, then, if $\beta \not= \frac \pi 2$, there is a unique $x^1_4$ such that for all $x_4\geq x^1_4$, $(x^1_1,x^1_2,1,x_4)\in
{\cal B}$. If $\beta <\frac \pi 2$ we have $\psi_1(1,x^1_4)=\frac \pi 2
-2\beta$, while if $\beta>\frac \pi 2$ we have $\psi_1(1,x^1_4)=
2\beta-\frac {3\pi} 2$.
Let $\bar {a_i}$, $\bar {b_1},\bar {b_2}$, and $\bar \beta$ be another choice of parameters that work and $\bar \Psi$ and $\bar \psi_i$ the corresponding functions. Then $\tan(\bar \psi_1) = c\tan(\psi_1)$ where $c=\frac {\bar a_4a_3}{\bar a_3 a_4}>0$. Plugging in $(x^0_3,x^0_4)$ from the previous paragraph allows us to conclude $\tan(\frac \pi 2 - \bar \beta) = c \tan(\frac \pi 2 - \beta)$, (i.e. $\tan(\bar \beta)=\frac 1 c \tan(\beta)$ if $\beta\not= \frac \pi
2$). Note in particular that the sign of $\frac \pi 2 -\bar \beta$ is the same as the sign of $\frac \pi 2 -\beta$. Plugging in $(1,x^1_4)$ from the above paragraph we get $\tan(\frac \pi 2-2\bar
\beta)=c\tan(\frac \pi 2-2\beta)$ if $\beta <\frac \pi 2$ and $\tan(2\bar \beta-\frac {3\pi} 2)=c\tan(2\beta-\frac {3\pi} 2)$ if $\beta>\frac \pi 2$. However this can only happen if c=1 and $\beta =
\bar \beta$. Thus we conclude that $\beta$ is determined by ${\cal B}$ and that either $\beta=\frac \pi 2$ or else $c=1$ and $\psi_1=\bar\psi_1$.
[*Step 2: If $\beta \not= \frac \pi 2$ then $\psi_0=\bar \psi_0$, while if $\beta = \frac \pi 2$ then $\tan (\bar \psi_0)=\frac 1 c \tan(\psi_0)$.*]{} We will first show that given ${\cal B}$, $\beta$ and $\psi_1$ then there is at most one choice for $\psi_0$. To see this fix $(x_1,x_2)$ and consider $S\subset R^2$ such that ${\cal B}\cap ((x_1,x_2)\times
R^2)=(x_1,x_2)\times S$. Then $\psi_1(S)$ is precisely the interval such that $A_\beta\cap (\psi_0(x_1,x_2)\times R)=(\psi_0(x_1,x_2)\times
\psi_1(S))$. However the shape of $A_\beta$ is such that $\psi_1(S)$ thus determines $\psi_0(x_1,x_2)$, unless $\beta=\frac \pi 2$ in which case it determines $\psi_0(x_1,x_2)$ up to sign. The sign is determined by continuity and the fact that for $x_2$ large and positive (resp. negative) then $\psi_0(x_1,x_2)$ is positive (resp. negative).
Thus if $\beta \not= \frac \pi 2$ then $\psi_1=\bar\psi_1$ and we see that $\bar \psi_0 =\psi_0$ is the unique solution. If $\beta = \frac \pi 2$ then $\tan(\bar \psi_1) = c\tan(\psi_1)$ and $A_\beta =\{(x,y)\in
R^2|-x+\frac \pi 2\geq y \geq x-\frac \pi 2$ when $x>0$ and $x+\frac \pi
2\geq y \geq -x-\frac \pi 2$ when $x<0\}$. Thus for $c>0$ the map $(x,y)\rightarrow (arctan(\frac 1 c\tan(x)),arctan(c\tan(y))$ preserves $A_\beta$ and step 2 follows.
The rest of the proof follows from the following equation that holds for all positive $x_1$ and all $x_2$: $$\frac {\bar a_2x_2+\bar b_2}{\bar a_1x_1+\bar b_1}=\frac 1 c \frac
{a_2x_2+b_2}{a_1x_1+b_1}$$ and the fact that $c=1$ when $\beta \not= \frac \pi 2$.
### Recovering the data
In this section ${\cal G}$ will denote a fixed admissible graph of groups, $G\defeq \pi_1({\cal G})$ the fundamental group of ${\cal G}$, and $G{\curvearrowright}T$ the Bass-Serre action for ${\cal G}$. For every vertex $v$ of ${\cal G}$ we choose a generator $\zeta_v\in Z(G_v)$ for the center of $Z(G_v)$ as in Definition \[geometricdatadef\]. Also, we will fix an admissible action $G{\curvearrowright}X$. We will use the template notation from section \[subsectemplates\]. Recall that when ${{\cal T}}$ is a half-template, then $\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}\subset \geo{{\cal T}}$ denotes the set of boundary points corresponding to rays which intersect all but finitely many walls.
The goal of this section is to prove the remaining half of Theorem \[main\]: the topological conjugacy class of the action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$ determines the functions $MLS_v:G_v{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}_+$ and $\tau_v:G_v{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}$ up to a multiplicative factor, for every vertex $v\in{\cal G}$.
An element $g$ of a vertex group $G_v$ is [*restricted*]{} if $g$ acts on $\bar Y_v$ (see section \[sectionvertexandedge\]) as an axial isometry and its fixed points in $\geo \bar Y_v$ are distinct from the fixed points of $G_e$ where $e$ is any edge incident to $v$.
It will be convenient to choose, for each vertex $v$ of ${\cal G}$, a restricted element $\de_v\in G_v$ which lies in the commutator subgroup $[G_v,G_v]\subset G_v$:
\[lotsofrestricted\] For every vertex $v$, the commutator subgroup $[G_v,G_v]$ contains restricted elements.
We first recall that $H_v\defeq G_v/Z(G_v)$ is a nonelementary hyperbolic group, and the induced action $H_v{\curvearrowright}\bar Y_v$ is discrete and cocompact.
Choose a free nonabelian subgroup $S\subset H_v$ [@hypgps p. 212], and elements $\bar g_1,\,\bar g_2\in S$ which belong to a free basis for the commutator subgroup $[S,S]\subset [H_v,H_v]$, and let $g_i\in G_v$ be lift of $\bar g_i$ under the projection $G_v{\rightarrow}H_v$. Then $g_i$ acts axially on $\bar Y_v$ since $\bar g_i$ has infinite order in $H_v$ and $H_v$ acts discretely on $\bar Y_v$. Note that $Fix(g_1,\geo\bar Y_v)\cap Fix(g_2,\geo\bar Y_v)=\emptyset$, since otherwise by Lemma \[discreteaxis\] we would have $Fix(g_1,\geo\bar Y_v)=Fix(g_2,\geo\bar Y_v)$, forcing ${\langle}g_1,g_2{\rangle}$ to be virtually cyclic, which is absurd. Set $h_n\defeq g_1^ng_2^n$. Lemma \[almostfree\] tells us that $h_n$ is axial for large $n$ and $Fix(h_n,\geo\bar Y_v)$ converges to $\{\xi_1,\xi_2\}\subset \geo\bar Y_v$ where $\xi_i\in Fix(g_i,\geo\bar Y_v)$. The induced action of $G_e$ on $\bar Y_v$ translates a geodesic $\ga_e\subset \bar Y_v$. By the finiteness of $\cal G$ we can choose elements $g_e\in G_e$ such that the induced translation of $g_e$ is nonzero but uniformly bounded. Thus Lemma \[discreteaxis\] says that subsets $Fix(G_e,\geo\bar Y_v)=Fix(g_e,\geo\bar Y_v)$ define a discrete subset of $(\geo\bar Y_v\times\geo \bar Y_v)/{\mathbb Z}_2$, so either
a\) $Fix(h_n,\geo\bar Y_v)\cap Fix(G_e,\geo\bar Y_v)=\emptyset$ for all edges $e$ incident to $v$ when $n$ is large,
or
b\) There is a subsequence $h_{n_i}$ and an edge $e$ incident to $v$ so that $Fix(h_{n_i},\geo\bar Y_v)= Fix(G_e,\geo\bar Y_v)$.
But if b) held then we would have $ Fix(G_e,\geo\bar Y_v)=\{\xi_1,\xi_2\}$, which, by Lemma \[discreteaxis\], would force the absurd conclusion that $Fix(g_1,\geo\bar Y_v)=Fix(g_e,\geo\bar Y_v)=Fix(g_2,\geo \bar Y_v)$. Hence case a) holds and the lemma is proved.
Notice that for every $v$, $MLS_v(\de_v)\neq 0$ (since $\de_v$ acts on $\bar Y_v$ as an axial isometry), $\tau_v(\de_v)=0$ since $\de_v\in[G_v,G_v]$, and $\tau_v(\zeta_v)\neq 0$.
\[needthis\] In order to determine $MLS_v$ and $\tau_v$ up to a multiplicative factor, it suffices to determine the ratios $$\frac{MLS_{v}(\si)}{MLS_{v}(\de_{v})}\quad\mbox{and}\quad \frac{\tau_{v}(\si)}
{\tau_{v}(\zeta_{v})}$$ for every restricted element $\si\in G_v$ whose fixed point set in $\geo\bar Y_v$ is disjoint from $Fix(\de_v,\geo\bar Y_v)$.
Choose an arbitrary $\si\in G_v$.
We first discuss $MLS_v$. Note that $MLS_v(\si)=0$ iff $\si$ projects to an element of finite order in $H_v$; hence we may assume that $\si$ acts on $\bar Y_v$ as an axial isometry. First assume that $Fix(\si,\geo \bar Y_v)=Fix(\de_v,\geo \bar Y_v)$. Let $\bar\si,\bar \de_v\in H_v$ be the projections to $H_v$. Then $\bar\si$ and $\bar \de_v$ generate a virtually cyclic subgroup $S$ because they have a common axis. Hence there is a finite subset $\{s_1,\ldots,s_k\}\subset G_v$ so that for any $n$ we have $\si^n=s_{i_n}\de_v^{j_n}\zeta_v^{k_n}$ for suitable $i_n,\,j_n,\,k_n$. Then $$MLS_v(\si)=\lim_{n{\rightarrow}\infty}\frac{1}{n}MLS_v(\si^n)=\lim_{n{\rightarrow}\infty}
MLS_v(\de_v^{j_n})$$ so we can recover the ratio above in this case.
Now assume $Fix(\si,\geo \bar Y_v)\cap Fix(\de_v,\geo \bar Y_v)=\emptyset$. Setting $h_k\defeq \de_v^k\si^{k^2}$, we argue as in the proof of Lemma \[lotsofrestricted\] to see that for large $k$, $h_k$ is restricted, $Fix(h_k,\geo \bar Y_v)\cap Fix(\de_v,\geo \bar Y_v)=\emptyset$, and $|MLS_v(h_k)-kMLS_v(\de_v)-k^2MLS_v(\si)|$ is uniformly bounded (by Lemma \[almostfree\]). We may then recover the desired ratios from the formula $$MLS_v(\si)=\lim_{k{\rightarrow}\infty}\frac{1}{k^2}MLS_v(h_k).$$
We now consider the behavior of $\tau_v$. Suppose $\si$ projects to an element of finite order in $H_v$, or $Fix(\si,\geo \bar Y_v)\cap Fix(\de_v,\geo\bar Y_v)\neq
\emptyset$. In either case we have a finite set $\{s_1,\ldots,s_k\}\subset G_v$ so that $\si^n=s_{i_n}\de_v^{j_n}\zeta_v^{k_n}$ for suitable $i_n,\,j_n,\,k_n$. Then $$\tau_v(\si)=\lim_{n{\rightarrow}\infty}\frac{1}{n}\tau_v(\si^n)=\lim_{n{\rightarrow}\infty}
[\frac{j_n}{n}\tau_v(\de_v)+\frac{k_n}{n}\tau_v(\zeta_v)].$$ For the case $Fix(\si,\geo \bar Y_v)\cap Fix(\de_v,\geo \bar Y_v)=\emptyset$, use the same $h_k$ as above for large $k$ since $\tau_v(h_k)=k^2\tau(\sigma)$.
We now focus our attention on a vertex $\bar v_1$ of ${\cal G}$. Choose an edge $\bar e$ of ${\cal G}$ incident to $\bar v_1$, and lift $\bar e$ to an edge $e$ of the Bass-Serre tree. We adopt the notation from section \[basicbassserre\] for the associated graph of groups ${\cal G}'$, $G'\defeq \pi_1({\cal G}')$, $T'\subset T$, etc. We fix some restricted element $\si\in G_{\bar v_1}$ with $Fix(\si,\geo\bar Y_{v_1})\cap Fix(\de_{v_1},\geo\bar Y_{v_1})= \emptyset$.
(Special rays) \[specialrays\] For every $(p,q,r,s)\in{\mathbb R}^4_0$ we define a geodesic ray $\ga\subset T' $ and sequences $\hat l_i=l_i(p,q,r,s)$, $\hat \eps_i=\hat\eps_i(p,q,r,s)$ as follows.
[*Case 1: $\bar e\subset{\cal G}$ is embedded.*]{} Let $e=\ol{v_1v_2}$. For each $i\in{\mathbb N}$ we set $s_{2i-1}\defeq \si^{2^{i-1}}\de_{v_1}^{[p2^{i-1}]}\zeta_{v_1}^{[q2^{i-1}]}$ and $s_{2i}\defeq\de_{v_2}^{[r2^{i-1}]}\zeta_{v_2}^{[s2^{i-1}]}$, where $[x]$ denote the integer part of $x\in{\mathbb R}$. Then we let $\ga\subset T$ be the geodesic ray with successive edges $$\label{amalgray}
e,\,s_1e,\,s_1s_2e,\ldots,s_1\ldots s_ke,\ldots,$$ and define, for all $i\in{\mathbb N}$, $\hat l_{2i-1}=2^{i-1}(MLS_{v_1}(\si)+|p|MLS_{v_1}(\de_{v_1}))$, $\hat l_{2i}=2^{i-1}|r|MLS_{v_2}(\de_{v_2})$; and $\hat \eps_{2i+1}\defeq 2^i(\tau_{v_1}(\si)+q\tau_{v_1}(\zeta_{v_1}))$, and $\hat\eps_{2i}\defeq 2^{i-1}s\tau_{v_2}(\zeta_{v_2})$.
[*Case 2: $\bar e\subset {\cal G}$ is a loop.*]{} Let $t$ be as in section \[basicbassserre\]. For each $i\in {\mathbb N}$ we set $s_{2i-1}\defeq \si^{2^{i-1}}\de_{v_1}^{[p2^{i-1}]}\zeta_{v_1}^{[q2^{i-1}]}$ and $s_{2i}\defeq\de_{v_1}^{[r2^{i-1}]}\zeta_{v_1}^{[s2^{i-1}]}$; then we let $\ga\subset T$ be the geodesic with successive vertices $$\label{hnnray}v_1,\,tv_1,\,ts_1t^{-1}v_1,\,ts_1t^{-1}s_2tv_1,\ldots
ts_1t^{-1}s_2t\ldots s_{2k}tv_1,\ldots,$$ and define, for all $i\in{\mathbb N}$, $\hat l_{2i-1}=2^{i-1}(MLS_{v_1}(\si)+|p|MLS_{v_1}(\de_{v_1}))$, $\hat l_{2i}=2^{i-1}|r|MLS_{v_1}(\de_{v_1})$; and $\hat \eps_{2i+1}\defeq 2^i(\tau_{v_1}(\si)+q\tau_{v_1}(\zeta_{v_1}))$, and $\hat\eps_{2i}\defeq 2^{i-1}s\tau_{v_1}(\zeta_{v_1})$.
These rays are useful because they admit templates that are asymptotically self-similar:
\[itinscaleinvariant\] There is a half template $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ for $\ga$ with walls $Wall_{{\cal T}}=\{ W_i\}_{i=1}^\infty$ and strips $Strip_{{\cal T}}=\{{{\cal S}}_i\}_{i=1}^\infty$, so that for $i$ sufficiently large, $l({{\cal S}}_i)=\hat l_i$, $\eps({{\cal S}}_i)=\hat\eps_i$, and ${\alpha}(W_i)=\beta$, where $\beta$ is the Tits angle between the (positively oriented) ${\mathbb R}$-factors of $Y_{v_1}$ and $Y_{v_2}$.
We will treat the case when $\bar e$ is embedded; the other case is similar. To prove the lemma we will show that the desired template may be obtained from a standard template for $\ga$ by changing the strip widths and strip gluings by a bounded amount. Thus by “uniformly” we will just mean independent of $i$, but possibly dependent on all other choices.
For $i\geq 1$ we set $e_i\defeq s_1\ldots s_{i-1}e$ and $v_i\defeq e_i\cap e_{i+1}$. Recall (section \[templatesection\]) that the standard template $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ for $\ga$ is constructed using flats $F_{e_i}\subset Y_{e_i}$ and flat strips ${{\cal S}}_{e_i,e_{i+1}}\subset
Y_{v_i}$, where ${{\cal S}}_{e_i,e_{i+1}}=\ga_{e_i,e_{i+1}}\times{\mathbb R}\subset\bar Y_{v_i}\times{\mathbb R}=Y_{v_i}$. We choose $x_1\in F_{e_1}$ and set $x_i\defeq s_1\ldots s_{i-1}x_1\in F_{e_i}$.
We will do the case when $i=2j-1$ is odd; the even case is similar. Let $\pi:Y_{v_1}=\bar Y_{v_1}\times{\mathbb R}{\rightarrow}\bar Y_{v_1}$ be the projection map, and set $\bar x_1\defeq\pi(x_1)$, $\bar F_e\defeq\pi(F_e)$, $\bar F_{s_ie}\defeq
\pi(\bar s_iF_e)=\pi(F_{s_ie})$, and $\ga_{e,s_ie}\defeq\pi({{\cal S}}_{e,s_ie})$. We apply $(s_1\ldots s_{i-1})^{-1}$ and then $\pi$ to everything, and are thereby reduced to showing that there is a $c_1$ so that $d(\bar x_1,\ga_{e,s_ie})<c_1$, $d(s_i\bar x_1,\ga_{e,s_ie})<c_1$, and $|d(s_i\bar x_1,\bar x_1)-\hat l_i|<c_1$.
>From the definition of $s_i$ we have $s_i\bar x_1=\si^{2^{j-1}}\de_{v_1}^{[p2^{j-1}]}\bar x_1$ since $\zeta_{v_1}$ acts trivially on $\bar Y_{v_1}$. Since $\si,\,\de_{v_1}
\in G_{v_1}$ are restricted elements, the sets $\geo\bar F_e\subset\geo \bar Y_{v_1}$ and $\geo \bar F_{s_ie}\subset\geo\bar Y_{v_1}$ are disjoint from the fixed point sets of $\si$ and $\de_{v_1}$; the latter two sets are disjoint by assumption. Therefore we may apply Lemma \[almostfree\] to conclude that when $j$ is sufficiently large,
a\) $s_i:\bar Y_{v_1}{\rightarrow}\bar Y_{v_1}$ is an axial isometry with an axis $\ga_i\subset \bar Y_{v_1}$ at uniformly bounded distance from $\bar x_1$ and $s_i\bar x_1$.
b\) $|d(s_i\bar x_1,\bar x_1)-\hat l_i|$ is uniformly bounded.
c\) The attracting (resp. repelling) fixed point of $s_i$ in $\geo\bar Y_{v_1}$ is close to the attracting fixed point, $\xi^+$, of $\si$ (resp. repelling fixed point, $\xi^-$, of $\de_{v_1}^{sign(p)}$).
Let $\ga_{e,s_ie}$ be the shortest path from $\bar F_e$ to $\bar F_{s_ie}$ with endpoints $\bar z_i\in \bar F_e$ and $\bar w_i \in \bar F_{s_ie}$ Let $\ga$ be a geodesic with endpoints $\xi^-$ and $\xi^+$. The Gromov hyperbolicity of $\bar Y_{v_1}$ and Lemma \[geodesicunion\] part 3 imply that for $t$ fixed and large and $i$ large the axis of $s_i$ comes within a uniform distance of $\ga_{e,s_ie}(t)$ and hence $\ga_{e,s_ie}(t)$ stay a uniform distance from $\ga$. Thus $\bar z_i$, which is the point on $\bar F_e$ closest to $\ga_{e,s_ie}(t)$, must stay a uniform distance from the set of points on $\bar F_e$ closest (in a Buseman function sense) to $\xi^+$ (which we see by taking $t$ large) and hence stay uniformly close to $\bar x_1$ . Similarly $s_i^{-1}(\bar w_i)$ approaches the set of points on $\bar F_e$ closest to $\xi^-$ and hence $\bar w_i$ stays uniformly close to $s_i(\bar x_1)$.
[*Step 2: There is a $c_2$ so that the standard template $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ satisfies $|\eps({{\cal S}}_i)-\hat\eps_i|<c_2$ and ${\alpha}(W_i)=\beta$ for all $i>1$.*]{} The assertion that ${\alpha}(W_i)=\beta$ is clear from the definition of $\beta(W_i)$ and the construction of standard templates. Step 1 then implies that there is a $c_3$ so that the origin $o_i\in W_i$ maps under $f:{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}X$ to within distance $c_3$ of $x_i$, for $i>1$. Hence from the definition of $\eps:Strip^o_{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}{\mathbb R}$ we see that $\eps({{\cal S}}_i)$ agrees with $\tau_{v_i}((s_1\ldots s_{i-1})s_i(s_1\ldots s_{i-1})^{-1})$ to within $2c_3$. The conjugacy invariance of $\tau_v$ then gives $|\eps({{\cal S}}_i)-\hat\eps_i|<c_2$ for a suitable $c_2$.
[*Step 3: Adjusting $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$.*]{} In steps 1 and 2 we have shown that the standard template satisfies conditions of Lemma \[itinscaleinvariant\] to within bounded error. So we now modify the construction of ${{\cal T}}$ by changing the metric[^13] on $\hat {{\cal S}}_{e_i,e_{i+1}}$so that $Width(\hat{{\cal S}}_{e_i,e_{i+1}})=\hat l_i$ if $l_i\geq 1$, and leaving $\hat{{\cal S}}_{e_i,e_{i+1}}$ untouched otherwise, and by modifying the gluings $\partial\hat{{\cal S}}_{e_i,e_{i+1}}{\rightarrow}W_{e_i}\,\amalg\,
W_{e_{i+1}}$ by a bounded amount so that $\eps({{\cal S}}_i)=\hat\eps_i$. Finally, if we redefine $f:{{\cal T}}{\rightarrow}X$ to agree with the original $f$ on $\amalg_e \,W_e$ and on ${{\cal T}}-(\amalg_e \,W_e)$, then we get the desired template for $\ga$.
Consider the subset ${\cal B}\subset{\mathbb R}^4_0$ of $4$-tuples $(p,q,r,s)$ for which the geodesic ray $\ga\subset T$ defined above gives a trivial subset $\geo^{\geo\ga}X$ (i.e. a single point); by Lemma \[fixedinbdy\] and Corollary \[geoetadetection\] the subset $\geo^{\geo\ga}X$ can be detected just using the action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$, and so ${\cal B}$ is also determined by the action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$. On the other hand, by Theorem \[shadthm\], $\geo^{\geo\ga}X$ is trivial iff $\geo^\infty{{\cal T}}$ is trivial (i.e. a single point) where $({{\cal T}},f,\phi)$ is any template for $\ga$. Using Lemma \[itinscaleinvariant\] we arrive at the following: the subset ${\cal B}$ of $(p,q,r,s)\in{\mathbb R}^4_0$ so that any template ${{\cal T}}$ with $l({{\cal S}}_i)=\hat l_i(p,q,r,s)$, $\eps({{\cal S}}_i)=\hat\eps_i(p,q,r,s)$, and ${\alpha}(W_i)=\beta$ (for $i$ sufficiently large) is trivial, is determined by the action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$. But since a template ${{\cal T}}$ with $l({{\cal S}}_i)=\hat l_i(p,q,r,s)$, $\eps({{\cal S}}_i)=\hat\eps_i(p,q,r,s)$, and ${\alpha}(W_i)=\beta$ (for $i$ sufficiently large) is trivial iff the self-similar template with data $\{\beta;\hat l_3,\hat\eps_3,\hat l_4,\hat\eps_4\}$ is trivial, we may apply Corollary \[geodata\] to conclude that the ratios $$\frac{MLS_{v_1}(\si)}{MLS_{v_1}(\de_{v_1})}\quad\mbox{and}\quad
\frac{\tau_{v_1}(\si)}{\tau_{v_1}(\zeta_{v_1})}$$ as well as $\beta$ are determined by the action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$. Moreover, unless $\beta=\frac{\pi}{2}$ then $$\frac{MLS_{v_1}(\si)}{\tau_{v_1}(\zeta_{v_1})}\quad\mbox{and}\quad
\frac{\tau_{v_1}(\si)}{MLS_{v_1}(\de_{v_1})}$$ are also determined.
Examples {#examplesection}
--------
In this section we construct the example mentioned in the introduction: we will find two locally compact Hadamard spaces $X_0$ and $X_r$ on which an admissible group $G$ acts discretely and cocompactly with the same geometric data (i.e. the induced actions of $G$ on $\geo X_0$ and $\geo X_r$ are topologically conjugate), an equivariant quasi-isometry $\tilde F:X_0\to X_r$, and a geodesic ray $\gamma$ of $X_0$ such that $\tilde F(\gamma)$ does not lie within a bounded distance of a geodesic ray in $X_r$.
To do that we consider for each (small) real $r$ a complex $M_r$, built out of four flat square tori $T_i$. On each $T_i$ we use standard angle coordinates $(s,t)_i$ with $(s+2n\pi,t+2m\pi)_i=(s,t)_i$ for any integers $n$ and $m$. We let $M_r=T_1\cup T_2\cup T_3\cup T_4/\sim_r$, where $(0,t)_1\sim_r(t,0)_2$, $(\pi,t)_2\sim_r(t,\pi)_3$, $(\pi,t)_3\sim(t,\pi)_4$ and $(0,t)_4\sim_r(t,r)_1$. We will let $X_r$ represent the universal cover.
The $X_r$ are Hadamard spaces with admissible fundamental groups which all have the same geometric data. This is easiest to see by considering $M_r$ as the union of four spaces $T_1\cup T_2$, $T_2\cup T_3$, $T_3\cup T_4$, and $T_4\cup
T_1$ each of which is isometric to a figure eight cross a circle, where both circles in the figure eight and the product circle have length $2\pi$. Each of the three spaces is glued to adjacent spaces along (product) boundary tori (reversing the factors). We note that the underlying finite graph of [G]{} is a square with four edges $e_i$ corresponding naturally to $T_i$.
It is easy to see that the $M_r$ are homeomorphic. In fact for small $r$ the fundamental groups are identified in a natural way. However, we will find it more useful to consider the map $F_r:M_0\to M_r$ defined by $F(s,t)_i=(s,t)_i$, except that $F((0,t)_4)=(t,0)_1$. This is not continuous along the closed geodesic $(0,t)_4$, but the induced equivariant quasi-isometry $\tilde F:X_0\to
X_r$ is relatively easy to study.
We now want to choose a geodesic ray $\gamma$ in $X_0$. For these spaces geodesics are just geodesics in templates. It is easier to first choose the degenerate half template ${{\cal T}}$ that it will lie in. By degenerate template we mean a template where we alow the strip widths to be 0. In fact in our case all the strip widths will be 0, all the angles will be $\frac \pi 2$, and the displacements will all be odd multiples of $\pi$. We will choose ${{\cal T}}$ so that the edges of the ray in the Bass-Serre tree project to the finite graph periodically in the order $e_1$, $e_2$, $e_3$, $e_4$, $e_1\ldots$. Subject to this constraint we can still choose the itinerary such that the displacements in ${{\cal T}}$ are any odd multiples of $\pi$ we please. Hence we may choose the itinerary (e.g. make it nontrivial) so that there is a geodesic $\gamma$ in ${{\cal T}}$ which misses all the vertices such that $\gamma\cap W_i$ gets arbitrarily long. (The easiest way to see this is to consider the developement $\cal D$. First choose a ray $r$ that you want to be ${\cal D}(\ga)$. The choice of itinerary at each step amounts to a choice of quarter planes among those shifted by $2n\pi$. We can thus make the choice so that the quarter plane intersects $r$ in increasingly long intervals).
Of course $\gamma$ is also a geodesic ray in $X_0$. $\tilde F$ will take ${{\cal T}}$ to a corresponding template ${{\cal T}}_r$, and the geodesic ray corresponding to $F(\gamma)$ must be a geodesic in this template. $\tilde F$ will be discontinuous exactly where walls corresponding to $e_4$ and $e_1$ are glued. The discontinuity is a translation by $r$ perpendicular to the gluing line.
We develop ${{\cal T}}$ (and ${{\cal T}}_r$) to the plane in such a way that $\gamma$ goes to a ray with angle $\frac \pi 2>\theta>0$, the quarter planes map to planes of type II and IV where walls of type $e_1$ and $e_3$ yield quarter planes of type II and walls of type $e_2$ and $e_4$ yield quarter planes of type IV. $\tilde
F$ will induce a map of developments which is discontinuous precisely on the horizontal lines where the quarter planes coming from $e_4$ meet those coming from $e_1$. The discontinuity will be precisely a vertical shift by $r$. Thus the image of $\gamma$ consists of arbitrarily long line segments of slope $\theta$ with infinitely many vertical jumps of size $r$. Since the segments get arbitrarily long, the only rays that can stay a bounded distance from $\tilde F(\gamma)$ must also have slope $\theta$. But then, because of the infinitely many vertical jumps of size $r$ in $\tilde F(\gamma)$, no such ray can stay a bounded distance from $\tilde F(\gamma)$.
One can make similar examples on singular piecewise Euclidean graph manifolds. We construct such examples by gluing together two pieces. Each piece is topologically a twice punctured torus cross $S^1$. The boundary of each piece will consist of two totally geodesic square flat two-tori. The first space is constructed by gluing both of the corresponding boundary tori together flipping the coordinates. The second space is similar except that for one of the boundary tori the gluing map is coordinate flipping composed with a small translation.
The metric of each piece is a product metric where the circle has length 1 and where the metric on the torus is the completion of the flat square torus minus two line segments (slits) of length $\frac 1 2$. The torus with the slits is a compact flat singular space with boundary being two closed geodesics of length 1 (i.e. going “around a slit”).
The argument that this gives an example is very similar to the above since geodesics in the space are in fact geodesics in the corresponding templates and since the induced map on the development of appropriate templates has properties similar to the above example.
We also suspect there are such examples on smooth graph manifolds. In fact one may be able to construct such an example by smooth approximations to the above example. To do this carefully it would be necessary to be careful with how closely template geodesics shadow actual geodesics in this case.
Chris Croke:\
Department of Mathematics\
University of Pennsylvania\
209 S. 33rd St.\
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6395\
[email protected]\
Bruce Kleiner:\
Department of Mathematics\
University of Utah\
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0090\
[email protected]\
Current address:\
Department of Mathematics\
University of Michigan\
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1109\
[email protected]\
[^1]: Following [@ballmann] we will refer to $CAT(0)$ spaces (complete, simply connected length spaces with nonpositive curvature in the sense of Alexandrov) as Hadamard spaces.
[^2]: Supported by NSF grants DMS-95-05175 DMS-96-26-232 and DMS 99-71749.
[^3]: Supported by a Sloan Foundation Fellowship, and NSF grants DMS-95-05175, DMS-96-26911, DMS-9022140.
[^4]: Let $M_1$ and $M_2$ be closed surfaces with nonpositive curvature, and let $N_1$ and $N_2$ be the Riemannian products $N_i\defeq M_i\times S^1$. Suppose $f_0:M_1{\rightarrow}M_2$ is a homotopy equivalence, $f\defeq f_0\times id_{S^1}:N_1{\rightarrow}N_2$ is the corresponding map between the $N_i$’s, and $\hat f:\tilde N_1{\rightarrow}\tilde N_2$ is a lift of $f$ to a map between the universal covers. Then it turns out that $\hat f$ extends continuously to up to the ideal boundary $\geo N_1$ if and only if $f_0$ is homotopic to a homothety.
[^5]: Boundaries can even fail to be (non-equivariantly) homeomorphic: [@leebcx] describes a pair of homeomorphic nonpositively curved $2$-complexes whose universal covers have nonhomeomorphic boundary (see also [@jwilson]).
[^6]: The action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$ is expansive if and only if $G$ is hyperbolic.
[^7]: It follows from the methods of [@ballmann III.3] that if $G{\curvearrowright}X$ is a cocompact isometric action on a Hadamard space, $g\in G$ is an axial isometry, and $\ga_g\subset$ is an axis for $g$ which does not bound a flat half plane, then the orbit of $\geo\ga\subset \geo X$ under the action $G{\curvearrowright}\geo X$ is dense in $\geo X$. Hence the set of points in $\geo X$ which are the unique attracting fixed point of some element of $G$ is dense in $\geo X$. Any $G$-equivariant homeomorphism $\geo X{\rightarrow}\geo X$ must fix this dense set pointwise, and must therefore be the identity. The uniqueness statement follows immediately from this.
[^8]: A subset $Z\subset X$ is $C$-quasi-convex if for all $x,\,y\in Z$ we have $\ol{xy}\subset N_C(Z)$.
[^9]: A map $c:[0,\infty)\to T$ has the [*bounded backtracking property*]{} if for every $r\in (0,\infty)$ there is an $r'\in (0,\infty)$ such that if $t_1<t_2$, and $d(c(t_1),c(t_2))>r'$, then $d(c(t),c(t_1))>r$ for every $t>t_2$.
[^10]: A direction for a strip ${{\cal S}}$ is an orientation for its ${\mathbb R}$-factor ${{\cal S}}\simeq {\mathbb R}\times I$.
[^11]: In general one may also have to complete the resulting quotient space to get a Hadamard space.
[^12]: ${{\cal S}}_{e_1,e_2}$ may have width zero.
[^13]: We do this in the simplest way: we start with the metric product decomposition $\hat{{\cal S}}_{e_i,e_{i+1}}\simeq I\times{\mathbb R}$ and then scale the metric on the $I$ factor.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We propose a change detection method for the famous Cox–Ingersoll–Ross model. This model is widely used in financial mathematics and therefore detecting a change in its parameters is of crucial importance. We develop one- and two-sided testing procedures for both drift parameters of the process. The test process is based on estimators that are motivated by the discrete time least-squares estimators, and its asymptotic distribution under the no-change hypothesis is that of a Brownian bridge. We prove the asymptotic weak consistence of the test, and derive the asymptotic properties of the change-point estimator under the alternative hypothesis of change at one point in time.'
bibliography:
- 'master.bib'
---
[**Change detection in the Cox–Ingersoll–Ross model**]{}\
[Gyula Pap]{} and [Tamás $\text{T. Szab\'o}^*$]{}
0.2cm
Bolyai Institute, University of Szeged, Aradi vértanúk tere 1, H–6720 Szeged, Hungary.
e–mails: [email protected] (G. Pap), [email protected] (T. T. Szabó).
$*$ Corresponding author.
[^1] [^2] [^3]
Introduction {#intro_pre}
============
We consider the well-known Cox–Ingersoll–Ross (CIR) model $$\begin{aligned}
\label{CIR_SDE}
{\mathrm{d}}X_t = (a - b X_t) \, {\mathrm{d}}t + \sigma \sqrt{X_t} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_t , \qquad
t {\geqslant}0 ,
\end{aligned}$$ where $a > 0$, $b > 0$, $\sigma > 0$ and $(W_t)_{t {\geqslant}0}$ is a standard Wiener process. We will be interested in detecting a change in the parameters $a$ and $b$, and for brevity we will use ${{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}:=(a,b)^{\top}.$ The volatility parameter $\sigma$ will not be estimated because we work with a continuous sample, from which (and indeed, from an arbitrarily small part of which) $\sigma$ can be calculated exactly, see @Barczy_13b [Remark 2.6]. Therefore change detection in $\sigma$ is not necessary – we can calculate, without any uncertainty, whether $\sigma$ is constant across our sample. The constraints on the parameter values ensure the ergodic behavior of our process – for details see Theorem \[Ergodicity\] below. These constraints also ensure that any solution of starting from a nonnegative value stays nonnegative indefinitely almost surely – see Proposition \[Pro\_CIR\].
The process was proposed as an interest rate model by @Cox_85 and is one of the standard “short rate” models in financial mathematics. The statistical properties of the model have therefore been extensively studied: @Overbeck_98 provided estimators based on continuous-time observations, while the low-frequency discrete-time CLS estimators were proposed by @Overbeck_97. High-frequency estimators were proposed by @Alaya_12 [@BenAlaya_13], whose results we will require occasionally.
There are a handful of change detection tests for the CIR process in the literature: @Schmid_04 used control charts and a sequential method (i.e., an online procedure, which is in contrast to our offline one, where we assume the full sample to be known before starting investigations). They also supposed noisy observations, which will not be our interest. @Guo_10 used the local parameter approach based on approximate maximum likelihood estimates. In essence, they wanted to find the largest interval for which the sample fits the model. Also, they used a discrete sample, whereas we will use a continuous one. The main result of our paper is that we were able to prove some asymptotic properties of the testing procedure under the alternative hypothesis as well as the null hypothesis. We believe this to be important because, if investigated only under the null hypothesis, a change-detection procedure is essentially a model-fitting test, and results under the alternative are necessary to verify its use for the more special task of change detection.
The statistical problem we are concerned with is the following: we would like to test the null hypothesis $$\mathrm{H}_0: (X_t)_{t \in [0,T]} \text{ is the path of a CIR process}$$ against the alternative hypothesis $$\begin{aligned}
\mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{A}}: \exists \tau \in [0,T]: & (X_{t})_{t\in[0,\tau]} \text{ is a CIR process with parameters } a=a', \ b=b', \text{ and } \\
& (X_{t})_{t\in[\tau,T]} \text{ is a CIR process with parameters } a=a'', \ b=b''.
\end{aligned}$$ In general, we will be interested in asymptotic results as $T \to \infty.$ Under $\mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{A}}$ we will also require $\tau = \rho T$ with $\rho \in (0,1).$
The layout of the paper is the following: in the remainder of the present Section 1 we will explain our notations. Section 2 will deal with the basic finite-sample and asymptotic properties of the CIR process and establishes the tools for our proofs. We will introduce our parameter estimators in Section 3 and derive their strong consistency. We will not investigate them in more detail than necessary since we will only use them to construct the test process, and we are more interested in their nice algebraic form than their statistical properties. We construct our test process and describe the test procedures in Section 4, where we also obtain the asymptotic distribution of the test process under $\mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{0}}$. Section 5 contains the first of our two asymptotic results – namely, the weak consistence of the test. The second result, which concerns the properties of the change-point estimator under $\mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{A}}$, is stated and proved in Section 6. Section 7 explains how to modify the proofs in order to detect a change in $b$. Finally, the lemmata necessary for the proofs of the main theorems have been collected into Section 8.
Notations
---------
In the following we describe our basic notations. Let ${\mathbb{N}}$, ${\mathbb{Z}}_+$, ${\mathbb{R}}$, ${\mathbb{R}}_+$ and ${\mathbb{R}}_{++}$ denote the sets of positive integers, non-negative integers, real numbers, non-negative real numbers and positive real numbers, respectively. For $x , y \in {\mathbb{R}}$, we will use $x \land y := \min(x, y)$ and $x \lor y := \max(x, y)$. By $\|x\|$ and $\|A\|$ we denote the Euclidean norm of a vector $x \in {\mathbb{R}}^d$ and the induced matrix norm of a matrix $A\in{\mathbb{R}}^{d \times d}$, respectively. We will use asymptotic notation for rates of convergence: $f(t) = {\operatorname{O}}(g(t))$ means that $\limsup_{t \to \infty} \frac{f(t)}{g(t)} < \infty$. Similarly, for a stochastic process $X_t$, the notation $X_t = {\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}(g(t))$ means that the collection of measures $\left({{\mathcal L}}\left(\frac{X_t}{g(t)}\right)\right)_{t {\geqslant}t_0}$ is tight for some $t_0 \in {\mathbb{R}}_+$. Unless otherwise noted, asymptotic statements are to be understood as $T \to \infty.$ Following the usual conventions, ${\stackrel{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}{\longrightarrow}}$, ${\stackrel{{{\mathcal D}}}{\longrightarrow}}$ and ${\stackrel{{\mathrm{a.s.}}}{\longrightarrow}}$ will denote convergence in probability, in distribution and almost surely, respectively.
As for the probabilistic setup, $\bigl(\Omega, {{\mathcal F}}, ({{\mathcal F}}_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}, {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\bigr)$ will always be a filtered probability space satisfying the usual conditions, i.e., $(\Omega, {{\mathcal F}}, {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}})$ is complete, the filtration $({{\mathcal F}}_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ is right-continuous and ${{\mathcal F}}_0$ contains all the ${\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}$-null sets in ${{\mathcal F}}$. We will repetadly work with continous martingales; as usual, their quadratic variation will be denoted by $\langle \cdot \rangle$.
Preliminaries {#Prel}
=============
In our first proposition we recall some well-known properties of the solution of .
\[Pro\_CIR\] For any random variable $\xi$ independent of $(W_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ and satisfying ${\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(\xi \in {\mathbb{R}}_+) = 1$, there is a (pathwise) unique strong solution $(X_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ of the SDE with $X_0 = \xi$. Further, we have ${\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(\text{$X_t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+$ \ for all \ $t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+$}) = 1$ and the following equalities: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Solution}
X_t &= {\mathrm{e}}^{-bt}
\left( X_0
+ a \int_0^t {\mathrm{e}}^{bu} \, {\mathrm{d}}u
+ \sigma \int_0^t {\mathrm{e}}^{bu} \sqrt{X_u} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_u \right) ,
\qquad t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+, \\ \label{eq:X2_solution}
X_t^2 & = {\mathrm{e}}^{-2bt} X_0^2 + \int_{0}^{t}{\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(t-u)}(2a + \sigma^2)X_u \, {\mathrm{d}}u + 2\sigma \int_{0}^{t} {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(t-u)} X_u^{3/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_u, \qquad t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+.
\end{aligned}$$ The conditional distribution of $X_t$ on $X_s$, where $s<t$, is noncentral chi-squared and we have $$\label{eq:finitesupmoments}
\sup_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t^\eta) < \infty$$ for all $\eta > 0$.
[**Proof.**]{} By a theorem due to Yamada and Watanabe [see, e.g., @Karatzas_91 Proposition 5.2.13], the strong uniqueness holds for . By @Ikeda_89 [Example V.8.2, page 221], there is a (pathwise) unique non-negative strong solution $(X_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ of with any initial value $\xi$ independent of $(W_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ and satisfying ${\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(\xi \in {\mathbb{R}}_+) = 1$, and we have ${\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(\text{$X_t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+$ \ for all \ $t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+$}) = 1$. Next, by application of the Itô’s formula for the process $(X_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathrm{d}}({\mathrm{e}}^{bt} X_t)
&= b {\mathrm{e}}^{bt} X_t \, {\mathrm{d}}t + {\mathrm{e}}^{bt} {\mathrm{d}}X_t
= b {\mathrm{e}}^{bt} X_t \, {\mathrm{d}}t
+ {\mathrm{e}}^{bt}
\bigl( (a - b X_t) \, {\mathrm{d}}t + \sigma \sqrt{X_t} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_t \bigr) \\
&= a {\mathrm{e}}^{bt} \, {\mathrm{d}}t + \sigma {\mathrm{e}}^{bt} \sqrt{X_t} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_t
\end{aligned}$$ for all $t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+$, which implies .
The noncentral chi-squared distribution is a well-known property of the process, and it can be found in the paper of @Feller_51. The property is a direct consequence of this fact and the calculations can be found, e.g., in @BenAlaya_13 [Proposition 3].
The following result states the existence of a unique stationary distribution and the ergodicity of the CIR process. The proof can be put together from @Feller_51, @Cox_85 [Equation 20], and @Jin_13.
\[Ergodicity\] Let $a, b, \sigma \in {\mathbb{R}}_{++}$. Let $(X_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ be a strong solution of with ${\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(X_0 \in {\mathbb{R}}_+) = 1$. Then
1. $X_t {\stackrel{{{\mathcal D}}}{\longrightarrow}}X_\infty$ as $t \to \infty$, and the distribution of $X_\infty$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Laplace}
{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}({\mathrm{e}}^{-\lambda X_\infty})
= \left(1 + \frac{\sigma^2}{2b} \lambda\right)^{-2a/\sigma^2} ,
\qquad \lambda \in {\mathbb{R}}_+ ,
\end{aligned}$$ i.e., $X_\infty$ has Gamma distribution with parameters $2a/\sigma^2$ and $2b/\sigma^2$, hence $${\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^\alpha)
= \frac{\Gamma\left(\frac{2a}{\sigma^2} + \alpha\right)}
{\left(\frac{2b}{\sigma^2}\right)^\alpha
\Gamma\left(\frac{2a}{\sigma^2}\right)} , \qquad
\alpha \in \left(-\frac{2a}{\sigma^2}, \infty\right) .$$
2. supposing that the random initial value $X_0$ has the same distribution as $X_\infty$, the process $(X_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ is strictly stationary;
3. for all Borel measurable functions $f : {\mathbb{R}}\to {\mathbb{R}}$ such that ${\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(|f(X_\infty)|) < \infty$, we have $$\label{ergodic}
\frac{1}{T} \int_0^T f(X_s) \, {\mathrm{d}}s {\stackrel{{\mathrm{a.s.}}}{\longrightarrow}}{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(f(X_\infty)) \qquad
\text{as \ $T \to \infty$.}$$
In the setting of Proposition \[Pro\_CIR\] we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t) &= {\mathrm{e}}^{-bt} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0)
+ a \int_0^t {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(t-u)} \, {\mathrm{d}}u \\
{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t^2) &= {\mathrm{e}}^{-2bt} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0^2) + \int_{0}^{t}(2a + \sigma^2)\left({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2t-u)} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0)
+ a \int_0^u {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2t-u-v)} \, {\mathrm{d}}v\right) \, {\mathrm{d}}u.\end{aligned}$$
Hence, $$\label{eq:X_mean_limits}
\lim_{t \to \infty} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t) = {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty) = \frac{a}{b}, \qquad \lim_{t \to \infty} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t^2) = {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^2) = \frac{2a^2 + a^2 \sigma^2}{2b^2},$$ moreover, $$\label{eq:X_diff_exp}
\int_0^{\infty} |{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t) - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty)| \, {\mathrm{d}}t < \infty, \qquad \int_0^{\infty} |{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t^2) - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^2)| \, {\mathrm{d}}t < \infty.$$
[**Proof.**]{} The first equalities are straightforward by taking expectations on both sides in Proposition \[Pro\_CIR\] (we note that the stochastic integrals in question are indeed martingales due to ). From there, is a question of elementary calculus: for the first equation we write $$\label{eq:EX_lim_calc}
\lim_{t \to \infty} \left({\mathrm{e}}^{-bt} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0) + a \int_0^t {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(t-u)} \, {\mathrm{d}}u\right) = \lim_{t \to \infty} a \int_0^t {\mathrm{e}}^{-bv} \, {\mathrm{d}}v = a \int_0^{\infty} {\mathrm{e}}^{-bv} \, {\mathrm{d}}v = \frac{a}{b}.$$ For the second equation we observe $$\label{eq:e_u_v_calc}
\int_{0}^{t}\int_{0}^{u} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2t-u-v)} \, {\mathrm{d}}v {\mathrm{d}}u = \frac{1}{b}\left(\int_{0}^{t}({\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(t-u)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2t-u)}) \, {\mathrm{d}}u \right)= \frac{1}{b}\int_{0}^{t}{\mathrm{e}}^{-2bu}\, {\mathrm{d}}u + \frac{{\mathrm{e}}^{-bt}}{b} \int_{0}^{t} {\mathrm{e}}^{-bu} \, {\mathrm{d}}u$$ and hence $$\label{eq:EX2_lim_calc}
\begin{split}
\lim_{t \to \infty} & \left({\mathrm{e}}^{-2bt} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0^2) + \int_{0}^{t}(2a + \sigma^2)\left({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2t-u)} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0)
+ a \int_0^u {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2t-u-v)} \, {\mathrm{d}}v\right) \, {\mathrm{d}}u \right) \\
& = (2a+ \sigma^2) \lim_{t \to \infty} \left( {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0) {\mathrm{e}}^{-bt} \int_{0}^{t} {\mathrm{e}}^{-bw} \, {\mathrm{d}}w + a \int_0^t \int_0^u {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2t-u-v)} \, {\mathrm{d}}v \, {\mathrm{d}}u \right) \\
& = (2a+\sigma^2) \frac{1}{b}\int_0^{\infty} {\mathrm{e}}^{-2bw} \, {\mathrm{d}}w.
\end{split}$$ For the first part of we consider (keeping in mind ) $$|{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t) - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty)| = \left|{\mathrm{e}}^{-bt} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0) - a \int_{t}^{\infty} {\mathrm{e}}^{-bu} \, {\mathrm{d}}u \right| {\leqslant}{\mathrm{e}}^{-bt} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0) + ab^{-1} {\mathrm{e}}^{-bt},$$ which yields the result immediately. For the second part, we combine and to obtain $$\begin{aligned}
|{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t^2) - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^2)| &= \left|{\mathrm{e}}^{-2bt} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0^2) + (2a+\sigma^2){\mathrm{e}}^{-bt}\int_{0}^{t}\left({\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0){\mathrm{e}}^{-bu} + \frac{1}{b} {\mathrm{e}}^{-bu}\right) \, {\mathrm{d}}u \right. \\
& \qquad \left. - \frac{1}{b} \int_{t}^{\infty}{\mathrm{e}}^{-2bu}\, {\mathrm{d}}u\right| \\
&{\leqslant}{\mathrm{e}}^{-2bt}{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0^2) + (2a+\sigma^2){\mathrm{e}}^{-bt}\left({\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0) + \frac{1}{b}\right)\frac{1}{b} + \frac{1}{2b^2}{\mathrm{e}}^{-2bt}.\end{aligned}$$ This yields the desired result immediately.
Finally, we recall a strong law of large numbers and a central limit theorem for continuous local martingales.
[**[Special case of @Liptser_01b Lemma 17.4]**]{} \[DDS\_stoch\_int\] Let the process $(W_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ be a standard Wiener process with respect to the filtration $({{\mathcal F}}_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}.$ Let $(\xi_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ be a measurable process adapted to $({{\mathcal F}}_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{SEGED_STRONG_CONSISTENCY2}
{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \int_0^t \xi_u^2 \, {\mathrm{d}}u < \infty \right) = 1 ,
\quad t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+ \qquad \text{ and } \qquad \int_0^t \xi_u^2 \, {\mathrm{d}}u {\stackrel{{\mathrm{a.s.}}}{\longrightarrow}}\infty \qquad
\text{as \ $t \to \infty.$}\end{aligned}$$ Then $$\begin{aligned}
\label{SEGED_STOCH_INT_SLLN}
\frac{\int_0^t \xi_u \, {\mathrm{d}}W_u}
{\int_0^t \xi_u^2 \, {\mathrm{d}}u} {\stackrel{{\mathrm{a.s.}}}{\longrightarrow}}0 \qquad
\text{as \ $t \to \infty$.}
\end{aligned}$$
[**[Special case of @Jacod_03 Corollary VIII.3.24.]**]{}\[thm:MCLT\] Let $(X^n_t)_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+}$ be a series of locally square-integrable continuous martingales such that $$\langle X^n \rangle_t {\stackrel{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}{\longrightarrow}}t, \quad t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+, \qquad \text{as } n \to \infty.$$ Then $(X^n)_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+} {\stackrel{{{\mathcal D}}}{\longrightarrow}}(W_t)_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+}$, where $(W_t)_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+}$ is a standard Wiener process.
Construction of our parameter estimators {#section_EULSE}
========================================
In this section we will define some estimators for the drift parameters of the CIR process, based on continuous time observations. We will do this in the following way: first we introduce least squares estimators based on low-frequency discrete time observations, then we will introduce our estimators as a formal analogy; we will not try to construct our estimators as solutions to a least-squares problem.
An LSE of $(a, b)$ based on a discrete time observation $(X_i)_{i\in\{0,1,\ldots,n\}}$, can be obtained by solving the extremum problem $$\begin{aligned}
\bigl({\widehat{a}}_n^{{{\mathrm{D}}}}, {\widehat{b}}_n^{{{\mathrm{D}}}}\bigr)
:= \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{(a,b)\in{\mathbb{R}}^2} \sum_{i=1}^n (X_i - X_{i-1} - (a - b X_{i-1}))^2 .
\end{aligned}$$ This is a simple exercise, which has the well-known solution $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{bmatrix}
{\widehat{a}}_n^{{{\mathrm{D}}}} \\
{\widehat{b}}_n^{{{\mathrm{D}}}}
\end{bmatrix}
= \begin{bmatrix}
n & -\sum_{i=1}^n X_{i-1} \\
-\sum_{i=1}^n X_{i-1} & \sum_{i=1}^n X_{i-1}^2
\end{bmatrix}^{-1}
\begin{bmatrix}
\sum_{i=1}^n (X_i - X_{i-1}) \\
- \sum_{i=1}^n (X_i - X_{i-1}) X_{i-1}
\end{bmatrix} ,
\end{aligned}$$ provided $n \sum_{i=1}^n X_{i-1}^2 - \left(\sum_{i=1}^n X_{i-1}\right)^2 > 0$.
By a formal analogy, we introduce the estimator of $(a, b)$ based on a continuous time observation $(X_t)_{t\in[0,T]}$ as $$\begin{aligned}
{\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T :=
\begin{bmatrix}
{\widehat{a}}_T^{{{}}} \\
{\widehat{b}}_T^{{{}}}
\end{bmatrix}
&= \begin{bmatrix}
T & -\int_0^T X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s \\
-\int_0^T X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s & \int_0^T X_s^2 \, {\mathrm{d}}s
\end{bmatrix}^{-1}
\begin{bmatrix}
X_T - X_0 \\
- \int_0^T X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}X_s
\end{bmatrix} ,
\end{aligned}$$ provided $T \int_0^T X_s^2 \, {\mathrm{d}}s - \left(\int_0^T X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s\right)^2 > 0$, which is true a.s. To see this, consider that, by a simple application of the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, $$T \int_0^T X_s^2 \, {\mathrm{d}}s - \left(\int_0^T X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s\right)^2 {\geqslant}0,$$ and equality happens only if $X$ is constant almost everywhere on $[0,T]$. In particular, since $X$ is continuous on $[0,T]$ almost surely, this implies $X_0 = X_T$ almost surely. However, since the distribution of $X_T$ conditionally on $X_0 = x$ is absolutely continuous by Proposition \[Pro\_CIR\], ${\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(X_T=X_0|X_0=x) = 0$ for all $x \in {\mathbb{R}}_+$, which suffices for the statement.
To condense our notation, we will use $$\label{def_Id}
{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_s:= \begin{bmatrix}
s & -\int_0^s X_u \, {\mathrm{d}}u \\
-\int_0^T X_u \, {\mathrm{d}}u & \int_0^s X_u^2 \, {\mathrm{d}}u
\end{bmatrix}
\qquad \text{and} \qquad
{{\boldsymbol{d}}}_s:=\begin{bmatrix}
X_s - X_0 \\
-\int_0^s X_u \, {\mathrm{d}}X_u
\end{bmatrix}$$
The stochastic integral $\int_0^s X_u \, {\mathrm{d}}X_u$ is observable, since, by Itô’s formula, we have ${\mathrm{d}}(X_t^2) = 2 X_t \,{\mathrm{d}}X_t + \sigma^2 X_t \, {\mathrm{d}}t$, $t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+$, hence $$\int_0^s X_u \, {\mathrm{d}}X_u
= \frac{1}{2}
\left( X_s^2 - X_0^2 - \sigma^2 \int_0^s X_u \, {\mathrm{d}}u \right) .$$
Using the SDE one can check that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:theta_difference}
\begin{bmatrix}
{\widehat{a}}_T^{{{}}} - a \\
{\widehat{b}}_T^{{{}}} - b
\end{bmatrix}
&= {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T^{-1}
\begin{bmatrix}
\sigma \int_0^T X_s^{1/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_s \\
- \sigma \int_0^T X_s^{3/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_s
\end{bmatrix} ,
\end{aligned}$$ provided $T \int_0^T X_s^2 \, {\mathrm{d}}s - \left(\int_0^T X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s\right)^2 > 0$, which is, again, true a.s. In further calculations we will use $$\label{def_tbd}
{\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_s := \sigma \begin{bmatrix}
\int_0^s X_u^{1/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_u \\
- \int_0^s X_u^{3/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_u
\end{bmatrix}.$$
\[Thm\_LSE\_cons\] Let $(X_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ be a strong solution of with ${\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(X_0 \in {\mathbb{R}}_+) = 1$. Then the LSE of $(a, b)$ is strongly consistent, i.e., $\bigl({\widehat{a}}_T^{{{}}}, {\widehat{b}}_T^{{{}}}\bigr) {\stackrel{{\mathrm{a.s.}}}{\longrightarrow}}(a, b)$ as $T \to \infty$.
[**Proof.**]{} Recall and write $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{bmatrix}
{\widehat{a}}_T^{{{}}} - a \\
{\widehat{b}}_T^{{{}}} - b
\end{bmatrix}
&= \left(\frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T}\right)^{-1}
\frac{\sigma^2 \int_0^T X_s^3 \, {\mathrm{d}}s}{T}
\begin{bmatrix}
\frac{\sigma^2 \int_0^T X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s}{\sigma^2 \int_0^T X_s^3 \, {\mathrm{d}}s}\cdot \frac{\sigma \int_0^T X_s^{1/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_s}{\sigma^2 \int_0^T X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s} \\
\frac{- \sigma \int_0^T X_s^{3/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_s}{\sigma^2 \int_0^T X_s^3 \, {\mathrm{d}}s}
\end{bmatrix}.\end{aligned}$$ Now, the statement is evident from and , noting that $$\frac{\sigma^2 \int_0^T X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s}{\sigma^2 \int_0^T X_s^3 \, {\mathrm{d}}s} = \frac{T^{-1}\sigma^2 \int_0^T X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s}{T^{-1}\sigma^2 \int_0^T X_s^3 \, {\mathrm{d}}s} {\stackrel{{\mathrm{a.s.}}}{\longrightarrow}}\frac{{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty)}{{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^3)}.$$
Construction of the test process {#section_test_process}
================================
First we introduce the martingale $$M_s := X_s - X_0 - \int_0^s (a - b X_u) \, {\mathrm{d}}u
= \sigma \int_0^s \sqrt{X_u} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_s , \qquad s \in {\mathbb{R}}_+ ,$$ which satisfies $$\label{eq:Mdiff}
{\mathrm{d}}M_s = {\mathrm{d}}X_s - (a - b X_s) \, {\mathrm{d}}s = \sigma \sqrt{X_u} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_s .$$
Let us fix a time horizon $T \in {\mathbb{R}}_{++}$. The process will again be introduced as a formal analogy to the efficient score vector, as is done in @Gombay_08. The analogue of the efficient score vector process at time $tT$, $t \in [0, 1]$, will be $$\begin{aligned}
\int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
{\mathrm{d}}M_s .
\end{aligned}$$ The information contained in a continuous sample $(X_u)_{u\in[0,tT]}$ is the quadratic variation of the efficient score vector process, namely, $$\int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}^\top
\langle M \rangle_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s
= \sigma^2 \int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
X_s & -X_s^2 \\
-X_s^2 & X_s^3
\end{bmatrix}
{\mathrm{d}}s
=: {{\boldsymbol{I}}}_{tT} ,$$ since $\langle M \rangle_s = \sigma^2 X_s$, $s \in {\mathbb{R}}_+$. For each $s \in {\mathbb{R}}_+$, replacing the parameters by their estimates in $M_s$, we obtain an estimate ${\widehat{M}}_s^{(T)}$, i.e., $${\widehat{M}}_s^{(T)} := X_s - X_0- \int_0^s ({\widehat{a}}_T - {\widehat{b}}_T X_u) \, {\mathrm{d}}u , \qquad
s \in {\mathbb{R}}_+ .$$ Our test process will be the estimated efficient score vector multiplied by the square root of the inverse of the information matrix, i.e., $${\widehat{{\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal M}}}}}}_t^{(T)}
:= {{\boldsymbol{I}}}_T^{-1/2}
\int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
{\mathrm{d}}{\widehat{M}}_s^{(T)} , \qquad t \in[0, 1] .$$ This process can also be written in CUSUM form $${\widehat{{\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal M}}}}}}_t^{(T)}
= {{\boldsymbol{I}}}_T^{-1/2} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT} \left( {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_{tT}^{{}}- {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T^{{}}\right) ,
\qquad t \in [0, 1] .$$ Indeed, $$\begin{aligned}
\int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
{\mathrm{d}}{\widehat{M}}_s^{(T)} &=
\int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
{\mathrm{d}}X_s -
\int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}^{\top}
{\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T
{\mathrm{d}}s
\\ &=
{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT} \left({{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT}^{-1}\int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
{\mathrm{d}}X_s -{\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T \right).
\end{aligned}$$
\[Thm\_H0\] Let $(X_t)_{t\in{\mathbb{R}}_+}$ be a strong solution of with ${\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(X_0 \in {\mathbb{R}}_+) = 1$. Then $$\left({\widehat{{\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal M}}}}}}_t^{(T)}\right)_{t\in[0,1]} {\stackrel{{{\mathcal D}}}{\longrightarrow}}({\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal B}}}}_t)_{t\in[0,1]} \qquad
\text{as \ $T \to \infty$,}$$ where $({\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal B}}}}_t)_{t\in[0,1]}$ is a 2-dimensional standard Brownian bridge.
[**Proof.**]{} We have $$\begin{aligned}
\int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
{\mathrm{d}}{\widehat{M}}_s^{(T)}
&= \int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
{\mathrm{d}}M_s
- \int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
\left({\mathrm{d}}M_s - {\mathrm{d}}{\widehat{M}}_s^{(T)}\right) ,
\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
\left({\mathrm{d}}M_s - {\mathrm{d}}{\widehat{M}}_s^{(T)}\right)
&= \int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
\left( {\widehat{a}}_T^{{}}- a - ({\widehat{b}}_T^{{}}- b) X_s \right)
{\mathrm{d}}s \\
&= \int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\
- X_s
\end{bmatrix}^\top
\begin{bmatrix}
{\widehat{a}}_T^{{}}- a \\
{\widehat{b}}_T^{{}}- b
\end{bmatrix}
{\mathrm{d}}s
= {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T^{-1} {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_T ,
\end{aligned}$$ with the notations from and . In the following, ${{\boldsymbol{E}}}_2$ denotes the 2-dimensional identity matrix. From the preceding calculations it follows that, for every $t \in [0,1],$ $$\begin{aligned}
{\widehat{{\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal M}}}}}}_t^{(T)}
&= {{\boldsymbol{I}}}_T^{-1/2} \left({\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_{tT} - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T^{-1} {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_T\right) \\
&= {{\boldsymbol{I}}}_T^{-1/2} \left({\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_{tT} - t {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_T\right) + {{\boldsymbol{I}}}_T^{-1/2}(t {{\boldsymbol{E}}}_2-{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T^{-1}){\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_T \\
&= (T{{\boldsymbol{I}}})^{-1/2} \left({\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_{tT} - t {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_T\right) + ((T^{-1}{{\boldsymbol{I}}}_T)^{-1/2} - {{\boldsymbol{I}}}^{-1/2})T^{-1/2}\left({\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_{tT} - t {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_T\right) \\
&\quad + {{\boldsymbol{I}}}_T^{-1/2}(t {{\boldsymbol{E}}}_2-{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T^{-1}){\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_T,
\end{aligned}$$ where $${{\boldsymbol{I}}}:= \sigma^2 \begin{bmatrix}
{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty) & -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^2) \\
- {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^2) & {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^3)
\end{bmatrix}.$$ It is a simple consequence of the ergodic theorem that $T^{-1}{{\boldsymbol{I}}}_T {\stackrel{{\mathrm{a.s.}}}{\longrightarrow}}{{\boldsymbol{I}}}$ as $T \to \infty$. Consequently, Theorem \[Thm\_H0\] will follow from $$\label{eq:informacio}
\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}1}(t {{\boldsymbol{E}}}_2-{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T^{-1}) {\stackrel{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}{\longrightarrow}}0 \qquad
\text{as \ $T \to \infty$,}$$ and $$\label{eq:wiener}
\left(T^{-1/2} \, {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_{tT}\right)_{t\in[0,1]}
{\stackrel{{{\mathcal D}}}{\longrightarrow}}({{\boldsymbol{I}}}^{1/2} \, {\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal W}}}}_t)_{t\in[0,1]}
\qquad \text{as \ $T \to \infty$,}$$ where $({\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal W}}}}_t)_{t\in[0,1]}$ is a 2-dimensional standard Wiener process.
We begin by the proof of . The convergence is a simple consequence of Theorem \[thm:MCLT\]. ${\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_t$ is a locally square-integrable martingale, therefore we only need to check the pointwise convergence of the quadratic variation. Using (iii) from Theorem \[Ergodicity\] it is easy to show that, for every $t \in [0,1]$, $$\frac{1}{T} \sigma^2 \int_0^{tT}
\begin{bmatrix}
X_s & -X_s^2 \\
-X_s^2 & X_s^3
\end{bmatrix}
ds
{\stackrel{{\mathrm{a.s.}}}{\longrightarrow}}t
\begin{bmatrix}
{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty) & -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^2) \\
- {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^2) & {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^3)
\end{bmatrix}
=
t {{\boldsymbol{I}}},
\quad
\text{as } T \to \infty.$$ For , introduce $${{\boldsymbol{Q}}}:= \begin{bmatrix}
1 & -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty) \\
- {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty) & {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty^2)
\end{bmatrix}$$ and note that due to Theorem \[Ergodicity\] we have $T^{-1}{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T {\stackrel{{\mathrm{a.s.}}}{\longrightarrow}}{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}.$ Now, first observe that $$\lVert t {{\boldsymbol{E}}}_2 - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT}{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T^{-1}\rVert {\leqslant}t \left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T} - \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT}}{tT}\right\rVert \left\lVert\left(\frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T}\right)^{-1}\right\rVert.$$ For this transformation to be sensible, we needed to extend $\frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_s}{s}$ continuously to $s=0$, but this can be done since all components of $\frac{I_s}{s}$ has a finite upper limit at 0 almost surely (i.e., the powers of $X_0$). Since the last factor converges to $\lVert{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}^{-1}\rVert$ almost surely, for it is sufficient to show that $$\label{eq:suptconvergence}
\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}1} t \left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T} - \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT}}{tT}\right\rVert {\stackrel{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}{\longrightarrow}}0.$$ In order to exploit the almost sure convergence of $\frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T}$, we note that $\frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T} {\stackrel{{\mathrm{a.s.}}}{\longrightarrow}}{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}$ implies $\sup_{s>T} {\left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_s}{s}-{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}\right\rVert} {\stackrel{{\mathrm{a.s.}}}{\longrightarrow}}0$ as $T \to \infty$ and thus $\sup_{s>T} {\left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_s}{s}-{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}\right\rVert} {\stackrel{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}{\longrightarrow}}0$ as $T \to \infty.$ Now let us introduce $$K:= \sup_{s {\geqslant}0} \left \lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_s}{s}\right \rVert.$$ This limit is finite almost surely since $\frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_s}{s}$ is continuous on ${\mathbb{R}}_+$ and has a finite limit at infinity almost surely. Now we observe, for an arbitrary $\epsilon > 0$, $$\begin{aligned}
{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}&\left(\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}1}t \left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T} - \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT}}{tT}\right\rVert > \epsilon\right) \\
& {\leqslant}{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\frac{\epsilon}{4 K} \wedge 1}t \left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T} - \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT}}{tT}\right\rVert > \epsilon\right) + {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{\frac{\epsilon}{4 K} {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}1}t \left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T} - \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT}}{tT}\right\rVert > \epsilon\right) \\
& {\leqslant}{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\frac{\epsilon}{4 K}2K > \epsilon\right) + {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{\frac{\epsilon}{4 K} {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}1} \left(t \left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T} - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}\right\rVert + \left \lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT}}{tT} - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}\right\rVert \right) > \epsilon\right)\\
& {\leqslant}0+{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T} - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}\right\rVert > \frac{\epsilon}{2}\right) + {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{\frac{\epsilon T}{4 K} {\leqslant}s} \left \lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{s}}{s} - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}\right\rVert > \frac{\epsilon}{2}\right).\end{aligned}$$ Dividing the last probability according to the value of $K$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}&\left(\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}1}t \left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T} - \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{tT}}{tT}\right\rVert > \epsilon\right) \\
& {\leqslant}{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T} - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}\right\rVert > \frac{\epsilon}{2}\right) + {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\left\{\sup_{\frac{\epsilon T}{4 K} {\leqslant}s} \left \lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{s}}{s} - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}\right\rVert > \frac{\epsilon}{2}\right\} \bigcap \left\{K {\leqslant}\sqrt{T}\right\}\right) \\
& \quad + {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(K > \sqrt{T}) \\
& {\leqslant}{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\left\lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T}{T} - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}\right\rVert > \frac{\epsilon}{2}\right) + {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{\frac{\epsilon \sqrt{T}}{4} {\leqslant}s} \left \lVert \frac{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{s}}{s} - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}\right\rVert > \frac{\epsilon}{2}\right) + {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(K > \sqrt{T}\right).\end{aligned}$$ All three terms in the last expression tend to zero as $T \to \infty$, therefore is proved.
Testing procedures {#subsec:testing}
------------------
Based on Theorem \[Thm\_H0\], we can develop the following tests with a significance level of $\alpha$:
[**Test 1 (one-sided):**]{} if it is clear that, in case of a change, $a' < a''$, reject $\mathrm{H}_0$ if the minimum of $({\widehat{{\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal M}}}}}}^{(1)}_t)_{t \in [0,T]}$ is greater than $C_1(\alpha)$, where $C_1(\alpha)$ can be obtained from the distribution of the minimum of a standard Brownian bridge. The same test can be applied to the maximum (for $a' > a''$) and to $({\widehat{{\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal M}}}}}}^{(2)}_t)_{t \in [0,T]}$ (for a change in $b$).
[**Test 2 (two-sided):**]{} reject $\mathrm{H}_0$ if the maximum of $|{\widehat{{\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal M}}}}}}^{(1)}_t|_{t \in [0,T]}$ is greater than $C_2(\alpha)$, where $C_2(\alpha)$ can be obtained from the distribution of the maximum of the absolute value of standard Brownian bridge. The same test can be applied to $|{\widehat{{\boldsymbol{{{\mathcal M}}}}}}^{(2)}_t|_{t \in [0,T]}$ (for a change in $b$).
Naturally, the test for $a$ and $b$ can be applied simultaneously, in which case the significance levels for the individual tests have to be modified accordingly, in order to produce an overall significance level of $\alpha$.
Asymptotic consistence of the test
==================================
Before stating our results under the alternative hypothesis, we need to examine the ergodicity results that we can use more closely. Let us take two parameter vectors: ${{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'$ and ${{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}''$ (in the formulation of the theorem, ${{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' = (a',b)^{\top}$ and ${{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'' = (a'', b)^{\top}$, but for the time being, we can work more generally). Furthermore, we take two random variables, $X_\infty'$ and $X_\infty''$, such that they are distributed according to the stationary distributions corresponding to ${{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'$ and ${{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}''$, respectively. Let us take a process $(X_t)_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+}$ such that it evolves according to with parameters ${{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'$ until $t=\rho T$ and with parameters ${{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}''$ thereafter. We would like to apply the ergodic theorem (i.e., Theorem \[Ergodicity\]) separately to the process before and after the change-point (i.e., $\rho T$). However, we cannot do this directly for the second part because the initial distribution may depend on $T$. However, we do have $$\label{aergodic}
\frac{1}{T - \rho T}\int_{\rho T}^T g(X_t) \, {\mathrm{d}}t {\stackrel{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}{\longrightarrow}}{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(g({\widetilde{X}}'')),$$ where $g:{\mathbb{R}}_+ \to {\mathbb{R}}$ with ${\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(|g({\widetilde{X}})|) < \infty$. Indeed, for an arbitrary ${\varepsilon}>0$ $$\begin{aligned}
&{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \left| \frac{1}{T - \rho T}\int_{\rho T}^T g(X_t) \, {\mathrm{d}}t
- {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(g({\widetilde{X}}'')) \right| > {\varepsilon}\right) \\
&= \int_{{\mathbb{R}}_+}
{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \left| \frac{1}{T - \rho T}\int_{\rho T}^T g(X_t) \, {\mathrm{d}}t
- {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(g({\widetilde{X}}''))\right| > {\varepsilon}\, \Bigg| \, X_{\rho T}=x \right)
\, {\mathrm{d}}P_X^{\rho T}(x) \\
& {\leqslant}\left \lVert P_X^{\rho T} - P^* \right \rVert + \int_{{\mathbb{R}}_+}
{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \left| \frac{1}{T - \rho T}\int_{\rho T}^T g(X_t) \, {\mathrm{d}}t
- {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(g({\widetilde{X}}''))\right| > {\varepsilon}\, \Bigg| \, X_{\rho T}=x \right)
\, {\mathrm{d}}P^*(x),\end{aligned}$$ where $P^*$ is the distribution of ${\widetilde{X}}'$, $P_X^{\rho T}$ is the distribution of $X_{\rho T}$ and $\lVert \cdot \rVert$ is the total variation norm. The first term converges to zero because the CIR process is positive Harris recurrent [@Jin_13 Theorem 2.5]. This implies ergodicity by @Meyn_93 [Theorem 6.1], since in this case the 1-skeleton (i.e., the process $(X_i)_{i \in {\mathbb{Z}}_+}$) is clearly irreducible because the support of the distribution of $X_1$ conditionally on $X_0$ is ${\mathbb{R}}_+$. In the second term the measure is finite, while the integrand is bounded by 1 and converges to zero pointwise, therefore is proved by the Lebesgue Dominated Convergence Theorem. The same line of reasoning can be used to apply Theorem \[DDS\_stoch\_int\] (with weak convergence) and Theorem \[thm:MCLT\] after the point of change. Let us now introduce $${{\boldsymbol{d}}}_{[a,b]}:= \begin{bmatrix}
\int_a^b
1 {\mathrm{d}}X_s \\[2mm]
- \int_a^b X_s {\mathrm{d}}X_s
\end{bmatrix} , \qquad
{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{[a,b]}
:= \begin{bmatrix}
\int_a^b 1 \, {\mathrm{d}}s
& -\int_a^b X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s \\[2mm]
-\int_a^b X_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s
& \int_a^b X_s^2 \, {\mathrm{d}}s
\end{bmatrix}.$$ With these notations, $${\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T^{{{}}} = \left({{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{[0,\tau]}+{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{[\tau,T]}\right)^{-1}({{\boldsymbol{d}}}_{[0,\tau]}+{{\boldsymbol{d}}}_{[\tau,T]}).$$ With the help of the ergodic theorem, we can see that this quantity has a finite weak limit: $${\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}:= \begin{bmatrix} {\widetilde{a}}\\ {\widetilde{b}}\end{bmatrix} :=
(\rho {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}' + (1-\rho) {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}'')^{-1} \left(\rho {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}' {{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'
+ (1-\rho) {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}''
{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'' \right),$$ where $${{\boldsymbol{Q}}}' := \begin{bmatrix}
1 & - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty') \\
- {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty') & {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}((X_\infty')^2)
\end{bmatrix}, \qquad
{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}'' := \begin{bmatrix}
1 & - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty'') \\
- {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty'') & {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}((X_\infty'')^2)
\end{bmatrix}.$$
\[thm:consistence\] If $a$ changes from $a'>0$ to $a''>0$ at time $\tau = \rho T$, where $\rho \in (0,1)$, then for any $\gamma \in \left(0, \frac{1}{4}\right)$ we have $$\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} {\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)} = T \psi + {\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}(T^{1-\gamma}),$$ with $\psi = (a' - a'') {{\boldsymbol{1}}}_1^{\top} ( (\rho {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}')^{-1} + ((1-\rho){{\boldsymbol{Q}}}'')^{-1})^{-1} {{\boldsymbol{1}}}_1.$ Here ${{\boldsymbol{1}}}_1 = (1,0)^{\top}$, the first unit vector.
Note how the sign of the principal term depends on the direction of change: it is negative in case of an upwards change and positive in case of a downwards change. This gives us the possibility to design one-sided tests.
[**Proof**]{}. First we show how the estimates behave in this case. Clearly, $${{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}= (1-\rho) (\rho {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}' + (1-\rho) {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}'')^{-1} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}'' ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'').$$ We have $$\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\ -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty')
\end{bmatrix}
=
{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}' \begin{bmatrix}
1 \\ 0
\end{bmatrix},$$ and hence $$\label{eq:theta'_psi}
({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix}
1 \\ -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty')
\end{bmatrix} = \frac{\psi}{\rho}.$$ In the same way we can conclude that $$\label{eq:theta''_psi}
({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix}
1 \\ -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty'')
\end{bmatrix} = -\frac{\psi}{1-\rho}.$$ Now we apply the following decomposition (which is useful for $t< \tau$; for $t {\geqslant}\tau$ it has to be modified in a straightforward manner): $$\label{eq:decomp}
\begin{split}
\int_0^{t}1 {\mathrm{d}}{\widehat{M}}_u^{(T)} &= \int_{0}^{t}1{\mathrm{d}}M_u + \int_{0}^{t}\left[({\widetilde{b}}-b'){\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) + (a'-{\widetilde{a}})\right]{\mathrm{d}}u \\
& \quad + \int_{0}^{t} ({\widehat{b}}_T-b') (X_u - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u)) \, {\mathrm{d}}u + \int_{0}^{t} \left[({\widehat{b}}_T-{\widetilde{b}}) {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) + ({\widetilde{a}}- {\widehat{a}}_T)\right] {\mathrm{d}}u \\
& = \int_{0}^{t}1{\mathrm{d}}M_u + \int_{0}^{t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u \\
& \quad + \int_{0}^{t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T) \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\ {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) - X_u \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u +
\int_{0}^{t} ({\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}- {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T) \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u.
\end{split}$$ This leads to $$\begin{aligned}
& \left| \sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} \int_0^{t}1 {\mathrm{d}}{\widehat{M}}_u^{(T)} - T \psi \right| \\
& {\leqslant}\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} \left| \int_{0}^{\tau \wedge t}1{\mathrm{d}}M_u' + \int_{\tau \wedge t}^{t}1{\mathrm{d}}M_u'' \right|
+ \sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} \left| \int_{0}^{t} ({\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}- {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T) \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u \right| \\
& \quad + \left|\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} \left(\int_{0}^{\tau \wedge t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u + \int_{\tau \wedge t}^{t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u - T \psi\right)\right| \\
& \quad + \sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} \left| \int_{0}^{\tau \wedge t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\ {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u)- X_u \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u + \int_{\tau \wedge t}^{t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'' - {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) - X_u \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u \right|.\end{aligned}$$ The first term is ${\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}(T^{\gamma - 1})$ according to Lemma \[lem:M\_sup\], the fourth term by Lemma \[lem:X\_EX\_diff\_sup\] and the second term by Lemma \[lem:theta\_conv\_alt\]. For the third term, we write $$\begin{aligned}
& \left|\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} \left(\int_{0}^{\tau \wedge t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u + \int_{\tau \wedge t}^{t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u - T \psi \right) \right| \\
&{\leqslant}\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} \left|\int_{0}^{\tau \wedge t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\ {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty) - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u \right| \\
& \quad + \sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} \left| \int_{\tau \wedge t}^{t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}'' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty) - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u\right| + \left| \sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} \left(\frac{\tau \wedge t}{\rho} - \frac{(t-\tau)^+}{1-\rho} - T \right) \psi \right|.\end{aligned}$$ The first two terms in this decomposition are bounded by and the last one is obviously zero, with the supremum attained at $t=\tau$. This completes the proof.
Estimation of the change point
==============================
The natural estimate of the change point if $a' > a''$, i.e., when a downward change in $a$ is being tested, is $${\widehat{\tau}}_T := \inf \{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+: {\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)} = \sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} {\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)} \}.$$ Clearly, this is a well-defined, finite quantity, since ${\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)}$ has continuous trajectories almost surely. Regarding this estimate, we state the following result:
\[thm:changepoint\] Under the asumptions of Theorem \[thm:consistence\], if $a' > a''$, then we have $${\widehat{\tau}}_T - \rho T = {\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}(1).$$
[**Proof.**]{} We remind the reader that, according to the assumptions, $\tau = \rho T$. We need to show that $$\lim_{K \to \infty} \sup_{T \in {\mathbb{R}}}{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(|{\widehat{\tau}}_T - \rho T| {\geqslant}K) = 0 \quad \text{a.s.},$$ or, equivalently, $$\lim_{K \to \infty} \limsup_{T \in {\mathbb{R}}}{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(|{\widehat{\tau}}_T - \rho T| {\geqslant}K) = 0 \quad \text{a.s.}$$
For this, it is sufficient to show that $$\label{eq:max_before}
\lim_{K \to \infty} \limsup_{T \to \infty} {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \sup_{\rho T - K < t < \rho T + K} {\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)} {\leqslant}\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T - K} {\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)} \right) = 0$$ and that $$\label{eq:max_after}
\lim_{K \to \infty} \limsup_{T \to \infty} {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \sup_{\rho T - K < t < \rho T + K} {\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)} {\leqslant}\sup_{\rho T + K {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} {\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)} \right) = 0.$$ First we prove . We observe $$\begin{aligned}
&{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{\rho T - K < t < \rho T + K} {\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)} {\leqslant}\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T - K} {\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)} \right)
{\leqslant}{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left({\widehat{M}}_{\rho T}^{(T)} {\leqslant}\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T - K} {\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)}\right) \\
& = {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\inf_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T - K} ({\widehat{M}}_{\rho T}^{(T)} - {\widehat{M}}_t^{(T)}) {\leqslant}0\right)
= {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\inf_{K {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T} t^{-1} \int_{\rho T - t}^{\rho T} 1 \, {\mathrm{d}}{\widehat{M}}_s^{(T)} {\leqslant}0\right)\end{aligned}$$
We apply the decomposition to show that $$\label{eq:tau_decomp}
\begin{split}
{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}& \left(\inf_{K {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T} t^{-1} \int_{\rho T - t}^{\rho T} 1 \, {\mathrm{d}}{\widehat{M}}_s^{(T)} {\leqslant}0\right) \\
& {\leqslant}{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \inf_{K {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T} t^{-1} \int_{\rho T - t}^{\rho T} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix}
1 \\ - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_s)
\end{bmatrix}
\, {\mathrm{d}}s {\leqslant}\frac{\psi}{2}\right) \\
& \quad + {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{K {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T}\left|t^{-1}(M_{\rho T} - M_{\rho T - t})\right|{\geqslant}\frac{\psi}{6}\right) \\
& \quad + {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{K {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T} \left|t^{-1} \int_{\rho T-t}^{\rho T} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T)^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 \\ {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_s) - X_s
\end{bmatrix}
\, {\mathrm{d}}s \right| {\geqslant}\frac{\psi}{6}\right) \\
& \quad + {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{K {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T} \left|t^{-1} \int_{\rho T - t}^{\rho T} ({\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}- {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T)^{\top}
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\ - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_s)
\end{bmatrix}
\, {\mathrm{d}}s \right| {\geqslant}\frac{\psi}{6}\right).
\end{split}$$ In the first term we take the probability of a deterministic event, therefore it is either 0 or 1; we show that for sufficiently large $K,N$ it is 0.
Actually, this is the same statement in continuous time as Lemma 7.7 in @Pap_13, and the proof is also the same. First we note that, as has been shown before, $$f(t):= ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix}
1 \\ - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t)
\end{bmatrix} \to \psi, \quad t \to \infty.$$ For an arbitrary ${\varepsilon}>0$, let us introduce $\nu({\varepsilon}):=\sup_{t: f(t) < \psi - {\varepsilon}} < \infty$. Furthermore, let $$\kappa({\varepsilon}) := \inf_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\nu({\varepsilon})} f(t) > -\infty.$$ Then we have, for a sufficiently large $T$, $$\begin{aligned}
&\inf_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T} t^{-1} \int_{\rho T -t}^{\rho T} f(s) \, {\mathrm{d}}s \\
& {\geqslant}\min\left(\inf_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T-\nu({\varepsilon})} t^{-1} \int_{\rho T -t}^{\rho T} f(s) \, {\mathrm{d}}s, \frac{1}{\rho T - \nu({\varepsilon})} \left(\kappa({\varepsilon})\nu({\varepsilon}) + (\rho T-\nu({\varepsilon})) \inf_{\nu({\varepsilon}) {\leqslant}s {\leqslant}\rho T} f(s)\right)\right) \\
& {\geqslant}\min\left(\psi - {\varepsilon}, \frac{\kappa({\varepsilon})\nu({\varepsilon})}{\rho T - \nu({\varepsilon})} + \psi - {\varepsilon}\right).\end{aligned}$$ As $\frac{\kappa({\varepsilon})\nu({\varepsilon})}{\rho T - \nu({\varepsilon})} \to 0$ as $T \to \infty$, we conclude that the second term in is 0 for sufficiently large $T$, irrespective of $K$.
The fourth term in converges to zero as $T \to \infty$ for any $K$, as $$\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T} \left\lVert t^{-1} \int_{\rho T -t}^{\rho T} \begin{bmatrix}
1 \\ -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_s)
\end{bmatrix}
\, {\mathrm{d}}s \right\rVert {\leqslant}\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T} \left\lVert
\begin{bmatrix}
1 \\ -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t)
\end{bmatrix} \right\rVert,$$ and the right hand side is bounded as $T \to \infty$. Meanwhile, ${\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}- {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T \to 0$ a.s., which suffices for the fourth term in . For the third term we use Lemma \[lem:lim\_limsup\_X\] and for the second one we can use Lemma \[lem:M\_sup\].
Detecting a change in $b$
=========================
In Theorems \[thm:consistence\] and \[thm:changepoint\] we postulated a change in $a$. However, this was only done to keep the resulting calculations tractable. Straightforward modifications allow us to prove the same results for a change in $b$ – following the same thoughts as in \[subsec:testing\]. In this case, we would have
\[thm:b\_consistence\] If $b$ changes from $b'>0$ to $b''>0$ at time $\tau = \rho T$, where $\rho \in (0,1)$, then for any $\gamma \in \left(0, \frac{1}{4}\right)$ we have $$\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} \int_0^t (- X_s) {\mathrm{d}}{\widehat{M}}_s^{(T)} = T \phi + {\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}(T^{1-\gamma}),$$ with $\phi = (b' - b'') {{\boldsymbol{1}}}_2^{\top} (((1-\rho){{\boldsymbol{Q}}}'')^{-1} + (\rho {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}')^{-1})^{-1} {{\boldsymbol{1}}}_2.$ Here ${{\boldsymbol{1}}}_2 = (0,1)^{\top}$, the second unit vector.
In place of we have, then, $$\begin{split}
\int_0^{t} X_u {\mathrm{d}}{\widehat{M}}_u^{(T)} &= \int_{0}^{t} X_u {\mathrm{d}}M_u + \int_{0}^{t}\left[({\widetilde{b}}-b'){\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u^2) + (a'-{\widetilde{a}}){\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u)\right]{\mathrm{d}}u \\
& \quad + \int_{0}^{t} \left[ ({\widehat{b}}_T-b') (X_u^2 - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u^2)) + (a'-{\widetilde{a}})(X_u -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u)) \right] \, {\mathrm{d}}u \\
& \quad + \int_{0}^{t} \left[({\widehat{b}}_T-{\widetilde{b}}) {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u^2) + ({\widetilde{a}}- {\widehat{a}}_T){\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u)\right] {\mathrm{d}}u \\
& = \int_{0}^{t}X_u{\mathrm{d}}M_u + \int_{0}^{t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix} -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \\ {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u^2) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u \\
& \quad + \int_{0}^{t} ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T) \begin{bmatrix} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u)-X_u \\ X_u^2 - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u^2) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u +
\int_{0}^{t} ({\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}- {\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}_T) \begin{bmatrix} -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \\ {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u^2) \end{bmatrix} \, {\mathrm{d}}u.
\end{split}$$ The second term is approximately $$t ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} \begin{bmatrix} -{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty') \\ {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}((X_\infty'')^2) \end{bmatrix} = t ({{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}' - {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}})^{\top} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}' \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \end{bmatrix} = t \frac{\phi}{\rho}$$ as in . From here the proofs proceed as for a change in $a$, with the only added difficulty that we will require and as well as , but the proof of that result is merely a matter of algebra.
Details of the proofs {#sec:lemmata}
=====================
In this section we detail the necessary lemmata for the proofs of our main theorems. Some of them, especially Lemma \[lem:Xint\_var\], are rather technical and depend essentially on tedious but straightforward calculations. Others, while using more sophisticated tools, are also tailored to the specific needs of the proofs and their proofs are not particularly insightful themselves, hence they were relegated to this section. The one exception to this is Lemma \[lem:KoLe\], which is an analogue of Lemma \[kole\] and may deserve independent interest.
\[lem:Xint\_var\] For the model described by we have $$\label{eq:Xint_var}
{\operatorname{Var}}\left(\int_{0}^{t}X_s {\mathrm{d}}s \right) = {\operatorname{O}}(t), \quad t \to \infty,$$ and $$\label{eq:X2int_var}
{\operatorname{Var}}\left(\int_{0}^{t}X_s^2 {\mathrm{d}}s \right) = {\operatorname{O}}(t), \quad t \to \infty.$$
[**Proof.**]{} For we note $${\operatorname{Var}}\left(\int_{0}^{t}X_s {\mathrm{d}}s \right) = {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left(\int_{0}^{t}(X_u - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}X_u) {\mathrm{d}}u \int_{0}^{t}(X_v - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}X_v) {\mathrm{d}}v\right) = \iint\limits_{[0,t]^2} {\operatorname{Cov}}(X_u,X_v) {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v.$$ By using , we can write $$\label{eq:CovXuXv}
\begin{split}
{\operatorname{Cov}}(X_u, X_v) &= {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}[(X_u - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}X_u)(X_v - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}X_v)] = \\
&= {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left[\left(e^{-bu}(X_0-{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}X_0) + \sigma \int_{0}^{u}e^{-b(u-w)}\sqrt{X_w} {\mathrm{d}}W_w\right) \right. \\
& \quad
\left. \times \cdot \left(e^{-bv}(X_0-{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}X_0) + \sigma \int_{0}^{v}e^{-b(v-z)}\sqrt{X_z} {\mathrm{d}}W_z\right)\right] \\
&= e^{-b(u+v)}{\operatorname{Var}}(X_0) + \sigma^2 \int_{0}^{u \wedge v} e^{-b(u+v-2w)}{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_w){\mathrm{d}}w \\
&{\leqslant}e^{-b(u+v)}{\operatorname{Var}}(X_0) + (E(X_0) + \frac{a}{b})\sigma^2 \int_{0}^{u \wedge v} e^{-b(u+v-2w)} {\mathrm{d}}w,
\end{split}$$ since $${\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_w) = e^{-bw}{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0) + a \int_{0}^{w}e^{-bs} {\mathrm{d}}s$$ by . Furthermore, $$\label{eq:e_uv_int_est}
\begin{split}
&\iint\limits_{[0,t]^2} \left(\int_{0}^{u \wedge v} e^{-b(u+v-2w)} {\mathrm{d}}w\right) {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v = \iint\limits_{[0,t]^2} \left[\frac{e^{-b(u+v-2w)}}{2b}\right]_{w=0}^{w=u \wedge v} {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v \\
& \quad = \iint\limits_{[0,t]^2} \left[\frac{1}{2b}\left(e^{-b|u-v|}-e^{-b(u+v)}\right)\right] {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v {\leqslant}\frac{1}{b}\iint\limits_{[0,t]^2} e^{-b|u-v|}{\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v = {\operatorname{O}}(t).
\end{split}$$ We combine this with the last line of and note that $$\label{eq:e_uv_int_asymp}
\iint\limits_{[0,t]^2} e^{-b(u+v)} {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v = {\operatorname{O}}(t),$$ which completes the proof of .
For we use the same approach. By , $$\begin{aligned}
{\operatorname{Cov}}(X_u^2, X_v^2) &= {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}[(X_u^2 - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u^2))(X_v^2 - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_v^2))] = \\
& = {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left[ \left( {\mathrm{e}}^{-2bu} (X_0^2 - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0)^2) + \int_{0}^{u}(2 a+\sigma^2) {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u-w)} (X_0 - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0)) \, {\mathrm{d}}w \right. \right. \\
& \qquad \qquad + (2a+\sigma^2)\sigma \int_{0}^{u}{\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u - w)} \int_{0}^{w} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(w-z)} \sqrt{X_z} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_z \\
& \qquad \qquad \left. + \sigma \int_{0}^{u}{\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u-w)} X_w^{3/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_w \right) \\
& \qquad \times \left( {\mathrm{e}}^{-2bv} (X_0^2 - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0)^2) + \int_{0}^{v}(2 a+\sigma^2) {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2v-w)} (X_0 - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0)) \, {\mathrm{d}}w \right. \\
& \qquad \qquad + (2a+\sigma^2)\sigma \int_{0}^{v}{\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(v - w)} \int_{0}^{w} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(w-z)} \sqrt{X_z} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_z \\
& \qquad \qquad \left. \left. + \sigma \int_{0}^{u}{\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(v-w)} X_w^{3/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}W_w \right) \right] \\
& = {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u+v)} {\operatorname{Var}}(X_0^2) + (2a+\sigma^2)^2{\mathrm{e}}^{-b(u+v)}\int_0^u {\mathrm{e}}^{-bw} \, {\mathrm{d}}w \int_0^v {\mathrm{e}}^{-bw} \, {\mathrm{d}}w {\operatorname{Var}}(X_0) \\
& \quad + 2 {\mathrm{e}}^{-3b(u+v)}(2a+\sigma^2)\int_0^u {\mathrm{e}}^{-bw} \, {\mathrm{d}}w \int_0^v {\mathrm{e}}^{-bw} \, {\mathrm{d}}w {\operatorname{Cov}}(X_0 ,X_0^2) \\
& \quad + (2a+\sigma^2)^2 \sigma^2 \int_{0}^{u} \int_{0}^{v} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left( \int_{0}^{w} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u-w-z)} \sqrt{X_z} {\mathrm{d}}W_z \right. \\
& \quad \phantom{+ (2a+\sigma^2)^2 \sigma^2 \int_{0}^{u} \int_{0}^{v} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\Bigg(}\times \left. \int_{0}^{r} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2v-r-q)} \sqrt{X_q}{\mathrm{d}}W_q\right){\mathrm{d}}r {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& \quad + (2a+\sigma^2) \sigma^2 \int_{0}^{u} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left( \int_{0}^{w} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u-w-z)} \sqrt{X_z} {\mathrm{d}}W_z \int_{0}^{v} {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(v-q)} X_q^{3/2}{\mathrm{d}}W_q\right) {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& \quad + (2a+\sigma^2) \sigma^2 \int_{0}^{v} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left( \int_{0}^{w} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2v-w-z)} \sqrt{X_z} {\mathrm{d}}W_z \int_{0}^{u} {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u-q)} X_q^{3/2}{\mathrm{d}}W_q\right) {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& \quad + \int_{0}^{u \wedge v} e^{-2b(u+v-2w)}{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_w^3){\mathrm{d}}w.\end{aligned}$$ Proceeding with the calculations, we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\operatorname{Cov}}(X_u^2, X_v^2) & {\leqslant}{\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u+v)} {\operatorname{Var}}(X_0^2) + (2a+\sigma^2)^2 \frac{1}{b^2}{\mathrm{e}}^{-b(u+v)} {\operatorname{Var}}(X_0) \\
& \quad + 2 {\mathrm{e}}^{-3b(u+v)}(2a+\sigma^2)\frac{1}{b^2} {\operatorname{Cov}}(X_0 ,X_0^2) \\
& \quad + (2a+\sigma^2)^2 \sigma^2 \int_{0}^{u} \int_{0}^{v} \int_{0}^{w \wedge r} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-r-2z)} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_z) {\mathrm{d}}z {\mathrm{d}}r {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& \quad + (2a+\sigma^2) \sigma^2 \int_{0}^{u} \int_{0}^{w \wedge v} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-3z)} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_z^2) {\mathrm{d}}z {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& \quad + (2a+\sigma^2) \sigma^2 \int_{0}^{v} \int_{0}^{w \wedge u} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-3z)} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_z^2) {\mathrm{d}}z {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& \quad + \int_{0}^{u \wedge v} e^{-2b(u+v-2w)}{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_w^3){\mathrm{d}}w.\end{aligned}$$ Referring to and we see that we need only concern ourselves about the fourth, fifth and sixth terms. For the fifth term, we have, for $u < v$, $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{0}^{u} \int_{0}^{w \wedge v} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-3z)} {\mathrm{d}}z {\mathrm{d}}w &= \int_{0}^{u} \int_{0}^{w} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-3z)} {\mathrm{d}}z {\mathrm{d}}w \\
&= \int_0^u \frac{1}{3b}({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-4w)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w)}) {\mathrm{d}}w \\
&= \frac{1}{12b^2}({\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(v-u)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(v+u)}) - \frac{1}{3b^2} ({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(u+2v)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u+v)}),\end{aligned}$$ and for $u > v$, $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{0}^{u} \int_{0}^{w \wedge v} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-3z)} {\mathrm{d}}z {\mathrm{d}}w &= \int_{0}^{v} \int_{0}^{w} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-3z)} {\mathrm{d}}z {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& \quad + \int_v^u \int_0^v {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-3z)} {\mathrm{d}}z {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& = \int_0^v \frac{1}{3b}({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-4w)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w)}) {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& \quad + \int_v^u \frac{1}{3b}({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u-v-w)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w)}) {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& = \frac{1}{12b^2} \left( {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u-v)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u+v)}\right) - \frac{1}{3b^2}\left({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+v)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u+v)}\right) \\
& \quad + \frac{1}{3b^2}\left( {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(u-v)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u-v)} - \left( {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(u+2v)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+v)} \right) \right).\end{aligned}$$ The same results, with $u$ and $v$ exchanged, hold for the sixth term. All the exponential expressions in question can be estimated from above by ${\mathrm{e}}^{-b|u-v|},$ whence we can invoke again to conclude that the fifth and sixth terms, integrated over $[0,t]^2$, are ${\operatorname{O}}(t).$
All that remains is the fourth term: for $u < v$, $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{0}^v & \int_{0}^{v} \int_{0}^{w \wedge r} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-r-2z)} {\mathrm{d}}z {\mathrm{d}}r {\mathrm{d}}w \\
&= \int_{0}^{u} \int_{0}^{w} \int_{0}^{r} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-r-2z)} {\mathrm{d}}z {\mathrm{d}}r {\mathrm{d}}w + \int_{0}^{u} \int_{w}^{r} \int_{0}^{r} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-r-2z)} {\mathrm{d}}z {\mathrm{d}}r {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& = \int_{0}^u \int_{0}^{w} \frac{1}{2b} \left( {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-3r)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-r)} \right) {\mathrm{d}}r {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& \quad + \int_{0}^{u} \int_{w}^{v} \frac{1}{2b} \left( {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-3w-r)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w-r)}\right) {\mathrm{d}}r {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& = \int_{0}^{u} \left[\frac{1}{6b^2}\left({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-4w)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w)}\right) - \frac{1}{2b^2} \left({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-2w)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-w)}\right) \right. \\
& \phantom{= \int_{0}^{u} \Bigg[}\left. + \frac{1}{2b^2} \left({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+v-3w)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-4w)}\right) - \frac{1}{2b^2} \left({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u + v - w)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v-2w)}\right) \right] {\mathrm{d}}w \\
& = \frac{1}{24b^3}\left({\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(v-u)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u+v)}\right) - \frac{1}{6b^3} \left({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(u+2v)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u+v)}\right) \\
& \quad - \frac{1}{4b^3}\left({\mathrm{e}}^{-2bv} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u+v)}\right) + \frac{1}{2b^3} \left({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(u+2v)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+2v)}\right) \\
& \quad + \frac{1}{6b^3}\left({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(v-u)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+v)}\right) - \frac{1}{8b^3}\left({\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(v-u)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u+v)}\right) \\
& \quad - \frac{1}{2b^3}\left({\mathrm{e}}^{-b(u+v)} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(2u+v)}\right) + \frac{1}{4b^3}\left({\mathrm{e}}^{-2bv} - {\mathrm{e}}^{-2b(u+v)}\right),\end{aligned}$$ and, $u$ and $v$ have to be interchanged for $u > v$ (in this case, we exchange the two outer integrals, and from there, the modifications are trivial). Again, we see that all the exponential terms are dominated by ${\mathrm{e}}^{-b|u-v|}$, which, by invoking , completes the proof of the lemma, noting that $\sup_{t {\geqslant}0} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t^3) < \infty.$
The following lemma is an analogue of Lemma \[kole\], which is a Hájek–Rényi type inequality. With Lemma \[kole\] one can estimate the tail probabilities of the maximum of a random sequence, based solely on the joint moments of the elements and, critically, without the assumption of independence. In our applications, not the supremum of a sequence but the maximum of a function is considered, so we had to modify the statement accordingly.
It turns out that the proof can be constructed along the lines of Theorem 4.1 in @Kokoszka_00. In that paper, a slightly stronger result than Lemma \[kole\] was formulated and proven; however, it was impractical to use, hence the more useful corollary formulated as Theorem 3.1 in @Kokoszka_98, which is obtainable from Theorem 4.1 in @Kokoszka_00 by a simple application of the Cauchy–Schwarz theorem.
\[lem:KoLe\] Let $Y_t$ be a process with a.s. continuous trajectory, $\alpha, \beta \in {\mathbb{R}}_+$ with $\alpha < \beta$ and $c$ a deterministic function. Then, for any ${\varepsilon}> 0$, $$\begin{aligned}
{\varepsilon}^2{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}&\left\{ \sup_{s \in [\alpha,\beta]} \left(c(s) \int_{0}^{s}Y_u {\mathrm{d}}u \right)^2 > {\varepsilon}^2 \right\} {\leqslant}c(\alpha)^{2} \int_0^{\alpha} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_u^2) \, {\mathrm{d}}u \\ & + \int_{\alpha}^{\beta}\left(\int_{0}^{s}\int_{0}^{s}{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_uY_v){\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v\right) {\mathrm{d}}|c(s)^2| + 2 \int_{\alpha}^{\beta} c(s)^2\left[{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_s^2)\int_{0}^{s}\int_0^s{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_uY_v){\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v\right]^{1/2} {\mathrm{d}}s\end{aligned}$$
[**Proof.**]{} For any nonnegative process $Z_t$ with a.s. continuous trajectories and a.s. locally bounded variation, let $\tau_{{\varepsilon}}$ be the first hitting time of $[{\varepsilon}, \infty)$ in $[\alpha, \infty)$, $A$ be the event $\{\tau_{{\varepsilon}} < \beta\}$ and $D_s$ be the event $\{\sup_{\alpha {\leqslant}u {\leqslant}s} Z_u {\leqslant}{\varepsilon}\}.$ Note that $D_\beta = A^C$. Then it is easy to check that $$\label{eq:epsilon_Z}
{\varepsilon}{{\boldsymbol{1}}}_A {\leqslant}Z_\alpha + \int_{\alpha}^{ \beta}{{\boldsymbol{1}}}_{D_s} {\mathrm{d}}Z_s.$$ Indeed, if $A$ occurs, the LHS is ${\varepsilon}$, and the RHS is ${\varepsilon}$, if $Z_\alpha < {\varepsilon}$ and $Z_\alpha$ if $Z_\alpha {\geqslant}{\varepsilon}$. If $A^C$ occurs, the LHS is zero, while the RHS is $Z_\beta {\geqslant}0$.
Let us apply this result with $Z_t = c(t)^2\left\lvert\int_{0}^{t} Y_s \, {\mathrm{d}}s \right\rvert^2$. We take expectations on both sides: $$\begin{aligned}
{\varepsilon}^2& {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{\alpha {\leqslant}s {\leqslant}\beta} \left \lvert c(s) \int_{0}^{s}Y_u {\mathrm{d}}u \right \rvert > {\varepsilon}\right) \\
& {\leqslant}{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left[ c(\alpha)^{2} \int_{0}^{\alpha} Y_u^2 \, {\mathrm{d}}u \right] + {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left[\int_{\alpha}^{\beta}{{\boldsymbol{1}}}_{D_s} {\mathrm{d}}\left(\left(c(s)\int_{0}^{s}Y_u {\mathrm{d}}u\right)^2\right)\right] \\
& = c(\alpha)^{2} \int_0^{\alpha} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_u^2) \, {\mathrm{d}}u + {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left[2 \int_{\alpha}^{\beta} {{\boldsymbol{1}}}_{D_s} c(s) \int_{0}^{s} Y_u {\mathrm{d}}u \left(\left(\int_{0}^{s}Y_u {\mathrm{d}}u \right) {\mathrm{d}}c(s) + c(s) Y_s {\mathrm{d}}s\right)\right] \\
& = c(\alpha)^{2} \int_0^{\alpha} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_u^2) \, {\mathrm{d}}u \\
& \quad + {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left[2 \int_{\alpha}^{\beta} {{\boldsymbol{1}}}_{D_s} \left( \int_{0}^{s} \int_{0}^{s} Y_u Y_v {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v \right) {\mathrm{d}}(c^2(s)) + 2 \int_{\alpha}^\beta {{\boldsymbol{1}}}_{D_s} c^2(s) Y_s \int_{0}^{s} Y_u {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}s\right] \\
& {\leqslant}c(\alpha)^{2} \int_0^{\alpha} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_u^2) \, {\mathrm{d}}u \\
& \quad + {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left[2 \int_{\alpha}^{\beta} {{\boldsymbol{1}}}_{D_s} \left( \int_{0}^{s} \int_{0}^{s} Y_u Y_v {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v \right) {\mathrm{d}}\lvert c^2(s)\rvert + 2 \int_{\alpha}^\beta {{\boldsymbol{1}}}_{D_s} c^2(s) Y_s \int_{0}^{s} Y_u {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}s\right] \end{aligned}$$ In the last step we replaced the induced norm of $c^2(s)$ by its total variation norm. Indeed, the inequality holds because $\int_{0}^{s} \int_{0}^{s} Y_u Y_v {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v = \left(\int_{0}^{s}Y_u {\mathrm{d}}u\right)^2$ for every $\omega$ in the probability space where $Y$ is defined, therefore the integrand is nonnegative. Now, we employ several well-known inequalities and the replacement of the indicator function by 1 to obtain our statement.
\[lem:X\_EX\_diff\_sup\] If the parameters $a$ and $b$ remain constant, we have, for any $\gamma < \frac{1}{4}$, $$\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} t^{\gamma - 1} \int_{0}^{t}|X_u - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u)| \, {\mathrm{d}}u = {\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}(1).$$
[**Proof.**]{} We will use Lemma \[lem:KoLe\] for the process $Y_t:= X_t - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t)$ and $c(s) = s^{\gamma - 1}$ and $\alpha=0, \ \beta = T$. Then we can use Lemma \[lem:Xint\_var\] to conclude that $$\int_{0}^{s} \int_{0}^{s} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_uY_v) \, {\mathrm{d}}v \, {\mathrm{d}}u = \int_{0}^{s} \int_{0}^{s} {\operatorname{Cov}}(X_u, X_v) \, {\mathrm{d}}v \, {\mathrm{d}}u {\leqslant}\kappa s, \quad s \in {\mathbb{R}}_+,$$ for some constant $\kappa > 0$. Hence, in this case, $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{0}^{T}&\left(\int_{0}^{s}\int_{0}^{s}{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_uY_v){\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v\right) {\mathrm{d}}|c(s)^2| + 2 \int_{0}^{T} c(s)^2\left[{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_s^2)\int_{0}^{s}\int_0^s{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_uY_v){\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v\right]^{1/2} {\mathrm{d}}s \\
& {\leqslant}\int_{0}^{T} \kappa (2 - 2 \gamma) s^{2 \gamma - 2} \, {\mathrm{d}}s + 2 \int_0^T s^{2 \gamma -2} (K \kappa s)^{1/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}s \\
& = \kappa (2-2\gamma)\int_0^T s^{2\gamma - 2} \, {\mathrm{d}}s + 2 (K \kappa)^{1/2} \int_0^T s^{2 \gamma - 3/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}s < \infty.\end{aligned}$$ This implies the desired statement immediately.
\[lem:M\_sup\] If the parameters $a$ and $b$ remain constant, we have, for any $\gamma < \frac{1}{2}$, $$\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} T^{\gamma - 1} |M_t| = {\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}(1).$$
[**Proof.**]{} First we note that $(M_t)_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+}$ has an a.s. continuous trajectory on ${\mathbb{R}}_+$, therefore also on $[0,1]$. Thus we conclude that $\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}1} |M_t| = {\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}(1)}$. Next, we use the law of the iterated logarithm for continuous martingales. This can be put together from the Dambis–Dubins–Schwarz theorem [@Karatzas_91 Theorem 3.4.6] and the law of the iterated logarithm for the Wiener process [@Karatzas_91 Theorem 2.9.23]. $$\limsup_{t \to \infty} \frac{|M_t|}{\sigma^{2\lambda}\left(\int_{0}^{t}X_u \, {\mathrm{d}}u\right)^{\lambda}} {\leqslant}\limsup_{t \to \infty} \frac{|M_t|}{\sigma \sqrt{\int_{0}^{t}X_u \, {\mathrm{d}}u} \sqrt{\log \log (\sigma^2 \int_{0}^{t}X_u \, {\mathrm{d}}u)}} = 1 \quad \text{a.s.}, \quad \forall \lambda > \frac{1}{2},$$ which means that the supremum on $[1, \infty]$ is finite a.s. (since the process in question has a.s. continuous trajectories). Now we note that $$\frac{\sigma^{2\lambda}\left(\int_{0}^{t}X_u \, {\mathrm{d}}u\right)^{\lambda}}{t^\lambda} \to \sigma^{2\lambda} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_\infty)^{\lambda} \quad \text{a.s.}.$$ Now the statement of the lemma is obtained straightforwardly since $$\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} T^{\gamma - 1} |M_t| = \max(\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}1} T^{\gamma - 1} |M_t|, \sup_{1 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}T} T^{\gamma - 1} |M_t|),$$ and both terms have been shown to be ${\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}(1)$.
\[lem:theta\_conv\_alt\] Under the conditions of Theorem \[thm:consistence\] we have $${\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}- {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}= {\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}} (T^{-1/2}).$$
[**Proof.**]{} $$\begin{aligned}
T^{1/2}({\widehat{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}- {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{\theta}}}}}) & = (T^{-1} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T)^{-1} T^{-1/2} \left[{{\boldsymbol{d}}}_{0,\tau}-{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T {{\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}}}}^{-1} \left(\rho {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}' \begin{bmatrix}
a \\ b
\end{bmatrix} \right) \right. \\ & \phantom{(T^{-1} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T)^{-1} T^{-1/2}} \qquad \left. +
{{\boldsymbol{d}}}_{\tau,T} - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T {{\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}}}}^{-1} \left((1-\rho) {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}'' \begin{bmatrix}
a'' \\ b''
\end{bmatrix}\right) \right]\end{aligned}$$
The first factor converges almost surely, so we analyze $$\begin{aligned}
T^{-1/2}&\left[{{\boldsymbol{d}}}_{0,\tau}-{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T {{\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}}}}^{-1} \left(\rho {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}' \begin{bmatrix}
a \\ b
\end{bmatrix} \right)\right] \\
&= T^{-1/2} {\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{d}}}}}_\tau + T^{-1/2}\left( {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{[0,\tau]} - {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T {{\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}}}}^{-1} \rho {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}'
\right)
\begin{bmatrix}
a' \\ b'
\end{bmatrix} \end{aligned}$$ The first term is ${\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}(1)$ by . We need to show that the second term is also ${\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}(1)$. For this, we can neglect the vector of the parameters, which are constant, so we investigate $$\begin{aligned}
T^{-1/2}\left( {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_\tau - \rho {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T {{\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}}}}^{-1} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}'\right) &= T^{-1/2} \left( {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_\tau - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}({{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{\tau})\right) + T^{-1/2} \left({\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}({{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_{\tau}) - \tau {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}'\right) \\ &\quad - T^{-1/2} \left(\rho ({{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}({{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T)) {{\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}}}}^{-1} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}'\right) \\
& \quad - T^{-1/2} \left( \rho ({\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}({{\boldsymbol{Q}}}_T) - T {{\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}}}}) {{\widetilde{{{\boldsymbol{Q}}}}}}^{-1} {{\boldsymbol{Q}}}' \right)\end{aligned}$$ The first and third factors have a finite variance at the limit, by Lemma \[lem:Xint\_var\]. Therefore, by an application of Chebyshev’s inequality, we have that they are ${\operatorname{O}}_{{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}}(1)$. The second and fourth terms are deterministic and ${\operatorname{O}}(1)$ by .
\[lem:lim\_limsup\_X\] Under the conditions of Theorem \[thm:consistence\] we have $$\lim_{K \to \infty} \limsup_{T \to \infty} {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \sup_{K {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T} \left| t^{-1} \int_{\rho T - t}^{\rho T} (X_s - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_s)) \, {\mathrm{d}}s \right| > \frac{\psi}{6} \right) = 0.$$
[**Proof.**]{} We use Lemma \[lem:KoLe\]. We choose $c(s) = s^{-1}$ and $Y_s = X_{\rho T - s} - {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_{\rho T - s})$ with $\alpha = K$ and $\beta = \rho T$. The estimate on the probability in question is then $$\label{eq:prob_est_1}
\begin{split}
K^{-2} &\int_{\rho T - K}^{\rho T} {\operatorname{Var}}(X_u) \, {\mathrm{d}}u + \int_{K}^{\rho T}\left(\int_{\rho T - s}^{\rho T}\int_{\rho T -s }^{\rho T}{\operatorname{Cov}}(X_u,X_v){\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v\right) {\mathrm{d}}\left|s^{-2}\right| \\
& \quad + 2 \int_{K}^{\rho T} s^{-2}\left[{\operatorname{Var}}(X_s)\int_{\rho T -s}^{\rho T}\int_{\rho T-s}^{\rho T}{\operatorname{Cov}}(X_u,X_v){\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v\right]^{1/2} {\mathrm{d}}s.
\end{split}$$ Now we make use of and to show that $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{\rho T -s}^{\rho T}\int_{\rho T-s}^{\rho T}{\operatorname{Cov}}(X_u,X_v){\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v & {\leqslant}{\operatorname{Var}}(X_0) \int_{\rho T -s}^{\rho T}\int_{\rho T-s}^{\rho T} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b(u+v)} {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v \\
& \quad + ({\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_0) + ab^{-1})\sigma^2 b^{-1} \int_{\rho T -s}^{\rho T}\int_{\rho T-s}^{\rho T} {\mathrm{e}}^{-b|u-v|} {\mathrm{d}}u {\mathrm{d}}v
{\leqslant}\mu s,\end{aligned}$$ for some positive constant $\mu$. We introduce $\lambda:= \sup_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}} {\operatorname{Var}}(X_t) < \infty,$ to continue the estimation started in : $$K^{-2} K \lambda + 2 \int_K^\rho T s^{-3} \mu s \, {\mathrm{d}}s + 2 \int_K^{\rho T} s^{-2} (\lambda \mu)^{1/2} s^{1/2} \, {\mathrm{d}}s.$$ Clearly, as $T \to \infty$ (and hence $\rho T \to \infty$), and then $K \to \infty$, this expression tends to zero, which completes our proof.
Under the conditions of Theorem \[thm:consistence\] we have, for any ${\varepsilon}> 0$, $$\lim_{K \to \infty} \limsup_{T \to \infty} {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \sup_{K {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T} \left| t^{-1} (M_\rho T - M_{\rho T-t}) \right| > {\varepsilon}\right) = 0.$$
[**Proof.**]{} Let us take a backward partition of $[0, \rho T]$ such that $0 = t_n < t_{n-1} < t_{n-2} < \ldots < t_1 < t_0 = \rho T.$ For $t \in [t_{i+1}, t_i]$, we have $$\left|\frac{M_\rho T - M_t}{\rho T -t}\right| {\leqslant}\left|\frac{M_\rho T - M_{t_{i+1}}}{\rho T - t_i}\right| + \left| \frac{M_t - M_{t_{i+1}}}{\rho T - t_i} \right|.$$ Therefore, we have the following estimation: $$\label{eq:disc_cont_decomp}
\begin{split}
& {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \sup_{K {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T} \left| t^{-1} (M_\rho T - M_{\rho T-t}) \right| > {\varepsilon}\right) = {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}\rho T-K} \left| (\rho T-t)^{-1} (M_\rho T - M_t) \right| > {\varepsilon}\right) \\
& {\leqslant}{\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \max_{i^* {\leqslant}i {\leqslant}n} \left| (\rho T - t_{i})^{-1} (M_\rho T - M_{t_{i+1}}) \right| > \frac{{\varepsilon}}{2} \right) \\
& \quad + \sum_{i=i*}^{n} {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{t_{i+1} < t < t_{i}} \left| (\rho T - t_{i})^{-1} (M_t - M_{t_{i+1}}) \right| > \frac{{\varepsilon}}{2} \right),
\end{split}$$ where $i^* = \min\{i: t_i < \rho T -K\}.$ Let us use this estimate with $t_i := \rho T - 2^{i-1}$ for $0 < i < n$, so that $n = \lfloor \log_2 \rho T \rfloor$ and $i^* = \lfloor \log_2 K \rfloor + 1$.
For the first term we can use the following lemma:
[**[@Kokoszka_98 Theorem 3.1]**]{} \[kole\] Let $(Y_n)_{n\in{\mathbb{N}}}$ be a sequence of random variables with finite second moments, and let $(c_n)_{n \in {\mathbb{N}}}$ be a sequence of nonnegative constants. Then, for any $a > 0$, $$\begin{aligned}
a^2 {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left( \max_{1 {\leqslant}k {\leqslant}n} c_k \left| \sum_{j=1}^k Y_j \right| > a \right)
&{\leqslant}\sum_{k=1}^{n-1} |c^2_{k+1} - c^2_k| \sum_{i,j=1}^k {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_iY_j) \\
&\quad +2 \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} c_{k+1}^2 \left({\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left( Y^2_{k+1} \right) \sum_{i,j=1}^k {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left(Y_iY_j\right)\right)^{1/2} \\
&\quad +2 \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} c_{k+1}^2 {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_{k+1}^2).
\end{aligned}$$
Let us set $Y_1:=M_{t_{i^*}}-M_{\rho T}$, and $Y_k=M_{t_{i^*+k-1}} -M_{t_{i^*+k-2}}$ for $1 < k {\leqslant}n-i^*+1$ and $c_k = (\rho T - t_{i^* + k - 1})^{-1}$. Let us note that due to the structure of the $t_i$, we have $c_k = 2^{-(i^* + k - 2)}$ for $k {\leqslant}n- i^* $ and $2^{-(n-1)} < c_{n-i^*+1} < c_{n-i^*}$. Consequently, we can use $$|c_{k+1}^2 - c_k^2| {\leqslant}|c_{k+1}^2 - 4 c_{k+1}^2| = 3 c_{k+1}^2.$$ Also, notice that $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{i,j=1}^k {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_iY_j) &= {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}\left(\sum_{i=1}^k Y_i\right)^2 = {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(M_{t_{i^*+k-1}} - M_{\rho T})^2 \\
&= \sigma^2 \int_{t_{i^*+k-1}}^{\rho T}{\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_u) \, {\mathrm{d}}u {\leqslant}\sigma^2 \mu (\rho T - t_{i^*+k-1}),\end{aligned}$$ with $\mu = \sup_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_+} {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(X_t) < \infty,$ and that similarly, $${\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(Y_{k+1}^2) {\leqslant}\sigma^2 \mu (t_{i^* + k} - t_{i^*+ k-1}) = \sigma^2 \mu 2^{(i^*+ k-2)}.$$ All in all, with Lemma \[kole\], we can estimate the first term in by $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{4}{{\varepsilon}^2}& \left(3 \sigma^2 \mu \sum_{k=1}^{n-i^*+1} 4^{-(i^* +k -1)} 2^{(i^* +k-1)} + 2 \sigma^2 \mu \sum_{k=1}^{n-i*+1} 4^{-(i^* +k - 1)} (2^{(i^* +k -2) + (i^* +k-1)})^{1/2} \right. \\
& \left. \quad +2 \sigma^2 \mu \sum_{k=1}^{n-i*+1} 4^{-(i^* + k - 1)} 2^{(i^* + k -2)} \right) \\
&{\leqslant}\frac{4}{{\varepsilon}^2} \left( 3 \sigma^2 \mu 2^{-i^*} \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}2^{-(k-1)} + 2 \sigma^2 \mu 2^{-i^*} \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}2^{-(k-1)} + 2\sigma^2 \mu 2^{-i^*} \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}2^{-(k-1)}\right) = \frac{56}{{\varepsilon}^2}\sigma^2 \mu 2^{-i^*}.\end{aligned}$$ This does not depend on $n$ (hence, on $T$), and since $i^* \to \infty$ as $K \to \infty$, we have that the first term in converges to zero as $\rho T \to \infty$ and then $K \to \infty$.
For the second term in we will use Doob’s submartingale inequality [see, e.g., @Karatzas_91 Theorem 1.3.8. (i)] to the submartingales $$N_{t,i} := (M_{t_{i+1}+t} - M_{t_{i+1}})^2, \quad t \in [0, t_i - t_{i+1}], \quad i = i^*,\ldots,n,$$ for which clearly $${\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{t_{i+1} < t < t_{i}} \left| (\rho T - t_{i})^{-1} (M_t - M_{t_{i+1}}) \right| > \frac{{\varepsilon}}{2} \right) = {\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}t_i - t_{i+1}} N_{t,i} > \frac{{\varepsilon}^2(\rho T-t_i)^2}{4}\right).$$ The inequality states that $${\operatorname{\mathbb{P}}}\left(\sup_{0 {\leqslant}t {\leqslant}t_i - t_{i+1}} N_{t,i} > \frac{{\varepsilon}^2(\rho T-t_i)^2}{4}\right) {\leqslant}\frac{4 {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(N_{t_i - t_{i+1}})}{{\varepsilon}^2 (\rho T-t_i)^2} = \frac{4 {\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}}(M_{t_i} - M_{t_{i+1}})^2}{{\varepsilon}^2 (\rho T-t_i)^2} {\leqslant}\frac{4\sigma^2 \mu (t_i - t_{i+1})}{{\varepsilon}^2 (\rho T-t_i)^2}.$$ Now, in our present setting, $$t_i - t_{i+1} {\leqslant}(\rho T - 2^{i-1}) - (\rho T - 2^{i}) = 2^{i-1} \quad \text{and} \quad (\rho T - t_i)^2 {\geqslant}2^{2i-4}.$$ Thus, the second term in can be estimated from above by $$\frac{\sigma^2 \mu {\varepsilon}^2}{4}\sum_{i=i^*}^{n} 2^{-i+3} {\leqslant}\frac{\sigma^2 \mu {\varepsilon}^2}{4} 2^{-i^*+3} \sum_{i=0}^{\infty} 2^{-i}.$$ Again, clearly this does not depend on $n$ (thus, $T$) and converges to zero as $i^* \to \infty$ (and thus, as $K \to \infty$). This suffices for our statement.
Acknowledgement {#acknowledgement .unnumbered}
===============
The authors are grateful to Professor Péter Major at the University of Szeged for supplying the basic idea of the proof of Lemma \[lem:M\_sup\].
, Bolyai Institute, University of Szeged, Aradi vértanúk tere 1, H–6720 Szeged, Hungary. E–mail: [email protected]
, Bolyai Institute, University of Szeged, Aradi vértanúk tere 1, H–6720 Szeged, Hungary. Tel.: +36-62-343882, Fax: +36-62-544548, E–mail: [email protected]
[^1]: *2010 Mathematics Subject Classifications*: primary 62M02; secondary 60J60 60F17.
[^2]: *Key words and phrases*: Change detection; Cox–Ingersoll–Ross process; Brownian bridge
[^3]: This research was supported by the European Union and the State of Hungary, co-financed by the European Social Fund in the framework of TÁMOP 4.2.4. A/2-11-1-2012-0001 ‘National Excellence Program’.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We present [[Hi]{}]{} observations of the elliptical galaxy NGC 2974, obtained with the Very Large Array. These observations reveal that the previously detected [[Hi]{}]{} disc in this galaxy (Kim et al. 1988) is in fact a ring. By studying the harmonic expansion of the velocity field along the ring, we constrain the elongation of the halo and find that the underlying gravitational potential is consistent with an axisymmetric shape.
We construct mass models of NGC 2974 by combining the [[Hi]{}]{} rotation curve with the central kinematics of the ionised gas, obtained with the integral-field spectrograph [[`SAURON`]{}]{}. We introduce a new way of correcting the observed velocities of the ionised gas for asymmetric drift, and hereby disentangle the random motions of the gas caused by gravitational interaction from those caused by turbulence. To reproduce the observed flat rotation curve of the [[Hi]{}]{} gas, we need to include a dark halo in our mass models. A pseudo-isothermal sphere provides the best model to fit our data, but we also tested an NFW halo and Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND), which fit the data marginally worse.
The mass-to-light ratio $M/L_I$ increases in NGC 2974 from 4.3 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ at one effective radius to 8.5 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ at 5 $R_e$. This increase of $M/L$ already suggests the presence of dark matter: we find that within 5 $R_e$ at least 55 per cent of the total mass is dark.\
nocite:
- '[@1988ApJ...330..684K]'
- '[@1985ApJ...295..305V]'
- '[@1992ApJ...387..484B]'
- '[@1997ApJ...488..702R]'
- '[@2003Sci...301.1696R]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.373..157B]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.371..157M]'
- '[@1994AJ....107.1003C]'
- '[@2000AJ....119.1579V]'
- '[@2003MNRAS.340...12W]'
- '[@1996ApJ...462..563N]'
- '[@2005ApJ...634..227D]'
- '[@1993ApJ...416L..45B]'
- '[@1997AJ....113..937M]'
- '[@2000AJ....119.1180S]'
- '[@1994ApJ...436..642F]'
- '[@1988ApJ...330..684K]'
- '[@2003MNRAS.345.1297E]'
- '[@2005MNRAS.357.1113K]'
- '[@2007MNRAS.379..401E]'
- '[@2001MNRAS.326...23B]'
- '[@1988ApJ...330..684K]'
- '[@xxx]'
- '[@1988ApJ...330..684K]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.371..157M]'
- '[@2007MNRAS.376.1021J]'
- '[@2004MNRAS.352..721E]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.366.1151S]'
- '[@2003MNRAS.345.1297E]'
- '[@2005MNRAS.357.1113K]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.366..787K]'
- '[@1987PhDT.......199B]'
- '[@1994ApJ...436..642F]'
- '[@1997MNRAS.292..349S]'
- '[@1997MNRAS.292..349S]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.366..787K]'
- '[@1994MNRAS.270..325C]'
- '[@2003MNRAS.345.1297E]'
- '[@2005MNRAS.357.1113K]'
- '[@1997MNRAS.292..349S]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.366..787K]'
- '[@1997MNRAS.292..349S]'
- '[@1997MNRAS.292..349S]'
- '[@1998ASPC..136..240S]'
- '[@2005MNRAS.357.1113K]'
- '[@2007MNRAS.376.1021J]'
- '[@2007MNRAS.376.1021J]'
- '[@2003MNRAS.345.1297E]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.366..787K]'
- '[@1994MNRAS.271..202E]'
- '[@1987BT]'
- '[@1995MNRAS.274..602Q]'
- '[@2004MNRAS.352..721E]'
- '[@1995MNRAS.274..602Q]'
- '[@1991AJ....102.1994K]'
- '[@2005MNRAS.357.1113K]'
- '[@1991AJ....101.1231C]'
- '[@2007MNRAS.376.1513N]'
- '[@2006AJ....132.1426S]'
- '[@2006ApJ...640..751C]'
- '[@2003MNRAS.345.1297E]'
- '[@2002MNRAS.333..400C]'
- '[@2005MNRAS.357.1113K]'
- '[@2005MNRAS.357.1113K]'
- '[@2005MNRAS.357.1113K]'
- '[@2003MNRAS.345.1297E]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.366.1151S]'
- '[@2002ApJ...578..787C]'
- '[@2001ApJ...546..681T]'
- '[@1997AJ....113..937M]'
- '[@1994ApJ...436..642F]'
- '[@2002AJ....123..729O]'
- '[@2005MNRAS.357.1113K]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.366.1126C]'
- '[@2002ApJ...578..787C]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.366.1126C]'
- '[@2007MNRAS.376.1021J]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.366.1126C]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.366.1126C]'
- '[@2001AJ....121.1936G]'
- '[@2006MNRAS.366.1126C]'
- '[@1996ApJ...462..563N]'
- '[@2001MNRAS.321..559B]'
- '[@1983ApJ...270..365M]'
- '[@1991MNRAS.249..523B]'
- '[@2005MNRAS.363..603F]'
- '[@2005MNRAS.363..603F]'
- '[@2007PhRvD..75f3002F]'
- '[@2007MNRAS.379..702S]'
- '[@2006ApJ...643..226H]'
- '[@1987BT]'
- '[@1991AJ....102.1994K]'
- '[@1991dodg.conf...71K]'
- '[@1994MNRAS.271..202E]'
title: 'The shape of the dark matter halo in the early-type galaxy NGC 2974'
---
\[firstpage\]
galaxies: elliptical and lenticular, cD — galaxies: individual: NGC 2974 — galaxies: kinematics and dynamics — galaxies: haloes — dark matter
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
Although the presence of dark matter dominated haloes around spiral galaxies is well established (e.g. van Albada et al. 1985), there is still some controversy about their presence around early-type galaxies. Spiral galaxies often contain large regular [[Hi]{}]{} discs, which allow us to obtain rotation curves out to large radii, and therefore we can constrain the properties of their dark haloes. But these discs are much rarer in elliptical galaxies (e.g. Bregman, Hogg & Roberts 1992), so that for this class of galaxies we are often required to use other tracers to obtain velocity measurements, such as stellar kinematics, planetary nebulae or globular clusters. These tracers however are not available for all early-type galaxies, and give mixed results (e.g. Rix et al. 1997, Romanowsky et al. 2003, Bridges et al. 2006).
With the increase in sensitivity of radio telescopes, it has been discovered that many early-type galaxies in the field do contain [[Hi]{}]{} gas, though with smaller surface densities than in spiral galaxies (e.g. Morganti et al. 2006). The average [[Hi]{}]{} surface density in the Morganti et al. sample is around $1
M_\odot$ pc$^{-2}$, which is far below the typical value for spiral galaxies (4 - 8$ M_\odot$ pc$^{-2}$, e.g. Cayatte et al. 1994). This would explain why previously only the most gas-rich early-type galaxies were detected in [[Hi]{}]{}. Morganti et al. find that [[Hi]{}]{} can be present in different morphologies: [[Hi]{}]{} discs seem to be as common as off-set clouds and tails, though they occur mostly in the relatively gas-rich systems.
Recently rotation curves of [[Hi]{}]{} discs in low surface brightness galaxies and dwarf galaxies, complemented with H$\alpha$ observations, have been used not only to confirm the existence of dark matter haloes, but also to obtain estimates on the inner slope of the density profiles of the haloes (e.g. van den Bosch et al. 2000; Weldrake, de Blok & Walter 2003). Simulations within a cold dark matter (CDM) cosmology yield haloes with cusps in their centres (NFW profiles, see Navarro, Frenk & White 1996), but observations suggest core-dominated profiles (e.g. de Blok & Bosma 2002; de Blok 2005).
Detailed studies of rotation curves of early-type galaxies that contain [[Hi]{}]{} discs are sparser, due to lack of spatial resolution: to detect low [[Hi]{}]{} surface densities, larger beams are needed. Also, only few early-type galaxies have [[Hi]{}]{} discs that are extended and regular enough to allow for detailed studies. Comparing $M/L$ values at large radii, derived from [[Hi]{}]{} velocities, to $M/L$ at smaller radii measured from ionised gas kinematics, the conclusion is that early-type galaxies also have dark matter dominated haloes (e.g. Bertola et al. 1993; Morganti et al. 1997; Sadler et al. 2000). Franx, van Gorkom & de Zeeuw (1994) used the [[Hi]{}]{} ring of the elliptical galaxy IC 2006 to determine not only the mass, but also the shape of the dark halo. They concluded that IC 2006 is surrounded by an axisymmetric dark halo, using the geometry of the ring and an harmonic expansion of its velocity map.
In this paper, we present a similar analysis of the regularly rotating [[Hi]{}]{} ring around the elliptical (E4) field galaxy NGC 2974. Kim et al. (1988) observed this galaxy before in [[Hi]{}]{} but their data had lower spatial resolution than ours, and they found a filled disc instead of a ring. Cinzano & van der Marel (1994) found an embedded stellar disc in their dynamical model of this galaxy, based upon long-slit spectroscopic data, but Emsellem, Goudfrooij & Ferruit (2003) constructed a dynamical model of NGC 2974 based on TIGER integral-field spectrography and long-slit stellar kinematics, that does not require a hidden disc structure. They did report the detection of a two-arm gaseous spiral in the inner 200 pc of NGC 2974 from high resolution WFPC2 imaging. Krajnović et al. (2005) constructed axisymmetric dynamical models of both the stars and ionised gas based upon [[`SAURON`]{}]{} integral-field data. These models require a component with high angular momentum, consisting of a somewhat flattened distribution of stars, though not a thin stellar disc. Emsellem et al. (2007) classify NGC 2974 as a fast rotator, which means that it possesses large-scale rotation and that its angular momentum is well defined. Some of the characteristics of NGC 2974 are given in Table \[tab:ngc2974\].
For our analysis of NGC 2974 we combine kinematics of neutral gas, obtained from our observations with the Very Large Array (VLA), with that of ionised gas, obtained with the integral-field spectrograph [[`SAURON`]{}]{} (Bacon et al. 2001). This combination of a small scale two-dimensional gas velocity map in the centre of the galaxy, and a [[Hi]{}]{} velocity map at the outskirts, allows measurements of a rotation curve ranging from 100 pc within the centre of the galaxy to 10 kpc at the edges of the [[Hi]{}]{} ring. We use this rotation curve, together with ground- and space based optical imaging, to determine the dark matter content in NGC 2974, and to constrain the shape of the dark halo.
In section 2, we discuss the two datasets and their reduction, and describe the [[Hi]{}]{} ring. We concentrate on the analysis of the velocity maps in section 3. Section 4 is devoted to the rotation curve that we extract from the velocity maps, and in section 5 we show mass models with various halo models, and find the best fit to the rotation curve. Section 6 summarizes our results.
\[tab:ngc2974\]
Parameter Value
----------------------------------- ----------------------
Morphological Type E4
$M_B$ (mag) -20.07
Effective $B-V$ (mag) 0.93
PA ($^{\circ}$) 41
Distance modulus (mag) 31.60
Distance (Mpc) 20.89
Distance scale (pc arcsec$^{-1}$) 101.3
Effective radius 24$^{\prime \prime}$
: Properties of NGC 2974. The values are taken from the Lyon/Meudon Extragalactic Database (LEDA) and corrected for the distance modulus, which is taken from the surface brightness fluctuation measurements by Tonry et al. (2001). Note that 0.06 mag is subtracted to adjust to the Cepheid zeropoint of Freedman et al. (2001); see Mei et al. (2005), section 3.3, for a discussion. The effective radius is taken from Cappellari et al. (2006).
Observations and data reduction {#sec:observations}
===============================
VLA observations
----------------
Earlier VLA observations (Kim et al. 1988) of NGC 2974 showed that this galaxy contains a significant amount of [[Hi]{}]{} that, in their observations, appears to be distributed in a regularly rotating disc. Given the modest spatial and velocity resolution of those observations, we re-observed NGC 2974 with the VLA C-array while also using a different frequency setup that allows us to study this galaxy at both higher spatial and higher velocity resolution. The observations were performed on 11 and 19 September 2005 with a total on-source integration time of 15 hours. In each observation, two partially overlapping bands of 3.15 MHz and 64 channels were used. The two bands were offset by 500 [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{} in central velocity. This frequency setup allows us to obtain good velocity resolution over a wide range of velocities (about 1080 [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{}).
The data were calibrated following standard procedures using the MIRIAD software package (Sault, Teuben & Wright 1995). A spectral-line data cube was made using robust weighting (robustness = 1.0) giving a spatial resolution of $19.9^{\prime\prime}\times
17.0^{\prime\prime}$ and a velocity resolution of 20.0 [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{} (after Hanning smoothing). The noise in the final datacube is 0.23 mJy beam$^{-1}$.
To construct the total [[Hi]{}]{} image, a mask was created using a datacube that was smoothed to about twice the spatial resolution and that was clipped at twice the noise of that smoothed datacube. The resulting total [[Hi]{}]{} is shown in Figure \[fig:optHI\], and our observations show that the [[Hi]{}]{} is distributed in a regular rotating ring instead of a filled disc. The inner radius of the ring is approximately $50^{\prime \prime}$ ($\sim$ 5 kpc) and extends to $120^{\prime
\prime}$, which corresponds to 12 kpc, or 5 effective radii (1 $R_e$ = 24$^{\prime \prime}$).
The [[Hi]{}]{} velocity field was derived by fitting Gaussians to the spectra at those positions where signal is detected in the total [[Hi]{}]{} image. The resulting velocity map is shown in Figure \[fig:velmap\]. Typical errors on this map are 5 - 10 [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{}.
We find a total mass of $5.5 \times 10^8 M_\odot$ for the [[Hi]{}]{} gas content of the ring, which is in agreement with Kim et al. (1988), if we correct for the difference in assumed distance modulus. The amount and morphology of the [[Hi]{}]{} observed in NGC 2974 are not unusual for early-type galaxies. Oosterloo et al. (2007) have found that between 5 and 10 per cent of early-type galaxies show [[Hi]{}]{} masses well above $10^9 M_\odot$, while the fraction of detections increases further for lower [[Hi]{}]{} masses (Morganti et al. 2006). The majority of the [[Hi]{}]{}-rich systems have the neutral hydrogen distributed in disc/ring like structures (often warped) with low surface brightness density and no or little ongoing star formation, as observed in NGC 2974. However, there is a region in the North-East of the [[Hi]{}]{} ring where the surface density is higher, and the gas could be forming stars. Jeong et al. (2007) published UV imaging of NGC 2974, obtained with GALEX. Their images reveal indeed a region of increased starformation in the North-East of the galaxy, as well as a starforming ring at the inner edges of the [[Hi]{}]{} ring.
At least some of the most [[Hi]{}]{} rich structures are the results of major mergers (see e.g. Serra et al. 2006). For the systems with less extreme [[Hi]{}]{} masses, like NGC 2974, the origin of the gas is less clear. Accretion of small companions is a possibility, but smooth, cold accretion from the intergalactic medium (IGM) is an alternative scenario.
SAURON observations
-------------------
Maps of the stellar and ionised gas kinematics of NGC 2974, obtained with the integral-field spectrograph [[`SAURON`]{}]{} were presented in Emsellem et al. (2004) and Sarzi et al. (2006), respectively, and we refer the reader to these papers for the methods of data reduction and extraction of the kinematics.
In Figure \[fig:velmap\] we compare both the [[`SAURON`]{}]{} velocity maps of stars and [\[[O$\,$iii]{}\]]{} with the velocity map of the [[Hi]{}]{} ring. Stars and gas are well aligned, and the transition between the ionised and the neutral gas seems to be smooth, suggesting that they form one single disc. The twist in the velocity map of the ionised gas in the inner $4^{\prime\prime}$ is likely caused by the inner bar of this galaxy (Emsellem et al. 2003, Krajnović et al. 2005).
Analysis of velocity fields
===========================
We used kinemetry (Krajnović et al. 2006) to analyse the [[`SAURON`]{}]{} and VLA velocity maps. In our application to a gas disc, kinemetry reduces to the tilted-ring method (Begeman 1978). The velocity along each elliptical ring is expanded in Fourier components (e.g. Franx et al. 1994; Schoenmakers, Franx & de Zeeuw 1997):
$$\label{eq:expan}
V_{\mathrm{los}}(R,\phi) = V_{\mathrm{sys}}(R) + \sum_{n=1}^{N} c_n(R)
\cos n\phi + s_n(R) \sin n\phi,$$
where $V_{\mathrm{los}}$ is the observed velocity, $R$ is the length of the semimajor axis of the elliptical ring, $\phi$ the azimuthal angle, measured from the projected major axis of the galaxy, $V_{\mathrm{sys}}$ the systemic velocity of the ring and $c_n$ and $s_n$ are the coefficients of the harmonic expansion. The $c_1$ term relates to the circular velocity $V_c$ in the disc, so that $c_1 = V_c
\sin i$, where $i$ is the inclination of the gas disc. Assuming that motions in the ring are intrinsically circular and that the ring is infinitely thin, the inclination can be inferred from the flattening $q$ of the fitted ellipse: $\cos i = q$.
If a gas disc only displays pure circular motions, all harmonic terms other than $c_1$ in Equation (\[eq:expan\]) are zero. Noncircular motions, originating from e.g. inflows caused by spiral arms or bars, or a triaxial potential, will cause these terms to deviate from zero. Alternatively, also wrong input parameters of the ring (which are flattening $q$, position angle $\Gamma$ and the coordinates of the centre of the ellipse) will result in specific patterns in these terms, see e.g. van der Kruit & Allen (1978), Schoenmakers et al. (1997) and also Krajnović et al. (2006) for details. Therefore, the flattening and position angle of each ring are determined by minimising $s_1, s_3$ and $c_3$ along that ring. The centre is kept constant and is chosen to coincide with the position of maximal flux in the galaxy.
Noncircular motions
-------------------
Figure \[fig:kinthree\] shows the properties of the elliptic rings that were fitted to the [[`SAURON`]{}]{} and VLA velocity fields, and Figure \[fig:kinhigh\] shows the resulting harmonic terms. The datapoints of the VLA data are separated by approximately one beamsize. Error bars were calculated by constructing 100 Monte Carlo realisations of the velocity fields, where the measurement errors of the maps were taken into account.
Both the position angles and the inclinations of the rings show some variation in the [[`SAURON`]{}]{} field, but are very stable in the VLA field. The dashed line in the top two panels of Figure \[fig:kinthree\] indicates the mean value of the position angle and inclination of the [[Hi]{}]{} data, which are $\Gamma = 47 \pm 1^\circ$ and $i = 60 \pm
2^\circ$. Here, $\Gamma$ is the position angle of the receding side of the galaxy, measured North through East. The systemic velocities (lower panel of Figure \[fig:kinthree\]) have been corrected for barycentric motion and are in good agreement. For the [[`SAURON`]{}]{} field we find a systemic velocity of $1891 \pm 3$ [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{}, while for the VLA field we find $1888 \pm 2$ [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{}. The dashed lines give both these mean velocities. Both the inclination and the systemic velocity that we find are in agreement with previous studies (Cinzano & Van der Marel 1994, Emsellem et al. 2003, Krajnović et al. 2005).
The harmonic terms are shown in Figure \[fig:kinhigh\]. All terms are normalised with respect to $c_1$. From $c_1$ we see that the velocity curve of the gas rises steeply in the centre, but flattens out at larger radii. This already suggests that a dark halo is present around this galaxy. In §\[sec:rot\] we will analyse the rotation curve in more detail.
The other terms have small amplitudes, and are small compared to $c_1$ ($<$ 4 per cent). We do not observe signatures that could indicate incorrect ring parameters, as described in Schoenmakers et al. (1997) and Krajnović et al. (2006).
Shape of the gravitational potential {#sec:elong}
------------------------------------
Following Schoenmakers et al. (1997), we calculate the elongation of the potential from the harmonic terms. Using epicycle theory these authors showed that an $\cos m\phi$-term perturbation of the potential results in signal in the $m-1$ and $m+1$ coefficients of the harmonic expansion in Equation (\[eq:expan\]).
We assume that the potential of NGC 2974 is affected by an $m=2$ perturbation, which could correspond to a perturbation by a bar. We assume that the galaxy is not affected by lopsidedness, warps or spiral arms. To first order, the potential of the galaxy in the plane of the gas ring can then be written as:
$$\label{eq:pot_bar}
\Phi(R, \phi) = \Phi_0(R) + \Phi_2(R) \cos 2\phi,$$
with $\Phi_2(R)\ll\Phi_0(R)$. As explained in Schoenmakers et al. (1997), the elongation of the potential $\epsilon_{\mathrm{pot}}$ in the plane of the gas is in this case given by:
$$\label{eq:elong}
\epsilon_{\mathrm{pot}}\sin 2\varphi = \frac{(s_3- s_1)}{c_1}\frac{(1+2q^2+5q^4)}{1-q^4},$$
where $\varphi$ is one of the viewing angles of the galaxy, namely the angle between the minor axis of the galaxy and the observer, measured in the plane of the disc. This viewing angle is in general unknown, so that from this formula only a lower limit on the elongation can be derived. Schoenmakers (1998) used this method in a statistical way and found an average elongation $\epsilon_{\mathrm{pot}} = 0.044$ for a sample of 8 spiral galaxies.
We calculated the elongation at different radii in NGC 2974, and the result is plotted in Figure \[fig:elong\]. As in Schoenmakers et al, we did not fix $\Gamma$ and $q$ when determining the harmonic terms, because an offset in $\Gamma$ or $q$ introduces extra signal in $c_1,
s_1$ and $s_3$, that would then be attributed to the elongation of the potential.
Although the ionised gas has high random motions (see also § \[sec:rot\]) and therefore the calculated elongation is probably only approximate, it is striking that the elongation changes sign around $10^{\prime \prime}$. The potential in the inner 10 arcseconds has a rather high elongation $\epsilon_{\mathrm{pot}}\sin 2 \varphi =
0.10 \pm 0.08$, while outside this region the elongation as measured from the ionised gas is $\epsilon_{\mathrm{pot}}\sin 2 \varphi =
-0.047 \pm 0.020$. The change of sign could be the result of the bar system in NGC 2974, with the direction along which the potential is elongated changing perpendiculary. It is worth mentioning here that Krajnović et al. (2005) find a ring in the [\[[O$\,$iii]{}\]]{} equivalent width map, with a radius of 9$^{\prime \prime}$. Their data suggest also the presence of a (pseudo-)ring around 28$^{\prime \prime}$, and Jeong et al. (2007) find a ring with a radius of $\sim
60^{\prime \prime}$ in their GALEX UV map, which is where our [[Hi]{}]{} starts. Assuming that these three rings are resonances of a single bar, Jeong et al. (2007) deduce a pattern speed of $78 \pm 6$ [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{} kpc$^{-1}$. In addition to the large scale bar, Emsellem et al. (2003) postulate a small nuclear bar ($\sim 3^{\prime \prime}$).
The [[Hi]{}]{} gas is more suitable for measuring the elongation of the potential, since the cold gas has a small velocity dispersion (typical values $< 10 $ [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{}) and is on nearly circular orbits. Taking the mean value of the elongation as obtained from the [[Hi]{}]{} field, we find $\epsilon_{\mathrm{pot}}\sin 2 \varphi = 0.016 \pm 0.022$. We conclude that the potential of NGC 2974 is well approximated by an axisymmetric one.
Rotation curve {#sec:rot}
==============
To find the rotation curve of NGC 2974, we subtract the systemic velocities from the ionised and neutral gas velocity fields separately. Next, we fix $\Gamma = 47^\circ$ and $q=0.50$ (or equivalently $i=60^\circ$) of the ellipses to the mean values obtained from the neutral gas, and rerun kinemetry on both the velocity maps, now forcing the position angle and flattening to be the same everywhere in the gas disc. Also, because velocity is an odd moment, the even terms in the harmonic expansion should be zero, and are not taken into account during the fit (see Krajnović et al. 2006). The rotation curve of the ionised gas is shown in Figure \[fig:fit\_vphi\] (open diamonds).
The ionised gas has a high observed velocity dispersion $\sigma_{\mathrm{obs}}$, exceeding 250 [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{} in the centre of the galaxy. Three phenomena can contribute to the observed velocity dispersion of a gas: thermal motions, turbulence and gravitational interactions:
$$\label{eq:cause_disp}
\sigma_{\mathrm{obs}}^2 = \sigma_{\mathrm{thermal}}^2 + \sigma_{\mathrm{turb}}^2 +
\sigma_{\mathrm{grav}}^2.$$
The thermal velocity dispersion is always present, and caused by the thermal energy of the gas molecules:
$$\sigma_{\mathrm{thermal}}^2 = \frac{kT}{m},$$
where $k$ is Boltzmann’s constant, $T$ the temperature of the gas and $m$ the typical mass of a gas particle. The contribution of $\sigma_{\mathrm{thermal}}$ to the total velocity distribution in ionised gas is small: a typical temperature for ionised gas is $10^4$ K, which implies $ \sigma_{\mathrm{thermal}} \sim 10$ km/s.
Turbulence can be caused by e.g. internal motions within the gas clouds orshocks induced by a non-axisymmetric perturbation to the potential, such as a bar. This increases the dispersion, but has a negligible effect on the circular velocity of the gas. In contrast, gravitational interactions of individual gas clouds not only increase random motions of the clouds and therefore their dispersion, but also lower the observed velocity. To correct for this last effect, we need to apply an asymmetric drift correction to recover the true circular velocity.
Unfortunately, it is not possible [*a priori*]{} to determine which fraction of the high velocity dispersion in the ionised gas is caused by turbulence and which by gravitational interactions. We therefore now first investigate the effect of asymmetric drift on the rotation curve of the ionised gas.
Asymmetric drift correction {#sec:adcshort}
---------------------------
Due to gravitational interactions of gas clouds on circular orbits, the observed velocity is lower than the circular velocity connected to the gravitational potential. Since we are interested in the mass distribution of NGC 2974, we need to trace the potential, and therefore we have to increase our observed velocity with an asymmetric drift correction, to obtain the true circular velocity. We follow the formalism described in Appendix \[sec:adc\], which is based on the Jeans equations and the higher order velocity moments of the collisionless Boltzmann equation.
We assume that the galaxy is axisymmetric, which is a valid approach given the low elongation of the potential that we derived in section \[sec:elong\]. Further we assume that the gas lies in a thin disc.
We fit the prescription that Evans & de Zeeuw (1994) used for their power-law models to the rotation curve extracted from the ionised gas,
$$\label{eq:vmod}
v_{\mathrm{mod}} = \frac{V_\infty R}{R_{\mathrm{mod}}},$$
where $V_\infty$ is the rotation velocity at large radii, and we introduce
$$\label{eq:rmod}
R_{\mathrm{mod}}^2 = R^2 + R_c^2,$$
with $R_c$ the core radius of the model. This is Equation (\[eq:powerlaw\]) evaluated in the plane of the disc ($z =
0$), with a flat rotation curve at large radii ($\beta = 0$). Since we observe the gas only in the equatorial plane of the galaxy, we cannot constrain the flattening of the potential $q_\Phi$. We therefore assumed a spherical potential $q_\Phi = 1$, which is not a bad approximation even if the density distribution is flattened, since the dependence on $q_\Phi$ is weak. Moreover, even though the density distribution of most galaxies is clearly flattened, the potential is in general significantly rounder than the density. For example, an axisymmetric logarithmic potential is only about a third as flattened as the corresponding density distribution (e.g. §2.2.2 of Binney & Tremaine 1987).
To be able to fit the observed velocity we need to convolve our model with the point-spread function (PSF) of the observations, and take the binning into account that results from the finite pixelsize of the CCD. We therefore constructed a two-dimensional velocity field of the extracted rotation curve, such that
$$\label{eq:velfield}
V(R, \phi) = v_{\mathrm{mod}} \cos \phi \sin i,$$
and we convolved this field with a kernel as described in the appendix of Qian et al. (1995). This kernel takes into account the blurring caused by the atmosphere and the instrument (FWHM = 1.4$^{\prime \prime}$, for the [[`SAURON`]{}]{} observations of NGC 2974, see Emsellem et al. 2004) and the spatial resolution of the reduced observations (0.8$^{\prime
\prime}$ for [[`SAURON`]{}]{}). We extracted the velocity along the major axis of the convolved velocity model and used the resulting rotation curve to fit our observations. The best fit is shown in Figure \[fig:fit\_vphi\], and has a core radius $R_c = 2.1^{\prime
\prime}$ ($\sim 0.2$ kpc).
Under the assumptions of Equation (\[eq:vmod\]), the asymmetric drift correction of Equation (\[eq:adc3\]) reduces to
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:adc_text}
V_c^2 = \overline{v_\phi}^2 - \sigma_R^2 \Big[ \frac{\partial \ln \Sigma}
{\partial \ln R} + \frac{\partial \ln \sigma_R^2}{\partial \ln R} +
\frac{R^2}{2R_{\mathrm{mod}}^2} + \nonumber\\ \frac{\kappa R^2}
{\kappa(2R_{\mathrm{mod}}^2\!-\!R^2) + R^2} \Big],\end{aligned}$$
where $\overline{v_\phi}$ is the observed velocity, $\Sigma$ is the surface brightness of the ionised gas and $\sigma_R$ the radial dispersion of the gas. The last two terms in the equation are connected to the shape of the velocity ellipsoid, with $\kappa$ indicating the alignment of the ellipsoid, see Appendix \[sec:adc\].
To determine the slope of the surface brightness profile, we run kinemetry on the [\[[O$\,$iii]{}\]]{} flux map, extracting the surface brightness along ellipses with the same position angle and flattening as the ones used to describe the velocity field. To decrease the noise we fit a double exponential function to the profile,
$$\label{eq:disp}
\Sigma(R) = \Sigma_0 e^{-R/R_0} + \Sigma_1 e^{-R/R_1},$$
and determine the slope needed for the asymmetric drift correction from this parametrisation. The observed surface brightness profile and its fit are shown in Figure \[fig:dens\_fit\]. As with the velocity profile, we convolved our model of the surface brightness during the fit with the kernel of Qian et al. (1995) to take seeing and sampling into account.
$\sigma_R$ can be obtained from the observed velocity dispersion $\sigma$ using Equation (\[eq:obs\]). Along the major axis, and under the assumptions made above, this expression simplifies to
$$\label{eq:sigma_simple}
\sigma_{\mathrm{obs}}^2 = \sigma_R^2 \Big[ 1 - \frac{R^2 \sin^2 i}{2R_{\mathrm{mod}}^2} - \frac{R^2 \cos^2 i} {\kappa R_{\mathrm{mod}}^2(2-R^2/R_{\mathrm{mod}}^2) + R^2} \Big],$$
with $R_{\mathrm{mod}}$ defined in Equation (\[eq:rmod\]), and adopting $R_c = 2.1^{\prime \prime}$ from the velocity profile .
We choose $\kappa = 0.5$, which is a typical value for a disc galaxy (e.g. Kent & de Zeeuw 1991), but we also experimented with other values for this parameter. Varying $\kappa$ between 0 and 1 resulted in differences in $V_c$ of approximately 10 [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{}, and we adopt this value into the error bars of our final rotation curve.
To obtain the slope of $\sigma_R$ we follow the same procedure as for the surface brightness, extracting the profile of $\sigma_{\mathrm{obs}}$ from the velocity dispersion map with kinemetry. We assume for the moment that turbulence is negligible in the galaxy ($\sigma_{\mathrm{turb}} = 0$) and subtract quadratically $\sigma_{\mathrm{thermal}} = 10$ [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{} from $\sigma_{\mathrm{obs}}$. We convert the resulting $\sigma_{\mathrm{obs}} =
\sigma_{\mathrm{grav}}$ into $\sigma_R$ using the relation in Equation (\[eq:sigma\_simple\]). We parametrise this profile by
$$\sigma_R(R) = \sigma_0 + \sigma_1 e^{-R_{\mathrm{mod}}/R_1}.$$
This profile has a core in the centre (introduced by $R_{\mathrm{mod}}$), so that we can better reproduce the flattening of the profile towards the centre. Again, we convolved our model to take seeing and sampling into account during the fit. The top panel of Figure \[fig:sigma\_fit\] shows the resulting profile and fit, as well as the observed velocity dispersion.
We first assume that turbulence plays no role in this galaxy, and we use $\sigma_R$ as computed above to calculate the asymmetric drift correction (Equation \[eq:adc\_text\]). The resulting rotation curve, as well as the observed rotation curve of the ionised gas, is shown in the top panel of Figure \[fig:asym\].
To check our asymmetric drift corrected rotation curve of the ionised gas, we compare it with the asymmetric drift corrected stellar rotation curve. Stars do not feel turbulence and are not influenced by thermal motions like the gas, and therefore their observed velocity dispersion contains only contributions of gravitational interactions: $\sigma_{\mathrm{obs}} = \sigma_{\mathrm{grav}}$. If we are correct with our assumption that turbulence does not play a role in the ionised gas, then the stellar corrected rotation curve should overlap with the corrected curve of the gas. If it does not, then we know that we should not have neglected the turbulence.
To derive the asymmetric drift correction of the stars, we obtain the observed rotation curve, surface density and velocity dispersion of the stars from our [[`SAURON`]{}]{} observations with kinemetry, and parametrise them in the same way as we did for the ionised gas (see Figures \[fig:fit\_vphi\] - \[fig:sigma\_fit\] for the observed profiles and their models). The models were convolved during the fitting as described for the ionised gas. Because for the stars $\sigma_{\mathrm{obs}} = \sigma_{\mathrm{grav}}$ we do not need to subtract $\sigma_{\mathrm{thermal}}$ as we did for the ionised gas and hence can calculate $\sigma_R$ directly from Equation (\[eq:sigma\_simple\]), where we inserted a core radius $R_c
= 3.0^{\prime \prime}$ from the stellar velocity model.
In the above, we assumed that the stars lie in a thin disc, which is not the case in NGC 2974. To check the validity of our thin disc approximation for our model of $\sigma_R$, we extract this quantity from the Schwarzschild model of Krajnović et al. (2005), for $\theta=84^\circ$, close to the $z=0$ plane. The resulting profile is smoothed and shown as the upper dotted blue line in Figure \[fig:sigma\_fit\]. It is not a fit to the data, but derived independently from the Schwarzschild model, and agrees very well with the stellar $\sigma_R$ we got from kinemetry. Also, $\sigma_{\mathrm{obs}}$ derived from the Schwarzschild model (lower dotted blue line) agrees with the results from kinemetry, giving us confidence that our stellar $\sigma_R$ is reliable.
When we compare the asymmetric drift corrected rotation curves of the ionised gas and of the stars in Figure \[fig:asym\], then it is clear that although for $R > 15^{\prime \prime}$ the agreement between the curves is very good, the correction for the gas is too high in the central part of the galaxy. This is an indication that turbulence cannot be neglected here, and needs to be taken into account.
Turbulence {#sec:turb}
----------
For radii larger than $15^{\prime \prime}$, the corrected velocity curve of the ionised gas is in agreement with the stellar corrected velocity curve, and since stellar motions are not influenced by turbulence, we can conclude that in this region turbulence is negligible. The bottom panel of Figure \[fig:asym\] shows the asymmetric drift correction $(V_c^2 - v_\phi^2)^{1/2}$ itself, and we see that outside 15$^{\prime \prime}$, the correction is more or less constant at approximately 120 [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{}(dashed line). In order to remove the turbulence from the central region in NGC 2974, we now assume that the asymmetric drift correction has the same value everywhere in the galaxy, namely 120 [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{}. We add this value quadratically to the observed rotation curve of the ionised gas, and obtain the rotation curve shown in Figure \[fig:asym\_stars\]. This corrected rotation curve agrees strikingly well with the corrected rotation curve of the stars, and this is a strong indication that our model for turbulence is reasonable, and at least good enough to get a reliable rotation curve for the ionised gas.
We now investigate the random motions resulting from turbulence and gravitational interaction in some more detail. Since we assumed a constant asymmetric drift correction $(V_c^2 - v_\phi^2)^{1/2}$ of $\sim 120$ [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{}, we can at each radius calculate the corresponding $\sigma_R$ with Equation (\[eq:adc\_text\]). Using Equation (\[eq:sigma\_simple\]) we obtain the observed velocity dispersion, which in this case consists only of $\sigma_{\mathrm{grav}}$. Since we know $\sigma_{\mathrm{obs}}$, we can subtract quadratically $\sigma_{\mathrm{grav}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{thermal}}$ = 10 [$\,$km$\,$s$^{-1}$]{} to obtain $\sigma_{\mathrm{turb}}$.
Figure \[fig:sigma\_turb\] shows $\sigma_{\mathrm{obs}}$ (deconvolved model) and its components $\sigma_{\mathrm{thermal}}$, $\sigma_{\mathrm{grav}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{turb}}$. We fitted a single exponential function (Equation \[eq:disp\]) with $R_c =
2.1^{\prime \prime}$ to the inner 15 arcseconds of $\sigma_{\mathrm{turb}}$ and find that with this parametrisation we can get a decent fit. We find a lengthscale of 5.0$^{\prime \prime}$ for the turbulence. The fit is also shown in Figure \[fig:sigma\_turb\].
Mass model and dark matter content
==================================
In this section we combine the corrected rotation curve of the ionised gas with the rotation curve of the neutral gas. The rotation curve of NGC 2974 rises quickly to a maximal velocity and then declines to a somewhat lower velocity, after which it flattens out (see e.g. Figure \[fig:maxdisc\]). Unfortunately, we lack the data to study this decline in more detail, because our [[Hi]{}]{} ring is not filled. The behaviour of our rotation curve is similar to what is seen in other bright galaxies with a concentrated light distribution (Casertano & van Gorkom 1991, Noordermeer et al. 2007). The decline of the rotation curve in such systems could indicate that the mass distribution in the centre is dominated by the visible mass and that the dark halo only takes over at larger radii. In contrast, in galaxies where the light distribution is less concentrated, such as low-luminosity later-type galaxies, the rotation curves does not decline (e.g. Spekkens & Giovanelli 2006, Catinella, Giovanelli & Haynes 2006).
We separately model the contribution of the stars, neutral gas and dark halo to the gravitational potential. Also we derive the total mass-to-light ratio as a function of radius, and obtain a lower limit on the dark matter fraction in NGC 2974.
In our model, we do not take the weak bar system of NGC 2974 into account. Emsellem et al. (2003) find that the perturbation of the gravitational potential caused by the inner bar in their model of this galaxy is less than 2 per cent. Also, we find that the harmonic coefficients that could be influenced by a large scale bar ($s_1$, $s_3$ and $c_3$) are small compared to the dominant term $c_1$ ($<$ 4 per cent). We therefore conclude that although the rotation curve probably is affected by the presence of the bar system, this effect is small, and negligible compared to the systematic uncertainties introduced by the asymmetric drift correction. Furthermore, the largest constraints in our models come from the rotation curve at large radii, where we showed that the elongation of the potential is consistent with axisymmetry.
Stellar contribution
--------------------
HST/WFPC2 MDM
---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------
Filter Band F814W $I$
Exposure Time (s) 250 1500
Field of View $32^{\prime \prime} \times 32^{\prime \prime}$ $17.4^{\prime} \times 17.4^{\prime}$
Pixel scale (arcsec) 0.0455 0.508
Date of Observation 16 April 1997 26 March 2003
: Properties of the space- and ground-based imaging of NGC 2974, used to model the stellar contribution to the potential. The MDM image was constructed of 3 separate exposures, resulting in a total integration time of 1500 s.[]{data-label="tab:images"}
The contribution of the stellar mass to the gravitational potential and the corresponding circular velocity can be obtained by deprojecting and modelling the surface photometry of the galaxy. We use the Multi-Gaussian Expansion (MGE) method for this purpose, as described in Cappellari (2002).
Krajnović et al. (2005) presented an MGE model of NGC 2974, based upon the PC part of a dust-corrected WFPC2/F814W image and a ground-based $I$-band image obtained at the 1.0m Jacobus Kapteyn Telescope (JKT). This image was however not deep enough to yield an MGE model that is reliable out to 5 $R_e$ or 120$^{\prime \prime}$, which is the extent of our rotation curve. We therefore construct another MGE model, replacing the JKT $I$-band image with a deeper one obtained with the 1.3-m McGraw-Hill Telescope at the MDM Observatory (see Table \[tab:images\]). This image is badly contaminated by a bright foreground star, so we do not include the upper half of the image in the fit. Since our model is axisymmetric, enough signal remained to get a reliable fit. We also exclude other foreground stars and bleeding from the image. The parameters of the point spread function (PSF) for the WFPC2 image were taken from Krajnović et al. (2005).
We match the ground-based MDM image to the higher resolution WFPC2 image, and use it to constrain the MGE-fit outside 15$^{\prime
\prime}$. Outside 200$^{\prime \prime}$, the signal of the galaxy dissolves into the background and we stop the fit there. We are therefore confident of our MGE model out to a radius of at least 120$^{\prime \prime}$, which is the extent of the observed [[Hi]{}]{} rotation curve. The goodness of fit can be examined as a function of radius in Figure \[fig:mge\_res\].
We forced the axial ratios $q_j$ of the Gaussians to lie in the interval \[0.58, 0.80\] (which is the same range as Krajnović et al. (2005) used in their paper), maximising the number of allowed inclinations and staying as close as possible to a model with constant ellipticity, without significantly increasing the $\chi^2$ of the fit. This resulted in an MGE model consisting of twelve Gaussians, whose parameters can be found in Table \[tab:mge\]. The parameters of the inner Gaussians agree very well with the ones in Krajnović et al.’s model, which is not surprising as we used the same dust-corrected WFPC image. The outer Gaussians deviate, where their JKT image is replaced by our MDM image.
Figure \[fig:mge\_contours\] shows the WFPC2 and MDM photometry and the overlaid contours of the MGE model. Also shown is the masked MDM image. The deviations in the WFPC plot between the isophotes and the MGE model around 10$^{\prime \prime}$ are point-symmetric and therefore probably reminiscent of a spiral structure (e.g. Emsellem et al. 2003). The deviations are however small, and we conclude that the MGE model is a good representation of the galaxy surface brightness.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$j$ $I_j(L_\odot$ pc$^-2)$ $\sigma_j$ (arcsec) $q_j$ $L_j (
\times 10^9 L_\odot )$
----- ------------------------ --------------------- ---------- ------------------------
1 187628. 0.0376306 0.580000 0.0099
2 44798.9 0.0923231 0.800000 0.0197
3 25362.4 0.184352 0.800000 0.0445
4 28102.0 0.343100 0.586357 0.1251
5 23066.0 0.607222 0.722855 0.3964
6 9694.88 1.20984 0.774836 0.7089
7 5019.87 3.56754 0.659952 2.7186
8 1743.48 9.23267 0.580000 5.5578
9 329.832 16.9511 0.770081 4.7057
10 111.091 30.5721 0.580000 3.8829
11 96.2559 44.0573 0.717554 8.6440
12 16.7257 103.085 0.800000 9.1678
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Parameters of the Gaussians of the MGE model of NGC 2974. From left to right: number of the Gaussian, central intensity, width (standard deviation), axial ratio and total intensity.[]{data-label="tab:mge"}
[c]{}
\
Gas contribution
----------------
The contribution of the [[Hi]{}]{} ring to the gravitational potential is small compared to the stars and halo ($5.5 \times 10^8 M_\odot$, three orders of magntiude smaller than the stellar mass) but still included in our mass models. We include a factor 1.3 in mass to account for the helium content of the ring. The mass of the ionised gas is estimated at only $2.2 \times 10^5 M_\odot$ (Sarzi et al. 2006), and therefore can be neglected in our models.
Mass-to-light ratio
-------------------
By comparing the observed rotation curve and the light distribution from the MGE model, we can already calculate the mass-to-light ratio in NGC 2974. The enclosed mass within a certain radius $r$ in a spherical system follows directly from the circular velocity:
$$\label{eq:mass_vc}
M(<r) = \frac{V_c^2 r}{G},$$
with $G$ the gravitational constant. Here we assume that the gravitational potential of the total galaxy is spherical symmetric. This is clearly not the case for the neutral gas, which resides in a thin disc. However, the total mass of the gas is three orders of magnitudes smaller than the total mass, and therefore can be neglected. Also, the stars reside in a flattened potential, as can be shown from their MGE model. But since we cannot disentangle the contributions of the stars and the dark matter to the observed rotation velocity [*a priori*]{}, we will for the moment assume that also the stellar mass density can be approximated by a spherical distribution.
Since we know the mass within a sphere of radius $r$, we also need to calculate the enclosed $I$-band luminosity within a sphere. We first obtain the gravitational potential of our MGE model as a function of radius (see appendix A of Cappellari et al. 2002). Here, we take the flattening of the separate Gaussians into account. We subsequently calculate the corresponding circular velocity, with an arbitrary $M_*/L$. To find the luminosity enclosed in a sphere we calculate the spherical mass needed to produce this circular velocity with Equation (\[eq:mass\_vc\]), and convert this mass back to a luminosity using the same $M_*/L$ that we used to calculate the velocity curve. This way we have replaced the luminosity within a flattened axisymmetric ellipsoid (oblate sphere) by a sphere with radius equal to the long axis of the ellipsoid.
With this method we arrive at a mass-to-light ratio $M/L_I=$ 8.5 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ at 5 effective radii ($1R_e = 24^{\prime
\prime}$). In the literature, this value is usually expressed in $B$-band luminosities. Using an absolute magnitude of $M_B= -20.07$ for NGC 2974 (see Table \[tab:ngc2974\]), we find that $M/L_B=$ 14 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,B}$. We checked that $M_B$ is consistent with our MGE model, adopting a colour $B-I = 2.13$ for NGC 2974 (see Tonry et al. 2001 and Table \[tab:ngc2974\]). [[Hi]{}]{} studies of other early-type galaxies yield similar numbers (Morganti et al. 1997 and references therein). For example, Franx et al. (1994) find $M/L_B = $16 $
M_\odot/L_{\odot,B}$ at 6.5 $R_e$ using the [[Hi]{}]{} ring around IC 2006, and Oosterloo et al. (2002) report $M/L_B
=$ 18 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,B}$ for NGC 3108 at 6 $R_e$.
Figure \[fig:ml\] shows the increase of $M/L_I$ with radius. We find that within 1 $R_e$, $M/L_I =$ 4.3 $ M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$, which agrees with the results from Schwarzschild modeling of Krajnović et al. (2005) and Cappellari et al. (2006). The increase of $M/L$ indicates that the fraction of dark matter grows towards larger radii.
Dark matter fraction
--------------------
To calculate the dark matter fraction, we need to know the stellar mass-to-light ratio $M_*/L$. An upper limit on $M_*/L_I$ can be derived by constructing a maximal disc model. From the MGE model we calculate a rotation curve (taking the flattening of the potential into account, as in Cappellari et al. 2002), and we increase $M_*/L_I$ until the calculated curve exceeds the observed rotation curve. This way, we find that $M_*/L_I$ cannot be larger than 3.8 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$. We plotted the rotation curve of the maximal disc model, together with the observed rotation curve in Figure \[fig:maxdisc\]. The rotation curve of the model has been convolved to take seeing and the resolution of the observations into account, as described in § \[sec:adcshort\]. The contribution of the neutral gas to the gravitational potential has been included in the model, but has only a negligible effect on the fit.
It is clear that even in the maximal disc model, a dark matter halo is needed to explain the flat rotation curve of the [[Hi]{}]{} gas at large radii. From this model, we can calculate a lower limit to the dark matter fraction in NGC 2974. We then find that within one $R_e$, 12 per cent of the total mass is dark, while within 5 $R_e$, this fraction has grown to 55 per cent.
There is however no reason to assume that the stellar mass-to-light ratio is well represented by its maximal allowed value. Cappellari et al. (2006) find $M_*/L_I = $ 2.34 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ for NGC 2974, measured from line-strength values using single stellar population models. The formal error that they report on this mass-to-light ratio is $\sim$ 10 per cent, but they warn that this value is strongly assumption dependent. Secondary star formation in a galaxy can result in an underestimation of $M_*/L$, and the GALEX observations of Jeong et al. (2007) indeed show evidence for recent star formation in NGC 2974. The population models of Cappellari et al. (2006) are based on a Kroupa initial mass function (IMF), but if instead a Salpeter IMF is used, their $M_*/L_I$ values increase by $\sim$ 40 per cent, which for NGC 2974 would result in $M_*/L_I = $ 3.3 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$. Cappellari et al. (2006) discard the Salpeter IMF based models, because for a large part of their sample their models then have $M_*/L_I > M_{\mathrm{tot}}/L_I$, which is unphysical.
If we adopt $M_*/L_I =$ 2.34 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ from the stellar population models, then 46 per cent of the total mass within 1 $R_e$ is dark. The dark matter fraction increases to 72 per cent within 5 $R_e$. See Figure \[fig:massfrac\] for the change in dark matter fraction as a function of radius, and the comparison with the lower limits derived above.
Gerhard et al. (2001) and Cappellari et al. (2006) find an average dark matter fraction of $\sim$ 30 per cent within one effective radius in early-type galaxies, but we note that NGC 2974 is an outlier in the sample of Cappellari et al. The value of 47 per cent that we find is a bit high compared to this average, though the minimal fraction of dark matter is 14 per cent in our galaxy. Without an accurate determination of $M_*/L$ we can not give a more precise estimate on the dark matter fraction in NGC 2974.
Halo models
-----------
We now include a dark halo in our model, to explain the flat rotation curve that we extracted from the [[Hi]{}]{} ring. We explore two different halo models: the pseudo-isothermal sphere and the NFW profile.
The pseudo-isothermal sphere has a density profile given by:
$$\label{eq:rho_iso}
\rho(r) = \frac{\rho_0}{1+(r/r_c)^2},$$
where $\rho_0$ is the central density of the sphere, and $r_c$ is the core radius.
The velocity curve resulting from the density profile of the pseudo-isothermal sphere is straightforward to derive analytically, and given by
$$\label{eq:vc_iso}
V_c^2(r) = 4\pi G \rho_0 r_c^2 \Big( 1 - \frac{r_c}{r}\arctan{ \frac{r}{r_c}}\Big).$$
The NFW profile was introduced by Navarro et al. (1996) to describe the haloes resulting from simulations, taking a cold dark matter cosmology into account. This profile has a central cusp, in contrast to the pseudo-isothermal sphere which is core-dominated. Its density profile is given by
$$\label{eq:rho_nfw}
\rho(r) = \frac{\rho_s}{r/r_s \big[1 + \big(\frac{r}{r_s}\big)^2\big]},$$
with $\rho_s$ the characteristic density of the halo and $r_s$ a characteristic radius. The velocity curve of the NFW halo is given by
$$\label{eq:vc_nfw}
V_c^2(r) = V_{200}^2 \frac{\ln(1+cx) -cx/(1+cx)}{x[\ln(1+cx) - c/(1+c)]},$$
where $x = r/r_{200}$ and $c$ the concentration parameter defined by $c=r_{200}/r_s$. $r_{200}$ is defined such that within this radius the mean density is 200 times the cricital density $\rho_{\mathrm{crit}}$, and $V_{200}$ is the circular velocity at that radius. These parameters depend on the assumed cosmology.
We construct mass models of NGC 2974 including a dark matter halo with the observed stellar and gaseous mass. We then calculate the circular velocity resulting from our models, by adding the circular velocities resulting from the separate components:
$$\label{eq:vctot}
V_c^2(r) = V_{c,\mathrm{halo}}^2+ V_{c,\mathrm{stars}}^2+ V_{c,\mathrm{gas}}^2,$$
and fit these to our observed rotation curve. The inner 25$^{\prime
\prime}$ of our model rotation curve, which are based on the [[`SAURON`]{}]{} ionised gas measurements, are convolved with a kernel to take seeing and sampling into account, as described in § \[sec:adcshort\].
For both profiles, we found that we could not constrain the stellar mass-to-light ratio in our models because of degeneracies: for each $M_*/L_I$ below the maximal disc value of 3.8 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ we could get a decent fit. We therefore show two fits for each model, with $M_*/L$ values that are justified by either linestrength measurements and single stellar population models ($M_*/L_I = $ 2.34 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$) or the observed rotation curve itself ($M_*/L_I
= $ 3.8 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$). This last case would be a model requiring a minimal halo.
The best fit models for a dark halo described by a pseudo-isothermal sphere is shown in Figure \[fig:iso\]. The model in the top panel has a fixed $M_*/L_I =$ 2.34 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$, while the bottom panel shows the model with $M_*/L_I =$ 3.8 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$. The first model fits the [[`SAURON`]{}]{} measurement of the rotation curve well, but has a small slope at the outer part, where the observations show a flat rotation curve. Nevertheless, this model provides a good fit, with a minimal $\chi^2 = 27$ for $27-2 = 25$ degrees of freedom. We find for this model $\rho_0 =$ 19 $M_\odot$ pc$^{-3}$ and core radius $r_c = 2.3^{\prime \prime} =$ 0.23 kpc. The second model with $M_*/L_I =
$ 3.8 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ provides a better fit to the [[Hi]{}]{} measurements, but has problems fitting the central part of the rotation curve. The model has a lower central density $\rho_0 =$ 0.06 $M_\odot$ pc$^{-3}$ and larger core radius $r_c = 54^{\prime \prime} =$ 5.4 kpc. The fit is worse than for the previous model, with $\chi^2 =
133$.
Figure \[fig:nfw\] shows the best fitting-models with an NFW dark halo. This model fits the data less well than the pseudo-isothermal sphere: for the model with $M_*/L_I =$ 2.34 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ (top panel) we find a minimal $\chi^2 = 44$ for $27-2$ degrees of freedom. The corresponding parameters of the density function are $\rho_s =$ 1.1 $M_\odot$ pc$^{-3}$ and $r_s = 21^{\prime \prime}$ = 2.1 kpc. For $M_*/L_I =$ 3.8 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ the fit is worse ($\chi^2 =
144$) but the outer part of the rotation curve is better fitted. We find $\rho_s =$ 1.1 $\times 10^{-3}$ $M_\odot$ pc$^{-3}$ and $r_s
\approx 1300^{\prime \prime}$, which corresponds to approximately 130 kpc.
Adopting $H_0 = 73$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, the critical density is given by $\rho_{\mathrm{crit}} = 3H_0^2/8 \pi G= 1.5\times10^{-7}$ $M_\odot$ pc$^{-3}$. We calculate the concentration parameter $c$, given that
$$\frac{\rho_s}{\rho_{\mathrm{crit}}} = \frac{200}{3}
\frac{c^3}{\ln (1+c) - c/(1+c)},$$
and find $c=71$ and $c=4.7$ for the NFW profiles in the $M_*/L_I =$ 2.34 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ and $M_*/L_I =$ 3.8 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ models, respectively. These values are quite deviant from the value that is expected from cosmological simulations ($c \sim 10$, Bullock et al. 2001). When fixing $c=10$ and fitting again an NFW halo to our observations with $M_*/L_I$ and the scale radius as free parameters, we arrive at the model shown in Figure \[fig:nfw\_c10\]. We find $M_*/L_I =$ 3.3 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ and $r_s \approx 380^ {\prime \prime} \approx$ 38 kpc, with a minimal $\chi^2$ value of 87 for $27-2$ degrees of freedom. We regard this model as more realistic than the two other NFW profiles mentioned above, but since also here the fit is not perfect, we cannot conclude that therefore $M_*/L_I = $ 3.3 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ is a better estimate for the stellar mass-to-light ratio in NGC 2974, than the value from the stellar population models.
The results of the halo models discussed above are summarized in Table \[tab:haloes\].
-------------- ------------------------- ----------------------- ------------- ----- ----------
Halo profile $M_*/L_I$ $\rho_0$,$\rho_s$ $r_c$,$r_s$ $c$ $\chi^2$
($M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$) ($M_\odot$ pc$^{-3}$) (kpc)
Pseudo- 2.34 19 0.23 - 27
isothermal 3.8 0.06 5.4 - 133
2.34 1.1 2.1 71 44
NFW 3.8 0.0011 130 4.7 144
3.3 0.0067 38 10 87
-------------- ------------------------- ----------------------- ------------- ----- ----------
: Comparison of the best fit models with a dark matter halo, as described in the text.[]{data-label="tab:haloes"}
MOND
----
An alternative to including a dark matter halo in a galaxy to explain its rotation curve at large radii, is provided by Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND, Milgrom 1983). In this theory, Newtonian dynamics is no longer valid for small accelerations ($a \ll a_0$), but instead the acceleration $a$ in a gravitational field is given by
$$\label{eq:mond}
a \mu(a/a_0) = a_N,$$
where $a_N$ is the Newtonian acceleration and $\mu$ is an interpolation function, such that $\mu(x) = 1$ for $x \gg 1$ and $\mu(x) = x$ for $x \ll 1$. Given the stellar mass-to-light ratio of a galaxy, MOND predicts its rotation curve. An overview of properties and predictions of MOND is offered by Sanders & McGaugh (2002).
We fitted our rotation curve of NGC 2974 with $M_*/L_I$ as a free parameter. For $a_0$ we adopted the value of $1.2 \times 10^{-8}$ cm/s$^2$, which was derived by Begeman, Broeils & Sanders (1991) from a sample of spiral galaxies. The contribution of the neutral gas is included in our model in the same way as described before, as well as a convolution to take seeing and sampling into account.
NGC 2974 is an ideal candidate to study the transition between the Newtonian and MOND regime, since the Newtonian acceleration reaches $a_0$ at a radius of approximately $95^{\prime\prime}$ if we adopt a stellar mass-to-light ratio of 2.34 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$. For larger $M_*/L_I$, this radius increases, and for the maximum disc value of 3.8 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$, $a_0$ is reached around $120^{\prime\prime}$. This means that a large part of the observed rotation curve lies in the transition region, and we could therefore use NGC 2974 to discriminate between interpolation function.
We first constructed a model with the standard interpolation function of MOND,
$$\mu(x)= \frac{x}{\sqrt{1+x^2}}.$$
The resulting fit is shown as model I in Figure \[fig:mond\]. This model has the same $M_*/L_I$ value as the maximal disc model, 3.8 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$, but does clearly not provide a good fit to the data.
We constructed a second model, with an alternative interpolation function explored by Famaey & Binney (2005),
$$\mu(x) = \frac{x}{1+x}.$$
This function makes the transition between the Newtonian and the MOND region less abrupt than the standard interpolation function and requires a lower $M_*/L_I$. The fit provided by this model to the data is much better (Model II in Figure \[fig:mond\]), but formally less good than a model with a dark matter halo. This model requires $M_*/L_I = $3.6 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$, and the fit yields $\chi^2 = 98$, for 27-1 degrees of freedom.
Famaey & Binney (2005) find that their simple interpolation function provides better constraints to the terminal velocity of the Milky Way than the standard function. Famaey et al. (2007) fitted the rotation curves of a sample of galaxies with Hubble types ranging from small irregular dwarf galaxies to large early-type spirals, and report that both interpolating functions fit the data equally well. However, Sanders & Noordermeer (2007) find that for their sample of early-type disc galaxies the simple interpolation function yields more sensible values for $M_*/L$ than the standard one.
It would be interesting to see whether there is a preference for the simple interpolation function over the standard one in early-type galaxies. In this scenario, the challenge for MOND would be to provide a universal interpolation function that would fit rotation curves of all galaxy types along the Hubble sequence. So far, mostly spirals and dwarf galaxies have been confronted with MOND, but with more early-type galaxies getting detected in [[Hi]{}]{} and more rotation curves becoming available, the sampling in morphology should become less biased to late-type galaxies.
Summary {#sec:conclusion}
=======
We obtained [[Hi]{}]{} observations of the early-type galaxy NGC 2974 and found that the neutral gas resides in a ring. The ring starts around 50$^{\prime \prime}$, and extends to 120$^{\prime \prime}$, which corresponds to 12 kpc or 5 effective radii. The total mass of the neutral gas is $5.5 \times 10^8 M_\odot$.
We compared the velocity field of the [[Hi]{}]{} ring with the kinematics of the ionised gas. We found that both velocity fields are very regular and nicely aligned, indicating that they could form a single disc. A harmonic decomposition of the velocity field showed that at large radii the gravitational potential is consistent with an axisymmetric shape.
We introduced a new way to correct the rotation curve of the ionised gas for asymmetric drift. We found that the correction approaches a constant value and this enabled us to remove the effect of turbulence on the rotation curve, assuming a constant asymmetric drift correction throughout the galaxy. We confirmed that this assumption is valid in NGC 2974, by comparing with the asymmetric drift corrected rotation curve of the stars (which was not affected by turbulence). An interesting question is whether other galaxies show the same behaviour. If this is the case, then with our method we would be able to investigate rotation curves of ionised gas and the effects of turbulence in more detail in other galaxies, and search for connections with e.g. spiral structure and bars. Although in principle we could for NGC 2974 also have used the stellar rotation curve together with the [[Hi]{}]{} to constrain the mass models, this will not be the case for all galaxies. For instance, in low surface brightness galaxies stellar kinematics are not easy to obtain, and even in high surface brightness galaxies, the absorption line kinematics need to be binned to higher signal-to-noise than the emission line kinematics, provided that ionised gas is present.
It is clear from the rotation curve of NGC 2974 that dark matter is required to explain the observed velocities.We found that the total mass-to-light ratio increases from 4.3 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ at 1 $R_e$ to 8.5 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$ at 5 $R_e$. This last value would correspond to 14 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,B}$ in $B$-band. Even in the maximal disc model, 55 per cent of the total mass is dark, and an additional dark halo needs to be included.
We constructed mass models of NGC 2974, where we modeled both the stellar and gaseous contribution to the gravitational potential. The latter is negligible compared to the stars ($M_{\mathrm{gas}} \sim
0.001 M_*$), but still included in our models. For the dark halo, we tested two different profiles: the core-dominated pseudo-isothermal sphere and the cuspy NFW profile. We experimented with different values for the stellar mass-to-light ratio, but found that we cannot constrain this value with just the rotation curve: for most $M_*/L$ smaller than the maximal disc value, we could obtain a decent fit for both the pseudo-isothermal sphere and the NFW profile. If we compare models with $M_*/L_I$ from single stellar population models (2.34 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$) with maximal disc model ($M_*/L_I = $ 3.8 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$), then the first provide better fits to the data. Especially the inner datapoints are better reproduced with $M_*/L_I =$ 2.34 $M_\odot/L_{\odot,I}$, but we note that the [[Hi]{}]{} data points are better fitted in the models with the larger $M_*/L_I$ value. The pseudo-isothermal sphere fits our data marginally better than the NFW profile, but the difference is not significant. With MOND we can also reproduce the observed rotation curve, but not as well as with models that include a dark matter halo.
The largest uncertainty in our analysis is the stellar mass-to-light ratio. We can only derive an upper limit on this ratio from the maximal disc model or e.g. from Schwarzschild modeling, since $M_*/L$ should always be equal to or smaller than the dynamical $M/L$. Values for $M_*/L$ from stellar population synthesis models depend significantly on the model assumptions: we mentioned already that going from a Kroupa to a Salpeter IMF can increase $M_*/L$ by as much as 40 per cent. Also, even low-level secondary star formation can affect $M_*/L$ severely. Furthermore, there is no reason why the $M_*/L$ should remain constant over 5 effective radii, which we assumed when modeling the stellar mass. If the stellar mass-to-light ratio were known, we would be able to determine the dark matter fraction in the galaxy with more accuracy, and either rule out or confirm the maximal disc hypothesis. Also, since $M_*/L$ is the only free parameter when fitting a rotation curve in MOND, knowing this value would provide us with a rotation curve that can be compared to the data directly, providing a clear test for MOND.
We have shown in this paper that it is possible to combine rotation curves of neutral and ionised gas, correcting the latter one for asymmetric drift using the Jeans equations and the higher order velocity moments of the collisionless Boltzmann equations. Our method to correct for the asymmetric drift therefore does not require a cold disc assumption ($\sigma \ll V_c$). With more early-type galaxies getting detected in [[Hi]{}]{}, and more high quality rotation curves becoming available, we can now study the shape of their dark matter haloes.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
The authors would like to thank Martin Bureau, Michele Cappellari, Richard McDermid, Marc Sarzi and Scott Tremaine for useful discussions, and Remco van den Bosch for careful reading of the manuscript. We also are grateful to Jesús Falcón-Barroso for making available the MDM image of NGC 2974 prior to publication.
This research was supported by the Netherlands Research School for Astronomy NOVA, and by the Netherlands Organization of Scientific Research (NWO) through grant 614.000.426 (to AW). AW acknowledges The Leids Kerkhoven-Bosscha Fonds for contributing to working visits. GvdV acknowledges support provided by NASA through Hubble Fellowship grant HST-HF-01202.01-A awarded by the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., for NASA, under contract NAS 5-26555.
The Very Large Array is part of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory, which is a facility of the National Science Foundation operated under cooperative agreement by Associated Universities, Inc. The [[`SAURON`]{}]{} observations were obtained at the William Herschel Telescope, operated by the Isaac Newton Group in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias.
The Digitized Sky Survey was produced at the Space Telescope Science Institute under US Government grant NAG W-2166. Photometric data of NGC 2974 was obtained using the 1.3-m McGraw-Hill Telescope of the MDM Observatory at Kitt Peak. We acknowledge the usage of the HyperLeda data base (http://leda.univ-lyon1.fr).
Bacon R., et al., 2001, MNRAS, 326, 23
Begeman K.G., 1978, PhD thesis, Groningen University
Begeman K.G., Broeils A.H., Sanders R.H., 1991, MNRAS, 249, 523
Bertola F., Pizzella A., Persic M., Salucci P., 1993, ApJ, 416L, 45
Binney J., Tremaine S., 1987, Galactic Dynamics, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ
Bregman J.N., Hogg D.E., Roberts M.S., 1992, ApJ, 387, 484
Bridges T., et al., 2006, MNRAS, 373, 157
Bullock J.S., Kolatt T.S., Sigad Y., Somerville R.S., Kravtsov A.V., Klypin A.A., Primack J.R., Dekel A., 2001, MNRAS, 321, 559
Cappellari M., 2002, MNRAS, 333, 400
Cappellari M., Verolme E.K., van der Marel R.P., Verdoes Kleijn G.A., Illingworth G.D., Franx M, Carollo C.M., de Zeeuw P.T., 2002, ApJ, 578, 787
Cappellari M., et al., 2006, MNRAS, 366, 1126
Catinella B., Giovanelli R., Haynes M.P., 2006, ApJ, 640, 751
Cayatte V., Kotanyi C. Balkowski C., van Gorkom J.H., 1994, AJ, 107, 1003
Casertano S., van Gorkom J.H., 1991, AJ, 101, 1231
Cinzano P., van der Marel R.P., 1994, MNRAS, 270 325
de Blok W.J.G., 2005, ApJ, 634, 227
de Blok W.J.G. & Bosma A., 2002, A&A, 385, 816
Emsellem E., Goudfrooij P., Ferruit P., 2003, MNRAS, 345, 1297
Emsellem E., et al., 2004, MNRAS, 352, 721
Emsellem E., et al., 2007, MNRAS, 2007, 379, 401
Evans N.W., de Zeeuw P.T., 1994, MNRAS, 271, 202
Famaey B., Binney J., 2005, MNRAS, 363, 603
Famaey B., Gentile G., Bruneton J.-P., Hongsheng, 2007, PhRvD, 75, 3002
Franx M., van Gorkom J.H., de Zeeuw P.T, 1994, ApJ, 436, 642
Freedman W.L., et al., 2001, ApJ, 553, 47
Gerhard O., Kronawitter A., Saglia R.P., Bender, R., 2001, AJ, 121, 1936
Häring-Neumayer N., Cappellari M., Rix H.-W., Hartung M., Prieto M.A., Meisenheimer K., Lenzen R., 2006, ApJ, 643, 226
Jeong H., Bureau M., Yi S.K., Krajnović D., Davies R.L., 2006, MNRAS, 2007, 376, 1021
Kent S.M., de Zeeuw P.T., 1991, AJ, 102, 1994
Kim D.-W., Jura M., Guhathakurta P., Knapp G.R., van Gorkom J.H., 1988, ApJ, 330, 684
Krajnović D., Cappellari M., Emsellem E., McDermid R.M., de Zeeuw P.T., 2005, MNRAS, 357, 1113
Krajnović D., Cappellari M., de Zeeuw P.T., Copin Y., 2006, MNRAS, 366, 787
Kuijken K., Tremaine S., 1991, in Sundelius B., ed., Dynamics of Disc Galaxies. Göteborg Univ. Press, Göteborg, p.71
Mei S., et al., 2005, ApJ, 625, 121
Milgrom M., 1983, ApJ, 270, 365
Morganti R., Sadler E.M., Oosterloo T., Pizzella A., Bertola F., 1997, AJ, 113, 937
Morganti R. et al., 2006, MNRAS, 371, 157
Navarro, J.F., Frenk C.S., White S.D.M., 1996, ApJ, 462, 563
Noordermeer E., van der Hulst J.M., Sancisi R., Swaters R.S., van Albada T.S., 2007, MNRAS, 376, 1513
Oosterloo T.A., Morganti R., Sadler E.M., Vergani D., Caldwell N., 2002, AJ, 123, 729
Oosterloo T.A., Morganti R., Sadler E.M., van der Hulst T., Serra P., 2007, A&AA, 465, 787
Qian E.E., de Zeeuw P.T., van der Marel R.P., Hunter C., 1995, MNRAS, 274, 602
Rix H.-W., de Zeeuw P.T., Cretton N., van der Marel R.P., Carollo C.M., 1997, ApJ, 488, 702
Romanowsky A.J., Douglas N.G., Arnaboldi M., Kuijken K., Merrifield M.R., Napolitano N.R., Capaccioli M., Freeman K.C., 2003, Science, 301, 1696
Sadler E.M., Oosterloo T.A., Morganti R., Karakas A., 2000, AJ, 119, 1180
Sanders R.H., McGaugh S.S., 2002, ARA&A, 40, 263
Sanders R.H., Noordermeer E., 2007, MNRAS, 379, 702
Sarzi M., et al., 2006, MNRAS, 366, 1151
Sault, R.J., Teuben, P.J., Wright, M.C.H. 1995, in ADASS IV, ed. R. Shaw, H.E. Payne, J.J.E. Hayes, ASP Conf. Ser., 77, 433,
Schoenmakers R.H.M., 1998, ASPC, 136, 240
Schoenmakers R.H.M, Franx M., de Zeeuw P.T., 1997, MNRAS, 292, 349
Serra P., Trager S.C., van der Hulst J.M., Oosterloo T.A., Morganti R., 2006, A&A, 453, 493
Spekkens K., Giovanelli R., 2006, AJ, 132, 1426
Tonry J.L., Dressler A., Blakeslee J.P., Ajhar E.A., Fletcher A.B., Luppino G.A., Metzger M.R., Moore C.B., 2001, ApJ, 546, 681
van Albada T.S., Bahcall J.N, Begeman K., Sancisi R., 1985, ApJ, 295, 305
van der Kruit P.C., Allen R.J., 1978, ARA&A, 16, 103
van den Bosch F.C., Robertson B.E., Dalcanton J.J., de Blok W.J.G., 2000, AJ, 119, 1579
Weldrake D.T.F., de Blok W.J.G., Walter F., 2003, MNRAS, 340, 12
Asymmetric drift correction in a thin disc {#sec:adc}
==========================================
In this appendix we derive expressions for the asymmetric drift correction in a stationary axisymmetric system, using the velocity moments of the collisionless Boltzmann equation. We then evaluate this expression in a thin disc approximation. Our method does not require that the velocity dispersion should be small compared to the circular velocity ($\sigma/V_c \ll 1$) and is comparable to the “hot disc model”, (see e.g. Häring-Neumayer et al. 2006).
The velocity ellipsoid
----------------------
To derive the asymmetric drift correction we start from the collisionless Boltzman equation for a stationary axisymmetric galaxy and using cylindrical coordinates $\vec r = (R, \phi, z)$,
$$\label{eq:cbe}
v_R\frac{\partial f}{\partial R} + v_z\frac{\partial f}{\partial z} +
\Big( \frac{v_\phi^2}{R} - \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial R}\Big)
\frac{\partial f}{\partial v_R} - \frac{v_R v_\phi}{R} \frac{\partial f}
{\partial v_\phi} - \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial z}
\frac{ \partial f}{\partial v_z} = 0,$$
with $f(R,z;v_R, v_\phi, v_z)$ the distribution function, $\Phi (R,
z)$ the underlying potential and $\nu(\vec r)$ the (luminosity) density given by $\int f(\vec r; \vec v) d \vec v $. We multiply the above equation by $v_R$ and subsequently integrate over all velocities. We then obtain the Jeans equation:
$$\label{eq:jeans1}
\frac{\partial (\nu \overline{ v_R^2})} {\partial R} +
\frac{\partial (\nu \overline{v_R v_z})}{\partial z} + \frac{\nu}{R}
\Big( \overline{v_R^2} - \overline{v_\phi^2} + R \frac{\partial \Phi}
{\partial R} \Big) = 0.$$
Since our system is axisymmetric, we set $\partial \nu / \partial
z = 0$ by symmetry. Substituting the circular velocity $V_c^2 =
R(\partial \Phi / \partial R)$, we arrive at Equation (4-33) of Binney & Tremaine (1987):
$$\label{eq:adc1}
V_c^2 = \overline{v_\phi}^2 - \sigma_R^2 \Big[ \frac{\partial \ln \nu}
{\partial \ln R} + \frac {\partial \ln \sigma_R^2}{\partial \ln R} + 1 -
\frac{\sigma_\phi^2}{\sigma_R^2} + \frac{R}{\sigma_R^2}
\frac{\partial (\overline{v_R v_z})}{\partial z} \Big],$$
with $\sigma_\phi^2 = \overline{v_\phi^2} - \overline{v_\phi}^2$, $\sigma_R^2 = \overline{v_R^2}$ and $\sigma_z^2 =
\overline{v_z^2}$. The observed velocity field gives $\overline
{v_\phi}$, and the remaining terms in Equation (\[eq:adc1\]) form the asymmetric drift correction.
The last term in the asymmetric drift correction depends on the alignment of the velocity ellipsoid. In case of alignment with the cylindrical coordinate system $(R, \phi, z)$ we have $\overline{v_R
v_z} = 0$, while in case of alignment with the spherical coordinate system $(r, \theta, \phi)$ we have $\overline{v_R v_z} = (\sigma_R^2 -
\sigma_z^2)(z/R)/[1 - (z/R)^2]$, which becomes proportional to $z/R$ close to the disc plane. These are two extreme situations, and we introduce the parameter $\kappa$ to find a compromise:
$$\label{eq:kappa}
\overline{v_R v_z} = \kappa (\sigma_R^2 - \sigma_z^2)\frac{z/R}{1 - (z/R)^2},
\qquad 0 \le \kappa \le 1,$$
where a typical value for $\kappa$ is 0.5 for disc galaxies (e.g. Kent & de Zeeuw 1991).
To evaluate the asymmetric drift correction, we need expressions for $\sigma_\phi / \sigma_R$ and $\sigma_z / \sigma_R$. We use higher order velocity moments of the collisionless Boltzmann equation to derive these expressions.
Starting again from Equation (\[eq:cbe\]), we multiply by $v_R v_\phi$ and integrate over all velocities:
$$\label{eq:jeans2}
\frac{\partial(\nu \overline{v_R^2 v_\phi})}{\partial R} +
\frac{\partial(\nu \overline{v_R v_z v_\phi})} {\partial z} + \frac{\nu}{R}
\Big( 2\overline v_R^2 v_\phi - \overline{v_\phi^3} - \overline{v_\phi}
R\frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial R} \Big) = 0.$$
Aligning the velocity ellipsoid in the azimuthal direction we have $\overline{v_R^2(v_\phi - \overline{v_\phi})} = 0$ and $\overline{v_R
v_z(v_\phi - \overline{v_\phi})} = 0$, so that $\overline{v_R^2
v_\phi} = \sigma_R^2\overline{v_\phi}$ and $\overline{v_R v_z v_\phi}
= \overline{v_R v_z}$ $\overline{v_\phi}$. We substitute these relations in Equation (\[eq:jeans2\]), and subtract $\overline{v_\phi}$ times the Jeans equation (\[eq:jeans1\]):
$$\nu \sigma_R^2 \frac{\partial \overline{v_\phi}}{\partial R} + \nu
\overline{v_r v_z}\frac{\partial \overline{v_\phi}}{\partial z} + \frac{\nu}
{R} \Big[ \sigma_R^2 \overline{v_\phi} - \big(\overline{v_\phi^3} - \overline{v_\phi^2} \overline{v_\phi}\big) \Big] = 0.$$
We substitute $\overline{v_\phi^3} - \overline{v_\phi^2}
\overline{v_\phi} = 2 \sigma_\phi^2 \overline{v_\phi} + \overline{
(v_\phi - \overline{v_\phi}^3)}$ and $\overline{v_R v_z}$ from Equation(\[eq:kappa\]) to arrive at
$$\label{eq:sigphisigr}
\frac{\sigma_\phi^2}{\sigma_R^2} = \frac{1}{2}\Big(1 + \alpha_R + \kappa
\frac{1 - \sigma_z^2/\sigma_R^2}{1 - (z/R)^2}\alpha_z
- \frac{ \overline{(v_\phi -
\overline{v_\phi})^3}} {\sigma_R^2 \overline{v_\phi}}\Big ),$$
where we have introduced the logarithmic slopes
$$\alpha_R = \frac{\partial \ln \overline{v_\phi}}{\partial \ln R}, \quad
\textrm{and} \quad \alpha_z = \frac{\partial \ln \overline{v_\phi}}
{\partial \ln z}.$$
To obtain an expression for $\sigma_z / \sigma_R$ we again start with the collisionless Boltzmann equation, but now multiply with $v_z(v_\phi - \overline{v_\phi})$ before integrating over all velocities:
$$\nu \overline{v_R v_z} \frac{z}{R} \Big( 1+\frac{\partial \ln \overline{v_\phi}}
{\partial \ln R} \Big) + \nu \sigma_z^2\frac{\partial \ln \overline{v_\phi}}
{\partial \ln z} = 0.$$
Substituting Equation (\[eq:kappa\]) we find
$$\label{eq:sigzsigr}
\frac{\sigma_z^2}{\sigma_R^2} = \frac{\kappa z^2(1 + \alpha_R)}
{\kappa z^2(1 + \alpha_R) - (R^2-z^2)\alpha_z},$$
The above expressions can be inserted into Equation (\[eq:adc1\]) to obtain the asymmetric drift correction and therefore the true circular velocity. In practice, we often apply the asymmetric drift correction in the thin disc approximation, because from observations the $z$-dependence is not straigthforward to derive.
In the thin disc approximation, we have $z \ll R$, and therefore we can write Equation (\[eq:kappa\]) as
$$\overline{v_Rv_z} = \kappa (\sigma_R^2 - \sigma_z^2) \frac{z}{R}.$$
and following the same reasoning as before, we see that the expressions in Equations (\[eq:sigphisigr\]) and (\[eq:sigzsigr\]) simplify slightly: in the first expression the one-to-last term disappears, and for the second one, $(R^2-z^2)$ gets replaced by $R^2$ in the nominator of the expression. Furthermore, the derivative of $\overline{v_Rv_z}$ simplifies considerably.
We find the following expression for the asymmetric drift correction in the thin disc approximation, after substitution in Equation (\[eq:adc1\]):
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:adc2}
V_c^2 = \overline{v_\phi}^2 - \sigma_R^2 \Big[ \frac{\partial \ln \nu}
{\partial \ln R} + \frac{\partial \ln \sigma_R^2}{\partial \ln R} +
\frac{1}{2}(1-\alpha_R) + \nonumber\\
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\overline{(v_\phi - \overline{v_\phi})^3}}
{\sigma_R^2 \overline{v_\phi}} - \frac{\kappa R^2 \alpha_z}
{\kappa z^2 (1 + \alpha_R) - R^2\alpha_z}\Big].\end{aligned}$$
The one-to-last term vanishes in the case of a velocity ellipsoid symmetric around $v_\phi = \overline{v_\phi}$. This need not necessarily be the case, and the exact form of $\overline{(v_\phi -
\overline{v_\phi})^3}$ depends on the underlying distribution function, which in general cannot be constrained easily (e.g. Kuijken & Tremaine 1991). However, since this term is a factor $\sigma_R^2$ smaller than the other terms, it can be safely ignored for most purposes.
Observables {#sec:adc_obs}
-----------
Here we investigate how in the thin disc approximation we can correct our observed velocity field for asymmetric drift, to obtain the true circular velocity $V_c$. This quantity traces the potential and therefore the mass of the galaxy.
In a thin disc, we can replace $\partial \ln \nu / \partial \ln R$ by the slope of the surface brightness $\partial \ln \Sigma / \partial
\ln R$. This slope can be obtained directly from observations.
The observed velocity and velocity dispersion of an axisymmetric thin disc seen under an inclination $i$ is given by:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:obs}
V & = &v_{\mathrm{sys}} + \overline{v_\phi}\cos \phi \sin i, \nonumber\\
\sigma^2 & = & \sigma_R^2 \sin^2\phi \sin ^2 i + \sigma_\phi^2 \cos^2\phi
\sin^2 i + \sigma_z^2\cos^2 i \nonumber\\
& & - \overline{v_R v_z} \sin \phi \sin{2i}.\end{aligned}$$
It is straightforward to obtain $\overline{v_\phi}$ from the observed velocity field, and though $\alpha_R$ can be estimated rather well, $\alpha_z$ is less easy to constrain. Therefore, we fit to $\overline{v_\phi}$ the prescription of Evans & de Zeeuw (1994) for power-law models:
$$\label{eq:powerlaw}
v_{\mathrm{mod}}\propto \frac{R}{(R_c^2+R^2 + z^2/q_\Phi^2)^{1/2 + \beta/4}},$$
where $R_c$ is the core radius, $q_\Phi$ the flattening of the potential and $\beta$ the logarithmic slope of the rotation curve at large radii (such that $\beta = 0$ implies a flat rotation curve).
For the slopes of $\overline{v_\phi}$ we find that:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:alpha}
\alpha_R & = &1 - \frac{(1+\beta/2)R^2}{R_c^2+R^2+z^2/q_\Phi^2} \nonumber\\
\alpha_z & = &- \frac{(1+\beta/2)z^2/q_\Phi^2}{R_c^2+R^2+z^2/q_\Phi^2} =
- \frac{z^2}{q_\Phi^2 R^2} (1 - \alpha_R),\end{aligned}$$
so that with $\overline{v_R v_z} = 0$ in the disc plane, we obtain:
$$\begin{aligned}
\sigma^2 & = & \sigma_R^2 \big[ 1 - \frac{1}{2}(1\!-\!\alpha_R)\cos^2\phi \sin^2 i -
\nonumber\\ & & \frac{(1+\beta/2)R^2}{\kappa q_\Phi^2 (R_c^2\!+\!R^2)(1\!+\!\alpha_R) +
(1\!+\!\beta/2)R^2} \cos^2 i \big]. \end{aligned}$$
When evaluated along the major axis, $\cos^2\phi=1$.
Assuming that the velocity ellipsoid is symmetric around $v_\phi =
\overline{v_\phi}$ the corresponding term in Equation (\[eq:adc2\]) vanishes. Inserting the relations obtained from the power-law model, we arrive at the following expression for the circular velocity:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:adc3}
V_c^2 = \overline{v_\phi}^2 - \sigma_R^2 \Big[\frac{\partial \ln \Sigma}
{\partial \ln R} + \frac{\partial \ln \sigma_R^2}{\partial \ln R} +
\frac{1}{2} (1-\alpha_R) + \nonumber\\ \frac{\kappa(1 - \alpha_R)}
{\kappa(2R_c^2-R^2) + R^2}\Big].\end{aligned}$$
\[lastpage\]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- '$^\ast$Email: [email protected]'
bibliography:
- 'iclr2017\_conference.bib'
- 'msst2017.bib'
title: |
Near-Data Processing for\
Differentiable Machine Learning Models
---
Introduction {#Introduction}
============
Background {#Related work}
==========
Proposed Methodology {#Methodology}
====================
Experimental Results {#Experimental Results}
====================
Discussion {#Discussion}
==========
Introduction {#introduction}
============
This demo file is intended to serve as a “starter file” for IEEE conference papers produced under LaTeX using IEEEtran.cls version 1.8b and later. I wish you the best of success.
mds
August 26, 2015
Subsection Heading Here
-----------------------
Subsection text here.
### Subsubsection Heading Here
Subsubsection text here.
Conclusion
==========
The conclusion goes here.
Acknowledgment {#acknowledgment .unnumbered}
==============
The authors would like to thank Byunghan Lee and other members of Data Science Laboratory, Seoul National University, and Design Technology Laboratory, Yonsei University for constructive discussions. This work was supported by ICT R&D program of MSIP/IITP. (No.R7117-16-0235), by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning (2014M3C9A3063541, 2016M3A7B4911115), and by the Brain Korea 21 Plus Project in 2017.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
One way to ameliorate the SUSY flavor and CP problems is to postulate that scalar masses lie in the TeV or beyond regime. For example, the focus point (FP) region of the minimal supergravity (mSUGRA) model is especially compelling in that heavy scalar masses can co-exist with low fine-tuning while yielding the required relic abundance of cold dark matter (via a mixed higgsino-bino neutralino). We examine many of the characteristics of collider events expected to arise at the CERN LHC in models with multi-TeV scalars, taking the mSUGRA FP region as a case study. The collider events are characterized by a hard component arising from gluino pair production, plus a soft component arising from direct chargino and neutralino production. Gluino decays in the FP region are characterized by lengthy cascades yielding very large jet and lepton multiplicities, and a large $b$-jet multiplicity. Thus, as one steps to higher jet, $b$-jet or lepton multiplicity, signal-over-background rates should steadily improve. The lengthy cascade decays make mass reconstruction via kinematic edges difficult; however, since the hard component is nearly pure gluino pair production, the gluino mass can be extracted to $\pm 8\%$ via total rate for $\eslt +\ge 7$-jet $+\ge 2\ b$-jet events, assuming 100 fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity. The distribution of invariant mass of opposite-sign/same-flavor dileptons in the hard component exhibits two dilepton mass edges: $m_{\tz_2}-m_{\tz_1}$ and $m_{\tz_3}-m_{\tz_1}$. As a consistency check, the same mass edges should be seen in isolated opposite-sign dileptons occurring in the soft component trilepton signal which originates mainly from chargino-neutralino production.
PACS numbers: 14.80.Ly, 12.60.Jv, 11.30.Pb, 13.85.Rm
---
FSU-HEP/070330\
MADPH-07-1480
[ **Precision gluino mass at the LHC\
in SUSY models with decoupled scalars** ]{}\
[Howard Baer$^{1,2}$, Vernon Barger$^2$, Gabe Shaughnessy$^2$,\
Heaya Summy$^1$, Lian-Tao Wang $^3$]{}\
[ *1. Dept. of Physics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA\
2. Dept. of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA\
3. Department of Physics, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08543\
*]{}
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
The minimal supergravity (mSUGRA) model[@sugra; @msugra; @wss] is a well-motivated supersymmetric model with a small parameter space that forms a template for many investigations of the phenomenological consequences of weak scale supersymmetry. In mSUGRA, it is assumed that the minimal supersymmetric standard model, or MSSM, is a valid effective theory of physics between the energy scales $Q=M_{GUT}$ and $Q=M_{weak}$. It is further assumed that all MSSM scalar masses unify to a common value $m_0$ at $M_{GUT}$, while gauginos unify to a common value $m_{1/2}$ and trilinear soft terms unify to a common value $A_0$. The weak scale soft parameters can be calculated by renormalization group evolution from $M_{GUT}$ to $M_{weak}$. The large value of the top quark Yukawa coupling drives the up-Higgs squared mass to negative values, leading to radiative electroweak symmetry breaking (EWSB). The EWSB minimization conditions allow one to trade the bilinear soft breaking term $B$ for $\tan\beta$, the ratio of Higgs field vevs. It also determines the magnitude (but not the sign) of the superpotential Higgs mass term $\mu$. Thus, the entire weak scale sparticle mass spectrum and mixings can be calculated from the well-known parameter set m\_0, m\_[1/2]{}, A\_0, , sign() . Thus, once this parameter set is stipulated, a whole host of observables, including the neutralino dark matter relic density $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2$ and collider scattering events, may be calculated. For implementation, we use Isajet v7.74[@isajet; @kraml] to calculate the sparticle mass spectrum and associated collider events, and IsaReD[@bbb] to calculate the neutralino relic density.
One of the important consequences of the MSSM, due to $R$-parity conservation, is that the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) is absolutely stable. In mSUGRA, the LSP is usually found to be the lightest neutralino $\tz_1$, which is a weakly interacting massive particle (WIMP), and hence has the potential to naturally match the measured abundance of cold dark matter in the universe. An analysis of the three-year WMAP and galaxy survey data sets [@wmap] implies that the ratio of dark matter density to critical density, \_[\_1]{}h\^2\_[\_1]{}/\_c =0.111\^[+0.011]{}\_[-0.015]{} (2) . where $h=0.74\pm 0.03$ is the Hubble constant. By comparing the mSUGRA predicted value of $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2$ to this measured value, one finds that only certain parts of the mSUGRA parameter space are cosmologically allowed. These include the following.
The bulk region at low $m_0$ and low $m_{1/2}$, where neutralino annihilation is enhanced by light $t$-channel slepton exchange[@bulk]. The tight WMAP $\Omega_{CDM}h^2$ limit has pushed this allowed region to very small $m_0$ and $m_{1/2}$ values, while LEP2 limits on $m_{\tw_1}$ and $m_{\tell}$ (and possibly on $m_h$) have excluded these same low values so that almost no bulk region has survived[@bb3].
The stau co-annihilation region occurs at very low $m_0$ but any $m_{1/2}$ values, so that $m_{\ttau_1}\simeq m_{\tz_1}$, and neutralinos can annihilate against tau sleptons[@stau] in the early universe. For certain $A_0$ values which dial $m_{\tst_1}$ to very low values, there also exists a top-squark co-annihilation region[@stop].
The $A$-funnel region occurs at large values of the parameter $\tan\beta\sim 50$, where $2m_{\tz_1}\sim m_A$, and neutralinos can annihilate through the broad pseudoscalar Higgs resonance[@Afunnel]. There is also a light Higgs resonance region where $2m_{\tz_1}\sim m_h$ at low $m_{1/2}$ values[@bulk; @drees_h].
At large $m_0$ near the boundary of parameter space, the superpotential Higgsino mass term $\mu$ becomes quite small, and the $\tz_1$ can become a mixed higgsino-bino neutralino. This region is known as the hyperbolic branch/focus point region (HB/FP)[@ccn; @fmm; @hb_fp]. In this case, neutralino annihilation to vector bosons is enhanced, and a match to the WMAP measured relic density can be found.
The HB/FP region of mSUGRA is especially compelling. In this region, the large value of $m_0\sim$ several TeV means that possible SUSY contributions to various flavor-changing and $CP$-violating processes are suppressed by the large squark and slepton masses. For instance, SUSY contributions to the flavor-violating decay $b\to s\gamma$ are small, so in the HB/FP region this decay rate is predicted to be in accord with SM predictions, as observed. Meanwhile, the calculated amount of fine-tuning in the electroweak sector has been shown to be small[@ccn; @fmm], in spite of the presence of multi-TeV top squarks.
In this paper, we examine the HB/FP region with regard to what sort of collider events are expected at the CERN LHC $pp$ collider, which is set to begin operating in the near future at a center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}=14$ TeV. Much previous work on this issue has been done. In Ref. [@lhcreach; @bbbkt], the reach of the LHC in the mSUGRA model, including the HB/FP region, was calculated. The reach for 100 fb$^{-1}$ was found to extend to $m_{1/2}\sim 700$ GeV, corresponding to a reach in $m_{\tg}$ of about 1.8 TeV. The reaches of $\sqrt{s}=0.5$ and 1 TeV $e^+e^-$ linear colliders were also calculated[@bbkt], and found to extend past that of the LHC, since when $\mu$ becomes small, charginos become light, and chargino pair production is a reaction that $e^+e^-$ colliders are sensitive to, essentially up to the kinematic limit for chargino pair production. In fact, the reach of the Fermilab Tevatron for SUSY in the clean trilepton channel[@Barger:1998hp] is somewhat enhanced in the HB/FP region[@bkt], since charginos and neutralinos can be quite light, and decay with characteristic dilepton mass edges. The reaches of direct[@direct] and indirect[@indirect] dark matter search experiments are also enhanced in the HB/FP region.
In Ref. [@hp], Hinchliffe and Paige examined characteristic measurements that the LHC could make for an mSUGRA sample point nearby to the HB/FP region. They found a good signal/background ratio could be obtained with a hard cut on effective mass $M_{eff}=\sum_{jets} E_T +\sum_{leptons} E_T+\eslt$ (e.g. $M_{eff} > 400$ GeV) and by requiring the presence of a $b$-jet[^1]. Some characteristic distributions such as $m(\ell^+\ell^-)$ which gave a dilepton mass edge at $m_{\tz_2}-m_{\tz_1}$ and $m(b-jet ,\ell)<\sqrt{(m_t^2-M_W^2)/2}$ (indicating the presence of a $t$-quark in the decay chain) could be made.
In Ref. [@mmt], Mizukoshi, Mercadante and Tata found that the LHC reach in the HB/FP region could be enhanced by up to 20% by requiring events with the presence of one or two tagged $b$-jets. In Ref. [@bkpu], a model-independent exploration of the HB/FP region was made with regard to collider and dark matter signals. The LHC reach via multilepton cascade decays was compared to the LHC reach via clean trileptons from $pp\to \tw_1\tz_2\to 3\ell+\eslt$ production. In the latter process, backgrounds from $W^*Z^*$ and $W^*\gamma^*$ were calculated, and the trilepton reach was found to be comparable to– but slightly smaller than– the reach via a search for gluino cascade decays. In Ref. [@baltz], the authors examined what sort of cosmological measurements could be made in several mSUGRA case studies (including the point[^2] LCC2 in the HB/FP region) by measurements at the LHC and a $\sqrt{s}=0.5$ and 1 TeV ILC. For LCC2 at the LHC, they assumed the $\tz_3-\tz_1$ and $\tz_2-\tz_1$ mass edges could be measured to an accuracy of 1 GeV, while it was conjectured that $m_{\tg}$ and $m_{\tz_1}$ could be measured to $\sim 10\%$ accuracy via some kinematic distributions.
In this paper, in anticipation of the LHC turn on, we wish to understand many of the characteristics of collider events expected in the HB/FP region, with an eye towards sparticle mass measurements rather than reach studies. We find that the expected collider events in the HB/FP region separate themselves into a hard component, arising from gluino pair production, and a soft component, arising from pair production of charginos and neutralinos. The gluino pair production events typically involve lengthy cascade decays to top and bottom quarks [@sscgaugino], and so high jet, $b$-jet and isolated lepton multiplicities are expected. However, the complex cascade decays do not lend themselves to simple kinematic measurements of the gluino or neutralino masses, mainly due to the combinatorics of picking out the correct gluino decay products[^3]. We do find that the gluino mass should be extractable based on total rate in the multi-jet+multi-lepton$+\eslt$ events to a precision of about 5-10% for 100 fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity. For both the hard and soft components, the $\tz_3-\tz_1$ and $\tz_2-\tz_1$ mass edges should be visible.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Sec. \[sec:fp\], we present details of sparticle masses and cross sections expected from the HB/FP region at the LHC. In Sec. \[sec:evgen\], we present some details of our signal and background calculations. In Sec. \[sec:dist\] we present distributions for a variety of collider observables for a case study and SM backgrounds. We present a set of cuts that allows good separation of signal vs. background over a large range of $m_{\tg}$ values. In Sec. \[sec:results\], we show expected signal-to-background plots for gluino pair production and discuss how these can be used to extract a measurement of the gluino mass. In Sec. \[sec:leps\], we address leptonic signals. We conclude in Sec. \[sec:conclude\].
Sparticle production and decay in the HB/FP region {#sec:fp}
==================================================
In the mSUGRA model, for a given set of GUT scale soft SUSY breaking (SSB) masses, the associated weak scale values may be computed via renormalization group (RG) evolution [@Barger:1992ac]. Once the weak scale SSB terms have been obtained, then the scalar potential must be minimized to determine if electroweak symmetry is properly broken. While one EWSB condition allows the bilinear parameter $B$ to be traded for $\tan\beta$, the other condition reads (at one-loop) \^2 = - , \[eq:ewsb\] which determines the magnitude of the superpotential $\mu$ parameter. Thus, one condition that EWSB is successfully broken is that a positive value of $\mu^2$ has been generated. Roughly, if all the soft parameters entering Eq. \[eq:ewsb\] are of order $M_Z^2$, then naturalness is satisfied, and the model is not fine-tuned.
For a fixed value of the parameter $m_{1/2}$ in the mSUGRA model, if $m_0$ is taken to be of order the weak scale, then $m_{H_u}^2$ is driven to negative values at the weak scale owing to the push from the large top quark Yukawa coupling in the RGEs. However, if $m_0$ is taken too large, then the GUT scale value of $m_{H_u}^2$ is so high that it is not driven to negative values when the weak scale is reached in RG running, and a positive value of $\mu^2$ cannot be found. Intermediate to these two extreme cases must exist a region where $\mu^2$ is found to be zero, which forms the large $m_0$ edge of parameter space. If $\mu^2$ is positive, but tiny, then extremely light higgsino-like charginos will be generated, in conflict with bounds from LEP2, which require $m_{\tw_1}>103.5$ GeV. If $\mu^2$ is large enough to evade LEP2 limits, then large higgsino-bino mixing occurs in the chargino and neutralino sectors, and in fact the lightest neutralino becomes a mixed higgsino-bino dark matter particle. A lightest neutralino of mixed higgsino-bino form has a large annihilation rate to vector bosons in the early universe, and hence may have a dark matter relic density in accord with WMAP measurements. In this region, dubbed the hyperbolic branch/focus point region, multi-TeV squark and slepton masses can co-exist with low fine-tuning as dictated by Eq. \[eq:ewsb\]. Thus, the HB/FP region is characterized by TeV-scale squark and slepton masses, which are useful for suppressing possible FCNC or CP-violating processes, low fine-tuning, and a dark matter relic density in accord with WMAP. Given these qualities, it is important to investigate what HB/FP supersymmetry events would look like at the LHC collider and what sort of mass measurements could be made in this region.
Point $m_0$ $m_{1/2}$ $M_{\tilde g}$ $\delta M_{\tilde g}/M_{\tilde g}$ $\Gamma_{\tilde g}$
------- ------- ----------- ---------------- ------------------------------------ ---------------------
FP0 2300 200 591 LEP2 excl. 0.2
FP1 2450 225 655 LEP2 excl. 0.4
FP2 2550 250 717 $\pm 10\%$ 0.6
FP3 2700 300 838 $\pm 8\%$ 1.1
FP4 2910 350 959 $\pm 7\%$ 1.8
FP5 3050 400 1076 $\pm 8\%$ 2.7
FP6 3410 500 1310 $\pm 8\%$ 5.1
FP7 3755 600 1540 — 8.1
FP8 4100 700 1766 — 11.8
FP9 4716 900 2211 — 20.7
: Points in the HB/FP region that yield a relic density $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2\sim 0.11$. Common values of $\tan \beta = 30$, $A_0 = 0$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV are assumed. The gluino mass in GeV and its anticipated measurement uncertainty at the LHC are also given. The total gluino width is given in MeV.[]{data-label="tab:fppoints"}
We have generated sparticle mass spectra in the HB/FP region using Isajet v7.74, retaining only points which yield a relic density $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2\sim 0.11$. These points and the anticipated measurement uncertainty are listed in Table \[tab:fppoints\]. Since the scalar quarks are decoupled, the gluino decays via suppressed 3-body decays, making the gluino width small and not a significant source of mass measurement uncertainty. In Fig. \[fig:rdscan\], we show the points in the HB/FP from Table \[tab:fppoints\] in the $m_0$ vs. $m_{1/2}$ plane. Isajet uses two-loop RGEs for the scalar mass evolution, and minimizes the RG-improved one-loop effective potential at an optimized scale $Q=\sqrt{m_{\tst_L}m_{\tst_R}}$ (which accounts for leading two-loop effects). A unique feature of Isajet’s sparticle mass algorithm is that it decouples various SSB terms from the RG evolution at their own mass scales, which gives a more gradual transition from the MSSM to the SM effective theory, as opposed to other approaches which use an “all-at-once” transition. Thus, the Isajet algorithm should give a good representation of sparticle mass spectra in cases that involve a severely split mass spectrum, such as in the HB/FP region.
In Fig. \[fig:mass\], we show the sparticle mass spectra as a function of $m_{1/2}$ along a line with $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2\sim 0.11$, for $\tan\beta =30$, $A_0=0$ and $\mu >0$. The physics in the HB/FP region is not very sensitive to $\tan\beta$ or $A_0$, since the scalar masses effectively decouple. We take $m_t=175$ GeV, but note that the $m_0$ value needed to obtain the correct relic density is extremely sensitive to the value of $m_t$ used, as shown in Ref. [@bkt]. In our case, since the scalar masses are expected to decouple, the $m_t$ dependence should not matter greatly for the phenomenology of interest.[^4]
![Sparticle masses vs. $m_{1/2}$ along lines with constant $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2=0.11$ in the HB/FP region of mSUGRA with $A_0=0$, $\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV.[]{data-label="fig:mass"}](fp-mass.eps){width="59.00000%"}
While squarks, sleptons and heavy Higgs scalars range in mass from $2.5-4.5$ TeV along the range of $m_{1/2}$ shown in Fig. \[fig:mass\], the $\tg$ remains relatively light, of order $650-2200$ GeV. In addition, since $\mu$ and $m_{1/2}$ are low, the charginos and neutralinos are [*all*]{} quite light, and possibly accessible to LHC experiments. The lower edge of the plot where $m_{1/2}\alt 250$ GeV is excluded by the LEP2 constraint on the chargino mass.
In Fig. \[fig:sigma\], we show sparticle pair production rates as a function of $m_{\tg}$ in the HB/FP region. While the production cross sections are evaluated at lowest order in perturbation theory, we adopt a renormalization/factorization scale choice $Q=(m_1+m_2)/4$ for the gluino pair production cross section which gives good agreement between LO and NLO results[@spira].[^5] For low values of $m_{\tg}\sim 700$ GeV, gluino pair production is in the pb range, while a variety of chargino and neutralino production processes ([*e.g.*]{} $\tw_1\tz_{1,2,3}$ and $\tw_1^+\tw_1^-$ production) have comparable rates. For higher values of $m_{\tg}$, the gluino pair production cross section drops quickly, and is below the fb level for $m_{\tg}>1900$ GeV. The various chargino and neutralino production rates drop less quickly, and turn out to be by far the dominant sparticle production cross sections for $m_{\tg}\agt 1.5$ TeV.
![Selected sparticle pair production cross sections vs. $m_{\tg}$ along a line of constant $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2=0.11$ in the HB/FP region of mSUGRA with $A_0=0$, $\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV.[]{data-label="fig:sigma"}](fp-sigma.eps){width="59.00000%"}
In the WMAP-allowed HB/FP region, since squarks have masses in the TeV range, only three-body decay modes of the gluino are allowed. Moreover, since the $\mu$ parameter is small and the lighter inos have a large higgsino component, the third generation quark-squark-ino couplings are enhanced by top quark Yukawa coupling terms[@btw; @wbsig], and gluinos dominantly decay to third generation particles, especially the top quark. Thus, the dominant gluino decays modes in the HB/FP region consist of $\tg\to t\bar{t}\tz_i$ or $t\bar{b}\tw_j$. Some major $\tg$ branching fractions are listed in Table \[tab:glbf\] for a case study which we label as FP5 with $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV. The Feynman diagrams of these dominant decay modes are shown in Fig. \[fig:fd\]. Thus, we expect in the HB/FP region that $pp\to \tg\tg X$ will yield events with very large jet and $b$-jet multiplicities, and isolated leptons. However, the combinatoric backgrounds will likely make kinematic reconstruction of mass edges which depend on $m_{\tg}$ very difficult. Meanwhile, for the same case study as in Table \[tab:glbf\], since $\tz_2\to e^+e^-\tz_1$ and $\tz_3\to e^+e^-\tz_1$ both occur at a branching fraction of 3.4%, it might be possible to see both the $\tz_2-\tz_1$ and $\tz_3-\tz_1$ mass edges in distributions of invariant opposite-sign/same flavor isolated dileptons.
![Feynman diagrams of dominant gluino decays in the HB/FP region.[]{data-label="fig:fd"}](gldec-a.eps "fig:"){width="29.00000%"} ![Feynman diagrams of dominant gluino decays in the HB/FP region.[]{data-label="fig:fd"}](gldec-b.eps "fig:"){width="29.00000%"}
mode BF
----------------------------- -------
$\tg\to t\bar{t}\tz_1$ 3.9%
$\tg\to t\bar{t}\tz_2$ 14.2%
$\tg\to t\bar{t}\tz_3$ 15.0%
$\tg\to t\bar{t}\tz_4$ 5.6%
$\tg\to t\bar{b}\tw_1+c.c$ 26.8%
$\tg\to t\bar{b}\tw_2+c.c.$ 13.9%
: Selected branching fractions of the $\tg$ for FP5 case study with parameters $m_0=3050$ GeV, $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$, $\tan\beta =30$ and $\mu >0$. []{data-label="tab:glbf"}
HB/FP signal and background event generation {#sec:evgen}
============================================
We use Isajet 7.74[@isajet] for the simulation of signal and background events at the LHC. A toy detector simulation is employed with calorimeter cell size $\Delta\eta\times\Delta\phi=0.05\times 0.05$ and $-5<\eta<5$. The HCAL energy resolution is taken to be $80\%/\sqrt{E}+3\%$ for $|\eta|<2.6$ and FCAL is $100\%/\sqrt{E}+5\%$ for $|\eta|>2.6$. The ECAL energy resolution is assumed to be $3\%/\sqrt{E}+0.5\%$. We use a UA1-like jet finding algorithm with jet cone size $R=0.4$ and require that $E_T(jet)>50$ GeV and $|\eta (jet)|<3.0$. Leptons are considered isolated if they have $p_T(e\ or\ \mu)>20$ GeV and $|\eta|<2.5$ with visible activity within a cone of $\Delta R<0.2$ of $\Sigma E_T^{cells}<5$ GeV. The strict isolation criterion helps reduce multi-lepton backgrounds from heavy quark ($c\bar c$ and $b\bar{b}$) production.
We identify a hadronic cluster with $E_T>50$ GeV and $|\eta(j)|<1.5$ as a $b$-jet if it contains a $B$ hadron with $p_T(B)>15$ GeV and $|\eta (B)|<3$ within a cone of $\Delta R<0.5$ about the jet axis. We adopt a $b$-jet tagging efficiency of 60%, and assume that light quark and gluon jets can be mis-tagged as $b$-jets with a probability $1/150$ for $E_T<100$ GeV, $1/50$ for $E_T>250$ GeV, with a linear interpolation for $100$ GeV$<E_T<$ 250 GeV.
We have generated 200K events each for a variety of $m_{1/2}$ values in the HB/FP region restricted to have $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2\sim 0.11$. In addition, we have generated background events using Isajet for QCD jet production (jet-types include $g$, $u$, $d$, $s$, $c$ and $b$ quarks) over five $p_T$ ranges as shown in Table \[tab:bg\]. Additional jets are generated via parton showering from the initial and final state hard scattering subprocesses. We have also generated backgrounds in the $W+jets$, $Z+jets$, $t\bar{t}(175)$ and $WW,\ WZ,\ ZZ$ channels at the rates shown in Table \[tab:bg\]. The $W+jets$ and $Z+jets$ backgrounds use exact matrix elements for one parton emission, but rely on the parton shower for subsequent emissions.
process events $\sigma$ (fb) cuts C1 (fb)
--------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- --------------------- --------------
QCD ($p_T:50-100$ GeV) $10^6$ $2.6\times 10^{10}$ –
QCD ($p_T:100-200$ GeV) $10^6$ $1.5\times 10^{9}$ 1513.3
QCD ($p_T:200-400$ GeV) $10^6$ $7.3\times 10^{7}$ 3873.7
QCD ($p_T:400-1000$ GeV) $10^6$ $2.7\times 10^{6}$ 486.0
QCD ($p_T:1000-2400$ GeV) $10^6$ $1.5\times 10^{4}$ 4.4
$W+jets; W\to e,\mu,\tau$ $(p_T(W):100-4000$ GeV) $5\times 10^5$ $3.9\times 10^{5}$ 1815.9
$Z+jets; Z\to \tau\bar{\tau},\ \nu s$ $(p_T(Z):100-3000$ GeV) $5\times 10^5$ $1.4\times 10^{5}$ 845.3
$t\bar{t}$ $3\times 10^6$ $4.6\times 10^{5}$ 6415.8
$WW,ZZ,WZ$ $5\times 10^5$ $8.0\times 10^{4}$ 9.3
signal (FP5: $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV) $2\times 10^5$ $1.2\times 10^{3}$ 77.5
: Events generated and cross sections for various SM background processes plus one HB/FP case study FP5 with $m_0=3050$ GeV, $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$, $\tan\beta =30$ and $\mu >0$. The C1 cuts are specified in Eqns. ($4 - 7$).[]{data-label="tab:bg"}
Event characteristics in the HB/FP region {#sec:dist}
=========================================
We begin by applying a set of pre-cuts to our event samples, which we list as cuts set C1[@frank]:\
\
**C1 Cuts:** & >& (100 [GeV]{},0.2 M\_[eff]{}),\
n(jets) && 4,\
E\_T(j1,j2,j3,j4)& > & 100, 50,50,50 [GeV]{},\
S\_T &>&0.2 . \[c1cutsend\] Here, $M_{eff}$ is defined as in Hinchliffe [*et al.*]{}[@frank] as $M_{eff}=\eslt +E_T(j1)+E_T(j2)+E_T(j3)+E_T(j4)$, where $j1-j4$ refer to the four highest $E_T$ jets ordered from highest to lowest $E_T$, $\eslt$ is missing transverse energy and $S_T$ is transverse sphericity. The event rates in fb are listed after C1 in Table \[tab:bg\], and we find that signal with these cuts is swamped by various SM backgrounds, especially those from QCD multi-jet production and $t\bar{t}$ production.
Next, we investigate a variety of distributions. We show in Fig. \[fig:meff\] the $M_{eff}$ distribution after using C1. The gray histogram denotes the sum of all backgrounds, while individual BG contributions are identified by the legend. The signal for case study FP5 is denoted by the purple histogram. In many models investigated by Hinchliffe [*et al.*]{}, it was found that signal emerges from BG at an $M_{eff}$ value near the peak of the distribution, which in fact provides a rough estimate of the strongly interacting sparticle masses involved in the production subprocess. In the HB/FP region, however, squarks have decoupled from the hadronic sparticle production cross section, so only gluino pair production contributes. In addition, since in the HB/FP region gluinos decay via three-body modes, the average jet $E_T$ is reduced significantly compared to SUSY cases with similar sparticle masses but with dominantly 2-body decays. Hence, in the HB/FP region, the $M_{eff}$ distribution from the signal is typically buried beneath SM BG. In addition, for this case study, we see some structure to the $M_{eff}$ distribution in the form of two separate peaks (which stand out more clearly on a linear scale, when BG is neglected). The peak near $M_{eff}\sim 500$ GeV comes dominantly from the [*soft*]{} signal component, which is mainly high $p_T$ chargino and neutralino production, which after all is the dominant sparticle production process in the HB/FP region. A second peak around $M_{eff}\sim 1200$ GeV comes from gluino pair production, which we denote as the [*hard*]{} component of the signal.
![Distribution of $M_{eff}$ from the FP5 case study with $m_0=3050$ GeV, $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$, $\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV (where $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV), versus various SM backgrounds.[]{data-label="fig:meff"}](fp4_cuts1-meff.eps){width="59.00000%"}
We noted earlier, based on an examination of gluino decay modes in the HB/FP region, that LHC collider events ought to be characterized by large jet multiplicity, large $b$-jet multiplicity and large isolated lepton multiplicity. With this in mind, we show in Fig. \[fig:njets\] the multiplicity of jets expected from signal and from SM BG, after cuts C1. At low $n(jets)\sim 4-6$, the distribution is dominated by QCD, $t\bar{t}$ and $W,Z+jets$ production. However, at much higher jet multiplicities $\sim 9-10$, the signal distribution emerges[^6] from the BG. Of course, at these high jet multiplicities, one may question the validity of the theoretical BG calculations. However, by investigating QCD multijet production and $W,Z+jets$ production without imposing C1, it may be possible to normalize the expected BG distributions to measured data, and thus obtain after LHC turn-on improved estimates of expected BGs in these channels.
![Distribution of number of jets in the FP5 case study with $m_0=3050$ GeV, $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$, $\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV (where $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV), versus various SM backgrounds.[]{data-label="fig:njets"}](fp4_cuts1-njets.eps){width="59.00000%"}
In Fig. \[fig:bjets\], we show the expected multiplicity of $b$-jets for signal and SM BG. The soft component of signal is expected to be $b$-jet poor, since it comes from hadronic chargino and neutralino decays. However, the hard component is expected to typically contain at least 4 $b$-jets, aside from efficiency corrections. Indeed, we see that the signal distribution extends out to high $b$-jet multiplicities of $n(b-jet)\sim 5-8$, while the BG typically gives $0-2$ $b$-jets. As noted previously, Mercadante [*et al.*]{} exploited this fact to enhance the LHC reach for SUSY in the HB/FP region[@mmt].
![Distribution of number of $b$-jets for the FP5 case study with $m_0=3050$ GeV, $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$,$\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV (where $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV), versus various SM backgrounds.[]{data-label="fig:bjets"}](fp4_cuts1-nbjets.eps){width="59.00000%"}
In Fig. \[fig:nleps\], we show the multiplicity of isolated leptons: electrons or muons. Again, while low lepton multiplicity is dominated by SM backgrounds, the high lepton multiplicity should be dominated by signal, owing to the lengthy gluino cascade decays, which can spin off additional isolated leptons at various stages.
![Distribution of number of isolated leptons for the FP5 case study with $m_0=3050$ GeV, $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$,$\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV (where $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV), versus various SM backgrounds.[]{data-label="fig:nleps"}](fp4_cuts1-nleps.eps){width="59.00000%"}
At this point, it is evident that requiring collider events with high jet and high $b$-jet multiplicity will aid in separating signal from BG in the HB/FP region. Thus, in Fig. \[fig:meffb\], we show the [*augmented*]{} effective mass distribution $A_T$, where A\_T=+\_[leptons]{}E\_T +\_[jets]{}E\_T , which gives the added contribution of additional jets beyond $n(jets)=4$ and also a contribution from isolated leptons. The distributions in Fig. \[fig:meffb\] all contain, along with cuts C1, $n(jets)\ge 6$ and [*a*]{}) $n(b-jets)\ge 0$, [*b*]{}) $n(b-jets)\ge 1$, [*c*]{}) $n(b-jets)\ge 2$ and [*d*]{}) $n(b-jets)\ge 3$. As we move to higher $b$-jet multiplicity, the signal distribution begins to stand out clearly from BG, which is dominated at this point by $t\bar{t}$ production.
![Distribution in $A_T$ (defined in Eq. 8) in events with $n(jets)\ge 6$ with varying number of $b$-tags, for the FP5 case study with $m_0=3050$ GeV, $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$,$\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV (where $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV), versus various SM backgrounds.[]{data-label="fig:meffb"}](fp4_cuts1-ameff6j.eps "fig:"){width="45.00000%"} ![Distribution in $A_T$ (defined in Eq. 8) in events with $n(jets)\ge 6$ with varying number of $b$-tags, for the FP5 case study with $m_0=3050$ GeV, $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$,$\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV (where $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV), versus various SM backgrounds.[]{data-label="fig:meffb"}](fp4+1b_cuts1-ameff6j.eps "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}\
![Distribution in $A_T$ (defined in Eq. 8) in events with $n(jets)\ge 6$ with varying number of $b$-tags, for the FP5 case study with $m_0=3050$ GeV, $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$,$\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV (where $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV), versus various SM backgrounds.[]{data-label="fig:meffb"}](fp4+2b_cuts1-ameff6j.eps "fig:"){width="45.00000%"} ![Distribution in $A_T$ (defined in Eq. 8) in events with $n(jets)\ge 6$ with varying number of $b$-tags, for the FP5 case study with $m_0=3050$ GeV, $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$,$\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV (where $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV), versus various SM backgrounds.[]{data-label="fig:meffb"}](fp4+3b_cuts1-ameff6j.eps "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}
Alternatively, we can move to higher jet multiplicity. In Fig. \[fig:meff7\], we again plot $A_T$ but this time for $n(jets)\ge 7$ and $n(b-jets)\ge 2$. The signal emerges from the BG clearly above $A_T\sim 1300-1400$ GeV, and has an advantage over Fig. \[fig:meffb\][*d*]{}) in that a somewhat larger signal rate remains after cuts. For the case shown, by imposing $A_T>1400$ GeV, we are left with a signal cross section for case FP5 of 11.1 fb, while BG from $t\bar{t}$ production is at the $1.5$ fb level with a tiny contribution from QCD multi-jet production. In addition, the remaining signal is 98% from gluino pair production, so is almost entirely from the hard component of the signal.
![Distribution of $A_T$ in events with $\ge 7$ jets and $\ge 2$ $b$-tags, from the FP5 case study with $m_0=3050$ GeV, $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$,$\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV (where $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV), versus various SM backgrounds.[]{data-label="fig:meff7"}](fp4+2b_cuts1-ameff7j.eps){width="59.00000%"}
Signal, background and sparticle mass extraction {#sec:results}
================================================
We will adopt the cuts of Sec. \[sec:dist\] as our cut set C2:\
\
**C2 Cuts:** & apply cut set C1 &\
& n(jets)7 &\
& n(b-jets)2 &\
& A\_T1400 [GeV]{}. These cuts have been optimized for $m_{\tg}\sim 1$ TeV. Next, we plot in Fig. \[fig:sigmgl\] the event rate after C2 versus $m_{\tg}$ along a line of FP region with $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2\sim 0.11$, with $\tan\beta =30$, $A_0=0$ and $\mu >0$. For $m_{\tg}\alt 700$ GeV, $m_{\tw_1}< 103.5$ GeV, so the region is excluded by LEP2 chargino pair searches. The solid blue curve denotes the signal rate after cuts C2, while the brown dot-dashed curve denotes SM BG. Signal rates are typically in the multi-fb regime, and exceed BG out to $m_{\tg}\sim 1500$ GeV.
![Cross section after C1 plus $\ge 7$ jets, $\ge 2$ $b$-tags and $A_T>1400$ GeV, for various points along the HB/FP region with $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2\sim 0.11$ with $A_0=0$,$\tan\beta =30$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV, versus $m_{\tg}$. We also show a band of the theoretically expected uncertainty of our results due to variations in factorization/renormalization scale and variations in $m_{\tq}\sim 2-5$ TeV. We also show the level of expected SM background.[]{data-label="fig:sigmgl"}](at-7j+2b-mgl.eps){width="59.00000%"}
Since the signal in Fig. \[fig:sigmgl\] comes from nearly pure $\tg\tg$ production, the total rate can be used as an absolute measure of the gluino mass. There are of course a variety of theoretical uncertainties which arise. One comes from how well-known is the absolute gluino pair production cross section. The value of $\sigma (\tg\tg )$ has been computed to NLO in QCD in Ref. [@spira], where it is shown that a variation in renormalization/factorization scale leads to an uncertainty in $\sigma (\tg\tg )$ of $\pm 11\%$. A further uncertainty arises from variations in the squark mass. Here, we are assuming decoupled scalars, so variation due to changes in $m_{\tq}$ are expected to be small. Nonethless, we find that by varying $m_{\tq}:2-5$ TeV, the cross section still varies by $\pm 10\%$. Folding the NLO uncertainty in quadrature with the $m_{\tq}$ uncertainty, we estimate the cross section uncertainty at $\pm 15\%$, and plot the expected theory cross section variation as the blue dashed lines.
At this point, it can be asked how well will we know the gluino branching fractions, upon which the signal rate also depends. Here, we remark that in the region with decoupled scalars, we are relying on a value of $\mu$ that is just right so that the neutralino LSP saturates the CDM relic density measurement. Small variations in $\mu$ about this region are found to lead to only small changes in the gluino branching fractions. This is shown in Fig. \[fig:bfs\], where we plot in frame [*a*]{}) variations in $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2$ versus $\mu$, and in frame [*b*]{}) variations in the dominant gluino branching fractions. In the plot, we adopt as usual the case study FP5, and vary $\mu$ by adopting the non-universal Higgs soft mass model[@nuhm] in Isajet, which allows use of mSUGRA parameters, but also independent variation in the $\mu$ and $m_A$ parameters (we keep $m_A$ fixed).
\
It might also be argued that the event rate depends on the value of $\tan\beta$ that we have selected for our case study. In fact, since scalar masses have decoupled, $b$ and $\tau$ Yukawa coupling effects are tiny, and the variation of the signal after cuts C2 with $\tan\beta$ is comparatively negligible, as long as we require that the $\mu$ value be fixed so that one obtains the relic density $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2\sim 0.11$. This is illustrated in Table \[tab:tanb\], where we plot signal rate after cuts C2 for $\tan\beta =10$, 20, 30, 40 and 50. In each case, the value of $m_{1/2}$ is fixed at 400 GeV, but $m_0$ is chosen so that the correct relic density is obtained. The resulting cross section after cuts C2 shows only a $\pm 6\%$ variability. Meanwhile, variations in the $A_0$ parameter again mainly affect the scalar sector, but since these decouple, the effects should again be small.
$m_0$ $\tan\beta$ $\sigma $(C2) (fb)
------- ------------- --------------------
4090 10 9.92
3150 20 10.45
3050 30 11.15
3000 40 11.04
2970 50 11.17
: Cross section after cuts C2 for HB/FP cases with $m_{1/2}=400$ GeV, $A_0=0$, $\mu >0$ and $m_t=175$ GeV. We list the $m_0$ value required to give $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2\sim 0.11$ for different $\tan\beta$ values. []{data-label="tab:tanb"}
A further consideration is to ask how well we really know our background estimates. At this stage, the answer is difficult to know, and depends on several factors, including how well the selected event generator, Isajet, models SM backgrounds. If indeed $t\bar{t}$ production is the dominant BG, then the plethora of $t\bar{t}$ events produced at the LHC will allow detailed study of this reaction, so that the distributions will be well-known from data. Better theory modeling– such as inclusion of exact matrix elements for extra jet radiation[@bcr]– will also help. Likewise, it can be expected that $W+jets$, $Z+jets$ and QCD backgrounds will also be well-studied, and the high $n(jet)$ and high $A_T$ tails will be better known due to actual collider measurements. In any case, we try to make a rough estimate by simply assuming that our event generator background is known to $\pm 100\%$. We add and subtract this BG uncertainty to our theory curves in Fig. \[fig:sigmgl\], with the resultant band being denoted by orange dashed lines.
At this point, we can try to estimate the precision with which the gluino mass can be extracted from total cross section measurements. We show in Fig. \[fig:sigmgl\] as data points the error bars expected from measuring the total cross section after cuts C2 with an assumed 100 fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity (red data points). A simple estimate of the uncertainty can be gained from the intersection of the upper and lower limits on the statistical cross section measurement with the band of theory uncertainty. Using this method, we find that points 2-6 yield a gluino mass measured in the range of $\pm 8\%$, as shown in Table \[tab:fppoints\]. The precision will increase or decrease depending on the ultimate uncertainty ascribed to the BG by the experimental groups. It would also decrease if an NNLO computation of gluino pair production is made. Note that even if the statistical error bars drop to zero (infinite integrated luminosity), the theory uncertainty still gives $\sim 7$% uncertainty. FP1– which is below the LEP2 excluded boundary– is difficult to measure because the projected theory curves level off for lower values of $m_{\tg}$. This is just a result of the fact that we optimized cuts in the 1 TeV $m_{\tg}$ region. A better optimization with softer cuts would need to be performed to extract these lower gluino masses. For $m_{\tg}\agt 1300$ GeV, another optimization would be needed with harder cuts. Here, the absolute gluino pair event rate is dropping, so we expect a rate-based measurement of $m_{\tg}$ would be more challenging and perhaps not feasible in this higher mass region.
Leptonic signatures {#sec:leps}
===================
While the analysis in Sec. \[sec:results\] focussed on lepton-inclusive signals, it is also useful to make use of the isolated lepton content of the signal. We expect events containing multiple isolated leptons to have somewhat reduced jet multiplicity compared to events with zero or one isolated lepton. To proceed with the multi-lepton channels, we retained cuts C1 and examined the $A_T$ distribution maintaining $n(b-jets)\ge 2$ but requiring $n(jets)\ge 4$ or $5$. The distribution in $A_T$ for $n(jets)\ge 4$ is shown in Fig. \[fig:ATlepsge2\]. Here we see signal emerging from BG for $A_T>1200$ GeV. (The plot using $n(jets)\ge 5$ is similar, but with lower signal and BG rates.) Hence, we adopt cut set C3 for events with 2 or more isolated leptons:\
\
**C3 Cuts:** & cuts set C1 &\
& n(isol. leptons)2 &\
& n(jets)4 &\
& b(b-jets)2 &\
& A\_T1200 [GeV]{}
![Distribution in $A_T$ of events with cuts C1, $n(leps)\ge 2$, $n(b-jets)\ge 2$ and $n(jets)\ge 4$ for the FP5 case study with $m_{\tg}=1076$ GeV.[]{data-label="fig:ATlepsge2"}](fp4_2l2b-at4j.eps){width="59.00000%"}
In Fig. \[fig:sigleps\], we show the signal rate of various multi-lepton topologies versus $m_{\tg}$ for FP cases with $A_0=0$, $\tan\beta =30$ and $\mu >0$. The zero and one lepton topologies use cuts C2, while the same-sign (SS) dilepton, opposite sign dilepton (OS) and trilepton rates use cuts C3. We see that there should be consistent signals above SM backgrounds in all the various multi-lepton channels for much of the mass range of $m_{\tg}$. Same sign lepton events would establish the Majorana nature of the gluino[@ssdl].
![Event rates for zero and one isolated lepton events after cuts C2, and OS and SS dileptons and trileptons after cuts C3, versus $m_{\tg}$. Zero and one lepton backgrounds are shown with the same color as the signal. We found no backgrounds events to OS, SS and $3l$ to the cross section level shown.[]{data-label="fig:sigleps"}](lep-sigma.eps){width="59.00000%"}
It is also well-known that kinematic information on neutralino mass differences can be gleaned by examining the invariant mass distribution of opposite-sign/same flavor dilepton pairs (OS/SF)[@mll]. We plot in Fig. \[fig:mll\] the invariant mass distribution for case study FP4. The HB/FP region is characterized by the fact that $m_{\tz_2}-m_{\tz_1}< M_Z$ [*and*]{} by $m_{\tz_3}-m_{\tz_1}<M_Z$, so that two-body spoiler decays of $\tz_2$ and $\tz_3$ are closed. We then expect two mass edges in the $m(\ell^+\ell^- )$ distribution: in the case of FP4, one is at $m_{\tz_2}-m_{\tz_1}=53.8$ GeV and another at $m_{\tz_3}-m_{\tz_1}=75.1$ GeV. Indeed, the double mass edge structure is becoming visible in the $M_{l \bar l}$ distribution with 100 fb$^{-1}$ of data as shown in Fig. \[fig:mll\].
![Distribution in OS/SF dilepton invariant mass for case FP4 using cuts C3. Two mass edges are becoming apparent at a luminosity of 100 fb$^{-1}$, in addition to the $Z$ peak.[]{data-label="fig:mll"}](mllossf_cuts3.eps){width="59.00000%"}
Conclusions {#sec:conclude}
===========
In this paper, we have examined the sort of collider events to be expected at the CERN LHC for SUSY models in the HB/FP region of the mSUGRA model. We found that by requiring high jet and $b$-jet multiplicity, and a high effective mass cut, a rather pure signal emerged from a dominantly $t\bar{t}$ SM background. Since the signal came almost entirely from gluino pair production, and the decay branching fractions were fixed by assuming the neutralino relic density saturated the WMAP $\Omega_{\tz_1}h^2$ measurement, the total signal rate could be used to extract an estimate of the gluino mass. Factoring in theory uncertainty on the total cross section and a $\pm 100\%$ error estimate on remaining background, we found that $m_{\tg}$ could be measured to a precision of about 8% for 100 fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity. This was our central result.
We note here that our conclusions apply more generally than to just the HB/FP region of the mSUGRA model. The key assumptions needed for our analysis are that:
1. The flavor/CP conserving MSSM is the correct effective theory of nature at the weak scale, with the lightest neutralino as LSP.
2. We assume gaugino mass unification, as occurs in many SUSY GUT and string models.
3. We assume that scalars– the squarks and sleptons– decouple due to mass values beyond the few TeV level. This leaves just the various gluinos, charginos and neutralinos contributing to LHC collider events.
4. The value of $\mu$ is fixed by the requirement that the relic abundance of $\tz_1$ saturates the WMAP measured value. This, along with gaugino mass unification, fixes the sparticle branching fractions to their assumed values.
If these conditions are fulfilled, then the methods presented here should allow for a gluino mass extraction if $m_{\tg}$ is in the mass range of $\sim 700-1300$ GeV. We note here that our result depends on the sparticle branching fractions being fixed to values near our calculated results. These in turn depend on the above assumptions being fulfilled. Thus, our study should be applicable to other heavy scalar situations, not only the HB/FP region of mSUGRA. Recently, such models have received renewed attention in light of FCNC constraints, and some string theory motivated models have produced heavier scalar spectra[@string]. Our considerations also apply to the low scalar mass regime of split SUSY models[@splitss], where the gluino decays promply inside collider detectors.
In addition, we note that the signal can be separated as to its isolated lepton content. Typically, for each additional isolated lepton, there should be on average 1.5 less jets per event. The OS/SF dilepton mass distribution embedded in the hard signal component should exhibit mass edges at $m_{\tz_2}-m_{\tz_1}$ and also at $m_{\tz_3}-m_{\tz_1}$, which are distinctive of this scenario in which the LSP is a mixed bino-higgsino particle. The same mass edges should appear in the clean trilepton channel originating mainly from chargino-neutralino production (the soft component), as shown in Ref. [@bkpu]. The mass-difference edges, along with the absolute gluino mass, may provide enough information to constrain the absolute chargino and neutralino masses (including the LSP mass), under the assumptions listed above.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy under grant No. DE-FG02-95ER40896, by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation. We thank T. Krupovnickas and X. Tata for discussions. The work of L.W. is supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0243680 and the Department of Energy under grant \# DE-FG02-90ER40542. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
[99]{} E. Cremmer, S. Ferrara, L. Girardello and A. van Proeyen, [[*Nucl. Phys. *]{}[**B 212**]{} (1983) 413]{}. A. Chamseddine, R. Arnowitt and P. Nath, [[*Phys. Rev. Lett. *]{}[**49**]{} (1982) 970]{}; R. Barbieri, S. Ferrara and C. Savoy, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 119**]{} (1982) 343]{}; N. Ohta, [[*Prog. Theor. Phys. *]{}[**70**]{} (1983) 542]{}; L. J. Hall, J. Lykken and S. Weinberg, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 27**]{} (1983) 2359]{}; for reviews, see H. P. Nilles, [*Phys. Rep.*]{} [**110**]{} (1984) 1, and P. Nath, [hep-ph/0307123]{}. For an overview, see [*e.g.*]{} H. Baer and X. Tata, [*Weak Scale Supersymmetry*]{}, Cambridge University Press (2006). ISAJET v7.74, by H. Baer, F. Paige, S. Protopopescu and X. Tata, [hep-ph/0312045]{}. H. Baer, J. Ferrandis, S. Kraml and W. Porod, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 73**]{} (2006) 015010]{}. H. Baer, C. Balazs and A. Belyaev, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0203**]{} (2002) 042]{} D. N. Spergel [*et al.*]{} (WMAP Collaboration), [astro-ph/0603449]{} (2006). H. Baer and M. Brhlik, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 53**]{} (1996) 597]{}; V. Barger and C. Kao, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 57**]{} (1998) 3131]{}. J. Ellis, K. Olive, Y. Santoso and V. Spanos, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 565**]{} (2003) 176]{}; H. Baer and C. Balazs, JCAP[**05**]{} (2003) 006; U. Chattapadhyay, A. Corsetti and P. Nath, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 68**]{} (2003) 035005]{}; A. Lahanas and D. V. Nanopoulos, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 568**]{} (2003) 55]{}; A. Djouadi, M. Drees and J. Kneur, [hep-ph/0602001]{} J. Ellis, T. Falk and K. Olive, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 444**]{} (1998) 367]{}; J. Ellis, T. Falk, K. Olive and M. Srednicki, [[*Astropart. Phys. *]{}[**13**]{} (2000) 181]{}; M.E. Gómez, G. Lazarides and C. Pallis, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 61**]{} (2000) 123512]{} and [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 487**]{} (2000) 313]{}; A. Lahanas, D. V. Nanopoulos and V. Spanos, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 62**]{} (2000) 023515]{}; R. Arnowitt, B. Dutta and Y. Santoso, [[*Nucl. Phys. *]{}[**B 606**]{} (2001) 59]{}; H. Baer, C. Balazs and A. Belyaev, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0203**]{} (2002) 042]{}. C. Böhm, A. Djouadi and M. Drees, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 30**]{} (2000) 035012]{}; J. R. Ellis, K. A. Olive and Y. Santoso, [[*Astropart. Phys. *]{}[**18**]{} (2003) 395]{}; J. Edsjö [*et al.*]{}, JCAP [**04**]{} (2003) 001 M. Drees and M. Nojiri, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 47**]{} (1993) 376]{}; H. Baer and M. Brhlik, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 53**]{} (1996) 597]{} and [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 57**]{} (1998) 567]{}; H. Baer, M. Brhlik, M. Diaz, J. Ferrandis, P. Mercadante, P. Quintana and X. Tata, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 63**]{} (2001) 015007]{}; J. Ellis, T. Falk, G. Ganis, K. Olive and M. Srednicki, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 510**]{} (2001) 236]{}; L. Roszkowski, R. Ruiz de Austri and T. Nihei, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0108**]{} (024) 2001]{}; A. Djouadi, M. Drees and J. L. Kneur, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0108**]{} (2001) 055]{}; A. Lahanas and V. Spanos, [[*Eur. Phys. J.* ]{}[**C 23**]{} (2002) 185]{}. R. Arnowitt and P. Nath, [[*Phys. Rev. Lett. *]{}[**70**]{} (1993) 3696]{}; H. Baer and M. Brhlik, Ref. [@bulk]; A. Djouadi, M. Drees and J. Kneur, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 624**]{} (2005) 60]{}. K. L. Chan, U. Chattopadhyay and P. Nath, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 58**]{} (1998) 096004]{}. J. Feng, K. Matchev and T. Moroi, [[*Phys. Rev. Lett. *]{}[**84**]{} (2000) 2322]{}, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 61**]{} (2000) 075005]{} and [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 63**]{} (2001) 095003]{}; J. Feng and F. Wilczek, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 631**]{} (2005) 170]{}. The HB/FP region appears much earlier in H. Baer, C. H. Chen, F. Paige and X. Tata, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 52**]{} (1995) 2746]{} and [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 53**]{} (1996) 6241]{}, but is not named, and fine-tuning is not addressed. H. Baer, C. H. Chen, F. Paige and X. Tata, Ref. [@hb_fp]; H. Baer, C. H. Chen, M. Drees, F. Paige and X. Tata, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 59**]{} (1999) 055014]{}; S. Abdullin and F. Charles, [[*Nucl. Phys. *]{}[**B 547**]{} (1999) 60]{}; S. Abdullin [*et al.*]{} (CMS Collaboration), [hep-ph/9806366]{}; B. Allanach, J. Hetherington, A. Parker and B. Webber, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**08**]{} (2000) 017]{}. H. Baer, C. Balazs, A. Belyaev, T. Krupovnickas and X. Tata, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0306**]{} (2003) 054]{}. H. Baer, A. Belyaev, T. Krupovnickas and X. Tata, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0402**]{} (2004) 007]{}; H. Baer, T. Krupovnickas and X. Tata, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0406**]{} (2004) 061]{}. H. Baer and X. Tata, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 47**]{} (1993) 2739]{}. V. D. Barger and C. Kao, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 60**]{} (1999) 115015]{}, [hep-ph/9811489]{}. H. Baer, M. Drees, F. Paige, P. Quintana and X. Tata, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 61**]{} (2000) 095007]{}; K. Matchev and D. Pierce, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 467**]{} (1999) 225]{}. I. Hinchliffe, F. Paige, M. Shapiro, J. Söderqvist and W. Yao, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 55**]{} (1997) 5520]{}. H. Baer, T. Krupovnickas and X. Tata, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0307**]{} (2003) 020]{}. Brubaker, E. [*et al.*]{} [hep-ex/0608032]{}
For a recent analysis, see H. Baer, C. Balazs, A. Belyaev and J. O’Farrill, JCAP[**0309**]{}, 2003 (007); a subset of earlier work includes M. Goodman and E. Witten, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 31**]{} (1985) 3059]{}; K. Griest, [[*Phys. Rev. Lett. *]{}[**61**]{} (1988) 666]{} and [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 38**]{} (1988) 2357]{} \[Erratum-ibid.D [**39**]{}, 3802 (1989)\]; M. Drees and M. Nojiri, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 47**]{} (1993) 4226]{} and [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 48**]{} (1993) 3483]{}; V. A. Bednyakov, H. V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus and S. Kovalenko, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 50**]{} (1994) 7128]{}; P. Nath and R. Arnowitt, [[*Phys. Rev. Lett. *]{}[**74**]{} (1995) 4592]{}; L. Bergstrom and P. Gondolo, [[*Astropart. Phys. *]{}[**5**]{} (1996) 263]{}; H. Baer and M. Brhlik, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 57**]{} (1998) 567]{}; J. Ellis, A. Ferstl and K. Olive, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 481**]{} (2000) 304]{} and [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 63**]{} (2001) 065016]{}; E. Accomando, R. Arnowitt, B. Dutta and Y. Santoso, [[*Nucl. Phys. *]{}[**B 585**]{} (2000) 124]{}; A. Bottino, F. Donato, N. Fornengo and S. Scopel, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 63**]{} (2001) 125003]{}; M. E. Gomez and J. D. Vergados, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 512**]{} (2001) 252]{}; A. B. Lahanas, D. V. Nanopoulos and V. C. Spanos, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 518**]{} (2001) 94]{}; A. Corsetti and P. Nath, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 64**]{} (2001) 115009]{}; E. A. Baltz and P. Gondolo, [[*Phys. Rev. Lett. *]{}[**86**]{} (2001) 5004]{}; M. Drees, Y. G. Kim, T. Kobayashi and M. M. Nojiri, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 63**]{} (2001) 115009]{}; see also J. Feng, K. Matchev and F. Wilczek, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 482**]{} (2000) 388]{} and [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 63**]{} (2001) 045024]{}; R. Ellis, A. Ferstl, K. A. Olive and Y. Santoso, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 67**]{} (2003) 123502]{}; J. R. Ellis, K. A. Olive, Y. Santoso and V. C. Spanos, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 69**]{} (2004) 015005]{}; see C. Muñoz, [hep-ph/0309346]{} for a recent review. J. Feng, K. Matchev and F. Wilczek, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 482**]{} (2000) 388]{} and [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 63**]{} (2001) 045024]{}; H. Baer, A. Belyaev, T. Krupovnickas and J. O’Farrill, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0408**]{} (2004) 005]{}. I. Hinchliffe and F. Paige, in [*Workshop on Physics at TeV Colliders, Les Houches, France, 21 May - 1 Jun 2001*]{}. H. Baer, V. D. Barger and R. J. N. Phillips, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 39**]{} (1989) 3310]{} P. G. Mercadante, J. K. Mizukoshi and X. Tata, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 72**]{} (2005) 035009]{}. H. Baer, T. Krupovnickas, S. Profumo and P. Ullio, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0510**]{} (2005) 020]{}. E. Baltz, M. Battaglia, M. Peskin and T. Wizansky, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 74**]{} (2006) 103521]{}. H. Baer, V. D. Barger, D. Karatas and X. Tata, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 35**]{} (1987) 96]{}. H. Bachacou, I. Hinchliffe and F. E. Paige, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 62**]{} (2000) 015009]{}. B. C. Allanach, C. G. Lester, M. A. Parker and B. R. Webber, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0009**]{} (2000) 004]{}. C. G. Lester, M. A. Parker and M. J. White, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0601**]{} (2006) 080]{}. B. K. Gjelsten, D. J. Miller and P. Osland, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0412**]{} (2004) 003]{}. B. K. Gjelsten, D. J. Miller and P. Osland, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0506**]{} (2005) 015]{}. A. Alves, O. Eboli and T. Plehn, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 74**]{} (2006) 095010]{}. V. D. Barger, M. S. Berger and P. Ohmann, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 47**]{} (1993) 1093]{}, [hep-ph/9209232]{} S. P. Martin and M. T. Vaughn, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 50**]{} (1994) 2282]{}, [hep-ph/9311340]{} W. Beenakker, R. Hopker, M. Spira and P. Zerwas, [[*Nucl. Phys. *]{}[**B 492**]{} (1997) 51]{}. H. Baer, X. Tata and J. Woodside, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 42**]{} (1990) 1568]{} and [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 45**]{} (1992) 142]{}. V. D. Barger, A. L. Stange and R. J. N. Phillips, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 45**]{} (1992) 1484]{}. H. Baer, V. D. Barger and R. J. N. Phillips, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 221**]{} (1989) 398]{}. H. Baer, A. Mustafayev, S. Profumo, A. Belyaev and X. Tata, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0507**]{} (2005) 065]{}. H. Baer, C. H. Chen and M. H. Reno, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 48**]{} (1993) 5168]{}. V. D. Barger, W. Y. Keung and R. J. N. Phillips, [[*Phys. Rev. Lett. *]{}[**55**]{} (1985) 166]{}. R. M. Barnett, J. F. Gunion and H. E. Haber, [[*Phys. Lett. *]{}[**B 315**]{} (1993) 349]{}. H. Baer, K. Hagiwara and X. Tata, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 35**]{} (1987) 1598]{}; H. Baer, D. Dzialo-Karatas and X. Tata, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 42**]{} (1990) 2259]{}; H. Baer, C. Kao and X. Tata, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 48**]{} (1993) 5175]{}; H. Baer, C. H. Chen, F. Paige and X. Tata, [[*Phys. Rev. *]{}[**D 50**]{} (1994) 4508]{}. See [*e.g.*]{} I. Antoniadis, K. Benakli, A. Delgado, M. Quiros and M. Tuckmantel, [[*Nucl. Phys. *]{}[**B 744**]{} (2006) 156]{} and B. S. Acharya, K. Bobkov, G. L. Kane, P. Kumar and J. Shao, [hep-th/0701034]{}. A. Arkani-Hamed and S. Dimopoulos, [[*J. High Energy Phys. *]{}[**0506**]{} (2005) 073]{}.
[^1]: The effective mass was introduced and used in heavy top quark production [@meff-hq].
[^2]: The parameters of the point are $m_0=3280$ GeV, $m_{1/2} = 300$ GeV, $\tan \beta = 10$, $A_0=0$ GeV and $\mu > 0$.
[^3]: Studies of gluino mass [@glmass] and spin [@glspin] determination have been made through the cascade decays $\tilde g\to b \tilde b^*_1$ with $\tilde b_1\to \tilde Z_2\to \tilde l\to \tilde Z_1$ at parameter point SPS1a.
[^4]: In our study, we adopt the reference value $m_t=175$ GeV to allow comparisons with other studies. The recent world average for the $t$-quark mass is $m_t=171.4$ GeV [@tmass].
[^5]: NLO gluino, chargino and neutralino cross sections are shown versus weak scale gaugino mass $M_1$ in the HB/FP region in Ref. [@bkpu].
[^6]: The use of the steps in the jet multiplicity was introduced in Ref. [@Wnjet] in extracting the signal of top quark pair production.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Seismic velocity is one of the most important parameters used in seismic exploration. Accurate velocity models are key prerequisites for reverse-time migration and other high-resolution seismic imaging techniques. Such velocity information has traditionally been derived by tomography or full-waveform inversion (FWI), which are time consuming and computationally expensive, and they rely heavily on human interaction and quality control. We investigate a novel method based on the supervised deep fully convolutional neural network (FCN) for velocity-model building (VMB) directly from raw seismograms. Unlike the conventional inversion method based on physical models, the supervised deep-learning methods are based on big-data training rather than prior-knowledge assumptions. [[~~about the subsurface that are required in many traditional inversion methods.~~]{}]{} During the training stage, the network establishes a nonlinear projection from the multi-shot seismic data to the corresponding velocity models. During the prediction stage, the trained network can be used to estimate the velocity models from the new input seismic data. One key characteristic of the deep-learning method is that it can automatically extract multi-layer useful features [[~~for velocity model building~~]{}]{} without human-curated activities and initial velocity setup. The data-driven method usually [[~~takes~~]{}]{} more time during the training stage, [[~~and uses less time (only seconds) for actual predictions~~]{}]{} Therefore, the computational time of geophysical inversions, can be dramatically reduced once a good generalized network is built. By using numerical experiments , in comparison with conventional FWI even when the input data [[~~was~~]{}]{} [[~~contaminated with noises or when the amplitudes have different magnitude.~~]{}]{} Discussions on the deep-learning methods, training dataset, lack of low frequencies, and advantages and disadvantages of the new method are also provided.'
author:
- |
Fangshu Yang$^{1}$, Jianwei Ma$^1$\
$^{1}$Center of Geophysics, Department of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China, E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]
bibliography:
- 'DLIgeo.bib'
title: 'Deep-learning inversion: a next generation seismic velocity-model building '
---
Introduction
============
Currently, velocity-model building (VMB) is an essential step in seismic exploration because it is used during the entire course of seismic exploration including seismic data acquisition, processing, and interpretation. Accurate subsurface-image reconstruction from surface seismic wavefields requires precise knowledge of the local propagation velocities between the recording location and the image location at depth. Good velocity models are prerequisites for reverse-time migration [@Baysal1983] and other seismic imaging techniques [@Biondi2006]. Estimated velocity models can also be used as initial models to recursively generate high-resolution velocity models with optimization algorithms [@Tarantola2005]. Many of the explored techniques such as migration velocity analysis [@AlYahya1989], tomography [@Chiao2001], and full-waveform inversion (FWI) [@Tarantola1984; @Mora1987; @Virieux2009] share the same purpose of building more accurate velocity models.
Traditional tomography methods [@Woodward2008], including reflection tomography, tuning-ray tomography, and diving-wave tomography [@Stefani1995], are widely used [[~~in building 3D subsurface velocity models for migration of seismic reflection data. They~~]{}]{} have worked sufficiently well in most cases. Seismic inversion is performed by means of wave inversion of a simple prior model of subsurface, and by using a back propagation loop to infer subsurface geological structures [@Tarantola1984]. Typically, FWI is a data-fitting procedure [[~~that aims at~~]{}]{} reconstructing high-resolution velocity models of the subsurface, as well as other parameters that govern wave propagation, from the full information contained in seismic data [@Virieux2009; @Operto2013]. In FWI, active seismic sources are used to generate seismic waves, and geophones are placed on the surface to record the measurements. An inverse problem is formulated to [[~~connect~~]{}]{} the measurements [[~~and~~]{}]{} the governing physics equations to obtain the model parameters. Numerical optimization techniques are utilized to solve for the velocity models. [[~~FWI is highly effective if the initial model is [[~~fairly~~]{}]{} accurate, but it suffers from cycle skipping if the predicted data from a initial model differs from the acquired data by more than half a period.~~]{}]{} Efforts have been made recently to overcome the limitations in FWI. Even though these conventional methods have shown great success in many applications, they can be limited in some situations owing to a lack of low-frequency components as well as computational inefficiency, subjective human factors, and other issues. Additionally, iterative refinement is expensive in the entire workflow. a robust, efficient, and accurate velocity-estimation method is needed to address these problems. [[~~However, so far, building a practical method for velocity models is still challenging and open because of the above-mentioned bottlenecks.~~]{}]{}
Machine learning (ML) ML has shown its strength in many fields including image recognition, recommendation systems [@Bobadilla2013], spam filters [@Androutsopoulos2000], fraud alerts [@Ravisankar2011], and other applications. Furthermore, ML has a long history of applications in geophysics. Nonlinear intelligent inverse technologies have been applied since the mid-1980s. [@Roth1994] first presented an application of neural networks to invert from the time-domain [[~~of seismic amplitude responses~~]{}]{} to a depth profile of acoustic [[~~velocity~~]{}]{} . They used pairs of synthetic shot [[~~gather~~]{}]{} (i.e., a set of seismograms obtained from a single source) and corresponding one-[[~~dimension~~]{}]{} velocity models to train a multi-layer feed-forward neural network with the goal of predicting velocities from new recorded data. They showed that the trained network can produce [[~~high resolution~~]{}]{} approximations to the solutions of the inverse problem. In addition, their method can invert the geophysical parameters in the presence of white noise. [@Nath1999] used neural networks for cross-well traveltime tomography. After training the network with synthetic data, the velocities can be topographically estimated by the trained network with the new cross-well data. In recent years, most ML-based methods have focused mainly on pattern recognition in seismic attributes [@Zeng2004; @Zhao2015b] and facies classifications in well logs [@Hall2016]. In the work of [@Guillen2015a], [[~~they~~]{}]{} proposed a novel workflow to detect salt [[~~body~~]{}]{} based on seismic attributes in a supervised learning method. An [[~~machine learning~~]{}]{} algorithm (i.e., Extremely Random Trees Ensemble) was used to train for automatically identifying salt regions. They concluded that [[~~machine learning~~]{}]{} is a promising mechanism for classifying salt bodies when the selected training dataset has a sufficient capacity for describing the complex decision boundaries. [[~~In 2017,~~]{}]{} [@Jia2017] used ML with supported vector regression [@Cortes1995] for seismic data interpolation. Unlike the conventional methods, no assumptions are imposed on ML-based interpolation problems. On the basis of the above work, [@Jia2017a] [[~~developed a criterion~~]{}]{} based on the Monte Carlo method [@Yu2016] for intelligent reduction of training sets. In that study, representative patches of seismic data were selected to train the method for efficient reconstructions.
Deep learning (DL) [@LeCun2015a; @Goodfellow2016], a new branch of machine learning, has drawn widespread interest by showing outstanding performance for recognition and classification [@Greenspan2016] in image and speech processing. Recently, [@Zhang2014] proposed to use of a kernel regularized least-squares method [@Evgeniou2000] for fault detection from seismic records. The authors used toy velocity models to generate seismic records and set the records and the velocity models as inputs and labels in the training set. The numerical experiments showed that this method obtained meaningful results. [@Wang2018] developed a salt-detection technique from raw multi-shot gathers by utilizing a fully convolutional neural network (FCN). The testing performance showed that salt detections is much faster and efficient by this method than traditional migration and interpretation. [@Lewis2017] In the work of [@Araya-Polo2017a], a deep neural network (DNN)-based statistical model was used to automatically predict faults directly from synthetic two-dimensional (2D) seismic data. Inspired by this concept, [@Araya-Polo2018] proposed an approach for VMB. One key element of this DL tomography is the use of a feature based on semblance that predigests the velocity information. Extracted features are obtained before the training process and are used as DNN inputs to train the network. [[~~In 2018,~~]{}]{} [@Mosser2018] used a generative adversarial network [@Goodfellow2014] with cycle-constraints [@Zhu2017b] to perform seismic inversion by formulating this problem as a domain-transfer problem. The mapping between the post-stack seismic traces and [[~~p-wave~~]{}]{} velocity models was approximated through this learning method. [[~~Due to the P-wave velocity models and the seismic amplitudes are represented as a function of depth, rather than depth and time, respectively, this approach lends itself to perform stratigraphic inversion, where a pre-existing velocity model is used to perform time-to-depth conversion of the seismic amplitude.~~]{}]{} Most research has focused on identifying features and attributes in migrated images; few studies have discussed VMB or velocity inversion.
Multi-layer neural networks are computational learning architectures that propagate the input data across a sequence of linear operators and simple non-linearities. In this system, a deep convolutional neural network (CNN), proposed by [@LeCun2010], is implemented with linear convolutions followed by non-linear activation functions. A strong motivation to use FCN stems from the universal approximation theorem [@Hornik1991; @Csaji2001], which states that a feed-forward network with a single hidden layer containing a finite number of neurons can approximate any continuous function on compact subsets under a mild assumption on the activation functions. Additionally, FCN assumes that we learn representative features by convolutional kernels in a data-driven fashion to extract features automatically. Compared with DNN, FCN exhibits structures with fewer parameters to explain multi-layer perceptions while still providing good results [@Burger2012].
[[~~What we propose in this paper is~~]{}]{} the use of FCN to reconstruct subsurface parameters, i.e., P-wave velocity model[[ ~~building~~]{}]{}, directly from raw [[~~input of the~~]{}]{} seismic data, instead of performing a local-based inversion with respect to subsurface represented through a grid. This method is an alternative formulation to conventional FWI [[~~in which the DL techniques are applied to a specific seismic workflow.~~]{}]{} [[~~In~~]{}]{} training process, multi-shot gathers are fed into the network together, and the network [[~~will~~]{}]{} effectively [[~~approximate~~]{}]{} the non-linear mapping between data and corresponding velocity model. [[~~In~~]{}]{} prediction process, the trained network can be saved to obtain unknown geomorphological structures only with new seismic data. Compared with traditional methods, [[~~no~~]{}]{} human intervention or initial velocity models are involved [[~~in~~]{}]{} the process. Although the training process is expensive, the cost of the prediction stage by the network is negligible once the training is completed. [[~~since the wave forward propagation is not involved when we use the network to predict.~~]{}]{} [[~~Meanwhile,~~]{}]{} [[~~DL-based~~]{}]{} method [[~~may~~]{}]{} provides a possible [[~~road~~]{}]{} for velocity inversion when the seismic data [[~~losses~~]{}]{} [[~~The numerical applications of our method mainly focuses on velocity inversion, that is to evaluate the velocity values by decreasing the mean square error between the predicted velocities and corresponding ground-truth velocities. Additionally, geometric shape/structure detection is also an important challenge we are faced with. In order to further show promising abilities of DL applied for geological application, we also presented numerical experiments related to detecting geometric and positional information of particular subsurface structures, which just be taken as a specific example of our seismic inversion.~~]{}]{} [[~~From numerical point of view, most~~]{}]{} numerical experiments [[~~performed on various data~~]{}]{} are used to demonstrate the applicability and feasibilities of our method.
This paper is organized as follows. [[~~The second part gives~~]{}]{} a brief introduction to the basic inversion problem, the concepts of FCN, [[~~After that, the methodology is presented, including the DL-based mathematical model, data preparation for the training set, and the architecture of the deep-learning-based velocity-model building (DLVMB) network.~~]{}]{} [[~~The fourth part~~]{}]{} [[ ~~shows two aspects of numerical experiments on 2D isotropic acoustic models with a uniform and constant density and Society of Exploration Geophysics (SEG) dataset that includes the DLVMB method for p-wave velocity inversion and a specific example, that is detecting geological structures~~]{}]{} All of the acronyms used in this paper are listed in Table \[tab1\].
FCN-based inversion method {#sec2}
==========================
Basic inversion problem
-----------------------
The constant density 2D acoustic wave equation is expressed as $$\label{e1}
\left.
\begin{array}{lcl}
\frac{1}{v^{2}(x,z)}\frac{\partial^{2}{u(x,z,t)}}{\partial{{t^{2}}}}=\nabla^{2}{u(x,z,t)}+s(x,z,t),&{}
\end{array}
\right.$$ where $(x,z)$ denotes the spatial location, $t$ represents time, $ v(x,z)$ is the velocity of the longitudinal wave at the corresponding location, $u(x,z,t)$ is the wave amplitude, $\nabla^{2}(\cdot)=\frac{\partial^{2}(\cdot)}{\partial{x^{2}}}+\frac{\partial^{2}(\cdot)}{\partial{z^{2}}}$ represents the Laplace operator, and $s(x,z,t)$ is the source signal.
Equation \[e1\] is usually given by $$\label{e2}
\left.
\begin{array}{lcl}
u=H(v),&{}
\end{array}
\right.$$ where [[~~$u\in Y$ is the wave field, and $v\in X$ denotes the model parameters that can be velocity, density, and others~~]{}]{} the operator $H(\cdot)$ maps $v$ to $u$, and is usually nonlinear.
The classical inversion methods aim at minimizing the following objective function: $$\label{e3}
\left.
\begin{array}{lcl}
\bar{v}=\arg\min\limits_{v}f(v)=\arg\min\limits_{v}\frac{1}{2}\|H(v)-d\|^{2}_{2},&{}
\end{array}
\right.$$ where $d$ denotes the measured seismic data, $\|\cdot\|_{2}$ is the $l_{2}$ norm, and $f(\cdot)$ represents the data-fidelity residual.
In many applications, the engine for solving the above equation is to develop a fast and reasonably accurate inverse operator $H^{-1}$. An adjoint-state method [@Plessix2006] is used to compute the gradient $g(v)=\nabla f(v)$, and iterative optimization algorithms are used to minimize the objective function. Owing to the nonlinear properties of the operator $H$ and the imperfection of the surveys $d$, it is difficult to obtain precise subsurface models. Therefore, minimizing the above equation is generally an ill-posed problem, and the solutions are non-unique and unstable. If $d$ contains full-waveform information, the above equation presents an FWI.
A review of the FCN
-------------------
Many DL algorithms are built with CNNs and provide state-of-the-art performance in challenging inverse problems such as image reconstruction [@Schlemper2017], super-resolution [@Dong2016], X-ray-computed tomography [@Jin2017], and compressive sensing [@Adler2017]. They are also studied as neuro-physiological models of vision [@Anselmi2016].
The FCN, proposed by [@Long2015] in the context of image and semantic segmentation, changes the fully connected layers of the CNN into convolutional layers to achieve end-to-end learning. Figure \[fig2\] shows a sketch of a simple FCN [[~~with a few convolutional layers~~]{}]{}. In this [[~~simple~~]{}]{} example, This FCN method can be described as follows: $$\label{e5}
\left.
\begin{array}{lcl}
y=Net(x;\Theta)=S$($K_{2}*(M(R(K_{1}*x+b_{1})))+b_{2}$)$,&{}
\end{array}
\right.$$ where $Net(\cdot)$ denotes an FCN-based network and also indicates the nonlinear mapping of the network, and $x,y$ denotes the inputs and outputs of the network, respectively. $\Theta=\{ K_{1},K_{2},b_{1},b_{2}\}$ is the set of parameters to be learned, including the convolutional weights ($K_{1}$ and $K_{2}$) and the bias ($b_{1}$ and $b_{2}$). $R(\cdot)$ introduces the nonlinear active function, such as the rectified linear unit [@Dahl2013], sigmoid, or exponential linear unit [@Clevert2015]. $M(\cdot)$ denotes the subsampling function (e.g., max-pooling, average pooling). $*$ is the convolutional operation, and
[[~~DLVMB~~]{}]{} Mathematical framework
----------------------------------------
With the goal of estimating velocity models using seismic data as inputs directly, the network needs to project seismic data from the data domain $(x,t)$ to the model domain $(x,z)$, as shown in Figure \[fig3\]. The basic concept of the [[~~DLVMB~~]{}]{} proposed method is to establish the map between inputs and outputs, which can be expressed as $$\label{e9}
\left.
\begin{array}{lcl}
\widetilde{v}=Net(d;\Theta),&{}
\end{array}
\right.$$ where $d$ is the raw unmigrated seismic data, and $\widetilde{v}$ denotes the [[~~p-wave~~]{}]{} velocity model predicted by the network. Our method contains two stages: the training process and the prediction process, as shown in Figure \[fig4\]. Before the training stage, many velocity models are generated and are used as outputs. The supervised network needs pairs of datasets. Therefore, the acoustic wave equation is applied as a forward model to generate the synthetic seismic data, which are used as inputs. Following the initial computation, the input–output pairs, which are named ${\{d_{n},v_{n}\}}_{n=1}^{N}$, are [[~~inputted~~]{}]{} to the network for learning the mapping.
During the training stage, the network learns to fit a nonlinear function from the input seismic data to the corresponding ground-truth velocity model. Therefore, the network learns by solving the optimization problem as $$\label{e10}
\left.
\begin{array}{lcl}
\widehat{\Theta}=\arg\min\limits_{\Theta}\frac{1}{mN}\sum\limits_{n=1}^{N}L(v_{n},Net(d_{n};\Theta)),&{}
\end{array}
\right.$$ where $m$ represents the total number of pixels in one velocity model, and $L(\cdot)$ is a measure of the error between ground-truth values $v_{n}$ and prediction values $\widetilde{v}_{n}$. In our numerical experiments, [[~~the cross-entropy function (equation \[e8\]) for detecting the structures and~~]{}]{} the $l_{2}$ norm is applied for [[~~predicting the velocity values~~]{}]{} .
For updating the learned parameters $\Theta$, the optimization problem can be solved by using back propagation and stochastic gradient-descent algorithms (SGD) [@Shamir2013]. The number of training datasets is large, and the numerical computation of the gradient $\triangledown _{\Theta}L(d;\Theta)$ is not feasible based on our GPU memory. Therefore, to approximate the gradient, the mini-batch size $h$ was applied for calculating $L_{h}$, i.e., the error between the prediction values and the corresponding ground-truth values of a small subset of the whole training dataset, in each iteration. This led to the following optimization problem: $$\label{e11}
\left.
\begin{array}{lcl}
\widehat{\Theta}=\arg\min\limits_{\Theta}\frac{1}{mh}L_{h}=\arg\min\limits_{\Theta}\frac{1}{mh}\sum\limits_{n=1}^{h}\|v_{n}-Net(d_{n};\Theta)\|_{2}^{2},&{}
\end{array}
\right.$$ Here, the ground-truth velocity models $v_{n}$ are given during the training process but are unknown during testing. It should be noted that the loss function is different from that (equation \[e3\]) in FWI, in which the loss measures the squared difference between the observed and simulated seismograms. In our case, we used the Adam algorithm [@Kingma2014], i.e., a deformation of the conventional SGD algorithm. The parameters are iteratively updated as follows: $$\left.
\begin{array}{lcl}
\Theta_{t+1}=\Theta_{t}-\delta g(\frac{1}{mh}\triangledown_{\Theta} L_{h}(d_{n};\Theta;v_{n})),&{}
\end{array}
\right.$$ where $\delta$ is the positive [[~~learning rate~~]{}]{} , and $g(\frac{1}{mh}\triangledown_{\Theta} L_{h}(d_{n};\Theta;v_{n}))$ denotes a function. [[~~with respect to $\triangledown_{\Theta} L$ (see Adam algorithm)~~]{}]{}
The network is built once the training process is completed. During the prediction stage, other unknown velocity models are obtained by the available learned network. In our work, the input seismic data for prediction is also synthetic seismic traces. In a real situation, however, the input is field data. The method can be calculated by algorithm \[alg1\].
**Input:** $\{d_{n}\}_{n=1}^{N}$: seismic data, $\{v_{n}\}_{n=1}^{N}$: velocity models, $T$: epochs, $lr$: learning rate of network, $h$: batch size, $num$ : number of training sets\
**Given notation:** $\ast$ : 2D convolution with channels including zero-padding, $\ast_{\uparrow}$ : 2D deconvolution (transposed convolution), $R(\cdot)$ : rectified linear unit, $B(\cdot)$ : batch normalization, $M(\cdot)$ : max-pooling, $C(\cdot)$ : copy and concatenate, $\Theta=\{K, b\}$ : learnable parameters, $L$: loss function, $Adam$: SGD algorithm\
**Initialize:** $t=1$, $loss=0.0$, $y_{0}=d$\
**1.Training process**
1. Generate different velocity models that have similar geological structures.
2. Synthesize seismic data using the finite-difference scheme.
3. Input all data pairs into the network and use the Adam algorithm to update the parameters.
$y_{i}\leftarrow B(R(K_{(2i-1)}\ast y_{i-1}+b_{(2i-1)}))$\
$m_{i}\leftarrow B(R(K_{(2i)}\ast y_{i}+b_{(2i)}))$\
$y_{i}\leftarrow M(m_{i})$ $y_{l}\leftarrow B(R(K_{(2l-1)}\ast y_{l-1}+b_{(2l-1)}))$\
$y_{l}\leftarrow B(R(K_{(2l)}\ast y_{l}+b_{(2l)}))$\
$y_{i}\leftarrow B(R(K_{(2l+3(l-i)-2)}\ast_{\uparrow} y_{i+1}+b_{(2l+3(l-i)-2)}))$\
$m_{i}\leftarrow B(R(K_{((2l+3(l-i)-1))}\ast C(y_{i},m_{i})+b_{(2l+3(l-i)-1)}))$\
$y_{i}\leftarrow B(R(K_{(2l+3(l-i))}\ast m_{i}+b_{(2L+3(l-i))}))$ $\widetilde{v}\leftarrow B(R(K_{(5l-2)}\ast y_{1}+b_{(5l-2)}))$\
$loss=L_{h}(\widetilde{v},v)$\
$\Theta_{j+1}\leftarrow Adam(\Theta_{j};lr;loss)$
**2.Prediction process**
1. Synthesize seismic data for different velocity models in the same way as that used for generating the training seismic data.
2. Input new seismic data into the learned network for prediction.
**Output:** Predicted velocity model $v^{\ast}$ \[alg1\]
Architecture of the [[~~DLVMB~~]{}]{} network
----------------------------------------------
To achieve automatic seismic VMB from the raw seismic data, we adopted and modified the UNet [@Ronneberger2015] architecture, which is a specific network built upon the concept of the FCN. Figure \[fig8\] shows the detailed architecture of the proposed network. It consists of a contracting path (left) used to capture the geological features and a symmetric shape of an expanding path (right) that enables precise localization. The numbers of channels in the left path are 64, 128, 256, 512, and 1024, as network depth increases. Skip layers are adopted to combine the local, shallow feature maps in the right path with the global, deep feature maps in the left path. We summarize the definitions of the different operations in Table \[tab2\], where $K$ and $\overline{K}$ denote the convolutional kernels. The mean and standard deviation in the batch normalization were calculated per dimension over the mini-batch. $\varepsilon$ is a value added to the denominator for numerical stability, $\gamma$ and $\beta$ are also learnable parameters; however, they were not used in our method.
We made two main modifications to the original UNet to fit the seismic VMB. First, the original UNet, proposed in the image-processing community, reads input images in RGB color channels that represent the information from the input images. [[~~while for processing the seismic data here~~]{}]{} , we assigned different shot gathers, generated at different source locations but from the same model as channels for the input. Therefore, the number of input channels is the same as the number of sources for each model. The multi-shot seismic data were fed into the network together to improve data redundancy. Second, [[~~different from~~]{}]{} a usual UNet, the outputs and inputs are in the same (image) domain. However, for our goal, we expected the network to realize the domain projection, i.e., to transform the data from the (x, t) domain to the (x, z) domain and [[~~tag the geologic bodies simultaneously~~]{}]{} . To complete this, the size of feature maps obtained by the final $3*3$ convolution was truncated to be the same size as the velocity model, and the channel of the output layer was modified to 1. This was done so that the neural network could train itself during the contracting and expanding processes to map the seismic data to the exact velocity model directly. and 23 convolutional layers in total are used in the network. [[~~For different tasks, i.e., velocity inversion and structure detection, the number of channels of the first and last layer was different, i.e., the first layer had 29 channels and last layer had 1 channel for the first task, but in terms of second task, the number of channels was 21 and 9 for first and last layer, respectively.~~]{}]{}
Numerical experiments and results
=================================
[[~~As stated earlier, inversion is our primary objective. However, evaluating the quality of velocity-model building, which included two-aspect applications, produced by our approach is important as it will condition the ultimate quality of our results. In terms of the velocity inversions studies, we first trained the network just with the simulated velocity models, then predicted the other input seismic traces. After that, we regarded the trained network as the pre-trained network to continue to train with the SEG salt velocity models and tested new model again.~~]{}]{} We compare the numerical results between our method and FWI. [[~~For all of the numerical examples, the hyper-parameter selections are shown in Table 4, which depends on the empirical experiments and experimental equipments.~~]{}]{} The numerical experiments are performed on an HP Z840 workstation with a Tesla K40 GPU, 32 Core Xeon CPU, 128 GB RAM, and an Ubuntu operating system that implements PyTorch ([http://pytorch.org]{}).
Data preparation [[~~for training set~~]{}]{}
---------------------------------------------
To train an efficient network, a suitable large-scale training set, i.e., input–output pairs, is needed. In a typical FCN model, training outputs are provided by some of the labeled images. . [[~~due to no~~]{}]{} [[~~currently, to the research environment of to the authors~~]{}]{} Each velocity model is unique.
[[~~In this study, we used the DLVMB network to solve the problem of p-wave velocity inversion. Additionally, as a particular example, we also used our method to automatically detect geological structures. According to the definition of the two applications, we used different approaches to generate data set for these two tasks, i.e., inversing velocity and identifying boundaries and locations of geological structures (e.g., salt domes and faults).~~]{}]{}
[[~~This is the first step we try to allow deep learning work for geological application. For reducing the difficulty of this problem in the beginning, only p-wave velocity was used to describe characteristics of subsurface structures.~~]{}]{}
To explore and prove the available capabilities of DL for seismic waveform inversion, we first [[~~attempted to~~]{}]{} generated random velocity models with smooth interface curvatures and increased the velocity values with depth. For the sake of simplicity, we assumed that each model had 5 to 12 layers as the background velocity and that the velocity values of each layer ranged arbitrarily from 2000 m/s to 4000 m/s. A salt body with an arbitrary shape and position was embedded into each model, each having a constant velocity value of 4500 m/s. The size of each velocity model used $x\times z$ = $201\times 301$ grid points with a spatial interval $\triangle{x}$ = $\triangle{z}$ = 10 m. Figure \[fig6-1\] shows 12 models from the simulated training dataset, and Figure \[fig6-3\] shows 6 examples of the testing dataset. To better apply our new method for inversion, a 3D salt velocity model from the SEG reference website was utilized for obtaining the 2D salt models. This type of model had same size [[~~with~~]{}]{} [[ ~~synthetic~~]{}]{} models, and the values ranged from 1500 m/s to 4482 m/s. Figure \[fig6-2\] [[~~are~~]{}]{} the 12 representative examples of the SEG salt models from the training dataset, and Figure \[fig6-4\] [[~~are~~]{}]{} the 6 models from the testing dataset. Owing to the limited extraction, 130 velocity models were included in SEG training dataset.
** To solve the acoustic wave equation, we used the time-domain stagger-grid finite-difference scheme that adopts a second-order time direction and eighth-order space direction [@Ozdenvar1997; @Hardi2016]. For each velocity model, 29 sources were evenly placed, and shot gathers were simulated sequentially. The recording geometry consisted of 301 receivers evenly placed at a uniform spatial interval. [.]{} [[~~We used [[~~as a source wavelet~~]{}]{} a Ricker wavelet with a dominant frequency of 25 Hz, the sampling time interval [[~~was~~]{}]{} 0.001 s, and the maximum [[~~travel~~]{}]{} time [[~~was~~]{}]{} 2 s.~~]{}]{} The perfectly matched layer (PML) [@D.Komatitsch2003] absorbing boundary condition was adopted to reduce [[~~unwanted~~]{}]{} reflection on the left, right and bottom edges. Additionally, to verify the stability of our method, we added Gaussian noise, with zero mean and standard derivation of $5\%$, to each testing seismic data. Moreover, we [[~~magnified the amplitude of seismic data to two times larger~~]{}]{} . The noisy or magnified data were also used as inputs and were fed into the network to invert the velocity values.
The ground-truth velocity models of the testing dataset had geological structures similar to those of the training dataset owing to the usage of supervised learning method. All of the velocity models for prediction were not included in the training dataset and were unknown in the prediction process. The input seismic data for prediction were also obtained by using the same method as that used for generating the inputs for the training dataset. For simulated models and SEG salt models, the testing dataset was composed of 100 and 10 velocity samples, respectively.
[[~~Results of the~~]{}]{}
---------------------------
The first inversion case was performed for 2D [[~~synthetic~~]{}]{} velocity models. During the training stage, the training batch for each epoch was constructed by randomly choosing 10 samples of velocity-model dimension $201\times 301$ from the training dataset. In each pair data, the dimension of one-shot seismic data was downsampled to $400 \times 301$. [[~~The learning rate was set to 0.001, and the learned DLVMB~~]{}]{} The network deemed to work better was selected when based on the training dataset and experimental guidance [@Bengio2012]. The mean squared error between the prediction velocity values and ground-truth velocity values is shown in Figure \[fig9-2\]. Figure \[fig12-10\]–Figure \[fig12-12\] show three exemplified results of the [[~~DLVMB~~]{}]{} proposed method. Visually, a generally good match was achieved between the predictions and the corresponding ground-truth.
In this case study, a comparison between our method and FWI was performed. We used the same parameter setting as that used to generate the training seismic data for the time-domain forward modeling. Multi-scale frequency-domain inversion strategy [@Sirgue2008] was adopted. The selected inversion frequencies were 2.5 Hz, 5 Hz, 10 Hz, 15 Hz, and 21 Hz, based on the research of [@Sirgue2004]. An adjoint-state based gradient descending method was adopted in this experiment [@Plessix2006]. The observed data of FWI was same as the seismic data we used for prediction. In addition, the true velocity model smoothed by the Gaussian smooth function was taken as the initial velocity model, as shown in Figure \[fig12-4\]–Figure \[fig12-6\]. The numerical experiments of FWI were performed on a computer cluster with four Tesla K80 GPU units, and a central operating system. Figure \[fig12-7\]–Figure \[fig12-9\] shows the results of FWI. All subfigures have the same colorbar, and the velocity value ranges from 2000 m/s to 4500 m/s. In this scenario, the FCN-based inversion method showed comparable results and preserved most of the geological structures.
To quantitatively analyze the accuracy of the predictions, we chose two horizontal positions, x = 900 m and x = 2000 m, and we plotted the prediction (blue), FWI (red), and ground-truth (green) velocity values in the velocity versus depth profiles shown in Figure \[fig13\]. Most prediction values matched well with the ground-truth values. Moreover, in Figure \[fig23\], a comparison of the shot records of the 15th receiver is displayed, including the observed data using the ground-truth velocity model, reconstructed data obtained by simulating the inversion result of FWI, and reconstructed data obtained by forward modeling the prediction velocity model of our method. The reconstructed data with [[~~DLVMB~~]{}]{} predictions obtained by the proposed method also matched well with the observed data.
The process of FWI for one [[~~synthetic~~]{}]{} model inversion incurred a GPU time of 37 min. In contrast, after training the [[~~DLVMB~~]{}]{} network , the GPU time per prediction in our simulated models was only 2 s on the lower-equipment machine, which is more than 1000 times less than that for FWI.
[[~~For further exploiting, we showed more promising experiments~~]{}]{} . Here, we [[~~just~~]{}]{} present experiments [[~~related to~~]{}]{} seismic data contaminated with random noise or the seismic amplitude . [[~~for an example~~]{}]{}. [[~~For the noisy seismic data, which was generated by adding Gaussian noise ($\mu=0, \sigma=5\% *$ minimum amplitude of each shot), was put into the trained network for prediction. Because the seismic data can be denoised before inversion, so we just added small-scale random noise to test the sensitivity to noise of our method.~~]{}]{} [[The noisy data were generated by adding zero-mean Gaussian noise with a standard deviation of $5\%$.]{}]{} Figure \[fig12-31\]–Figure \[fig12-33\] show the prediction results using the proposed method with noisy inputs; examples are shown in second column of Figure \[fig20\]. A comparison of the predictions (i.e., the results shown in Figure \[fig12-10\]–Figure \[fig12-12\]) and the clean inputs (e.g., examples shown in first column of Figure \[fig20\]) revealed that our method still provides acceptable results. However, compared with the ground truth, some parts of the predictions are not close to the true values, particularly the superficial background layers. This may have been caused by perturbations. In future research, the sensitivity to other type noise will be considered such as coherent noise and multiples.
Similarly, to test the sensitivity to amplitude, another test was performed in which the amplitude of the testing seismic data was doubled; examples are shown in third column of Figure \[fig20\]. In this test, the processed data were applied as the input for prediction; the performance comparison is displayed in Figure \[fig12-34\]–Figure \[fig12-36\]. The prediction velocities using the processed inputs with higher amplitudes were consistent with the predictions using the original inputs. This is in compliance with the theoretical analysis and indicates that our proposed method achieves velocity inversion adaptively and stably.
To further show the outstanding ability of the [[~~DL~~]{}]{} proposed method, the trained network for the simulated dataset was utilized as the initialized network, which is one approach of transfer learning to train the SEG salt dataset. In the training process, the number of epochs was set to 50, and each epoch had 10 training samples (i.e., training mini-batch size). The other hyper-parameters for learning were same as [[~~DLVMB~~]{}]{} those used for [[~~synthetic~~]{}]{} model inversion. Figure \[fig9-3\] shows the mean-squared error of the SEG training dataset. The loss converged to zero when only 130 models were used for training. Similar to the test above, a comparison was performed between the proposed method and FWI with the same algorithm as that used in the experiments for simulated models. In this FWI experiment, the selected inversion frequency was 2.5 Hz, and the other three values ranged from 5 Hz to 15 Hz with a uniform frequency interval of 5 Hz. The initial velocity models were also obtained by using the Gaussian smooth function shown in Figure \[fig13-4\]–Figure \[fig13-6\]. Figure \[fig14\] describes all performances of the numerical experiments, in which all subfigures have the same colorbar, and the value is from 1500 m/s to 4500 m/s. The comparison results of velocity values in the velocity versus depth profiles are displayed in Figure \[fig15\]. In this test, compared with FWI method, the proposed [[~~DLVMB~~]{}]{} method yielded a slightly lower performance, which could be attributed to the small number of training datasets. However, the predictions using the pre-trained initialized network (i.e., transfer learning in our study) were better than those obtained using the random initialized network.
The additional experiments using SEG salt datasets under more realistic conditions are also performed. When the seismic data were contaminated with noise, as shown in the second column of Figure \[fig21\], most prediction values obtained by the [[~~DLVMB~~]{}]{} inversion network shown in Figure \[fig13-31\]–Figure \[fig13-33\] were close to ground-truth velocities, but were slightly lower than the predictions obtained using the clean data. However, the prediction results shown in Figure \[fig13-34\]–Figure \[fig13-36\] using the inputs with higher amplitudes, as shown in third column of Figure \[fig21\], made no differences. In this test, because the training dataset of the SEG salt models was less than that for the simulated models, the performance of the proposed method for the SEG dataset was not outstanding. Therefore, in future work, we will augment the diversity of the training set gradually and take advantage of the transfer learning to apply this novel method on other complex samples.
In comparison, the training time of our method for all model inversion was 43 min; the GPU time per prediction in the SEG salt dataset was 2 s on the lower-equipment machine. A comparison of the time consumed for training and prediction process is shown in Table \[tab7\].
In summary, the numerical experiments provide promising evidence for the feasibility of our [[~~DLVMB~~]{}]{} proposed method for velocity inversion [[~~and structure detection~~]{}]{} from the raw input of seismic shot gathers directly without the need for initial velocity models. This indicates that the neural network can effectively approximate non-linear mapping even when the inputs have perturbation. Compared with conventional FWI, the computational time of the proposed method is fast because it does not involve the . The main computational costs are incurred mostly during the training stage, which is only once during the model setup; this can be handled off-line in advance. After training, the prediction costs are negligible. Thus, the FCN-based inversion method makes the overall computational time a fraction of that needed for traditional physical-based inversion techniques.
Discussion
==========
From an experimental perspective, the numerical results demonstrate that our proposed method presents promising capabilities of DL for velocity inversion. The objective of the research is to apply the latest breakthroughs in data science, particularly in DL techniques. Although the indications of our method are inspiring, many factors can affect its performance, including the choice of training dataset; the selection of hyper-parameters such as learning rate, batch size, and training epoch; and the architecture of the neural network. For our purposes, we focused on the profound understanding of DL applied for seismic inversion. Therefore a discussion on more impressive results and the advantages and disadvantages of the new method is provided in this section.
*(a) How does the training dataset affect the network?*
The limitation of our approach is that the capability of the network relies on the dataset. In general, the models to be trained should involve structures or characteristics similar to those contained in the predictions. That is, the supervised learned network for prediction is limited to the choice of the training dataset, and the amount of data required for training depends on many factors. In most cases, a large amount of large-scale and diverse training samples results in a more powerful network. Moreover, the time consumed for training process is longer. One representative test of our proposed method for SEG salt models was conducted. In our experiments, predictions without salt are also presented. A comparison of the results between our method and FWI are shown in Figure \[fig16\]. Our method yielded a lower performance than FWI. In particular, the sediment was vague because only 10 training samples without salt were utilized for training. Thus, the capability of the network to learn these models is lower than that for other salt models.
In addition, according to the simple geological structures contained in the simulated dataset, such as several smooth interfaces, increasing background velocity, and constant-velocity salt, relatively high similarity was noted between the training and testing datasets. According to experimental guidance [@Bengio2012] and the other similar research [@Wangw2018; @Wu2018], the number of simulated training datasets was set to 1600. The effect of the of training dataset number on the network will be investigated in the future.
In training stage of the DL method, one needs a training dataset that including lots of training pairs. The observed data could be a 1-shot gather, or other number shot gathers. In our method, the shot numbers were fixed and were specific to the network such that 29 available shot seismic datasets were used for training the 29-shot network; in the prediction step, the same was considered for the 29 shot gathers. For further exploration, a comparison of performances with only 1-, 13-, 21-, 27-, and 29-shot training data is shown in Figure \[fig11\] owing to the constraint of the GPU memory. In Figure \[fig11-1\], the comparison mean loss revealed that all of the training losses in different cases converged to zero along the epoch number. This indicates that our proposed method can be applied with arbitrary training shots and may be an advantage over the traditional FWI. Figure \[fig11-2\]–Figure \[fig11-4\] show the testing performance for the mean loss, mean peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR), and mean structural similarity (SSIM). The 1-shot case displayed a little bit unstable. The quantitative results may be misleading, however, because all testing evaluations are obtained for 10 selected network during training stage and take their average. In our next work, we will investigate the effects of training shots to apply the novel method in a more realistic scenario.
*(b) How can we apply the network when a lack of low frequencies exists in the testing data?*
The lack of low frequencies in field data is a main problem for practical application of FWI. However in the ML or DL methods, it is possible to learn the “low frequency" from simulation data or prior-information data. Two other numerical experiments are provided to show the performance of our method. As shown in Figure \[fig17\], all of the training datasets have low-frequency information, which is same as the original information used for prediction. However, the low frequency (i.e., 0–1/10 normalized Fourier spectrum) of the testing seismic data is removed by Fourier transform and the Butterworth high-pass filter. Then, the reconstructed seismic data, shown in Figure \[fig17-6\], were used for prediction, the results of which are shown in Figure \[fig17-2\]. In this case, the proposed method predicted most parts of the velocity model. A comparison of the prediction shown in Figure \[fig17-1\] with complete data shown in Figure \[fig17-5\] revealed that the structure boundaries are less clear, and the background velocity layers are somewhat vague, which could be attributed to the low-frequency information.
In addition, the performance of the supervised learning method relies on a training set. Therefore, the new training seismic dataset missing the low frequencies, which was processed by using the same approach as that used for the testing data (Figure \[fig17-6\]), and the corresponding ground-truth velocity models could be utilized to train the network. The prediction results are displayed in Figure \[fig18\]. Visually, the predictions were slightly better than that shown in Figure \[fig17\] but were still lower than those with complete data.
*(c) Is the learned network robust and stable for any prediction?*
A general question often asked when learning is applied to some problems is whether the method can be generalized to other problems, e.g., whether a method trained on a specific dataset can be applied to another dataset without re-training. Thus far, it has been difficult to test complex (e.g., SEG salt models) or real models by using the trained network directly because the performance of our proposed method relies on the datasets, and similar distribution is relatively weak between the two types different velocity models. In our work, transfer learning [@Pan2010], i.e., a research problem in ML that focuses on storing knowledge gained while solving one problem and applying it to a different but related problem, was applied when the new training models are similar to the simulated models. The goal of using the pre-trained network as an initialization is to more effectively show the nonlinear mapping between the inputs and outputs rather than just allowing the machine to remember the characteristics of the dataset. A comparison of the training loss versus the number of epochs between random initial networks (i.e., the same as parameter initialization in UNet) and a pre-trained initial network (i.e., trained network for a simulated dataset) is shown in Figure \[fig24\]. The network learned better with the pre-trained initialization in the same computational time.
Conclusion
==========
In this study, we proposed a supervised end-to-end DL method in a new fashion for velocity inversion that presents an alternative to “conventional" FWI formulation. In the proposed formulation, rather than performing local-based inversion with respect to subsurface parameters, we used a FCN to reconstruct these parameters. After a training process, the network is able to propose a subsurface model from only seismic data. The numerical experiments showed impressive results in the potential of the DL in seismic model building and clearly demonstrated that a neural network can effectively approximate the inverse of a non-linear operator that is very difficult to resolve. The learned network still computes satisfactory velocity profiles when the seismic data are under more realistic conditions. Compared with FWI, once the network training is completed, the reconstruction costs are negligible. Moreover, little human intervention is needed, and no initial velocity setup is involved. The loss function is measured in the model domain, and no seismograms are generated when using the network for prediction. In addition, no cycle-skipping problem exists.
The large-scale diverse training set plays an important role in the supervised learning method. Inspired by the success of transfer learning and generative adversarial learning in computer vision, and the combination of traditional methods and neural networks. We propose two possible directions for future work. The first is to generate more complex and realistic velocity models using a generative adversarial network, which is a type of semi-supervised learning network, based on the limited open dataset. Then, we can train the network with these complex datasets and apply the trained network to field data by transfer learning. The second is to uncover the potential relationship between conventional approaches for inversion and specific networks. This approach enables to develop novel network designs that can reveal the hidden wave-equation model and invert more complex geological structures based on the physical systems. Further studies are required to adopt these methods to large problems, field data, and other applications.
Acknowledgements
================
The authors would like to thank the editors and reviewers for offering useful comments to improve this manuscript. Thanks are extended to Dr. Wenlong Wang for providing primary CNN code compiled with PyTorch and the suggestion of feeding multi-shot gathers into the network together to improve data redundancy. This work is supported in part by the National Key Research and Development Program of China under Grant 2017YFB0202902, NSFC under Grant 41625017 and Grant 91730306, and the China Scholarship Council.
{width="100.00000%"}
{width="100.00000%"}
{width="110.00000%"}
{width="100.00000%"}
{width="100.00000%"}
{width="48.00000%"} {width="48.00000%"}\
{width="48.00000%"} {width="48.00000%"}\
{width="48.00000%"} {width="48.00000%"}\
{width="50.00000%"} {width="50.00000%"}\
{width="50.00000%"} {width="50.00000%"}\
{width="50.00000%"} {width="50.00000%"}
{width="50.00000%"} {width="50.00000%"}\
{width="50.00000%"} {width="50.00000%"}\
{width="50.00000%"} {width="50.00000%"}
{width="70.00000%"}
Acronyms Corresponding definition
---------- ------------------------------------
FCN Fully convolutional neural network
DL Deep learning
FWI Full-waveform inversion
VMB Velocity-model building
ML Machine learning
DNN Deep neural network
CNN Convolutional neural network
SEG Society of exploration geophysics
SGD Stochastic gradient descent
: All acronyms used in this paper and their definitions.[]{data-label="tab1"}
-------------------- -------- ---------- --------------- -------- ----------------
Task Source Spatial Sampling time Ricker Maximum travel
num interval interval wave time
Velocity inversion 29 10 m 0.001 s 25 Hz 2 s
-------------------- -------- ---------- --------------- -------- ----------------
: Parameters of forward modeling. []{data-label="tab4"}
Operation (Acronym) Definition(2D)
------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Convolution (conv) $output=K*input+b$
Batch normalization (BN) $out=\frac{input-mean[input]}{\sqrt{Var[input]+\varepsilon}}*\gamma+\beta$
Rectified linear unit (Relu) $out=max(0,input)$
Max-pooling (max-pooling) $out=max[input]_{w\times h}$
Deconvolution / Transposed convolution (deconv) $out=\overline{K}*input+b$
Skip connection and concatenation $out=[input,padding]_{channel}$
: Definitions of the different operations for our proposed network.[]{data-label="tab2"}
------------------- ---------- ------- ------- ----------- --------------- -------------- --
Task Learning Epoch Batch SGD Number of Number of
rate size algorithm training setd testing setd
Inversion
(simulated model) 1.0e-03 100 10 Adam 1600 100
Inversion
(SEG salt model) 1.0e-03 50 10 Adam 130 10
------------------- ---------- ------- ------- ----------- --------------- -------------- --
: Parameters of training process in our proposed network.[]{data-label="tab3"}
------------ ---------- -------- -------- --------
Training 1078 min 43 min N/A N/A
Prediction 2 s 2 s 37 min 25 min
------------ ---------- -------- -------- --------
: Time consumed for the training and testing processes. The three columns of each method from left to right indicate the GPU time for the simulated velocity-model inversion, and SEG salt-model inversion. The training time is the total time required for all training sets; the testing time is for only one model. N/A indicates that FWI had no training time. []{data-label="tab7"}
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
date:
title: 'On the linear independence of $p$-adic $L$-functions modulo $p$'
---
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">[Bruno Anglès, Gabriele Ranieri]{}</span>
Laboratoire de mathématiques Nicolas Oresme,\
CNRS UMR 6139, Université de Caen BP 5186,\
14032 Caen cedex, France\
E-mail: [email protected]\
E-mail: [email protected]
[<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Abstract</span>]{}
Let $p \geq 3$ be a prime. Let $n \in {{\mathbb N}}$ such that $n \geq 1$, let $\chi_1, \ldots , \chi_n$ be characters of conductor $d$ not divided by $p$ and let $\omega$ be the Teichmüller character. For all $i$ between $1$ and $n$, for all $j$ such that $0 \leq j \leq ( p-3 )/2$, set $$\theta_{i, j} =
\begin{cases}
\chi_i \omega^{2 j + 1}&\;\hbox{if} \ \chi_i\;{\rm is} \ {\rm odd}; \\
\chi_i \omega^{2 j}&\;\hbox{if} \ \chi_i\;{\rm is} \ {\rm even}.
\end{cases}$$ Let $K$ be the least extension of ${{\mathbb Q}}_p$ which contains all the values of the characters $\chi_i$ and let $\pi$ be a prime of the valuation ring ${{\cal O}}_K$ of $K$. For all $i, j$ let $f ( T, \theta_{i, j} )$ be the Iwasawa series associated to $\theta_{i, j}$ and $\overline{f ( T, \theta_{i, j} )}$ its reduction modulo $( \pi )$. Finally let $\overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p}$ be an algebraic closure of ${{\mathbb F}}_p$. Our main result is that if the characters $\chi_i$ are all distinct modulo $( \pi )$, then $1$ and the series $\overline{f ( T, \theta_{i, j} )}$, for $1 \leq i \leq n$ and $0 \leq j \leq ( p- 3 )/2$, are linearly independent over a certain field $\Omega$ which contains $\overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p} ( T )$.
Introduction {#sec:parteprima}
============
Let $ p $ be an odd prime. Let $n \in {{\mathbb N}}$ such that $n \geq 1$, let $\chi_1, \ldots , \chi_n$ be characters of conductor $ d $ not divided by $p$ and let $\omega$ be the Teichmüller character. For all $ i $ between $1$ and $ n $ and $j$ such that $0 \leq j \leq ( p-3 )/2$, set $$\theta_{i, j} =
\begin{cases}
\chi_i \omega^{2 j + 1}&\;\hbox{if} \ \chi_i\;{\rm is} \ {\rm odd}; \\
\chi_i \omega^{2 j}&\;\hbox{if} \ \chi_i\;{\rm is} \ {\rm even}.
\end{cases}$$ Observe that, by definition, $ \theta_{i, j} $ is an even character for all $i, j$.
Set $\kappa_0 = 1 + dp$ and $K = {{\mathbb Q}}_p ( \chi_1, \ldots , \chi_n )$ (i.e. the least extension of ${{\mathbb Q}}_p$ generated by all the images of $\chi_i$ for all $i$). Let $\pi$ be a prime of the valuation ring ${{\cal O}}_K$ of $ K $ and let ${{\mathbb F}}_q$ be ${{\cal O}}_K/ \pi {{\cal O}}_K$. For all $ i $ between $1$ and $ n $ and $j$ between $0$ and $( p-3 )/ 2$, set $f ( T, \theta_{i, j} )$ the Iwasawa power series attached to the $p$-adic $L$-function $L_p ( s, \theta_{i, j} )$ (see [@4 Theorem 7.10]) and $\overline{f ( T, \theta_{i, j} )}$ its reduction modulo $( \pi )$.
Let $\overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p}$ be an algebraic closure of ${{\mathbb F}}_p$. For $F ( T ) \in \overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p}[[T]]$, we say that $ F ( T ) $ is a pseudo-polynomial if and only if there exist $r \in {{\mathbb N}}$, $a_1, \ldots , a_r \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p$ and $c_1, \ldots , c_r \in \overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p}$ such that $$F ( T ) = \sum_{i = 1}^r c_i ( T + 1 )^{a_i}.$$ Then the set of the pseudo-polynomials is a ring which we denote by $A$. Moreover we denote by $ \Omega $ the quotient field of $ A $. The elements of $ \Omega $ are called pseudo-rational functions. Anglès (see [@1 Theorem 4.5]) shows that for all non-trivial even character of the first kind $ \theta $, $\overline{f ( T, \theta )}$ is not a pseudo-rational function. We shall prove the following generalisation of this result:
\[teo:teo1\] Suppose that the characters $ \chi_i $ are all distinct modulo $( \pi )$ (i.e. for all integer $i \neq j$ there exist $a \in ( {{\mathbb Z}}/ d {{\mathbb Z}})^\ast$ such that $\chi_i ( a ) \not \equiv \chi_j ( a ) \mod ( \pi )$). Then the elements of the set $$\{ 1, \ \overline{f ( T, \theta_{i, j} )}, \ 1 \leq i \leq n, \ 0 \leq j \leq ( p-3 )/ 2 \}$$ are linearly independent over $\Omega$.
Observe that in the statement of Theorem \[teo:teo1\] it is necessary to suppose that the characters $\chi_i$ are all distinct modulo $( \pi )$. Indeed suppose that there exist $i \neq k$ between $1$ and $n$ such that $\chi_i$ and $ \chi_k $ are congruent modulo $( \pi )$. Since $p$ is odd this implies that $\chi_i$ and $\chi_k$ have the same parity. Then for all $0 \leq j \leq ( p-3 )/2$ we have that $\theta_{i, j}$ is congruent to $\theta_{k, j}$ modulo $( \pi )$, which implies $\overline{f ( T, \theta_{i, j} )} = \overline{f ( T, \theta_{k, j} )}$. Thus in this case the series $\overline{f ( T, \theta_{i, j} )}$ are dependent.
Observe also that if the characters $\chi_i$ are distinct modulo $( \pi )$, then for all $i, i^\prime$ between $1$ and $n$, $j, j^\prime$ between $0$ and $( p-3 )/2$, $\theta_{i, j}$ is congruent to $\theta_{i^\prime, j^\prime}$ modulo $( \pi )$ if and only if $i = i^\prime, j = j^\prime$. It is clear that $i = i^\prime$ implies $j = j^\prime$ and $j = j^\prime$ implies $i = i^\prime$. Then suppose that $i \neq i^\prime$, $j \neq j^\prime$ and that $\theta_{i, j}$ is congruent to $\theta_{i^\prime, j^\prime}$ modulo $( \pi )$. Moreover suppose that $ \chi_i $ and $\chi_{i^\prime}$ are even (the other case is identical). Hence there exists an integer $ a $ such that $\omega^{2j} ( a ) \not \equiv \omega^{2j^\prime} ( a ) \mod ( \pi )$. Since $p$ does not divide $ d $ there exists an integer $c$ such that $1 + cd \equiv a \mod ( p )$. Then $\theta_{i, j} ( 1 + cd ) \equiv \omega^{2j} ( a ) \mod ( \pi )$ and $\theta_{i^\prime, j^\prime} ( 1+cd ) \equiv \omega^{2j^\prime} ( a ) \mod ( \pi )$. Since $\theta_{i, j}$ and $\theta_{i^\prime, j^\prime}$ are equivalent modulo $( \pi )$, we get $\omega^{2j} ( a ) \equiv \omega^{2j^\prime} ( a ) \mod ( \pi )$ which is a contradiction.
As in the proof of [@1 Theorem 4.5], the main ingredient in the proof of Theorem \[teo:teo1\] is a remarkable result due to Sinnott. Before the statement of that result we must define the following equivalence relation: let $a, b \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p^\ast$. We say that $a$ is equivalent to $b \mod ( {{\mathbb Q}}^\ast )$ ($a \equiv b \mod ( {{\mathbb Q}}^\ast )$) if and only if there exists $c \in {{\mathbb Q}}^\ast$ such that $a b^{-1} = c$.
\[pro:pro2\][([@3 Proposition 1])]{} Let $ F $ be a finite field of characteristic $p$ and let $r_1 ( T ), \ldots , r_s ( T ) \in F ( T ) \cap F[[T]]$. Let $c_1, \ldots , c_s \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p- \{ 0 \}$ and suppose that $$\sum_{i = 1}^s r_i ( ( T + 1 )^{c_i} - 1 ) = 0.$$ Then for all $a \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p$, $$\sum_{c_i \equiv a \mod ( {{\mathbb Q}}^\ast )} r_i ( ( T + 1 )^{c_i} - 1 ) \in F.$$
Let’s describe briefly the strategy of the proof of Theorem \[teo:teo1\]. First (section \[sec:parteseconda\]) we recall some properties of the $p$-adic Leopoldt transform (most of them already proved in [@1]) which we will often use.
Then (section \[sec:parteterza\]) we consider the case $d \geq 2$. Some results about the $p$-adic Leopoldt transform of [@1] and Proposition \[pro:pro2\] will allow us to reduce the proof of Theorem \[teo:teo1\] to the computation of the rank of a certain matrix whose entries depend on the values of the characters $ \chi_i $ (Lemma \[lem:lem11\]). After such computation the proof of this case of the theorem will follow by some simple remarks of linear algebra.
In section \[sec:partequarta\] we study the case $d = 1$. In that case we have to consider a <<perturbation>> of the functions $f ( T, \theta_{i, j} )$ to be able to apply Proposition \[pro:pro2\]. Then the proof is not very different from the proof of the previous case (actually it is simpler since it does not request a result similar to Lemma \[lem:lem11\]) and some remarks of linear algebra will imply the assumption.
Finally we give a possible link between Theorem \[teo:teo1\] and Ferrero-Washington’s heuristic (see [@2]). Let $i$ be an integer between $1$ and $( p-3 )/2$. Write $$f ( T, \omega^{2i} ) = \sum_{k = 0}^{+ \infty} a_k ( \omega^{2i} ) T^k.$$ The $\lambda$-invariant of $f ( T, \omega^{2i} )$, denoted by $\lambda ( \omega^{2i} )$, is the least $ k $ such that $a_k ( \theta ) \not \equiv 0 \mod ( p )$. We set $$\lambda^- = \sum_{i = 1}^{( p-3 ) /2} \lambda ( \omega^{2i} ).$$ Ferrero and Washington make the following hypothesis to define a heuristic to make previsions about possible bounds for $\lambda^-$.
[*Ferrero-Washington’s hypothesis: Every coefficient of $ f ( T, \omega^{2i} ) $ is random$\mod ( p )$ and independent from the other coefficients.* ]{}
Theorem \[teo:teo1\] implies that $$1, \overline{f ( T, \omega^0 )}, \overline{f ( T, \omega^2 )}, \ldots ,\overline{f ( T, \omega^{p-3} )}$$ are linearly independent over $\Omega$. Thus our result seems to confirm Washington’s hypothesis.
Preliminaries {#sec:parteseconda}
=============
In this section we shall list some properties of the $p$-adic Leopoldt transform which will be very important in the proof of Theorem \[teo:teo1\]. Let $L$ be a finite extension of ${{\mathbb Q}}_p$, ${{\cal O}}_L$ its valuation ring and ${{\mathbb F}}_{q^\prime}$ its residue field. Let $\kappa$ a topological generator of $1 + p {{\mathbb Z}}_p$ and, for all $a \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p^\ast$, set $\omega ( a )$ the unique $( p-1 )$th root of unity in $ {{\mathbb Z}}_p $ congruent to $a \mod ( p )$. Following [@1] for all $\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p -1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}$ we define $p$-adic Leopoldt transform $ \Gamma_\delta $ the unique continuous $\mathcal{O}_L$-linear endomorphism of $\mathcal{O}_L[[T]]$ such that for all $a \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p$, $$\Gamma_\delta ( ( T + 1 )^a ) =
\begin{cases}
\omega^\delta ( a ) ( T + 1 )^{{\log_p ( a ) \over \log_p ( \kappa )}}&\;\hbox{if} \ a \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p^\ast; \\
0&\;\hbox{otherwise}
\end{cases}$$ (see [@1 Sections 2., 3.] for the proof of the fact that $\Gamma_\delta$ is well-defined and unique). In an obvious way we can define a similar ${{\mathbb F}}_{q^\prime}$-linear continuous endomorphism of ${{\mathbb F}}_{q^\prime}[[T]]$ that we denote by $\overline{\Gamma}_\delta$. Observe that if $a \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p^\ast$ we have $a \equiv \omega ( a ) \mod ( p )$. Thus, for all $a \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p^\ast$, we have $$\overline{\Gamma}_\delta ( ( T + 1 )^a ) = a^\delta ( T + 1 )^{{\log_p ( a ) \over \log_p ( \kappa )}}.$$
In the proof of Theorem \[teo:teo1\] we use other ${{\cal O}}_L$-linear endomorphisms of ${{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$ already introduced by Anglès in [@1]. Let us recall their definition. Let $\mu_{p-1} \subseteq {{\mathbb Z}}_p^\ast$ be the group of $( p-1 )$th roots of unity. For all $\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p-1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}$ and $F ( T ) \in {{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$, we set $$\gamma_\delta ( F ( T ) ) = {1 \over p-1} \sum_{\eta \in \mu_{p-1}} \eta^\delta F ( ( T + 1 )^\eta - 1 ).$$ Observe that $\gamma_\delta \gamma_{\delta^\prime} = 0$ for $\delta \neq \delta^\prime$, $\gamma_\delta^2 = \gamma_\delta$ and $\sum_{\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p-1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}} \gamma_\delta = Id_{{{\cal O}}_L[[T]]}$.
For $F ( T ) \in {{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$ set $$\begin{aligned}
D ( F ( T ) ) & = ( T + 1 ) {d \over dT} F ( T ) \\
U ( F ( T ) ) & = F ( T ) - {1 \over p} \sum_{\zeta \in \mu_p} F ( \zeta ( T + 1 ) - 1 ) \in {{\cal O}}_L[[T]].\end{aligned}$$ In an obvious way we can define the ${{\mathbb F}}_{q^\prime}$-linear endomorphism of ${{\mathbb F}}_{q^\prime}[[T]]$ $\overline{\gamma}_\delta$, $\overline{D}$ and $\overline{U}$. Observe that:
- $U^2 = U$;
- $DU = UD$;
- $\gamma_\delta U = U \gamma_\delta$ for all $\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p-1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}$;
- $D \gamma_\delta = \gamma_{\delta + 1} D$ for all $\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p-1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}$;
- $\overline{U} = \overline{D}^{p-1}$.
In the following lemma we shall list some properties of $ \Gamma_\delta $ whose we need to prove Theorem \[teo:teo1\].
\[lem:lem3\] Let $\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p- 1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}$ and $F ( T ) \in {{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$. Then
1. $\Gamma_\delta ( F ( T ) ) = \Gamma_\delta \gamma_{-\delta} ( F ( T ) ) = \Gamma_\delta \gamma_{-\delta} U F ( T )$.\
2. Suppose that $\Gamma_\delta ( F ( T ) )$ is a pseudo-polynomial. Then $\gamma_{-\delta} U ( F ( T ) )$ is a pseudo-polynomial.\
3. $\overline{\Gamma}_{\delta + 1} ( \overline{F ( T )} ) = \overline{\Gamma}_\delta \overline{D} ( \overline{F ( T )} )$.
[[[**Proof.**]{}]{}]{}1. See [@1 Proposition 3.2(2)].
2\. The assumption immediately follows from [@1 Proposition 3.1].
3\. Since $\overline{\Gamma}_\delta$ is a ${{\mathbb F}}_{q^\prime}$-linear continuous endomorphism of ${{\mathbb F}}_{q^\prime}[[T]]$, it suffices to prove that the assumption is true for $F ( T ) = ( T + 1 )^a$ with $a \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p$. If $ p $ divides $a$ we have $$0 = \overline{\Gamma}_{\delta + 1} ( ( T + 1 )^a ) = \overline{\Gamma}_\delta ( \overline{D} ( ( T + 1 )^a ) )$$ and the assumption is trivial.
Suppose that $p$ does not divide $a$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
\overline{\Gamma}_\delta (\overline{D} ( ( T + 1 )^a ) ) & = \overline{\Gamma}_\delta ( a ( T + 1 )^a ) )\\
& = a \overline{\Gamma}_\delta ( ( T + 1 )^a ) \\
& = a^{\delta + 1} ( T + 1 )^{{\log_p ( a ) \over \log_p ( \kappa )}}\\
& = \overline{\Gamma}_{\delta + 1} ( ( T + 1 )^a ).\end{aligned}$$
$\square$
0.2cm
Let $\theta$ be a Dirichlet character of the first kind such that $$\theta = \chi \omega^{\delta + 1},$$ with $\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p-1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}$ and $\chi$ a character of conductor $d$ not divided by $p$. Observe that $\kappa_0 = 1 + dp$ is a topological generator of $1 + p {{\mathbb Z}}_p$ and from now on set $\kappa = \kappa_0$. Suppose that ${{\mathbb Q}}_p ( \chi ) \subseteq L$. Set $$F_\chi ( T ) = \sum_{a = 1}^d {\chi ( a ) ( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^d}$$ and $\overline{F_\chi} ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q^\prime} ( T )$ its reduction modulo the maximal ideal of ${{\cal O}}_L$. In the following lemma we list some properties of $F_\chi ( T )$ and we recall the relation between $F_\chi ( T )$ and $f ( T, \theta )$.
\[lem:lem4\] We have:
1. If $d \geq 2$, then $F_\chi ( T ) \in {{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$.\
2. If $d = 1$, then $\gamma_\alpha ( F_\chi ( T ) ) \in {{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$ for all $\alpha \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p-1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}$ and $\alpha \neq 1$.\
3. If $d \geq 2$, then $F_\chi ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 ) = \varepsilon F_\chi ( T )$ where $\varepsilon = 1$ if $\chi$ is odd and $\varepsilon = -1$ if $\chi$ is even.\
4. If $d = 1$, then $F_\chi ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 ) = - F_\chi ( T ) - 1$.\
5. If $d$ divides the positive integer $g$ we have $$F_\chi ( T ) = {\sum_{a = 1}^g \chi ( a ) ( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^g}.$$
6. $\Gamma_\delta \gamma_{-\delta} U ( F_\chi ( T ) ) = f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \theta )$.
[[[**Proof.**]{}]{}]{}For 1., 2., 3., 4. see [@1 Lemma 4.1].
5\. We have: $$\begin{aligned}
{\sum_{a = 1}^g \chi ( a ) ( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^g} & = \sum_{a = 1}^d \chi ( a ) \sum_{b \equiv a \mod ( d )} {\chi ( b ) ( T + 1 )^b \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^g} \\
& = \sum_{a = 1}^d \chi ( a ) { ( T + 1 )^a + ( T + 1 )^{a + d} + \ldots + ( T + 1 )^{a + g - d} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^g} \\
& = {\sum_{a = 1}^d \chi ( a ) ( T + 1 )^a ( 1 - ( T + 1 )^g ) \over ( 1 - ( T + 1 )^g ) ( 1 - ( T + 1 )^d )} \\
& = F_\chi ( T ).\end{aligned}$$
6\. Remember that $U \gamma_{-\delta} = \gamma_{-\delta} U$. Then apply [@1 Lemma 4.4].
$\square$
0.2cm
Consider the ring ${{\cal O}}_L[[t]]$. It acts over ${{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$ via: $$( t + 1 ) F ( T ) = F ( ( T + 1 )^{\kappa_0} - 1 ) \in {{\cal O}}_L[[T]],$$ for all $F ( T ) \in {{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$.
\[lem:lem5\] Let $H ( T ) \in {{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$. Then for all $F ( T ) \in {{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$ we have $$H ( T ) \Gamma_\delta ( F ( T ) ) = \Gamma_\delta ( H ( t ) F ( T ) ).$$
[[[**Proof.**]{}]{}]{}Since $\Gamma_\delta$ is ${{\cal O}}_L$-linear and continuous it suffices to prove the assumption in the case $P ( T ) = ( T + 1 )^a$, where $a \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p$. By [@1 Proposition 3.2(3)] for all $b \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p^\ast$ we have $$\Gamma_\delta ( F ( T + 1 )^b - 1 ) = \omega^\delta ( b ) ( T + 1 )^{{\log_p ( b ) \over \log_p ( \kappa )}} \Gamma_\delta ( F ( T ) ).$$ Then we get $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_\delta ( ( t + 1 )^a F ( T ) ) & = \Gamma_\delta ( F ( ( T + 1 )^{\kappa_0^a} - 1 )\\
& = \omega^\delta ( a ) ( T + 1 )^{{\log_p ( \kappa_0^a ) \over \log_p ( \kappa_0 )}} \Gamma_\delta ( F ( T ) )\\
& = ( T + 1 )^a \Gamma_\delta ( F ( T ) ).\end{aligned}$$
$\square$
0.2cm
The case $d \geq 2$ {#sec:parteterza}
===================
The aim of this section is to prove Theorem \[teo:teo1\] in the case where the conductor $d$ of the characters $\chi_i$ is $\geq 2$.
[**Proof of Theorem \[teo:teo1\] in the case $d \geq 2$.**]{} Let $\chi_1, \chi_2, \ldots , \chi_n$ characters of conductor $d \geq 2$ distinct modulo $( \pi )$. Without loss of generality we can suppose $\chi_1, \ldots , \chi_r$ odd and $\chi_{r + 1}, \ldots , \chi_n$ even for a certain integer $r \leq n$. For all $i$ between $1$ and $n$ and $j$ between $0$ and $( p-3 )/2$ set $$\label{eqn:relcollina}
\theta_{i, j} =
\begin{cases}
\chi_i \omega^{2 j + 1}&\;\hbox{if} \ 1 \leq i \leq r; \\
\chi_i \omega^{2 j}&\;\hbox{otherwise.}
\end{cases}$$ Suppose that for all $1 \leq i \leq n$, $0 \leq j \leq ( p-3 )/2$, there exist $g_{i, j} ( T ) \in \Omega$ such that $$\sum_{i = 1}^n \sum_{j = 0}^{( p- 3 )/2} g_{i, j}( T ) \overline{f( T, \theta_{i, j} )} \in \Omega$$ and $g_{i, j} ( T ) \neq 0$ for some $i, j$. Set $h_{i, j} ( T ) = g_{i, j} ( 1/ ( T + 1 ) - 1 )$ for all $i, j$. Then we have $$\sum_{i = 1}^n \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/ 2} h_{i, j}( T ) \overline{f( 1/ ( T + 1 ) -1, \theta_{i, j} )} \in \Omega$$ and $h_{i, j} ( T ) \neq 0$ for certain $i, j$. Observe that we can suppose that $h_{i, j} \in A$ for all $i, j$ and that $$\label{eqn:rel41}
\sum_{i = 1}^n \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/ 2} h_{i, j}( T ) \overline{f( 1/ ( T + 1 ) -1, \theta_{i, j} )} \in A.$$ By Lemma \[lem:lem4\](6.) and (\[eqn:relcollina\]) for all $i$ between $1$ and $n$ and $j$ between $0$ and $( p-3 ) /2$, we have: $$\label{eqn:relcollina2}
f\bigg( {1 \over T + 1} - 1, \theta_{i, j} \bigg) =
\begin{cases}
\Gamma_{2j} \gamma_{-2j} ( F_{\chi_i} ( T ) )&\;\hbox{if} \ 1 \leq i \leq r; \\
\Gamma_{2j - 1} \gamma_{-2j + 1}( F_{\chi_i} ( T ) )&\;\hbox{otherwise.}
\end{cases}$$ Moreover by Lemma \[lem:lem3\](3.), for all $\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p- 1 ){{\mathbb Z}}$ we have $$\overline{\Gamma}_{\delta + 1} \overline{\gamma}_{- \delta - 1} = \overline{\Gamma}_\delta \overline{\gamma}_\delta \overline{D}.$$ Hence we can rewrite relation (\[eqn:rel41\]) in the following way: $$\sum_{i = 1}^r \sum_{ j = 0}^{ ( p-3 ) /2 } h_{i, j}( T ) \overline{\Gamma}_0 \overline{\gamma}_0 ( \overline{D}^{2j} \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ( T ) ) + \sum_{i = r+ 1}^n \sum_{j = 0}^{ ( p-3 ) /2 } h_{i, j}( T ) \overline{\Gamma}_0 \overline{\gamma}_0 ( \overline{D}^{2j - 1} \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ( T ) ) \in A.$$ By Lemma \[lem:lem3\](1.) this last relation implies that $$\label{eqn:rel42}
\sum_{i = 1}^r \sum_{ j = 0}^{( p- 3 )/2} h_{i, j}( T ) \overline{\Gamma}_0 \overline{\gamma}_0 \overline{U} ( \overline{D}^{2j} \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ( T ) ) + \sum_{i = r+ 1}^n \sum_{j = 0}^{( p - 3 )/2} h_{i, j}( T ) \overline{\Gamma}_0 \overline{\gamma}_0 \overline{U} ( \overline{D}^{2j - 1} \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ( T ) ) \in A.$$ Applying Lemma \[lem:lem5\] and \[lem:lem3\](2.) to (\[eqn:rel42\]) we get $$\label{eqn:rel43}
\sum_{i = 1}^r \sum_{ j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} h_{i, j}( t ) \overline{\gamma}_0 \overline{U} ( \overline{D}^{2j} \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ( T ) ) + \sum_{i = r+ 1}^n \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} h_{i, j} ( t ) \overline{\gamma}_0 \overline{U} ( \overline{D}^{2j - 1} \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ( T ) ) \in A.$$
Set for all $1 \leq i \leq n$, $0 \leq j \leq ( p-3 )/2$, $$\label{eqn:relcollina3}
F_{i, j} ( T ) =
\begin{cases}
\overline{U} \overline{D}^{2j} ( \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ( T ) )&\;\hbox{if} \ 1 \leq i \leq r; \\
\overline{U} \overline{D}^{2j - 1} ( \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ( T ) )&\;\hbox{otherwise.}
\end{cases}$$ Then we can rewrite relation (\[eqn:rel43\]) in the following way: $$\label{eqn:rel44}
\sum_{i = 1}^n \sum_{ j = 0}^{( p - 3 )/2} h_{i, j}( t ) \overline{\gamma}_0 ( F_{i, j} ( T ) ) \in A.$$
Now recall that by Lemma \[lem:lem4\](3.), we have $$F_{\chi_i} ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 ) =
\begin{cases}
F_{\chi_i} ( T )&\;\hbox{if} \ 1 \leq i \leq r ; \\
- F_{\chi_i} ( T )&\;\hbox{if} \ r+1 \leq i \leq n.
\end{cases}$$ Moreover observe that for all $1 \leq i \leq n$, $0 \leq k \leq p-2$ we have $$( \overline{U} \overline{D}^k \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ) ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} -1 ) = ( -1 )^k \overline{U} \overline{D}^k ( \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} -1 ) ).$$ Let $i$ be between $1$ and $r$ and $j$ be between $0$ and $( p-3 )/ 2$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
F_{i, j} ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} -1 ) & = ( \overline{U} \overline{D}^{2j} \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ) ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 ) ) \\
& = (-1)^{2j} \overline{U} \overline{D}^{2j} ( \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 ) ) \\
& = \overline{U} \overline{D}^{2j} ( \overline{F}_{\chi_i} ( T ) ) \\
& = F_{i, j} ( T ).\end{aligned}$$ With exactly the same computation we can prove that $$F_{i, j} ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} -1 ) = F_{i, j} ( T )$$ for all $i, j$, also in the case where $r + 1 \leq i \leq n$. Then $$\label{eqn:rel45}
F_{i, j} ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 ) = F_{i, j} ( T ), \ \forall i, j.$$
We recall that ${{\mathbb F}}_q$ is, by definition, the residue field of the least extension of ${{\mathbb Q}}_p$ which contains all the images of the characters $\chi_i$. Consider the least field which contains ${{\mathbb F}}_q$ and all the coefficients of $h_{i, j} ( T )$ for all $i, j$. Since $h_{i, j} ( T ) \in A \subseteq \overline{F}_p[[T]]$, such field is a finite extension of ${{\mathbb F}}_q$. Call it ${{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}$ and write $h_{i, j} ( t ) = \sum_{b \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p} c_{i, j, b} ( t + 1 )^b$ with $c_{i, j, b} \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}$. Moreover observe that since $h_{i, j} ( T ) \neq 0$ for certain integer $i, j$, there exist $i, j, b$ such that $c_{i, j, b} \neq 0$. Let $$G_b ( T ) = \sum_{i = 1}^n \sum_{ j = 0}^{( p- 3 )/2} c_{i, j, b} F_{i, j} ( T ).$$ By Lemma \[lem:lem4\](1.), $G_b ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}[[T]] \cap {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} ( T )$. Since $$( t + 1 )^b ( G_b ( T ) ) = G_b ( ( T + 1 )^{\kappa_0^b} - 1 ),$$ by (\[eqn:rel44\]) we have $$\label{eqn:rel46}
\overline{\gamma}_0 ( \sum_{b \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p} G_b ( ( T + 1 )^{\kappa_0^b} - 1 ) ) \in A.$$
Choose a subset of $\mu_{p-1}$ whose elements represent all the classes of $\mu_{p - 1} / \{-1, 1\}$ and call it $S$. From (\[eqn:rel45\]) it follows that $$\label{eqn:relpure}
G_b ( T ) = G_b ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 )$$ for all $b$. Thus by (\[eqn:rel46\]) we get $$\sum_{\eta \in S} \sum_{b \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p} G_b ( ( T + 1 )^{\eta \kappa_0^b} - 1 ) \in A.$$ Since $G_b ( T ) = 0$ for all but finitely many $b \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p$, there exists a positive integer $u$ such that $$\sum_{\eta \in S} \sum_{k = 1}^u G_{b_k} ( ( T + 1 )^{\eta \kappa_0^{b_k}} - 1 ) \in A.$$ Moreover we set $G_k ( T ) = G_{b_k} ( T )$. By Proposition \[pro:pro2\] there exist an integer $l \leq u$, $b_1, b_2, \ldots b_l \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p$, $b_i \neq b_j$ for $i \neq j$, $\eta_1, \eta_2, \ldots \eta_l \in \mu_{p - 1}$ with $\eta_i \kappa_0^{b_i} \sim_{{{\mathbb Q}}^\ast} \eta_j \kappa_0^{b_j}$ for all $i$, $j$ and $\eta_i \kappa_0^{b_i} \neq \eta_j \kappa_0^{b_j}$ for $i \neq j$ such that $$\label{eqn:rel47}
\sum_{k = 1}^l G_k ( ( T + 1 )^{\eta_k \kappa_0^{b_k}} - 1 ) \in A.$$
For all $1 \leq k \leq l$ write $$\eta_k \kappa_0^{b_k} = \eta_1 \kappa_0^{b_1} x_k,$$ where $x_j \in {{\mathbb Q}}^\ast \cap {{\mathbb Z}}_p^\ast$ and $x_i \neq x_k$ if $i \neq k$. Recall that by (\[eqn:relpure\]), we have $G_k ( T ) = G_k ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 )$. Hence we can suppose that $x_k > 0$ for all $k$. By (\[eqn:rel47\]) we get $$\sum_{k = i}^l G_k ( ( T + 1 )^{x_k} - 1 ) \in A.$$ Therefore there exist some positive integers $N_1 , N_2 , \ldots N_l$ not divided by $p$ such that $1 \leq N_1 < N_2 < \ldots < N_l$ and $$\sum_{k = i}^l G_k ( ( T + 1 )^{N_k} - 1 ) \in A.$$ If we rewrite $G_k ( T )$ as a combination of $F_{i, j} ( T )$, we get $$\sum_{k = 1}^l \sum_{i = 1}^n \sum_{ j = 0}^{( p - 3 )/2} c_{i, j, k} F_{i, j} ( ( T + 1 )^{N_k} - 1 ) \in A.$$ By [@1 Lemma 3.5] if $H ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} ( T )$, then $H ( T ) \in A$ if and only if there exists $m \in {{\mathbb N}}$ such that $( T + 1 )^m H ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} [T]$. Since the denominator of $F_{i, j} ( ( T + 1 )^{N_k} - 1 )$ is relatively prime with $( T + 1 )$ for all $i, j, k$, we get $$\label{eqn:rel48}
\sum_{k = 1}^l \sum_{i = 1}^n \sum_{ j = 0}^{( p - 3 )/2} c_{i, j, k} F_{i, j} ( ( T + 1 )^{N_k} - 1 ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} [T].$$
Observe that, by Lemma \[lem:lem4\](5.), we have $$F_{\chi_i} ( T ) = \sum_{a = 1}^{d p} {\chi_i ( a ) ( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p }}.$$ Then for all $1 \leq i \leq n$ and $0 \leq j \leq ( p-3 )/2$, we have $$\label{eqn:relsola1}
F_{i, j} ( T ) =
\begin{cases}
\sum_{a = 1, p \not \mid a}^{d p - 1} {\chi_i ( a ) a^{2j} ( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p }}&\;\hbox{if} \ 1 \leq i \leq r; \\
\sum_{a = 1, p \not \mid a}^{d p - 1} {\chi_i ( a ) a^{2j - 1} ( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p }} &\;\hbox{otherwise.}
\end{cases}$$
Then replacing in (\[eqn:rel48\]) using (\[eqn:relsola1\]), we get $$\label{eqn:rel49}
\sum_{k = 1}^l \sum_{i = 0}^r \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, k} \sum_{a = 1 , p \not \mid a}^{dp} \bigg( {a^{2j} \chi_i ( a ) ( T + 1 )^{a N_k} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_k}} \bigg) +$$ $$+ \sum_{k = 1}^l \sum_{i = r + 1}^n \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, k} \sum_{a = 1, p \not \mid a}^{dp} \bigg( {a^{2 j - 1} \chi_i ( a ) ( T + 1 )^{a N_k} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_k}} \bigg) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}[T].$$ To finish the proof we shall prove that (\[eqn:rel49\]) is satisfied only if $c_{i, j, k} = 0$ for all $i, j, k$, obtaining a contradiction.
We need the following remark:
\[rem:Osservazione11\] Let $ V $ be a vectorial space over a field $ F $ and $W$ a sub-space of $V$. Moreover let $ \phi $ be an endomorphism of $ V $ such that $\phi ( W ) \subseteq W$. We remark that if $ m $ is a positive integer and $v_1, v_2, \ldots , v_m \in V$ are eigen-vectors of $\phi$ with non-zero eigen-values $\lambda_1, \lambda_2, \ldots , \lambda_m$ such that $\lambda_i \neq \lambda_j$ if $i \neq j$ and if $$v_1 + v_2 + \ldots + v_m \in W,$$ then $v_i \in W$ for all $i$.
If we apply Remark \[rem:Osservazione11\] in the particular case where $F = {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}$, $V = {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} ( T )$, $W = {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} [T]$, $m = p - 1$, $\phi = \overline{D}$, $\lambda_b = b$ for all $1 \leq b \leq p - 1$ and $$v_b = V_b ( T ) = \sum_{k = 1}^l \sum_{i = 0}^r \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, k} \sum_{a N_k \equiv b \mod ( p )} \bigg( {a^{2j} \chi_i ( a ) ( T + 1 )^{a N_k} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_k}} \bigg) +$$ $$+ \sum_{k = 1}^l \sum_{i = r + 1}^n \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, k} \sum_{a N_k \equiv b \mod ( p )}^{dp} \bigg( {a^{2 j - 1} \chi_i ( a ) ( T + 1 )^{a N_k} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_k}} \bigg),$$ by (\[eqn:rel49\]) we get $V_b ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} [T]$. Multiply $V_b ( T )$ by $1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_l}$. Then $$( 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_l} ) V_b ( T ) \in ( 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_l} ) {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}[T].$$ Let us recall that $p$ does not divide $N_k$ for all $k$. Observe that if $\zeta$ is a primitive $d N_l$-th root of unity, then $\zeta - 1$ is a root of $( 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_l} ) V_b ( T )$. Since $N_l > N_k$ for all $k < l$, $\zeta - 1$ is a zero of $$( 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_l} ) \sum_{k = 1}^{l-1} \sum_{i = 0}^r \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, k} \sum_{a N_k \equiv b \mod ( p )} \bigg( {a^{2j} \chi_i ( a ) ( T + 1 )^{a N_k} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_k}} \bigg) +$$ $$+ ( 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_l} ) \sum_{k = 1}^{l-1} \sum_{i = r + 1}^n \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, k} \sum_{a N_k \equiv b \mod ( p )}^{dp} \bigg( {a^{2 j - 1} \chi_i ( a ) ( T + 1 )^{a N_k} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{d p N_k}} \bigg).$$ Then we get $$\label{eqn:relsola2}
\sum_{i = 1}^r \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, l} \sum_{a N_l \equiv b \mod ( p )} a^{2 j} \chi_i ( a ) \zeta^{a N_l} +$$ $$+ \sum_{i = r + 1}^n \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, l} \sum_{a N_l \equiv b \mod ( p )} a^{2 j - 1} \chi_i ( a ) \zeta^{a N_l} = 0.$$ Observe that since $ p $ does not divide $d$, $\{ a, p + a, \ldots , p ( d - 1 ) + a \}$ is a set of representants of all the classes modulo $d$. Moreover observe that, since $\zeta$ is a primitive $d N_l$-th root of unity, $\zeta^\prime = \zeta^{N_l}$ is a primitive $d$-th root of unity. Let $k \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ p {{\mathbb Z}}$ such that $k N_l \equiv b \mod ( p )$. We can rewrite (\[eqn:relsola2\]) as $$\label{eqn:relsola3}
\sum_{i = 1}^r \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, l} k^{2j} \sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_i ( h ) \zeta^{\prime h} + \sum_{i = r + 1}^n \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, l} k^{2j - 1} \sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_i ( h ) \zeta^{\prime h} = 0.$$ Then for all primitive $d$-th root of unity, (\[eqn:relsola3\]) must be satisfied.
Set $$x_{i, k} =
\begin{cases}
\sum_{j = 0}^{( p - 3 )/2} c_{i, j, l} k^{2 j},&\;\hbox{if} \ 1 \leq i \leq r; \\
\sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, l} k^{2 j - 1}&\;\hbox{otherwise}
\end{cases}$$ and let $$\{\zeta_1, \zeta_2, \ldots , \zeta_{\phi ( d )} \}$$ be the set of primitive $d$-th roots of unity in $\overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p}$ (recall that $p$ does not divide $d$). Then by (\[eqn:relsola3\]) we have $$\label{eqn:relsola4}
\sum_{i = 1}^n x_{i, k} \sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_i ( h ) \zeta_c^h = 0.$$ for all $1 \leq c \leq \phi ( d )$. Hence we have a system of $n$ unknows ($x_{1, k} , \ldots , x_{n, k}$) and $\phi ( d )$ equations (one for all primitive $d$-th root of unity). Observe that $n < \phi ( d )$. Indeed by definition $n$ is less than the number of the characters of conductor $d \geq 2$ distinct $\mod ( \pi )$. Since we have only $\phi ( d )$ characters whose conductor divides $d$ and since the trivial character has conductor $1 \neq d$, we have $n \leq \phi ( d ) - 1$. Thus the number of equations of the system is greater then the number of its unknowns. We shall prove that the system has the unique solution $( 0, 0, \ldots , 0 )$.
Let $B$ be the matrix associated to the system (\[eqn:relsola4\]). Then $$B = \left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
\sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_1 ( h ) \zeta_1^h & \sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_2 ( h ) \zeta_1^h & \cdots & \sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_n ( h ) \zeta_1^h \\
\sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_1 ( h ) \zeta_2^h & \sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_2 ( h ) \zeta_2^h & \cdots & \sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_n ( h ) \zeta_2^h \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
\sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_1 ( h ) \zeta_{\phi ( d )}^h & \sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_2 ( h ) \zeta_{\phi ( d )}^h & \cdots & \sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \chi_n ( h ) \zeta_{\phi ( d )}^h\\
\end{array}
\right).$$ Observe that $B = C E$, where $$C = \left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
1 & \zeta_1 & \cdots & \zeta_1^{d-1} \\
1 & \zeta_2 & \cdots & \zeta_2^{d-1} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
1 & \zeta_{\phi ( d )} & \cdots & \zeta_{\phi ( d )}^{d - 1}\\
\end{array}
\right),
E = \left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
\chi_1 ( 0 ) & \chi_2 ( 0 ) & \cdots & \chi_n ( 0 ) \\
\chi_1 ( 1 ) & \chi_2 ( 1 ) & \cdots & \chi_n ( 1 ) \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
\chi_1 ( d - 1 ) & \chi_2 ( d - 1 ) & \cdots & \chi_n ( d - 1 ) \\
\end{array}
\right).$$ In the following lemma will prove that $\ker ( B )$ is equals to $\{ ( 0, 0, \ldots , 0 ) \}$, which implies $x_{1, k} = x_{2, k} = \ldots = x_{n, k} = 0$.
\[lem:lem11\] We have:
1. The rank of $C$ is $\phi ( d )$.\
2. The set $$\mathcal{B} = \{ ( 1, \zeta, \ldots, \zeta^{d-1} ), \ \zeta \in \mu_d, \ \zeta \ {\rm not} \ {\rm primitive} \}$$ is a basis of $\ker ( C )$.\
3. $\ker ( B ) = \{ ( 0, 0, \ldots , 0 ) \}$.
[[[**Proof.**]{}]{}]{}1. Let $C^\prime$ be the matrix whose columns coincide with the first $\phi ( d )$ columns of the matrix $C$. Then $C^\prime$ is a square matrix equals to $$C^\prime = \left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
1 & \zeta_1 & \cdots & \zeta_1^{\phi ( d )-1} \\
1 & \zeta_2 & \cdots & \zeta_2^{\phi ( d ) -1} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
1 & \zeta_{\phi ( d )} & \cdots & \zeta_{\phi ( d )}^{\phi ( d ) - 1}\\
\end{array}
\right).$$ Observe that $C^\prime$ is a Vandermonde matrix. Thus its determinant is equals to $$\prod_{1 \leq r < s \leq \phi ( d )} ( \zeta_r - \zeta_s ).$$ Since $p$ does not divide $d$, we have $$\zeta_r \neq \zeta_s.$$ Thus the determinant of $C^\prime$ is non-zero. Therefore $C$ has rank $\phi ( d )$, since its square $\phi ( d ) \times \phi( d )$ sub-matrix $C^\prime$ has non-zero determinant.
2\. Since $C$ has rank $\phi ( d )$, the dimension of $\ker ( C )$ is $d - \phi ( d )$. Observe that $\mathcal{B}$ has $d - \phi ( d )$ elements. Hence $\mathcal{B}$ is a basis of $\ker ( C )$ if and only if $\mathcal{B} \subseteq \ker ( C )$ and the elements of $\mathcal{B}$ are linearly independent.
First let us prove that $\mathcal{B} \subseteq \ker ( C )$. Let $\zeta \in \mu_d$ be a $d$-th root of unity which is not primitive. Observe that $( 1, \zeta, \ldots , \zeta^{d-1} ) \in \ker ( C )$ if and only if $$\sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \zeta_i^h \zeta^h = 0$$ for all $i$. Since $$\zeta_i \zeta \sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \zeta_i^h \zeta^h = \sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \zeta_i^h \zeta^h$$ and $\zeta_i \zeta \neq 1$ because $p$ does not divide $d$, it follows that $$\sum_{h = 0}^{d - 1} \zeta_i^h \zeta^h = 0.$$ Thus $( 1, \zeta, \ldots , \zeta^{d-1} ) \in \ker ( C )$ for all non primitive $d$-th root of unity $\zeta$. Then $\mathcal{B} \subseteq \ker ( C )$.
Denote still by $\zeta$ an element of $\mu_d$ whose order is different from $d$. Set $\beta_\zeta \colon {{\mathbb Z}}/ d {{\mathbb Z}}\rightarrow \mu_d$ the character which sends $i \in {{\mathbb Z}}/d {{\mathbb Z}}$ to $\zeta^i$. Observe that if $\zeta^\prime \in \mu_d$ and $\zeta \neq \zeta^\prime$, $$\beta_\zeta ( 1 ) = \zeta \neq \zeta^\prime = \beta_{\zeta^\prime} ( 1 ),$$ since $p$ does not divide $d$. Thus the characters $\beta_\zeta$ are all distinct. Hence the theorem of the linear independence of characters imply that $\beta_\zeta$ are linearly independent over $\overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p}$. From this fact it follows that the vectors $( 1, \zeta, \ldots , \zeta^{d-1} )$ are linearly independent for all non primitive $d$-th root of unity $\zeta$. Hence $\mathcal{B}$ is a basis of $\ker ( C )$.
3\. Using the previous notation for all non primitive $d$-th root of unity $\zeta$, let $\beta_\zeta$ be the function which sends $j \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ d {{\mathbb Z}}$ to $\zeta^j$. Observe that every non trivial linear combination of the vectors $( \chi_i ( 0 ), \chi_i ( 1 ), \ldots , \chi_i ( d - 1 ) )$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$ is not in $\ker ( C )$ if and only if the functions $\chi_i$ and $\beta_\zeta$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$ and non primitive $d$-th root of unity $\zeta$ are linealry independent over $\overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p}$ (here $\chi_i$ is considered as a function of ${{\mathbb Z}}/ d {{\mathbb Z}}$ over ${{\mathbb F}}_q \subseteq \overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p}$). Suppose that such fonctions are dependent. Then we can choose a minimal $r$, non-zero $\lambda_i$ and $\mu_\zeta$ in $\overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p}$ such that $$\label{eqn:rel111}
\sum_{i = 1}^r \lambda_i \chi_i + \sum_{\zeta {\rm not} \ {\rm primitive}} \mu_\zeta \beta_\zeta = 0.$$ First observe that $r \geq 2$. Indeed if $r = 0$ then (\[eqn:rel111\]) would imply the linear dependence of the elements of $\mathcal{B}$ against 2.. Moreover if $r = 1$ then there would exist a character $\chi_i$ of conductor $d$ such that $( \chi_i ( 0 ), \chi_i ( 1 ), \ldots , \chi_i ( d - 1 ) ) \in \ker ( C )$. Then we would have $$\sum_{h = 0}^{d-1} \zeta_j^h \chi_i ( h ) = 0$$ for all primitive $d$-th root of unity $\zeta_j$, which contradicts [@4 Lemma 4.8].
Let $b \in ( {{\mathbb Z}}/ d {{\mathbb Z}})^\ast$ such that $\chi_1 ( b ) \neq \chi_2 ( b )$ (such $b$ exists because recall that, by hypothesis, $\chi_1$ is different from $\chi_2$ modulo $( \pi )$). Hence by (\[eqn:rel111\]), for all $z \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ d {{\mathbb Z}}$ we have $$\label{eqn:rel112}
\sum_{i = 1}^r \lambda_i \chi_i ( b z ) + \sum_{\zeta {\rm not} \ {\rm primitive}} \mu_\zeta \beta_\zeta ( b z ) = 0.$$ Observe that the function which sends $z \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ d {{\mathbb Z}}$ to $\beta_\zeta ( b z )$ coincides with the function $\beta_{\zeta^b}$. Hence we can rewrite (\[eqn:rel112\]) as $$\label{eqn:rel113}
\sum_{i = 1}^r \lambda_i \chi_1 ( b ) \chi_i ( z ) + \sum_{\zeta {\rm not} \ {\rm primitive}} \chi_1 ( b ) \mu_\zeta \beta_{\zeta^b} ( z ) = 0.$$ If we multiply (\[eqn:rel111\]) by $\chi_1 ( b )$ and we subtract it to (\[eqn:rel113\]),we get a non trivial relation with less than $r$ characters $\chi_i$ and it is impossible by the minimality of $r$.
Finally consider the matrix $B$. Let $v = ( \lambda_1, \lambda_2, \ldots , \lambda_n ) \in \ker ( B )$. Since $B = CE$, then $E ( v ) \in \ker ( C )$. This fact implies that $$\sum_{ i = 1 }^n \lambda_i ( \chi_i ( 0 ), \chi_i ( 1 ), \ldots , \chi_i ( d - 1 ) ) \in \ker( C ).$$ But we have previously proved that this relation is possible only if $\lambda_i = 0$ for all $i$. Thus $v = ( 0, 0, \ldots , 0 )$.
$\square$
0.2cm
By the previous lemma we immediately get $x_{i, k} = 0$ for all $1 \leq i \leq n$ and for all $1 \leq k \leq p-1$. Remember that, by definition, $$x_{i, k} =
\begin{cases}
\sum_{j = 0}^{( p - 3 )/2} c_{i, j, l} k^{2 j},&\;\hbox{if} \ 1 \leq i \leq r; \\
\sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{i, j, l} k^{2 j - 1}&\;\hbox{otherwise.}
\end{cases}$$ We shall prove that the relation $x_{i, k} = 0$ for all $i, k$ implies $c_{i, j, l} = 0$ for all $i, j$. We just consider the case $i \leq r$ (the proof in the other case is very similar). Let $i$ be an integer between $1$ and $r$ and set $c_{i, j, l} = y_j$. Since $x_{i, k} = 0$ for all $k$ between $1$ and $p-1$, we have the following relations: $$\label{eqn:rel214}
\sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} y_j k^{2 j} = 0.$$ The matrix $M$ associated to the first $( p - 1 )/2$ equations of the system (\[eqn:rel214\]) is given by: $$M =
\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
1 & 1 & \cdots & 1 \\
1 & 4 & \cdots & 4^{( p - 3 )/ 2} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
1 & {( p-1 )^2 \over 4} & \cdots & \bigg( {( p-1 )^2 \over 4} \bigg)^{( p - 3 )/2}\\
\end{array}
\right) =
\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
1 & \alpha_1 & \cdots & \alpha_1^{( p-3 )/2} \\
1 & \alpha_2 & \cdots & \alpha_2^{( p-3 )/2} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
1 & \alpha_{( p - 1 )/2} & \cdots & \alpha_{( p-1 )/2}^{( p - 3 ) /2}\\
\end{array}
\right)$$ So $M$ is a Vandermonde matrix and its determinant is equals to: $${\rm det} ( M ) = \prod_{1 \leq r < s \leq ( p-1 )/2} ( \alpha_r - \alpha_s ) \neq 0.$$ It follows that the only solution of the system (\[eqn:rel214\]) is $y_j = 0$ for all $j$.
Then we have proved that the coefficients $c_{i, j, l} = 0$ for all $i$ and $j$. Since $N_{l-1} > N_k$ for all $k < l-1$, if we replace $l$ with $l-1$ with the same procedure we can prove that the coefficients $c_{i, j, l-1} = 0$ for all $i, j$ and so on. Thus $c_{i, j, k} = 0$ for all $i, j, k$, which is a contradiction.
$\square$
0.2cm
The case $d = 1$ {#sec:partequarta}
================
The aim of this section is to prove Theorem \[teo:teo1\] in the case where $d = 1$. In other words, let $\chi$ the trivial character. We shall prove that $${\rm dim}_\Omega ( \Omega + \Omega \overline{f ( T, \chi \omega^0 )} + \Omega \overline{f ( T, \chi \omega^2 )} + \ldots + \Omega \overline{f ( T, \chi \omega^{p-3} ) )} = {p + 1 \over 2}.$$ As we have already remarked is Section \[sec:parteprima\] we shall modify the proof of the case $d \geq 2$. Let us give a preliminar reason for this. Let $\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p-1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}$ be odd. Then by Lemma \[lem:lem4\](6.) we have $$f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \chi \omega^{\delta + 1} ) = \Gamma_\delta \gamma_{-\delta} U ( ( F_\chi ( T ) ).$$ Since $\chi$ is the trivial character we have $$\label{eqn:relmontagna1}
F_\chi ( T ) = \sum_{a = 0}^{p - 1} { ( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^p} - 1 = - {1 \over T} - 1.$$ Thus $\overline{F_\chi} ( T ) \not \in {{\mathbb F}}_p[[T]]$ and we shall see that this fact does not allow us to apply Proposition \[pro:pro2\] (observe that if $\chi^\prime$ is not the trivial character then $\overline{F_{\chi^\prime}} ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_q[[T]]$ and see also Remark \[rem:Osservazione2\]). The following lemma explains how we can solve this problem.
\[lem:lem6\] Let $$\widetilde{F_\chi} ( T ) = ( p + 1 ) F_\chi ( ( T + 1 )^{p+1} - 1 ) - F_\chi ( T ).$$ Then $\widetilde{F_\chi} ( T ) \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p[[T]]$.
Moreover $$T \overline{f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \chi \omega^{\delta + 1} )} = \overline{\Gamma}_\delta \overline{\gamma}_{-\delta} \overline{U} ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) )$$ for all odd $\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p-1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}$.
Finally $1, T \overline{f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \chi \omega^0 )}, \ldots , T \overline{f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \chi \omega^{p-3} )}$ are independent over $\Omega$ if and only if $1, \overline{f ( T , \chi \omega^0 )}, \ldots , \overline{f ( T, \chi \omega^{p-3} )}$ are independent over $\Omega$.
[[[**Proof.**]{}]{}]{}Observe that $$\begin{aligned}
\widetilde{F_\chi} ( T ) & = ( p + 1 ) F_\chi ( ( T + 1 )^{p+1} - 1 ) - F_\chi ( T ) \\
& = -{( p + 1 ) \over ( T + 1 )^{p + 1} - 1} + {1 \over T} - p \\
& = { ( T + 1 )^{p+1} - ( p + 1 ) T - 1 \over T ( ( T + 1 )^{p+1} - 1 ) } - p.\end{aligned}$$ We remark that $ T^2 $ exactly divides $T ( ( T + 1 )^{p+1} - 1 )$. Moreover $T^2$ divides $( T + 1 )^{p + 1} - ( p + 1 ) T - 1$. Then we immediately get $\widetilde{F_\chi} ( T ) \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p[[T]]$.
Let $L$ be a finite extension of ${{\mathbb Q}}_p$ and let ${{\cal O}}_L$ be its valuation ring. Let $d$ be an integer not divided by $p$ and set $\kappa_0 = 1 + dp$. Remember that in Section \[sec:parteseconda\] we have defined an action of ${{\cal O}}_L[[t]]$ over ${{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$ such that, for all $a \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p$ and $F ( T ) \in {{\cal O}}_L[[T]]$, $$( t + 1 )^a F ( T ) = F ( ( T + 1 )^{\kappa_0^a} - 1 ).$$ Set $L = {{\mathbb Q}}_p$, $d = 1$ and $\kappa_0 = 1 + p$. Then, since $$\widetilde{F}_\chi ( T ) = F_\chi ( ( T + 1 )^{p+1} - 1 ) - F_\chi ( T ) + p F_\chi ( ( T + 1 )^{p+1} - 1 ),$$ we have $$\widetilde{F_\chi} ( T ) \equiv t F_\chi ( T ) \mod ( p ).$$ By Lemma \[lem:lem5\](2.) we get $$\overline{\Gamma_\delta} \overline{\gamma_{-\delta}} \overline{U} ( ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) ) = \overline{\Gamma_\delta} \overline{\gamma_{-\delta}} \overline{U} ( t \overline{F_\chi} ( T ) ) = T \overline{\Gamma_\delta} \overline{\gamma_{-\delta}} \overline{U} ( \overline{F_\chi} ( T ) ).$$ Then, by Lemma \[lem:lem4\](6.), we immediately get $$T \overline{f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \chi \omega^{\delta + 1} )} = \overline{\Gamma}_\delta \overline{\gamma}_{-\delta} \overline{U} ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) ).$$
Finally $1, T \overline{f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \chi \omega^0 )}, \ldots , T \overline{f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \chi \omega^{p-3} )}$ are independent over $\Omega$ if and only if $1, \overline{f ( T, \chi \omega^0 )}, \ldots , \overline{f ( T, \chi \omega^{p-3} )}$ are independent over $\Omega$, since $T \in \Omega$ and the image of $\Omega$ via the endomorphism of $\overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p} ( ( T ) )$ which sends $F ( T ) \in \overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p} ( ( T ) )$ in $F ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 )$ is $\Omega$.
$\square$
0.2cm
By the previous lemma to finish the proof of Theorem \[teo:teo1\] it suffices to show that $1, T \overline{f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \chi \omega^0 )}, \ldots , T \overline{f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \chi \omega^{p-3} )}$ are linearly independent over $\Omega$. Since, always by the previous lemma, for all odd $\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p-1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}$ we have $$T \overline{f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \chi \omega^{\delta + 1} )} = \overline{\Gamma}_\delta \overline{\gamma}_{-\delta} \overline{U} ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) )$$ and $\overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_p[[T]]$, to show the linear independence we can easily adapt our proof of Theorem \[teo:teo1\] in the case $d \geq 2$.
[**Proof of Theorem \[teo:teo1\] in the case $d = 1$.**]{} First observe that by Lemma \[lem:lem6\] to prove the assumption it suffices to show that $$1, T \overline{f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 , \chi \omega^0 )}, \ldots , T \overline{f ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1, \chi \omega^{p-3} )}$$ are linearly independent over $\Omega$. Suppose that this is not the case. Then there exist $h_0 ( T ), \ldots , h_{( p-3 ) / 2} ( T ) \in \Omega$ such that $$\label{eqn:rel31}
\sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} h_j ( T ) T \overline{f\bigg( {1 \over T + 1} - 1, \omega^{2j} \bigg)} \in \Omega,$$ with $h_j ( T ) \neq 0$ for a certain $j$. Observe that without loss of generality we can suppose that $h_{j} ( T ) \in A$ for all $i$ and that $$\sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} h_j ( T ) T \overline{ f\bigg( {1 \over T + 1} - 1, \omega^{2j} \bigg)} \in A.$$ By Lemma \[lem:lem6\] we get $$\sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} h_j ( T ) \overline{\Gamma}_{2j - 1} \overline{\gamma}_{- 2j + 1 } \overline{U} ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) ) \in A.$$
By Lemma \[lem:lem3\](3.) and since $\overline{D} \overline{\gamma_{\delta}} = \overline{\gamma_{\delta + 1}} \overline{D}$ for all $\delta \in {{\mathbb Z}}/ ( p-1 ) {{\mathbb Z}}$, we have $$\sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} h_j ( T ) \overline{\Gamma}_{- 1} \overline{\gamma}_1 \overline{D}^{2j} \overline{U} ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) ) \in A.$$ Moreover, applying Lemma \[lem:lem5\], we get $$\sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} \overline{\Gamma}_{- 1} \overline{\gamma}_1 \overline{D}^{2j} \overline{U} ( h_j ( t ) \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) ) \in A.$$ From Lemma \[lem:lem3\](2.) it follows $$\label{eqn:relmontagna2}
\sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} \overline{\gamma}_1 \overline{D}^{2j} \overline{U} ( h_j ( t ) \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) ) \in A.$$
For all $j$ such that $0 \leq j \leq ( p - 3 )/2$ set $$F_j ( T ) = \overline{D}^{2j} \overline{U} ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) ).$$ Then we can rewrite (\[eqn:relmontagna2\]) in the following way: $$\label{eqn:relmontagna3}
\sum_{j = 0}^{( p - 3 )/2} \overline{\gamma}_1 ( h_j ( t ) F_j ( T ) ) \in A.$$
By Lemma \[lem:lem4\](4.) we have $$F_\chi ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 ) = -F_\chi ( T ) - 1.$$ Then $$\begin{aligned}
\overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 ) & = \overline{F_\chi} ( ( T + 1 )^{- ( p + 1 )} - 1 ) - \overline{F_\chi} ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 ) \\
& = - \overline{F_\chi} ( ( T + 1 )^{p + 1} - 1 ) - 1 + \overline{F_\chi} ( T ) + 1 \\
& = - \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ).\end{aligned}$$ Moreover observe that for all $j$ between $0$ and $( p - 3 )/2$, $$( \overline{D}^{2 j} \overline{U} ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ) ) ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} -1 ) = \overline{D}^{2j} \overline{U} ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 ).$$ Then for all $j$ $$( \overline{D}^{2 j} \overline{U} ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ) ) ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} -1 ) = - \overline{D}^{2j} \overline{U} ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) ).$$ It follows that $$\label{eqn:relmontagna4}
F_j ( T ) = - F_j ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 )$$ for all $j$.
Consider the least field which contains ${{\mathbb F}}_p$ and all the coefficients of $h_ j ( T )$ for all $j$. Since $h_j ( T ) \in A \subseteq \overline{{{\mathbb F}}_p}[[T]]$, such field is a finite extension of ${{\mathbb F}}_p$. Call it ${{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}$ and write $h_j ( t ) = \sum_{b \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p} c_{j, b} ( t + 1 )^b$ with $c_{j, b} \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}$. Moreover observe that since $h_j ( T ) \neq 0$ for certain integer $j$, there exist $j, b$ such that $c_{j, b} \neq 0$. Set $$G_b ( T ) = \sum_{j = 0}^{( p - 3 )/2} c_{j, b} F_j ( T )$$ and observe that $G_b ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}[[T]] \cap {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} ( T )$ for all $b$. Since $$( t + 1 )^b ( G_b ( T ) ) = G_b ( ( T + 1 )^{\kappa_0^b} - 1 ),$$ by (\[eqn:relmontagna3\]) we have $$\label{eqn:relmontagna6}
\overline{\gamma}_1 ( \sum_{b \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p} G_b ( ( T + 1 )^{\kappa_0^b} - 1 ) ) \in A.$$
Choose a subset of $\mu_{p-1}$ whose elements represent all the classes of the group $\mu_{p - 1} / \{-1, 1\}$ and call it $S$. From (\[eqn:relmontagna4\]) it follows that $$\label{eqn:relmontagna7}
G_b ( T ) = - G_b ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 )$$ for all $b$. Thus by (\[eqn:relmontagna6\]) we get $$\sum_{\eta \in S} \sum_{b \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p} \eta G_b ( ( T + 1 )^{\eta \kappa_0^b} - 1 ) \in A.$$ Since $G_b ( T ) = 0$ for all but finitely many $b \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p$, there exists an integer $u$ such that $$\sum_{\eta \in S} \sum_{k = 1}^u \eta G_{b_k} ( ( T + 1 )^{\eta \kappa_0^{b_k}} - 1 ) \in A.$$ Moreover set $G_k ( T ) = G_{b_k} ( T )$. Since $G_k ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}[[T]] \cap {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} ( T )$ for all $k$, we can apply Proposition \[pro:pro2\], obtaining that there exist an integer $l \leq u$, $b_1, b_2, \ldots b_l \in {{\mathbb Z}}_p$, $b_i \neq b_j$ for $i \neq j$, $\eta_1, \eta_2, \ldots \eta_l \in \mu_{p - 1}$ with $\eta_i \kappa_0^{b_i} \sim_{{{\mathbb Q}}^\ast} \eta_j \kappa_0^{b_j}$ for all $i$, $j$ and $\eta_i \kappa_0^{b_i} \neq \eta_j \kappa_0^{b_j}$ for $i \neq j$ such that $$\label{eqn:relmontagna8}
\sum_{k = 1}^l \eta_k G_k ( ( T + 1 )^{\eta_k \kappa_0^{b_k}} - 1 ) \in A.$$
\[rem:Osservazione2\] We remark that that the fact that for all $k$, $G_k ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}[[T]] \cap {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} ( T )$ is necessary to apply Proposition \[pro:pro2\]. This relation is verified since for all $j$, we have $F_j ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_p [[T]] \cap {{\mathbb F}}_p ( T )$ which is an immediate consequence of the fact that $\overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_p[[T]] \cap {{\mathbb F}}_p ( T )$.
Finally observe that in the case $d \geq 2$, for all character $\chi^\prime$ of conductor $d$ we have $\overline{F_{\chi^\prime}} ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_q[[T]] \cap {{\mathbb F}}_q ( T )$. For this reason it is not necessary <<to perturbate>> $F_{\chi^\prime} ( T )$ to apply Proposition \[pro:pro2\].
For all $1 \leq k \leq l$ write $$\eta_k \kappa_0^{b_k} = \eta_1 \kappa_0^{b_1} x_k,$$ where $x_k \in {{\mathbb Q}}^\ast \cap {{\mathbb Z}}_p^\ast$ and $x_i \neq x_k$ if $i \neq k$. Recall that by (\[eqn:relmontagna7\]), we have $G_k ( T ) = - G_k ( ( T + 1 )^{-1} - 1 )$. Hence we can suppose that $x_k > 0$ for all $k$. By (\[eqn:relmontagna6\]) we get $$\sum_{k = 1}^l \eta_k G_k ( ( T + 1 )^{x_k} - 1 ) \in A.$$ Therefore there exist some integers $N_1 , N_2 , \ldots N_l$ not divided by $p$, such that $1 \leq N_1 < N_2 < \ldots < N_l$ and $$\sum_{k = 1}^l \eta_k G_k ( ( T + 1 )^{N_k} - 1 ) \in A.$$ By definition of $G_k ( T )$ this last relation becomes: $$\label{eqn:relmontagna9}
\sum_{k = 1}^l \eta_k \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{j, k} F_j ( ( T + 1 )^{N_k} - 1 ) \in A.$$
Now we want to compute $F_j ( T )$ for all $j$. First remember that $$F_\chi ( T ) = \sum_{a = 0}^{p-1} {( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^p} - 1.$$ Then $$\overline{D}^{2j} ( \overline{F_\chi} ( T ) ) = \sum_{a = 1}^{p-1} {a^{2 i} ( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^p}$$ for all $j$ between $0$ and $( p-1 )/2$. Since $\overline{U} = \overline{D}^{p-1}$ we have $$\overline{D}^{2i} \overline{U} ( \overline{F_\chi} ( T ) ) = \sum_{a = 1}^{p-1} {a^{2 i} ( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^p}.$$ Remember that $$\overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) = \overline{F_\chi} ( ( T + 1 )^{p+1} - 1 ) - \overline{F_\chi} ( T ) = t \overline{F_\chi} ( T ).$$ Then $$\begin{aligned}
\overline{D}^{2j} \overline{U} ( \overline{\widetilde{F_\chi}} ( T ) ) & = t \overline{D}^{2j} \overline{U} ( \overline{F_\chi} ( T ) ) \\
& = t \bigg( \sum_{a = 1}^{p-1} {a^{2 i} ( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^p} \bigg) \\
& = \sum_{a = 1}^{p - 1} {a^{2i} ( T + 1 )^{a ( p + 1 )} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{p ( p + 1 )}} - \sum_{a = 1}^{p - 1} {a^{2i} ( T + 1 )^a \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^p}. \end{aligned}$$ Replacing in (\[eqn:relmontagna9\]) we get $$\sum_{k = 1}^l \eta_k \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{j, k} \sum_{a = 1}^{p - 1} \bigg( {a^{2j} ( T + 1 )^{a N_k ( p + 1 )} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{p N_k ( p + 1 )}} - {a^{2j} ( T + 1 )^{a N_k} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{p N_k}} \bigg) \in A.$$ Since by [@1 Lemma 3.5] a rational function $H ( T ) \in A$ if and only if there exists an integer $n$ such that $( T + 1 )^n H ( T )$ is a polynomial, we get $$\label{eqn:relmontagna10}
\sum_{k = 1}^l \eta_k \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{j, k} \sum_{a = 1}^{p - 1} \bigg( {a^{2j} ( T + 1 )^{a N_k ( p + 1 )} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{p N_k ( p + 1 )}} - {a^{2j} ( T + 1 )^{a N_k} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{p N_k}} \bigg) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} [T]$$ (recall that, by definition, ${{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}$ is the extension of ${{\mathbb F}}_p$ generated by $c_{j, k}$ for all $j, k$).
We apply Remark \[rem:Osservazione11\] in the particular case where $F = F_{q_1}$, $V = {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} ( T )$, $W = {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} [T]$, $m = p - 1$, $\phi = \overline{D}$, $\lambda_b = b$ for all $1 \leq b \leq p - 1$ and $$v_b = V_b ( T ) : = \sum_{k = 1}^l \eta_k \sum_{j = 0}^{( p-3 )/2} c_{j , k} \bigg( {a_{b, k}^{2j} ( T + 1 )^{a_{b,k} N_k ( p + 1 )} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{p N_k ( p + 1 )}} - {a_{b, k}^{2j} ( T + 1 )^{a_{b,k} N_k} \over 1 - ( T + 1 )^{p N_k}} \bigg),$$ where $a_{b, k}$ satisfies the relation $a_{b, k} N_k \equiv b \mod ( p )$. Then by Remark \[rem:Osservazione11\], $V_b ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}[T]$. Let us recall that $p$ does not divide $N_k$ for all $k$ between $1$ and $l$. Since $p$ does not divide $b$, we have $a_{b, k} \in {{\mathbb F}}_p^\ast$ for all $b, k$.
Let $\zeta$ be a primitive $( p + 1 ) N_l$th root of unity and multiply $V_b ( T )$ by the polynomial $1 - ( T + 1 )^{p ( p + 1 ) N_l}$. We get $$\label{eqn:rel311}
Q( T ) + \eta_l \sum_{j = 0}^{( p - 3 )/2} c_{j, l} a_{b,l}^{2 j} ( T + 1 )^{p ( p + 1 ) N_l} = P( T ),$$ where $Q ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1} ( T ), P ( T ) \in {{\mathbb F}}_{q_1}[T]$, $Q ( \zeta - 1 ) = 0$ (since $N_l > N_k$ for all $k < l$) and $P ( \zeta - 1 ) = 0$. Then if (\[eqn:rel311\]) is satisfied we have $$\eta_l \zeta^{a_b N_l ( p + 1 )} \sum_{j = 0}^{( p - 3 )/2} c_{j, l} a_{b, l}^{2 j} = 0$$ for all $b$ between $1$ and $p - 1$. Since $\eta_l \zeta^{a_b N_l ( p + 1 )} = \eta_l \in {{\mathbb F}}_p^\ast$, we have $$\label{eqn:relmontagna11}
\sum_{j = 0}^{( p - 3 )/2} c_{j, l} a_{b,l}^{2 j} = 0,$$ for all $b$. Observe that, since $1 \leq b \leq p-1$, $a_{b, l} N_l \equiv b \mod ( p )$ and $p$ does not divide $N_l$, for all $c \in {{\mathbb F}}_p^\ast$ there exists $b$ such that $a_{b,l} = c$. Then to find the $c_{j, l}$ satisfying (\[eqn:relmontagna11\]) is equivalent to find all the solutions of the system $$\label{eqn:rel312}
\sum_{j = 0}^{ ( p - 3 )/2} x_j k^{2 j} = 0,$$ where $x_j$ are the unknows of the system and $1 \leq k \leq p-1$. Observe that the system (\[eqn:rel312\]) is identical to the system (\[eqn:rel214\]) that we have studied at the end of Section \[sec:parteterza\]. Since we have already remarked that (\[eqn:rel214\]) has only the solution $( 0, \ldots , 0 )$, also (\[eqn:rel312\]) has the unique solution $( 0, \ldots , 0 )$. This fact implies $c_{j, l} = 0$ for all $j$.
Since $N_{l-1} > N_k$ for all $k < l-1$, if we replace $l$ with $l-1$ with the same procedure we can prove that the coefficients $c_{j, l-1} = 0$ for all $j$ and so on. Thus $c_{j, k} = 0$ for all $j, k$, which implies $h_j ( T ) = 0$ for all $j$. Since we have supposed that there exists $j$ such that $h_j ( T ) \neq 0$, we obtain a contraddiction.
$\square$
0.2cm
[\[Bo–Gi–SO\]]{}
B. Anglès, [*On the $p$-adic Leopoldt transform of a power series*]{}, Acta Arith. [**134**]{}, [349-367]{}, (2008).
S. Lang, [*Cyclotomic field I, II*]{}, Springer, 1990.
W. Sinnott, [*On the power series attached to $p$-adic $L$-functions*]{}, J. Reine Angew. Math. [**382**]{}, [22-34]{}, (1987).
L. C. Washinghton, [*Introduction to cyclotomic fields*]{}, 2nd ed., Springer, 1997.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
In this paper, we study the asymptotic behavior of radial extremal functions to an inequality involving Hardy potential and critical Sobolev exponent. Based on the asymptotic behavior at the origin and the infinity, we shall deduce a strict inequality between two best constants. Finally, as an application of this strict inequality, we consider the existence of nontrivial solution of a quasilinear Brezis-Nirenberg type problem with Hardy potential and critical Sobolev exponent.
**Key Words:** asymptotic behavior, extremal functions, Hardy potential, critical Sobolev exponent, Brezis-Nirenberg type problem
**Mathematics Subject Classifications:** 35J60.
author:
- |
[Benjin Xuan]{}[^1] Jiangchao Wang\
[*Department of Mathematics*]{}\
[*University of Science and Technology of China*]{}\
[*Universidad Nacional de Colombia*]{}\
title: Asymptotic behavior of extremal functions to an inequality involving Hardy potential and critical Sobolev exponent
---
Introduction. {#intro}
=============
In this paper, we study the asymptotic behavior of extremal functions to the following inequality involving Hardy potential and critical Sobolev exponent: $$\label{eq1.1}
C \left(\int_{\mathbb{R}^N} \frac{|u|^{p_*}}{|x|^{bp_*}}
\,{\rm d}x \right)^{p/p_*} \leqslant \int_{\mathbb{R}^N} \left(
\frac{|{\rm D}u|^{p}}{|x|^{ap}} -\mu
\frac{|u|^{p}}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\right)\,{\rm d}x,$$ where $1<p<N,\ 0\leqslant a <\frac{N-p}{p},\ a\leqslant b<(a+1),\
p_*=\frac{Np}{N-(a+1-b)p},\ \mu< \overline{\mu}$, $\overline{\mu}$ is the best constant in the Hardy equality.
We shall show that for $\mu<\overline{\mu}$ the best constant of inequality (\[eq1.1\]) is achievable. Furthermore, the extremal functions of inequality (\[eq1.1\]) is radial symmetric. Then we study the asymptotic behavior of the radial extremal functions of inequality (\[eq1.1\]) at the origin and the infinity. At last, for any smooth bounded open domain $\Omega
\subset \mathbb{R}^N$ containing $0$ in its insides, we shall deduce a strict inequality between two best constants $S_{\lambda,\,\mu}(p,a,b;\Omega)$ and $S_{0,\,\mu}(p,a,b;\Omega)=S_{0,\,\mu}$: $$\label{eq1.4} S_{\lambda,\,\mu}(p,a,b;\Omega)< S_{0,\,\mu},$$ if $\lambda>0$, where $S_{0,\,\mu}$ and $S_{\lambda,\,\mu}(p,a,b;\Omega)$ will be defined in Section 2 and 4 respectively. We believe that the strict inequality (\[eq1.4\]) will be useful to study the existence of quasilinear elliptic problem involving Hardy potential and critical Sobolev exponent. As an application of this strict inequality, we consider the existence of nontrivial solution of a quasilinear Brezis-Nirenberg problem with Hardy potential and critical Sobolev exponent.
In their famous paper [@BN], Brezis and Nirenberg studied problem: $$\label{eq1.5}
\left\{ \begin{array}{rl}
-\Delta u &=\lambda u+u^{2^\ast-1}, \mbox{ in }\ \Omega,\\
u& >0,\mbox{ in }\ \Omega,\\
u& =0, \mbox{ on }\
\partial\,\Omega.
\end{array}\right.$$ Since the embedding $H_0^1(\Omega) \hookrightarrow
L^{2^*}(\Omega)$ is not compact where $2^*=2N/(N-2)$, the asociated energy functional does not satisfy the (PS) condition globally, which caused a serious difficulty when trying to apply standard variational methods. Brezis and Nirenberg successfully reduced the existence of solutions of problem (\[eq1.5\]) into the verification of a special version of the strict inequality (\[eq1.4\]) with $p=2,\ a=b=\mu=0$. To verify (\[eq1.4\]) in their case, they applied the explicit expression of the extremal functions to the Sobolev inequality, especially the asymptotic behavior of the extremal functions at the origin and the infinity. Brezis-Nirenberg type problems have been generalized to many other situations (see [@CG; @EH1; @EH2; @GV; @JS; @NL; @PS; @XC; @XSY; @ZXP] and references therein).
Recently, Jannelli [@JE] introduced the term $\mu\frac{u}{|x|^2}$ in the equation, that is, $$\label{eq1.6}
\left\{ \begin{array}{rl}
-\Delta u - \mu\frac{u}{|x|^2} & =\lambda u+u^{2^\ast-1}, \mbox{ in }\ \Omega,\\
u& >0,\mbox{ in }\ \Omega,\\
u& =0, \mbox{ on }\
\partial\,\Omega.
\end{array}\right.$$ He studied the relation between critical dimensions for $\lambda\in
(0,\ \lambda_1)$ and $L_{\rm loc}^2$ integrability of the associated Green function, where $\lambda_1$ is the first eigenvalue of operator $-\Delta - \mu\frac{1}{|x|^2}$ on $\Omega$ with zero-Dirichlet condition. Ruiz and Willem [@RW] also studied problem (\[eq1.6\]) under various assumption on the domain $\Omega$, and even for $\mu\leqslant 0$. Those proofs in [@JE] and [@RW] were reduced to verify the strict inequality (\[eq1.4\]) with $p=2, a=b=0$. In 2001, Ferrero and Gazzola [@FG] considered the existence of sign-changed solution to problem (\[eq1.6\]) for larger $\lambda$. They distinguished two distinct cases: resonant case and non-resonant cases of the Brezis-Nirenberg type problem (\[eq1.6\]). For the resonant case, they only studied a special case: $\Omega$ is the unit ball and $\lambda=\lambda_1$. The general case was left as an open problem. In 2004, Cao and Han [@CH] complished the general case. In all the references cited above, the asymptotic behavior of the extremal functions at the origin and the infinity was applied to derived the local (PS) condition for the associated energy functional.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we shall show that the best constant of (\[eq1.1\]) is achieved by some radial extremal functions. Section 3 is concerning with the asymptotic behavior of the radial extremal functions. In Section 4, we first derive various estimates on the approximation extremal functions, and then establish the strict inequality (\[eq1.4\]). In section 5, based on this strict inequality, we obtain the existence results of nontrivial solution of a quasilinear Brezis-Nirenberg problem.
Radial extremal functions {#radial}
=========================
In order to obtain the extremal functions of (\[eq1.1\]). We consider the following extremal problem: $$\label{eq2.2}
S_{0,\,\mu}=\inf\left\{Q_\mu(u)\ :\ u\in
\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N),\
\|u;L_b^{p_\ast}(\mathbb{R}^N)\|=1\right\},$$ where $$Q_\mu(u)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\frac{|{\rm D}u|^p}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x-\mu\int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\frac{|u|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,{\rm d}x,$$ and $$\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N)=\{u\in
L_b^{p_\ast}(\mathbb{R}^N):|{\rm D}u|\in L_a^p(\mathbb{R}^N)\}$$ is the closure of $C_0^\infty (\mathbb{R}^N)$ under the norm $\| u
\|_{\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N)}=\| |{\rm D}u|; L_a^p
(\mathbb{R}^N) \|$. For any $\alpha, q$, the norm of weighted space $L_\alpha^{q}(\mathbb{R}^N)$ is defined as $$\|u;L_\alpha^{q}(\mathbb{R}^N)\|=(\int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\frac{|u|^{q}}{|x|^{\alpha{q}}}\,{\rm
d}x)^{\frac{1}{q}}.$$
Similar to Lemma 2.1 in [@GP], one can easily obtain the following Hardy inequality with best constant $\overline{\mu}=(\frac{N-(a+1)p}{p})^p$: $$\label{eq2.02}
\overline{\mu} \int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\frac{|u|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,{\rm d}x \leqslant \int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\frac{|{\rm D}u|^p}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x.$$ Thus, for $\mu<\overline{\mu}$, $Q_\mu(u)\geqslant 0$ for all $u\in\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N)$, and the equality holds if and only if $u\equiv 0$. From the so-called Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg inequality [@CKN], $S_{0,\,\mu}<\infty$.
\[lem2.3\] If $\mu\in (0,\ \overline{\mu}),\ b\in [a,\ a+1)$, then $S_{0,\,\mu}$ is achieved at some nonnegative function $u_0\in
\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N)$. In particular, there exists a solution to the following “limited equation": $$\label{eq2.1}
-\mbox{div}(\frac{{|{\rm D}u|}^{p-2}{\rm
D}u}{|x|^{ap}})-\mu\frac{|u|^{p-2}u}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}=\frac{|u|^{p_\ast-2}u}{|x|^{bp_\ast}}.$$
[**Proof. **]{}The achievability of $S_{0,\,\mu}$ at some $u_0\in
\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N)$ with $\|u_0;L_b^{p_\ast}(\mathbb{R}^N)\|=1$ is due to [@WW] for $p=2$ and [@TY] for general $p$. Without loss of generality, suppose that $u_0\geqslant 0$, otherwise, replace it by $|u_0|$. It is easy to see that $u_0$ satisfies the following Euler-Lagrange equation: $$-\mbox{div}(\frac{|{\rm D}u|^{p-2}{\rm
D}u}{|x|^{ap}})-\mu\frac{|u|^{p-2}u}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
=\delta\frac{|u|^{p_\ast-2}u}{|x|^{b{p_\ast}}},$$ where $\delta=Q_\mu(u_0)/ \|u_0;L_b^{p_\ast}(\mathbb{R}^N)\|^{p_\ast}= Q_\mu(u_0)=S_{0,\,\mu}>0$ is the Lagrange multiplier. Set $\overline{u}=c_0u_0,\ c_0=S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{1}{p_\ast-p}}$, then $\overline{u}$ is a solution to equation (\[eq2.1\]).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In fact, all the dilation of $u_0$ of the form $\sigma^{-\frac{N-(a+1)p}{p}}u_0(\frac{\cdot}{\sigma})$ are also minimizers of $S_{0,\,\mu}$. In order to obtain further properties of the minimizers of $S_{0,\,\mu}$, let’s recall the definition of the Schwarz symmetrization (see [@HT]). Suppose that $\Omega\subset{\mathbb{R}^N}$, and $f\in C_0(\Omega)$ is a nonnegative continuous function with compact support, the the Schwarz symmetrization $S(f)$ of $f$ is defined as $$S(f)(x)=\sup \left\{t:\mu(t)>\omega_N|x|^N\right\},
\quad \mu(t)=\left|\,\{x\ :\ f(x)>t\}\right|,$$ where $\omega_N$ denotes the volume of the standard $N$-sphere. Applying those properties of Schwarz symmetrization in [@HT], we have the following lemma:
\[lem2.2\] For $v\in\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N)\setminus \{0\},\
k\geqslant 0$, define $$R(v)=\dfrac{\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}\{k^{1-p-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}(|\partial_\rho
v|^2+\frac{|\Lambda v|^2}{\rho^2})^{p/2}\rho^{N-1}
-k^{1-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}\mu|v|^p\rho^{N-1-p}\}\,{\rm d}\rho \,{\rm
d}S}{\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}|v|^{p_\ast}\rho^{\frac{(N-p){p_\ast}}{p}-1}\,{\rm
d}\rho \,{\rm d}S},$$ where $\partial_\rho$ is the directional differential operator along direction $\rho$ and $\Lambda$ is the tangential differential operator on $S^{N-1}$. Then $$\inf \{R(v)\ :\ v\in\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N) \mbox{
is radial}\} = \inf \{R(v)\ :\ v
\in\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N)\}.$$
[**Proof. **]{}By the density argument, it suffices to prove the lemma for $v\in C_0^\infty (\mathbb{R}^N)$. Let $v^*$ be the Schwarz symmetrization of $v$. Noting that $\Lambda v^\ast=0, p_*\leqslant \frac{Np}{N-p}$, and applying those properties of Schwarz symmetrization in [@HT], we have $$\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}|v^\ast|^{p_\ast}\rho^{\frac{(N-p){p_\ast}}{p}-1} \,{\rm d}\rho
\,{\rm d}S\geqslant \int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}|v|^{p_\ast}\rho^{\frac{(N-p){p_\ast}}{p}-1} \,{\rm d}\rho
\,{\rm d}S=1,$$ $$\begin{split}
k^{1-p-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}&(|\partial_\rho
v^\ast|^2+\frac{|\Lambda v^\ast|^2}{\rho^2})^{p/2}\rho^{N-1}\,{\rm
d}\rho
\,{\rm d}S\\
&\leqslant
k^{1-p-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}(|\partial_\rho
v|^2+\frac{|\Lambda v|^2}{\rho^2})^{p/2}\rho^{N-1}\,{\rm d}\rho
\,{\rm d}S
\end{split}$$ and $$k^{1-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}\mu\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}|v^\ast|^p\rho^{N-1-p}\,{\rm d}\rho
\,{\rm d}S\geqslant
k^{1-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}\mu\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}|v|^p\rho^{N-1-p}\,{\rm
d}\rho \,{\rm d}S.$$ Thus, we have $$\begin{split}
&\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}\{k^{1-p-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}(|\partial_\rho
v^\ast|^2+\frac{|\Lambda v^\ast|^2}{\rho^2})^{p/2}\rho^{N-1}
-k^{1-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}\mu|v^\ast|^p\rho^{N-1-p}\}\,{\rm d}\rho
\,{\rm d}S\\&\leqslant
\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}\{k^{1-p-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}(|\partial_\rho
v|^2+\frac{|\Lambda v|^2}{\rho^2})^{p/2}\rho^{N-1}
-k^{1-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}\mu |v|^p\rho^{N-1-p}\}\,{\rm d}\rho \,{\rm
d}S.
\end{split}$$ That is, $$R(v^*)\leqslant R(v),$$ thus, $$\inf \{R(v)\ :\ v\in\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N) \mbox{
is radial}\} \leqslant \inf \{R(v)\ :\ v
\in\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N)\}.$$ On the other hand, it is trivial that $$\inf \{R(v)\ :\ v\in\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N) \mbox{
is radial}\} \geqslant \inf \{R(v)\ :\ v
\in\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N)\}.$$
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[lem2.4\] If $\mu\in (0,\ \overline{\mu}),\ b\in [a,\ a+1)$, then all the minimizers of $S_{0,\,\mu}$ is radial. In particular, there exists a family of radial solutions to equation (\[eq2.1\]).
[**Proof. **]{}We rewrite those integrals in $S_{0,\,\mu}$ in polar coordinates. Noting that $|{\rm D}u|^2=|\partial_r
u|^2+\frac{1}{r^2}|\Lambda u|^2$, we have $$\label{eq2.6}
\begin{split}
Q_\mu(u)&=\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}(|\partial_r
u|^2+\frac{1}{r^2}|\Lambda u|^2)^{p/2} r^{N-1-ap}\,{\rm d}r\,{\rm d}S\\
&\ \ \ \ -\mu\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}|u|^p
r^{N-1-(a+1)p}\,{\rm d}r\,{\rm d}S.
\end{split}$$ Making the change of variables $r=\rho^k,\quad
k=\frac{N-p}{N-(a+1)p}\geqslant 1$, from (\[eq2.6\]), we have $$\label{eq2.7}
\begin{split}
Q_\mu(u)&=k^{1-p}\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}(|\partial_\rho
u|^2+k^2\frac{|\Lambda u|^2}{\rho^2})^{p/2}\rho^{N-1}\,{\rm d}\rho
\,{\rm d}S \\
&\ \ \ \ -k\mu\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}|u|^p
\rho^{N-p-1}\,{\rm d}\rho \,{\rm d}S.
\end{split}$$ On the other hand, the restriction condition $\|u;L_b^{p_\ast}(\mathbb{R}^N)\|=1$ becomes $$\label{eq2.8}
k\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}|u|^{p_\ast}\rho^{\frac{(N-p){p_\ast}}{p}-1}\,{\rm
d}\rho \,{\rm d}S=1.$$ To cancel the coefficient $k$ in (\[eq2.8\]), let $v=k^{\frac{1}{p_\ast}}u$, then we have the following equivalent form of $S_{0,\,\mu}$: $$\label{eq2.9}
\begin{split}
S_{0,\,\mu}= \inf\left
\{ \right. & \left. \int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}\{k^{1-p-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}(|\partial_\rho
v|^2+k^2\frac{|\Lambda v|^2}{\rho^2})^{p/2}\rho^{N-1} \right.\\
& \ \ \ -k^{1-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}\mu|v|^p\rho^{N-1-p}\}\,{\rm
d}\rho \,{\rm d}S \ :\ v \in\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N),\\
& \left. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}|v|^{p_\ast}\rho^{\frac{(N-p){p_\ast}}{p}-1}\,{\rm
d}\rho \,{\rm d}S=1\right\}.
\end{split}$$ Since $k\geqslant 1$, we have $$\label{eq2.10}
\begin{split}
S_{0,\,\mu} \geqslant \inf\left
\{ \right. & \left. \int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}\{k^{1-p-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}(|\partial_\rho
v|^2+\frac{|\Lambda v|^2}{\rho^2})^{p/2}\rho^{N-1} \right.\\
& \ \ \ -k^{1-\frac{p}{p_\ast}}\mu|v|^p\rho^{N-1-p}\}\,{\rm
d}\rho \,{\rm d}S\ :\ v
\in\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N),\\
& \left. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\int_{S^{N-1}}\int_0^{+\infty}|v|^{p_\ast}\rho^{\frac{(N-p){p_\ast}}{p}-1}\,{\rm
d}\rho \,{\rm d}S=1\right\}.
\end{split}$$ From Lemma \[lem2.2\], we know that the left side hand is achieved at some radial function, and the inequality in (\[eq2.10\]) becomes equality if and only if $v$ is radial. Thus, all the minimizers of $S_{0,\,\mu}$ is radial.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asymptotic behavior of extremal functions {#Behavior}
=========================================
In this section, we describe the asymptotic behavior of radial extremal functions of $S_{0,\,\mu}$. Our argument here is similar to that in §3.2 of [@AFP]. Let $u(r)$ be a nonnegative radial solution to (\[eq2.1\]). Rewriting in polar coordinates, we have $$\label{eq3.1}
(r^{N-1-ap}|u'|^{p-2}u')'+r^{N-1}(\mu\frac{|u|^{p-2}u}{r^{(a+1)p}}+\frac{|u|^{p_\ast-2}u}{r^{bp_\ast}})=0.$$ Set $$\label{eq3.2}
t=\log r,\quad y(t)=r^\delta u(r),\quad
z(t)=r^{(1+\delta)(p-1)}|u'(r)|^{p-2}u'(r),$$ where $\delta=\frac{N-(a+1)p}{p}$. A simple calculation shows that $$\label{eq3.3}
\left\{{\begin{array}{l} \dfrac{{\rm d}y}{{\rm d}t}=\delta
y+|z|^{\frac{2-p}{p-1}}z;\\[3mm]
\dfrac{{\rm d}z}{{\rm d}t}=-\delta z-|y|^{p_\ast-2}y-\mu|y|^{p-2}y.
\end{array}}\right.$$ It follows from (\[eq3.3\]) that $y$ satisfies the following equation: $$\label{eq3.4}
(p-1)|\delta y-y'|^{p-2}(\delta y'-y'' )+\delta |\delta
y-y'|^{p-2}(\delta y-y')-\mu y^{p-1}-y^{p_\ast-1}=0.$$
It is easy to see that the complete integral of the autonomous system (\[eq3.3\]) is $$\label{eq3.5}
V(y,z)=\frac{1}{p_\ast}|y|^{p_\ast}+\frac{\mu}{p}|y|^p+\frac{p-1}{p}|z|^{\frac{p}{p-1}}+\delta
yz.$$ Similar to Lemma 3.6-3.9 in [@AFP], we have the following four lemmas. We will omit proofs of the first three lemmas because one only needs to replace $\delta=\frac{N-p}p$ there by $\delta=\frac{N-(a+1)p}{p}$ in our case. The interested reader can refer to [@AFP]. The idea of the fourth Lemma is also similar to that of Lemma 3.9 in [@AFP], with different choice of function $\xi$. We shall write down its complete proof for completeness.
\[lem3.1\] $y$ and $z$ are bounded.
\[lem3.2\] For any $t\in\mathbb{R}^N$, $(y(t),z(t))\in \{(y,z)\in\mathbb{R}^2:V(y,z)=0\}.$
\[lem3.3\] There exists $t_0\in\mathbb{R}$, such that $y(t)$ is strictly increasing for $t<t_0$; and strictly decreasing for $t>t_0$. Furthermore, we have $$\label{eq3.6}
\underset{t\in\mathbb{R}}{\max}\
y(t)=y(t_0)=[\frac{N}{N-(a+1-b)p}(\delta^p-\mu)]^{\frac{1}{p_\ast-p}}$$
\[lem3.4\] Suppose that $y$ is a positive solution to (\[eq3.4\]) such that $y$ is increasing in $(-\infty,0)$ and decreasing in $(0,+\infty)$, then there exist $c_1,c_2>0$, such that $$\label{eq3.7}
\underset{t\rightarrow-\infty}{\lim}e^{(l_1-\delta)t}y(t)=y(0)c_1>0;$$ $$\label{eq3.8}
\underset{t\rightarrow+\infty}{\lim}e^{(l_2-\delta)t}y(t)=y(0)c_2>0,$$ where $l_1,l_2$ are zeros of function $\xi(s)=(p-1)s^p-(N-(a+1)p)s^{p-1}+\mu$ such that $0<l_1<l_2.$
[**Proof. **]{}First, it is easy to see that $l_1<\delta<l_2$. Next, we prove (\[eq3.7\]) step by step and omit the proof of (\[eq3.8\]).
**1.** It follows from (\[eq3.3\]) that $$\label{eq3.9}
\begin{array}{rl}
\frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}t}(e^{-(\delta-l_1)t}y(t))
&=-(\delta-l_1)e^{-(\delta-l_1)t}y(t)+e^{-(\delta-l_1)t}(\delta y(t)+|z|^{\frac{1}{p-1}})\\
&=e^{-(\delta-l_1)t}y(t)(l_1-\frac{|z(t)|^{\frac{1}{p-1}}}{y(t)}).\\
\end{array}$$ Rewritting the above equation into the integral form, we have $$\label{eq3.10}
e^{-(\delta-l_1)t}y(t)=y(0)e^{-\int_{t}^{0}(l_1-y(s)^{-1}|z(s)|^{1/p-1}){\rm
d}s}.$$
**2.** Let $H(s)=\frac{|z(s)|^{\frac{1}{p-1}}}{y(s)}$.
**Claim:** $H(s)$ is a increasing function from $(-\infty,0]$ into $(l_1,\delta]$.
In fact, we shall prove that $H'(s)>0$ for $s<0$. Otherwise, we prove by contradiction, suppose that there exists $s_0<0$ such that $H'(s_0)\leqslant0$. A direct computation shows that $$H'(s)=\frac{-\frac{1}{p-1}y(s)z'(s)|z(s)|^{\frac{2-p}{p-1}}-|z(s)|^{\frac{1}{p-1}}y'(s)}{y^2(s)}.$$ Replacing formulas of $y'(s_0)$ and $z'(s_0)$ from (\[eq3.3\]), and noting that (\[eq3.5\]) and Lemma \[lem3.2\], it follows that $$H'(s_0)=(\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{p_\ast})y^{p_\ast}(s_0)\leqslant0,$$ which contradicts to the fact that $y>0$. Thus, $H'(s)>0$, and hence $H$ is strictly increasing on $(-\infty,0]$.
On the other hand, from (\[eq3.3\]) and $y'(0)=0$, we have $H(0)=\delta$; from (\[eq3.5\]), it follows that $\underset{t\rightarrow-\infty}{\lim}H(s)=l_1$, which proves our claim.
**3.** (\[eq3.7\]) holds.
From the above claim and (\[eq3.10\]), it follows that $e^{-(\delta-l_1)t}y(t)>0$ is decreasing on $(-\infty,0]$, and hence the limit $\underset{t\rightarrow-\infty}{\lim}e^{-(\delta-l_1)t}y(t)$ exists. Set $$\alpha\equiv\underset{t\rightarrow-\infty}{\lim}e^{-(\delta-l_1)t}y(t)=
y(0)e^{\int_{-\infty}^{0}(H(s)-l_1)ds}.$$ To prove (\[eq3.7\]), it suffices to show that $\alpha<-\infty$. From (\[eq3.3\]) and (\[eq3.5\]), a direct computation shows that $$H'(s)=-\frac{(a+1-b)p}{(p-1)(N-(a+1-b)p)}H(s)^{2-p}\xi(H(s)),$$ where $$\xi(s)=(p-1)s^p-(N-(a+1)p)s^{p-1}+\mu.$$ From the definitions of $l_1,l_2$, we may suppose that $$H'(s)=(H(s)-l_1)(H(s)-l_2)g(H(s)),$$ where $g$ is a continuous negative function on the interval $[l_1,\delta]$, thus satisfies $|g(H(s))|\geqslant c_1>0$. From (\[eq3.10\]), it follows that $$\alpha=\underset{t\rightarrow-\infty}{\lim}e^{(\delta-l_1)t}y(t)=y(0)e^{\int_{-\infty}^{0}(H(s)-l_1){\rm
d}s} =y(0)e^{\int_{l_1}^{\delta}[(H(s)-l_2)g(H(s))]^{-1}{\rm
d}H(s)}.$$ Since $l_2>\delta$ and $|g(H(s))|\geqslant c_1$ on $[l_1,\delta]$, we know that $$\int_{l_1}^{\delta}[(H(s)-l_2)g(H(s))]^{-1}{\rm d}H(s)<+\infty,$$ that is, $\alpha<+\infty$, thus (\[eq3.7\]) follows.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the following corollary, we rewrite these conclusions on $y$ into those on the positive solution $u\in
\mathfrak{D}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N)$ of equation (\[eq3.1\]).
\[coro3.1\] Let $u\in
\mathfrak{D}^{1,p}(\mathbb{R}^N)$ be a positive solution of equation (\[eq3.1\]). Then there exists two positive constants $C_1, C_2>0$ such that $$\label{eq3.11}
\lim_{r\rightarrow 0}\, r^{l_1}u(r)=C_1>0, \quad\quad
\lim_{r\rightarrow+\infty}\, r^{l_2}u(r)=C_2>0.$$ and $$\label{eq3.13}
\lim_{r\rightarrow0}\, r^{l_1+1}|u'(r)|=C_1 l_1>0,
\quad\quad \lim_{r\rightarrow+\infty}\,
r^{l_2+1}|u'(r)|=C_2 l_2>0.$$
[**Proof. **]{}From (\[eq3.2\]), we know $u(r)=r^{-\delta}y(t)$. Applying Lemma \[lem3.4\] directly, we have $$\lim_{r\rightarrow0}\,
r^{l_1}u(r)=\lim_{t\rightarrow-\infty}\,
e^{(l_1-\delta)t}y(t)=y(0)c_1=C_1>0,$$ $$\lim_{r\rightarrow+\infty}\, r^{l_2}
u(r)=\lim_{t\rightarrow+\infty}\,
e^{(l_2-\delta)t}y(t)=y(0)c_2=C_2>0.$$
Noting that $\lim\limits_{t\rightarrow-\infty}H(t)=l_1$ and $\lim\limits_{t\rightarrow+\infty}\,H(t)=l_2$, it follows that $$\label{eq3.14}
\begin{split}
\lim_{r\rightarrow0}\,r^{l_1}u(r)\cdot H(t)
&=\lim_{r\rightarrow0}\,r^{l_1}u(r)\cdot
\frac{|z(t)|^{\frac{1}{p-1}}}{y(t)}
=\lim_{r\rightarrow0}\,r^{l_1}u(r)\cdot
\frac{r^{1+\delta}|u'(r)|}{r^{\delta}u(r)}\\
&=\lim_{r\rightarrow0}\,r^{l_1+1}|u'(r)| =C_1l_1>0
\end{split}$$ and $$\label{eq3.15}
\begin{split}\lim_{r\rightarrow+\infty}\,r^{l_2}u(r)\cdot H(t)&
=\lim_{r\rightarrow+\infty}\,r^{l_2}u(r)\cdot
\frac{|z(t)|^{\frac{1}{p-1}}}{y(t)}
=\lim_{r\rightarrow+\infty}\,r^{l_2}u(r)\cdot
\frac{r^{1+\delta}|u'(r)|}{r^{\delta}u(r)}\\
&=\lim_{r\rightarrow+\infty}\,r^{l_2+1}|u'(r)|=C_2l_2>0.\
\end{split}$$
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, we shall give a uniqueness result of positive solution of equation (\[eq3.1\]).
\[thm3.1\] Suppose that $u_1(r)$ and $u_2(r)$ are two positive solutions of equation (\[eq3.1\]). Let $(y_1(t),z_1(t))$ and $(y_2(t),z_2(t))$ be two solutions to ODE system (\[eq3.5\]) corresponding to $u_1(r)$ and $u_2(r)$ respectively. If $$\label{eq3.16}
\underset{t\in(\infty,+\infty)}{\max}y_1(t)=y_1(0)=[\frac{N}{N-(a+1-b)p}(\delta^p-\mu)]^{\frac{1}{p_\ast-p}},$$ and $y_2(0)=y_1(0)$. Then $(y_1(t),z_1(t))=(y_2(t),z_2(t))$, hence $u_1=u_2$.
[**Proof. **]{}The proof is similar to that of Theorem 3.11 in [@AFP].
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similar to Theorem 3.13 in [@AFP], we resume the above results together and obtain the following theorem which describes the asymptotic behavior of all the radial solutions to equation (\[eq3.1\]).
\[thm3.2\] All positive radial solutions to equation (\[eq2.1\]) have the form: $$\label{eq3.17}
u(\cdot)=\varepsilon^{-\frac{N-(a+1)p}{p}}u_0(\frac{\cdot}{\varepsilon}),$$ where $u_0$ is a solution to equation (\[eq2.1\]) satisfying $u_0(1)=y(0)=[\frac{N}{N-(a+1-b)p}(\delta^p-\mu)]^{\frac{1}{p_\ast-p}}$. Furthermore, there exist constants $C_1,C_2>0$ such that $$\label{eq3.18}
0<C_1\leqslant\frac{u_0(x)}{(|x|^{l_1/\delta}+|x|^{l_2/\delta})^{-\delta}}\leqslant
C_2,$$ where $l_1,l_2$ are the two zeros of function $\xi(s)=(p-1)s^p-(N-(a+1)p)s^{p-1}+\mu$ satisfying $0<l_1<l_2.$
Strict inequality (\[eq1.4\])
=============================
In this section, applying the asymptotic behavior of the solutions to equation (\[eq2.1\]) obtained in the previous section, we give some estimates on the extremal function of $S_{0,\,\mu}$. Let $u_0$ be an extremal function of $S_{0,\,\mu}$ with $\|u_0;L_b^{p_\ast}(\mathbb{R}^N)\|=1$. From the discussion in Section 2 and 3, we know that $u_0$ is radial, and for all $\varepsilon>0$, $$U_\varepsilon(r)=\varepsilon^{-\frac{N-(a+1)p}{p}}u_0(\frac{r}{\varepsilon})$$ is also an extremal function of $S_{0,\,\mu}$, and there exists a positive constant $C_\varepsilon$ such that $C_\varepsilon
U_\varepsilon$ is a solution to equation (\[eq2.1\]). In fact, from the proof of Lemma \[lem2.3\], we know that $C_\varepsilon=S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{1}{p_\ast-p}}$, which is independent of $\varepsilon$, denoted by $C_0$. Set $u_{\varepsilon}^{\ast}=C_0 U_\varepsilon$, then from equation (\[eq2.1\]) we have $$\label{eq4.1}
Q_\mu(u_{\varepsilon}^\ast)=\|u_{\varepsilon}^{\ast};
{L_b^{p_\ast}} \|^{p_\ast}=S_{0,\,\mu}^
{\frac{p_\ast}{p_\ast-p}}=S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p}}.$$
For any $\varepsilon>0$, and $m\in\mathbb{N}$ large enough such that $B_{\frac{1}{m}}\subseteq \Omega$, define $$\label{eq4.2}
u_{\varepsilon}^m(x)= \Big\{{\begin{array}{l}
u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)-u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(\frac{1}{m}),\quad x\in B_{\frac{1}{m}}\backslash\{0\};\\
0,\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\ \ x\in\Omega\backslash
B_{\frac{1}{m}}.
\end{array}}$$
\[lem4.1\] Set $\varepsilon=m^{-h},\ h>1$. Then as $m\to \infty$, we have $$\label{eq4.3}
Q_\mu(u_{\varepsilon}^m)\leqslant
S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p}}+{\cal O}(m^{-(h-1)[(a+1+l_2)p-N]}),$$ and $$\label{eq4.4}
\|u_{\varepsilon}^{\ast}; {L_b^{p_\ast}} \|^{p_\ast}\geqslant
S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p}}- {\cal
O}(m^{-(h-1)[(b+l_2)p_*-N]}),$$ where and afterward ${\cal O}(m^{-\alpha})$ denotes a positive quality which is $O(m^{-\alpha})$, but is not $o(m^{-\alpha})$, as $m\to \infty$.
[**Proof. **]{}We shall only prove (\[eq4.3\]), and omit the prove of (\[eq4.4\]).
Since $Q_\mu(u_{\varepsilon}^m)=
\int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\frac{|Du_{\varepsilon}^m|^p}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x-\mu\int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\frac{|u_{\varepsilon}^m|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,{\rm
d}x$, we estimate each term in $Q_\mu(u_{\varepsilon}^m)$ as follows: $$\label{eq4.5}\begin{array}{rl}
\displaystyle \int_\Omega\frac{|{\rm
D}u_{\varepsilon}^m|^p}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm d}x &=\displaystyle
\int_{B_{\frac{1}{m}}}\frac{|{\rm
D}u_{\varepsilon}^\ast|^p}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x\\[5mm]
&=\displaystyle \int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\frac{|{\rm
D}u_{\varepsilon}^\ast|^p}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm d}x
-\int_{\mathbb{R}^N\backslash B_{\frac{1}{m}}}\frac{|{\rm
D}u_{\varepsilon}^\ast|^p}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm d}x\\
&\leqslant \displaystyle \int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\frac{|{\rm
D}u_{\varepsilon}^\ast|^p}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm d}x
\end{array}$$ and $$\label{eq4.6}\begin{array}{rl}
\displaystyle
&\displaystyle\int_\Omega\frac{|u_{\varepsilon}^m|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,{\rm
d}x =\displaystyle \int_{B_{\frac{1}{m}}}
\frac{(u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)- u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(\frac1m)
)^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}} \,{\rm d}x\\[5mm]
&\ \geqslant\displaystyle \int_{B_{\frac{1}{m}}}
\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^p -p
u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(\frac1m)u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^{p-1}}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
\,{\rm
d}x\\[5mm]
&\ =\displaystyle \int_{\mathbb{R}^N}
\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}} \,{\rm d}x
-\int_{\mathbb{R}^N\backslash
B_{\frac{1}{m}}}\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
\,{\rm d}x
-p u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(\frac1m) \displaystyle
\int_{B_{\frac{1}{m}}}\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^{p-1}}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
\,{\rm d}x.
\end{array}$$ On the other hand, from the definition of $u_{\varepsilon}^\ast$, we have $$\label{eq4.7}\begin{array}{rl}
\displaystyle \int_{\mathbb{R}^N\backslash
B_{\frac{1}{m}}}\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
\,{\rm d}x &=C_0^p\omega_N \displaystyle \int_{\frac1m}^{+\infty}
\frac{\varepsilon ^{-[N-(a+1)p]} u_0(\frac
r\varepsilon)^p}{r^{(a+1)p}} r^{N-1}\,{\rm d}r\\[3mm]
& =C_0^p\omega_N \displaystyle \int_{m^{h-1}}^{+\infty} u_0(t)^p
t^{N-1-(a+1)p} \,{\rm d}t
\\[3mm]
& ={\cal O}(m^{-(h-1)[(a+1+l_2)p-N]}),
\end{array}$$ where in the second equality, we make the change of variable $t=\frac r\varepsilon$, and in the last equality, we use the asymptotic behavior of $u_0$ at the infinity, since $h>1$, hence $m^{h-1}\to \infty$ as $m\to \infty$. Note that $\xi^\prime(l_2)=p(p-1)l_2^{p-1}-(p-1)(N-(a+1)p)l_2^{p-2}>0$, that is $(a+1+l_2)p-N>0$. Similarly, we can estimate the last integration in (\[eq4.6\]) as follows: $$\label{eq4.8}\begin{array}{rl}
u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(\frac1m) \displaystyle
\int_{B_{\frac{1}{m}}}\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^{p-1}}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
\,{\rm d}x &=C_0^p\omega_N u_0(\frac1{m\varepsilon})
\displaystyle \int_0^{\frac1m} \frac{\varepsilon ^{-[N-(a+1)p]}
u_0(\frac r\varepsilon)^{p-1}}{r^{(a+1)p}} r^{N-1}\,{\rm d}r\\[3mm]
&=C_0^p\omega_N u_0(m^{h-1}) \displaystyle \int_0^{m^{h-1}}
u_0(t)^{p-1} t^{N-1-(a+1)p} \,{\rm d}t
\\[3mm]
& \leqslant C_0^p\omega_N C_2 m^{-(h-1)l_2p}
[C+m^{(h-1)[N-(a+1)p-(p-1)l_2]} ]
\\[3mm]
&={\cal O}(m^{-(h-1)[(a+1+l_2)p-N]}),
\end{array}$$ where the last equality is from $\xi(l_2)=0$ and so $N-(a+1)p-(p-1)l_2=\mu/l_2^{p-1}>0$. Thus, (\[eq4.3\]) follows from (\[eq4.5\])-(\[eq4.8\]).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[lem4.2\] Set $\varepsilon=m^{-h},\ h>1$. If $c<(a+1+l_2)p-N$, then $$\label{eq4.9}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\frac{|u_{\varepsilon}^m(x)|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\,{\rm
d}x\geqslant {\cal O}(m^{-ch}).$$
[**Proof. **]{}A direct computation shows that $$\begin{array}{rl}
& \displaystyle
\int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\frac{|u_{\varepsilon}^m(x)|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\,{\rm
d}x =\displaystyle \int_{B_{\frac{1}{m}}}
\frac{(u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)- u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(\frac1m)
)^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}} \,{\rm d}x\\[5mm]
&\ \ \ \geqslant\displaystyle \int_{B_{\frac{1}{m}}}
\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^p -p
u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(\frac1m)u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^{p-1}}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}
\,{\rm
d}x\\[5mm]
& \ \ \ =\displaystyle \int_{\mathbb{R}^N}
\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}} \,{\rm d}x
-\int_{\mathbb{R}^N\backslash
B_{\frac{1}{m}}}\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}
\,{\rm d}x -p u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(\frac1m) \displaystyle
\int_{B_{\frac{1}{m}}}\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^{p-1}}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}
\,{\rm d}x.
\end{array}$$ We estimate each of the above integrations as follows: $$\label{eq4.10}
\displaystyle \int_{\mathbb{R}^N}
\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}} \,{\rm d}x
=C_0^p\omega_N\varepsilon^c \int_0^\infty
u_0(t)^pt^{N-1-(a+1)p+c}\, {\rm d}x
= {\cal O}(m^{-ch}),$$ $$\label{eq4.11}
\begin{array}{rl}
\displaystyle \int_{\mathbb{R}^N\backslash
B_{\frac{1}{m}}}\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}
\,{\rm d}x&=C_0^p\omega_N
\varepsilon^c\displaystyle\int_{m^{h-1}}^\infty
u_0(t)^pt^{N-1-(a+1)p+c}\, {\rm d}x\\
&={\cal O}(m^{-(h-1)[(a+1+l_2)p-N]-c})
\end{array}$$ and $$\label{eq4.12}
\begin{array}{rl}
u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(\frac1m) \displaystyle
\int_{B_{\frac{1}{m}}}\frac{u_{\varepsilon}^\ast(x)^{p-1}}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}
\,{\rm d}x &=C_0^p\omega_N u_0(\frac1{m\varepsilon})
\displaystyle \int_0^{\frac1m} \frac{\varepsilon ^{-[N-(a+1)p]}
u_0(\frac r\varepsilon)^{p-1}}{r^{(a+1)p-c}} r^{N-1}\,{\rm d}r\\[3mm]
& =C_0^p\omega_N u_0(m^{h-1}) \varepsilon^c\displaystyle
\int_0^{m^{h-1}} u_0(t)^{p-1} t^{N-1-(a+1)p+c} \,{\rm d}t
\\[3mm]
&\leqslant C_0^p\omega_N C_2 m^{-(h-1)l_2p-ch}
[C+m^{(h-1)[N-(a+1)p-(p-1)l_2]} ]
\\[3mm]
& ={\cal O}(m^{-(h-1)[(a+1+l_2)p-N]-c}).
\end{array}$$ Note that since $c<(a+1+l_2)p-N$, we have $-ch>
-(h-1)[(a+1+l_2)p-N]-c$, that is, we prove the lemma.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let $\Omega$ be a smooth bounded open domain in $\mathbb{R}^N$ with $0\in \Omega$, define $\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$ as the closure of $C_0^\infty (\Omega)$ under the norm $\| u
\|_{\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)}=\| |{\rm D}u|; L_a^p
(\Omega) \|$ and $$\label{eq4.13}
S_{\lambda,\,\mu}(p,a,b;\Omega)=\inf\left\{Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u)\ :\
u\in \mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega),\
\|u;L_b^{p_\ast}(\Omega)\|=1\right\},$$ where $$Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u)=\int_{\Omega}\frac{|{\rm
D}u|^p}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x-\mu\int_{\Omega}\frac{|u|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,{\rm d}x - \lambda
\int_{\Omega}\frac{|u|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\,{\rm d}x.$$ If $\lambda=0$, by rescaling argument, it is easy to show that $S_{0,\,\mu}(p,a,b;\Omega)=S_{0,\,\mu}$. But for $\lambda>0$, we shall have a strict inequality between $S_{\lambda,\,\mu}(p,a,b;\Omega)$ and $S_{0,\,\mu}$.
\[thm4.1\] If $\mu\in (0,\ \overline{\mu}),\ \lambda>0,\ b\in [a,\ a+1),\ c\in (0,\
(a+1+l_2)p-N)$, then the strict inequality (\[eq1.4\]) holds.
[**Proof. **]{}We shall study $$\frac{Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u_\varepsilon^m)}{\|u_\varepsilon^m;
L_b^{p_*}(\Omega)\|^p}.$$ It follows from Lemma 4.1 and 4.2 that $$\label{eq4.14}
\begin{array}{rl}
Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u_\varepsilon^m) &=Q_\mu(u_\varepsilon^m)
-\lambda\displaystyle \int_\Omega
\frac{|u_{\varepsilon}^m(x)|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\,{\rm
d}x \\
&\leqslant S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p}}+{\cal
O}(m^{-(h-1)[(a+1+l_2)p-N]})-{\cal O}(m^{-ch})
\end{array}$$ and $$\label{eq4.15}
\begin{array}{rl}
\|u_\varepsilon^m; L_b^{p_*}(\Omega)\|^p &\geqslant
S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p_*}} -{\cal
O}(m^{-(h-1)[(b+l_2)p_*-N]p/p_*})\\
&= S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p_*}}-{\cal
O}(m^{-(h-1)[(a+1+l_2)p-N]}).
\end{array}$$ Thus, we have $$\label{eq4.16}
\begin{array}{rl}
\dfrac{Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u_\varepsilon^m)}{\|u_\varepsilon^m;
L_b^{p_*}(\Omega)\|^p} &\leqslant
\dfrac{S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p}}+{\cal
O}(m^{-(h-1)[(a+1+l_2)p-N]})-{\cal
O}(m^{-ch})}{S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p_*}} -{\cal
O}(m^{-(h-1)[(b+l_2)p_*-N]p/p_*})}\\
&= S_{0,\,\mu} +{\cal
O}(m^{-(h-1)[(a+1+l_2)p-N]}) - {\cal O}(m^{-ch}).
\end{array}$$ If $c\in (0,\ (a+1+l_2)p-N)$, we can choose $h$ large enough such that $c<(h-1)(a+1+l_2)p-N)/h$ and so $-ch > -(h-1)[(a+1+l_2)p-N]$, thus as $m$ large enough, (\[eq1.4\]) holds.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application
===========
In this section, as an application of the strict inequality of (\[eq1.4\]), we consider the existence of nontrivial solutions to the following quasilinear Brezis-Nirenberg type problem involving Hardy potential and Sobolev critical exponent:
$$\label{eq5.1}
\left\{ {\begin{array}{rl} -\mbox{div}(\dfrac{|{\rm D}u|^{p-2}{\rm
D}u}{|x|^{ap}})-\mu\dfrac{|u|^{p-2}u}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
&=\dfrac{|u|^{{p_\ast}-2}u}{|x|^{bp_\ast}}+\lambda\dfrac{|u|^{p-2}u}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}, \mbox{ in}\ \Omega,\\[3mm]
u&=0, \mbox{ on}\ \partial\,\Omega,
\end{array}} \right.$$
where $\Omega\subset \mathbb{R}^N$ is an open bounded domain with $C^1$ boundary and $0\in \Omega$, $1<p<N,\
p_\ast=\frac{Np}{N-(a+1-b)p}$, $0\leq a<\frac{N-p}{p},\ a\leqslant b<(a+1),\
c>0$; $\lambda,\ \mu$ are two positive real parameters.
To obtain the existence result, let’s define the energy functional $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}$ on $\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$ as $$E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u)=\frac1p\int_\Omega \left[ \frac{|{\rm D}u|^p}{|x|^{ap}}-\mu \frac{|u|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
-\lambda\frac{|u|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\right]\,{\rm
d}x -\frac1 {p_*}\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p_*}}{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x.$$ It is easy to see that $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}$ is well-defined in $\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$, and $E_{\lambda,\,\mu} \in C^1(\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega), \mathbb{R})$. Furthermore, all the critical points of $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}$ are weak solutions to (\[eq5.1\]). We shall apply the Mountain Pass Lemma without (PS) condition due to Ambrosetti and Rabinowitz [@AR] to ensure the existence of (PS)$_\beta$ sequence of $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}$ at some Mountain Pass type minimax value level $\beta$. Then the strict inequality (\[eq1.4\]) implies that $\beta< \frac {a+1-b}N S_{0, \mu}^\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p}$. Finally, combining the generalized concentration compactness principle and a compactness property called singular Palais-Smale condition due to Boccardo and Murat [@BM](cf. also [@GP]), we shall obtain the existence of nontrivial solutions to (\[eq5.1\]).
Let’s define two more functionals on $\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$ as follows: $$I_\mu(u)=\frac1p\int_\Omega \frac{|{\rm D}u|^p}{|x|^{ap}}\,\,{\rm
d}x -\frac\mu p\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,\,{\rm
d}x,\ J(u)=\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\,\,{\rm
d}x,$$ and denote ${\cal M}=\{u\in \mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)\ : \ J(u)=1 \}$. For $\mu\in (0, \overline{\mu})$, the Hardy inequality shows that $\frac1p \frac{|{\rm D}u|^p}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x -\frac\mu p \frac{|u|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,{\rm
d}x$ is nonnegative measure on $\Omega$. The classical results in the Calculus of Variations(cf. [@SM]) show that $I_\mu$ is lower semicontinuity on ${\cal M}$. On the other hand the compact imbedding theorem in [@XBJ] implies that ${\cal M}$ is weakly closed. Thus the direct method ensure that $I_\mu$ attains its minimum on ${\cal M}$, denote $\lambda_1=\min \{I_\mu(u) \ :\ u\in {\cal M} \}>0$. From the homogeneity of $I_\mu$ and $J$, $\lambda_1$ is the first nonlinear eigenvalue of problem: $$\label{eq5.3}
\left\{ {\begin{array}{rl} -\mbox{div}(\dfrac{|{\rm D}u|^{p-2}{\rm
D}u}{|x|^{ap}})-\mu\dfrac{|u|^{p-2}u}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
&=\lambda\dfrac{|u|^{p-2}u}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}, \mbox{in}\ \Omega,\\
u&=0, \mbox{on}\ \partial\,\Omega.
\end{array}} \right.$$
The following lemma indicates that $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}$ satisfies the geometric condition of Mountain Pass Lemma without (PS) condition due to Ambrosetti and Rabinowitz [@AR], the proof is direct and omitted.
\[lem5.1\] If $\mu\in (0,\ \mu), \lambda\in (0,\ \lambda_1)$, then
1. $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(0)=0$;
2. $\exists \,\alpha, r>0$, s.t. $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u)\geqslant \alpha$, if $\|u\|=r$;
3. For any $v\in \mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega),\ v\neq 0$, there exists $T>0$ such that $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(tv)\leqslant 0$ if $t>T$.
For $v\in \mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$ with $\|v\|>r$ and $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(v)\leqslant 0$, set $$\beta:=\inf_{\gamma\in\Gamma} \max_{t\in [0, 1]} E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(\gamma(t)),$$ where $$\Gamma:=\{\gamma\in C([0, 1], \mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)) \ | \ \gamma(0)=0,\ \gamma(1)=v \}.$$ It is easy to see that $\beta$ is independent of the choice of $v$ such that $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(v)\leqslant 0$, and furthermore $\beta\geqslant \alpha$. If $\beta$ is finite, from Lemma \[lem5.1\] and Mountain Pass Lemma, there exists a (PS)$_\beta$ sequence $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ of $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}$ at level $\beta$, that is, $E_{\lambda,\,\mu} (u_m) \to \beta$ and $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}^\prime (u_m) \to 0$ in the dual space $(\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega))^\prime$ of $\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$ as $m\to \infty$.
\[lem5.2\] If $\mu\in (0,\ \overline{\mu}), \lambda\in (0,\ \lambda_1)$, then the strict inequality (\[eq1.4\]) is equivalent to $$\label{eq5.4}\beta< \frac{a+1-b}{N}S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p}}.$$
[**Proof. **]{}**1.** (\[eq1.4\]) $\implies$ (\[eq5.4\]).
Let $v_1$ be a function such that $\|v_1; L_b^{p_*}(\Omega)\|=1$, and $Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(v_1)<S_{0,\,\mu}$. We have $$\label{eq5.5}
\begin{array}{rl}\beta & \leqslant\sup\limits _{0<t<\infty} E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(tv_1)=\sup\limits _{0<t<\infty}
(\dfrac{t^p}p Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(v_1)-\dfrac{t^{p_*}}{p_*})\\
& = (\dfrac 1p-\dfrac1{p_*})Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(v_1)^{\frac{p_*}{p_*-p}}=\dfrac{a+1-b}N Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(v_1)^{\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p}}\\
& <\dfrac{a+1-b}N S_{0,\,\mu}^{\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p}}.
\end{array}$$
**2.** (\[eq5.4\]) $\implies$ (\[eq1.4\]).
Since $\lambda<\lambda_1$, for $u=g(t)=tv$ with $t$ closed to $0$, we have $(D E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u), u)>0$; while for $u=g(1)=v$, we have $$(D E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(v), v)< p E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(v)\leqslant 0.$$ Consider function $f(t)=E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(tv)\in C^1([0,1],\, \mathbb{R})$, we have that $f^\prime (t)>0$ for $t$ closed to $0$, and $f_-^\prime(1)\leqslant 0$. From the medium value theorem, there exists $t_0\in (0, 1)$ such that $f^\prime(t_0)=0$, that is, for $u=t_0v$, we have $$(D E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u), u)=Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u)-\|u; L_b^{p_*}(\Omega)\|^{p_*}=0.$$ Thus a direct computation shows that $$\frac{Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u)}{\|u; L_b^{p_*}(\Omega)\|^{p}} =Q_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u)^{1-p/p_*}
=(\frac{N}{a+1-b} E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u) )^\frac{(a+1-b)p}{N},$$ that is, $$\beta=\inf_{\gamma\in\Gamma} \max_{t\in [0, 1]} E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(\gamma(t))\geqslant
\frac{a+1-b}N S_{\lambda,\,\mu}(p, a, b, \Omega)^\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p}.$$ Hence (\[eq5.4\]) $\implies$ (\[eq1.4\]).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\[lem5.3\] If $\mu\in (0,\ \overline{\mu}), \lambda\in (0,\ \lambda_1)$, then any (PS)$_\beta$ sequence of $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}$ is bounded in $\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$.
[**Proof. **]{}Suppose that $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ is a (PS)$_\beta$ sequence of $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}$. As $m\to \infty$, we have $$\label{eq5.6}
\begin{array}{ll} & \beta+o(1) =E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u_m)\\[2mm]
&\ \ \ \ =\dfrac1p\displaystyle \int_\Omega \left[ \frac{|{\rm D}u_m|^p}{|x|^{ap}}-\mu \frac{|u_m|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
-\lambda\frac{|u_m|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\right]\,{\rm
d}x -\dfrac1 {p_*}\displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u_m|^{p_*}}{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x
\end{array}$$ and $$\label{eq5.7}
\begin{array}{rl} & o(1)\|\varphi\| =({\rm D} E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u_m), \varphi)\\[2mm]
&\ \ \ \ \ =\displaystyle\int_\Omega \left[ \frac{|{\rm D}u_m|^{p-2} {\rm D}u_m \cdot {\rm D}\varphi}{|x|^{ap}}
-\mu \frac{|u_m|^{p-2} u_m \varphi}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
-\lambda\frac{|u_m|^{p-2} u_m \varphi}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\right]\,{\rm
d}x \\[4mm]
&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ -\displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u_m|^{p_*-2}u_m \varphi}{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x,
\end{array}$$ for any $\varphi \in \mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$. From (\[eq5.6\]) and (\[eq5.7\]), as $m\to \infty$, it follows that $$\begin{array}{rl} p_*\beta+o(1)-o(1)\|u_m\|& =p_*E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u_m) - ({\rm D} E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u_m), u_m)\\[2mm]
&=(\dfrac{p_*}p-1) \displaystyle \int_\Omega \left[ \frac{|{\rm D}u_m|^p}{|x|^{ap}}-\mu \frac{|u_m|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
-\lambda\frac{|u_m|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\right]\,{\rm
d}x \\[4mm]
& \geqslant (\dfrac{p_*}p-1)(1-\dfrac{\lambda}{\lambda_1})\displaystyle \int_\Omega \left[
\frac{|{\rm D}u_m|^p}{|x|^{ap}}-\mu \frac{|u_m|^p}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}
\right]\,{\rm
d}x\\[4mm]
& \geqslant (\dfrac{p_*}p-1)(1-\dfrac{\lambda}{\lambda_1})(1-\dfrac{\mu}{\overline{\mu}})\|u_m\|^p.
\end{array}$$ Thus, $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ is bounded in $\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$ if $\mu\in (0,\ \mu), \lambda\in (0,\ \lambda_1)$.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the boundedness of $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ in $\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$, we have the following medium convergence: $$u_m \rightharpoonup u \mbox{ in } \mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega), \ L_1^{p}(\Omega) \mbox{ and } L_b^{p_*}(\Omega),$$ $$u_m \to u \mbox{ in } L_\alpha^{r}(\Omega)\ \mbox{ if } 1\leq r<\frac{Np}{N-p},\ \frac\alpha r< (a+1)+N(\frac1r-\frac1p),$$ $$u_m \to u\ \ \mbox{a.e. in } \Omega.$$
In order to obtain the strong convergence of $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ in $L_b^{p_*}(\Omega)$, we need the following generalized concentration compactness principle(cf. also [@TY]) and [@WW] and references therein), the proof is similar to that in [@LPL2] and we omit it.
\[lem5.4\] Suppose that ${\cal M}(\mathbb{R}^N)$ is the space of bounded measures on $\mathbb{R}^N$, and $\{u_m\}\subset \mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$ is a sequence such that: $$\begin{array}{ll}
u_m \rightharpoonup u & \mbox{ in } \mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega),\\[2mm]
\xi_m:=\left(|x|^{-ap}|{\rm D}u_m|^p-\mu |x|^{-(a+1)p}|u_m|^p \right) \,{\rm
d}x \rightharpoonup \xi & \mbox{ in } {\cal M}(\mathbb{R}^N),\\[2mm]
\nu_m:=|x|^{-bp_*}|u_m|^{p_*} \,{\rm
d}x\rightharpoonup \nu & \mbox{ in } {\cal M}(\mathbb{R}^N),\\[2mm]
u_m\to u & \mbox{ a.e. on } \mathbb{R}^N.
\end{array}$$ Then there are the following statements:
1. There exists some at most countable set $J$, a family $\{x^{(j)}\ :\ j\in J\}$ of distinct points in $\mathbb{R}^N$, and a family $\{\nu^{(j)}\ :\ j\in J \}$ of positive numbers such that $$\label{eq5.8}
\nu=|x|^{-bp_*}|u|^{p_*} \,{\rm
d}x+\sum_{j\in J} \nu^{(j)}\delta_{x^{(j)}},$$ where $\delta_x$ is the Dirac-mass of mass $1$ concentrated at $x\in \mathbb{R}^N$.
2. The following inequality holds $$\label{eq5.9}
\xi \geq (|x|^{-ap}|{\rm D}u|^p-\mu |x|^{-(a+1)p}|u|^p ) \,{\rm
d}x+\sum_{j\in J} \xi^{(j)}\delta_{x^{(j)}},$$ for some family $\{\xi^{(j)}>0\ :\ j\in J \}$ satisfying $$\label{eq5.10}
S_{0,\, \mu}\big( \nu^{(j)}\big)^{p/p_*}\leqslant \xi^{(j)},\ \ \mbox{for all }j\in J.$$ In particular, $\sum\limits_{j\in J}\big( \nu^{(j)}\big)^{p/p_*}<\infty$.
\[lem5.5\] If $\mu\in (0,\ \mu), \lambda\in (0,\ \lambda_1)$, let $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ be a (PS)$_\beta$ sequence of $E_{\lambda,\,\mu}$ at level $\beta$ defined above. (\[eq5.4\]) implies that $\nu^{(j)}=0$ for all $j\in J$, that is, up to a subsequence, $u_m\to u$ in $L_b^{p_*}(\Omega)$ as $m\to 0$.
[**Proof. **]{}From Lemma \[lem5.3\], $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$ is bounded in $\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$, then we have that $|{\rm D}u_m|^{p-2} {\rm D}u_m$ is bounded in $\left(L^{p\prime}(\Omega; |x|^{-ap}) \right)^N$, where $p^\prime$ is the conjugate exponent of $p$, i.e. $\frac1p+\frac1{p^\prime}=1$. Without loss of generality, we suppose that $T\in \left(L^{p\prime}(\Omega; |x|^{-ap}) \right)^N$ such that $$|{\rm D}u_m|^{p-2} {\rm D}u_m \rightharpoonup T \mbox{ in }\left(L^{p\prime}(\Omega; |x|^{-ap}) \right)^N.$$
Also, $|u_m|^{p-2} u_m$ is bounded in $L^{p\prime}(\Omega; |x|^{-(a+1)p})$, $|u_m|^{p_*-2} u_m$ is bounded in $L^{p_*\prime}(\Omega; |x|^{-bp_*})$, and $u_m\to u$ almost everywhere in $\Omega$, thus it follows that $$|u_m|^{p-2} u_m \rightharpoonup |u|^{p-2} u \mbox{ in } L^{p\prime}(\Omega; |x|^{-(a+1)p})$$ and $$|u_m|^{p_*-2} u_m \rightharpoonup |u|^{p_*-2} u \mbox{ in } L^{p_*\prime}(\Omega; |x|^{-bp_*}).$$ From the compactness imbedding theorem in [@XBJ], it follows that $$|u_m|^{p-2} u_m \to |u|^{p-2} u \mbox{ in } L^{p\prime}(\Omega; |x|^{-(a+1)p+c}).$$ Taking $m\to \infty$ in (\[eq5.7\]), we have $$\label{eq5.14}
\displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{T\cdot {\rm D}\varphi}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x=
\mu \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p-2} u \varphi}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,{\rm
d}x
+\lambda \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p-2} u \varphi}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\,{\rm
d}x + \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p_*-2}u \varphi}{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x,$$ for any $\varphi \in \mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega)$. Let $\varphi=\psi u_m$ in (\[eq5.7\]), where $\psi \in C(\bar\Omega)$, and take $m\to \infty$, it follows that $$\label{eq5.15}
\displaystyle\int_\Omega \psi \,{\rm
d}\xi+ \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{uT\cdot {\rm D}\psi}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x=
\displaystyle\int_\Omega \psi \,{\rm
d}\nu+
\lambda \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p} \psi}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\,{\rm
d}x.$$ Let $\varphi=\psi u$ in (\[eq5.14\]), it follows that $$\label{eq5.16}\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{uT\cdot {\rm D}\psi}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x& + \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{\psi T\cdot {\rm D}u}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x =
\mu \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p} \psi}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,{\rm
d}x\\[3mm]
& \ \ \
+\lambda \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p} \psi}{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\,{\rm
d}x+ \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p_*} \psi}{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x,
\end{array}$$ Thus, form (\[eq5.8\]) and Lemma \[lem5.4\], (\[eq5.15\])$-$(\[eq5.16\]) implies that $$\label{eq5.17}\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\int_\Omega \psi \,{\rm
d}\xi &=\displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{\psi T\cdot {\rm D}u}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x-\mu \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p} \psi}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,{\rm
d}x+\displaystyle\int_\Omega \psi \,{\rm
d}\nu-\displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p_*} \psi}{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x\\[3mm]
& =\displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{\psi T\cdot {\rm D}u}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x- \mu \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p} \psi}{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,{\rm
d}x+\sum_{j\in J} \nu^{(j)}\psi(x^{(j)}).
\end{array}$$ Letting $\psi\to \delta_{x^{(j)}}$, we have $$\xi^{(j)}= \nu^{(j)}.$$ Combining with (\[eq5.10\]), it follows that $\nu^{(j)} \geqslant S_{0,\, \mu}\big( \nu^{(j)}\big)^{p/q}$, which means that $$\label{eq5.18}\nu^{(j)} \geqslant S_{0,\, \mu}^\frac{N}{(a+1-b)p},$$ if $\nu^{(j)}\neq 0$. On the other hand, taking $m\to\infty$ in (\[eq5.6\]), and using (\[eq5.17\]) with $\psi\equiv 1$, (\[eq5.8\]) and (\[eq5.14\]), it follows that $$\label{eq5.19}\begin{array}{ll}
\beta & = \dfrac1p \displaystyle\int_\Omega \,{\rm
d}\xi -\dfrac{1}{p_*}\displaystyle\int_\Omega \,{\rm
d}\nu - \dfrac\lambda p \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p} }{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\,{\rm
d}x \\[3mm]
& =\dfrac1p\left( \sum\limits_{j\in J} \nu^{(j)}
+\displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{T\cdot {\rm D}u}{|x|^{ap}}\,{\rm
d}x- \mu \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p} }{|x|^{(a+1)p}}\,{\rm
d}x\right)\\[3mm]
&\ \ \ -\dfrac1{p_*}\left( \sum\limits_{j\in J} \nu^{(j)}
+ \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p_*} }{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x\right)- \dfrac\lambda p \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p} }{|x|^{(a+1)p-c}}\,{\rm
d}x \\[3mm]
&=(\dfrac1p- \dfrac1{p_*}) \sum\limits_{j\in J} \nu^{(j)}
+ (\dfrac1p- \dfrac1{p_*}) \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p_*}}{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x\\[3mm]
& \geqslant (\dfrac1p- \dfrac1{p_*}) \sum\limits_{j\in J} \nu^{(j)}
=\dfrac {a+1-b}N \sum\limits_{j\in J} \nu^{(j)}.
\end{array}$$ From (\[eq5.18\]), (\[eq5.19\]), (\[eq5.4\]) implies that $\nu^{(j)}=0$ for all $j\in J$. Hence we have $$\int_\Omega \frac{|u_m|^{p_*} }{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x \to \int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p_*} }{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x,$$ as $m\to \infty$. Thus, the Brezis-Lieb Lemma [@BL] implies that, up to a subsequence, $u_m\to u$ in $L_b^{p_*}(\Omega)$ as $m\to 0$.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to deduce the almost everywhere convergence of ${\rm D}u_m$ in $\Omega$ and to obtain existence of nontrivial solution to (\[eq5.1\]), we shall apply the variational approach supposed in [@GP] and a convergence theorem due to Boccardo and Murat(cf. Theorem 2.1 in [@BM]), so we suppose that $a=0$, and $\mathfrak{D}_{a,b}^{1,p}(\Omega) =W_0^{1,p}(\Omega)$.
\[thm5.1\] If $a=0, \mu\in (0,\ \overline{\mu}),\ \lambda\in (0,\ \lambda_1),\ b\in [0,\ 1),\ c\in (0,\
(1+l_2)p-N)$, then there exists a nontrivial solution to (\[eq5.1\]).
[**Proof. **]{}Apply the variational approach supposed in [@GP] and a convergence theorem in [@BM], there exists a subsequence of $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$, still denoted by $\{u_m\}_{m=1}^\infty$, such that $$u_m\to u \mbox{ in } W_0^{1,\,q}(\Omega),\ q<p,$$ which implies that $u$ is a solution to (\[eq5.1\]) in sense of distributions. Since $u\in W_0^{1,p}(\Omega)$, by density argument, $u$ is a weak solution to (\[eq5.1\]). Next, we shall show that $u\not\equiv 0$.
In fact, from the homogeneity and Lemma \[lem5.5\], we have $$\begin{array}{ll}
0<\alpha\leqslant \beta & =\lim\limits_{m\to\infty}E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u_m)
=\lim\limits_{m\to\infty}\left[E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u_m)
-\dfrac1p({\rm D} E_{\lambda,\,\mu}(u_m), u_m)\right]\\
&=\lim\limits_{m\to\infty}(\dfrac1p- \dfrac1{p_*}) \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u_m|^{p_*}}{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x\\[3mm]
&=(\dfrac1p- \dfrac1{p_*}) \displaystyle\int_\Omega \frac{|u|^{p_*}}{|x|^{bp_*}}\,{\rm
d}x,
\end{array}$$ Thus, $u\not\equiv 0$.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In sight of Theorem \[thm5.1\], we conjecture that the conclusion is also true for $0\leqslant a <\frac{N-p}{p}$.
If $0\leqslant a <\frac{N-p}{p}, \mu\in (0,\ \overline{\mu}),\ \lambda\in (0,\ \lambda_1),\ b\in [a,\ a+1),\ c\in (0,\
(a+1+l_2)p-N)$, then there exists a nontrivial solution to (\[eq5.1\]).
[01]{}
B.Abdellaoui, V.Felli and I.Peral, Existence and Nonexistence Results for Quasilinear Elliptic Equations Involving the p-laplacian, Advances in Differential Equations, 481-508. A. Ambrosetti & P. H. Rabinowitz, Dual variational methods in critical point theory and applications, J. Funct. Anal., **14**(1973), pp349-381. L. Boccardo and F. Murat, Almost everywhere convergence of the gradients of solutions to elliptic and parabolic equations, Nonli. Anal., TMA, Vol. [**19**]{}(1992), 581-597. H. Brezis and E. Lieb, A relation between pointwise convergence of functions and convergence of functionals, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., Vol. [**88**]{}(1983), PP486-490. H. Brezis and L. Nirenberg, Positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations involving critical exponents, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., Vol. [**36**]{}(1983), 437-477. L. Caffarrelli, R. Kohn and L. Nirenberg, First order interpolation inequalities with weights, Compositio Mathematica, Vol. [**53**]{}(1984), 259-275. D. M. Cao and P. G. Han, Solutions for semilinear elliptic equations with critical exponents and Hardy potential, J. Diff. Eqns., Vol. [**205**]{}(2004), 521-537. K.-S. Chou and D. Geng, On the critical dimension of a semilinear degenerate elliptic equation involving critical Sobolev-Hardy exponent, Nonli. Anal., TMA, Vol. [**26**]{}(1996), PP1965-1984. H. Egnell, Semilinear elliptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponents, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., Vol. [**104**]{}(1988), PP27-56. H. Egnell, Existence and nonexistence results for m-Laplace equations involving critical Sobolev exponents, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., Vol. [**104**]{}(1988), PP57-77.
A. Ferrero and F. Gazzola, Existence of solutions for singular critial growth semilinear elliptic equations, J. Diff. Eqns., Vol. [**177**]{}(2001), 494-522.
J. P. Garcia Azorero and I. Peral Alonso, Hardy inequalities and some critical elliptic and parabolic problems, J. Diff. Eqns., Vol. [**144**]{}(1998), 441-476.
M. Guedda and L. Veron, Quasilinear ellptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponents, Nonli. Anal., TMS, Vol. [**13**]{}(1989), PP879-902.
T. Horiuchi, Best constant in weighted Sobolev inequality with weights being powers of distance from the origen, J. Inequal. Appl., Vol. [**1**]{}(1997), PP275-292.
E. Jannelli, The role played by space dimension in elliptic critical problems, J. Diff. Eqns., Vol. [**156**]{}(1999), 407-426.
E. Jannelli and S. Solomini, Critical behaviour of some elliptic equations with singular potentials, Rapport no. 41/96, Dipartimento di Mathematica Universita degi Studi di Bari, 70125 Bari, Italia.
P. L. Lions, The concentration-compactness principle in the calculus of variations, the limit case, Rev. Mat. Ibero Americana, part 1, Vol. [**1**]{}(1985), PP145-201, part 2, Vol. [**2**]{}(1985), PP45-121.
L. Nicolaescu, A weighted semilinear elliptic equation involving critical Sobolev exponents, Diff. & Int. Eqns., Vol. [**3**]{}(1991), PP653-671.
P. Pucci and J. Serrin, Critical exponents and critical dimensions for polyharmonic operators, J. Math. Pures Appl., Vol. [**69**]{}(1990), PP55-83.
D. Ruiz and M. Willem, Elliptic problems with critical exponents and Hardy potentials, J. Diff. Eqns., Vol. [**190**]{}(2003), PP524-538.
M. Struwe, Variational Methods, Applications to Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations and Hamiltonian Systems, 2 ed, Springer-Verlag, 1996.
J.-G. Tan and J.-F. Yang, On the singular variational problems, Acta Mat. Sinica, Vol. [**24**]{}(2004), PP672-690.
Z.-Q. Wang and M. Willem, Singular minimization problems, J. Diff. Eqns., Vol. [**161**]{}(2000), PP307-320.
B.-J. Xuan and Z.-C. Chen, Existence, multiplicity and bifurcation for critical polyharmonic equations, Sys. Sci. and Math. Sci., Vol. [**12**]{}(1999), PP59-69.
B.-J. Xuan, The solvability of quasilinear Brezis-Nirenberg type problems with singular weights, Nonli. Anal., Vol. [**62**]{}(2005), PP703-725.
B.-J. Xuan, S.-W. Su and Y.-J. Yan, Existence results of Brezis-Nirenberg problems with Hardy potential and singular coefficients, accepted by Nonlinear Analysis.
X.-P. Zhu, Nontrivial solution of quasilinear elliptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponent, Sci. Sinica, Ser. A Vol. [**31**]{}(1988), PP1166-1181.
[^1]: Supported by Grant 10101024 and 10371116 from the National Natural Science Foundation of China. [*e-mail:[email protected]*]{}(B. Xuan)
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
address:
- 'Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, N.M. 87131'
- 'Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, N.M. 87131'
- 'University of Bucharest, Faculty of Mathematics 14 Academiei str., 70109 Bucharest, Romania'
author:
- 'Charles P. Boyer'
- Krzysztof Galicki
- Liviu Ornea
title: Constructions in Sasakian Geometry
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
A Riemannian manifold $(M,g)$ is called a [*Sasakian manifold*]{} if there exists a Killing vector field $\xi$ of unit length on $M$ so that the tensor field $\Phi$ of type $(1,1)$, defined by $\Phi(X) ~=~ -\nabla_X \xi$, satisfies the condition $(\nabla_X
\Phi)(Y) ~=~ g(X,Y)\xi -g(\xi,Y)X$ fo any pair of vector fields $X$ and $Y$ on $M.$ This is a curvature condition which can be easily expressed in terms the Riemann curvature tensor as $R(X,\xi)Y ~=~ g(\xi,Y)X-g(X,Y)\xi$. Equivalently, the Riemannian cone defined by $(\calc(M), \bar{g}, \Omega) ~=~ (\bbr_+\times M,
\ dr^2+r^2g, d(r^2\eta))$ is Kähler with the Kähler form $\Omega=d(r^2\eta)$, where $\eta$ is the dual 1-form of $\xi$. The 4-tuple $\cals=(\xi,\eta,\Phi,g)$ is commonly called a [*Sasakian structure*]{} on $M$ and $\xi$ is its [*characteristic*]{} or [*Reeb vector field*]{}.
Sasakian geometry is a special kind of contact metric geometry such that the structure transverse to the Reeb vector field $\xi$ is Kähler and invariant under the flow of $\xi.$ In fact $\eta$ is the contact 1-form, and $\Phi$ is a $(1,1)$ tensor field which defines a complex structure on the contact subbundle $\ker~\eta$ which annihilates $\xi.$ When both $M$ and the leaves of the foliation generated by $\xi$ are compact the Sasakian structure is called [*quasi-regular*]{}, and the space of leaves $X^{orb}$ is a compact Kähler orbifold. In such a case $M$ is the total space of a circle [*orbi-bundle*]{} (also called V-bundle) over $X^{orb}.$ Moreover, the 2-form $d\eta$ pushes down to a Kähler form $\gro$ on $X^{orb}.$ Now $\gro$ defines an integral class $[\gro]$ of the orbifold cohomology group $H^2(X^{orb},\bbz)$ which generally is only a rational class in the ordinary cohomology $H^2(X,\bbq).$
This construction can be inverted in the sense that given a Kähler form $\gro$ on a compact complex orbifold $X^{orb}$ which defines an element $[\gro]\in H^2(X^{orb},\bbz)$ one can construct a circle orbi-bundle on $X^{orb}$ whose orbifold first Chern class is $[\gro].$ Then the total space $M$ of this orbi-bundle has a natural Sasakian structure $(\xi,\eta,\Phi,g)$, where $\eta$ is a connection 1-form whose curvature is $\gro.$ The tensor field $\Phi$ is obtained by lifting the almost complex structure $I$ on $X^{orb}$ to the horizontal distribution $\ker~\eta$ and requiring that $\Phi$ annihilates $\xi.$ Furthermore, the map $(M,g)\ra{1.3}
(X^{orb},h)$ is an orbifold Riemannian submersion. This is an orbifold version of a well-known construction of Kobayashi. For the essentials and more details on Sasakian geometry we refer the reader to the forthcoming book [@BG05] of the first two authors.
The purpose of this paper is to describe in detail certain constructions of new Sasakian manifolds from old ones. In Section 2 we generalize the join construction introduced by the first two authors [@BG00a] in the case of quasi-regular manifolds to arbitrary quasi-regular Sasakian spaces. This construction is far more flexible yielding a multitude of examples. Furthermore, owing to the recent metrics discovered on $S^5$ in [@BGK05], we are able to prove the existence of families of metrics on manifolds homeomorphic to $S^2\times S^5.$ However, determination of the smooth structure is rather subtle and would ultimately involve computation of the Kreck-Stolz invariants for these manifolds [@KS88].
In Section 3 we show how the join construction emerges as a special case of Lerman’s contact fibre bundle construction [@Ler04] which under some additional assumptions can be adapted to the Sasakian case. In particular, when both the base and the fiber of the contact fiber bundle are toric we show that the construction yields a new toric Sasakian manifold.
In the last section we study the toric Sasakian manifolds in dimension 5. All compact, smooth, simply-connected, oriented 5-manifolds were classified by fundamental theorems of Smale and Barden [@Sm62; @Bar65]. In particular, the manifold (and its unique smooth structure) is completely determined by $H_2(M^5,\bbz)$ together with the second Stiefel-Whitney class map $w_2:H_2(M,\bbz)\ra{1.2}\bbz_2$. The second Betti number $b_2(M)$, the structure of the 2-torsion subgroup, and $w_2$ all provide obstruction to the existence of various geometric structures on such manifolds. For example, it is an elementary result that torsion in the second homology group is the obstruction to the existence of a free circle action on $M^5$. Moreover, vanishing of the torsion is also a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of a regular contact structure as observed by Geiges [@Gei91]. Remarkably, Oh proves the same condition is also a necessary and sufficient for the existence of an effective $T^3$ action on $M^5$ [@Oh83] and Yamazaki shows that in such a case one can always choose a $T^3$ action with a compatible toric K-contact structure. We use these results to show that any simply-connected compact oriented 5-manifold with vanishing 2-torsion admits a toric Sasakian structure. Furthermore, we prove by explicitly constructing circle bundles over the blow-ups of Hirzebruch surfaces that one can always find toric Sasakian structures which are regular.
[**Acknowledgements.**]{} The authors thank Santiago Simanca and Stefan Stolz for helpful discussions. L.O. is grateful to the Department of Mathematics and Statistics of the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque for warm hospitality and an excellent research environment during the academic year 2004–2005. L.O. also acknowledges partial funding from the Efroymson Foundation, as well as Grant 2-CEx-06-11-22/25.07.06. K.G. would like to thank IHES and MPIM in Bonn for hospitality and support. Finally, K.G. and L.O. would like to thank National Research Council. In 2003/2004 our joint COBASE grant sponsored short visits of L.O. at UNM and K.G. in Bucharest which visits seeded the later collaboration.
The Join Construction {#joinsection}
=====================
In this subsection we apply a construction due to Wang and Ziller [@WaZi90] to define a multiplication on the set of quasi-regular Sasakian orbifolds. This was done originally in [@BG00a] in the case of Sasakian-Einstein orbifolds which is perhaps of more interest, but there is an easy generalization to the strict Sasakian case. The idea is quite simple and is based on the fact that product of Kähler orbifolds is a Kähler orbifold in a natural way.
\[sewz.1\]We denote by $\cals\calo$ the set of compact quasi-regular Sasakian orbifolds, by $\cals\calm$ the subset of $\cals\calo$ that are smooth manifolds, and by $\calr\subset
\cals\calm$ the subset of compact, simply connected, regular Sasakian manifolds. The set $\cals\calo$ is topologized with the $C^{m,\gra}$ topology, and the subsets are given the subspace topology.
The set $\cals\calo$ is graded by dimension, that is, $$\cals\calo =\bigoplus_{n=0}^\infty \cals\calo_{2n+1},$$ and similarly for $\cals\calm$ and $\calr.$ In the definition of Sasakian structure it is implicitly assumed that $n>0.$ So we want to extend the definition of a Sasakian structure to the case when $n=0.$ This can easily be done since a connected one dimensional orbifold is just an interval with possible boundary, or a circle. So we can just take $\xi ={\partial\over \partial t},
\eta =dt,\Phi=0,$ with the flat metric $g=dt^2.$ In this case the space of leaves $\calz$ of the characteristic foliation is just a point. The unit circle $S^1$ with this structure will play the role of the identity in our monoid. Notice that the identity is smooth.
For each pair of relatively prime positive integers $(k_1,k_2)$ we define a graded multiplication $$\label{joinmaps}
\star_{k_1,k_2}:\cals\calo_{2n_1+1}\times \cals\calo_{2n_2+1}\ra{1.5}
\cals\calo_{2(n_1+n_2)+1}$$ as follows: Let $\cals_1,\cals_2\in \cals\calo$ of dimension $2n_1+1$ and $2n_2+1$ respectively. Since each orbifold $\cals_i$ has a quasi-regular Sasakian structure, its Reeb vector field generates a locally free circle action, and the quotient space by this action has a natural orbifold structure $\calz_i$ [@Mol88]. Thus, there is a locally free action of the 2-torus $T^2$ on the product orbifold $\cals_1\times \cals_2,$ and the quotient orbifold is the product of the orbifolds $\calz_i.$ (Locally free torus actions on orbifolds have been studied in [@HaSa91]). Now the Sasakian structure on $\cals_i$ determines a Kähler structure $\gro_i$ on the orbifold $\calz_i$, but in order to obtain an integral orbifold cohomology class $[\gro_i]\in H^2(\calz_i,\bbz)$ we need to assure that the period of a generic orbit is one. By a result of Wadsley [@Wad] the period function on a quasi-regular Sasakian orbifold is lower semi-continuous and constant on the dense open set of regular orbits. This is because on a Sasakian orbifold all Reeb orbits are geodesics. Thus, by a transverse homothety we can normalize the period function to be the constant $1$ on the dense open set of regular orbits. In this case the Kähler forms $\gro_i$ define integer orbifold cohomology classes $[\gro_i]\in H^2_{orb}(\calz_i,\bbz).$ If $Z_i$ denotes the underlying complex space associated with the orbifold $\calz_i$, one should not confuse $H^*_{orb}(\calz_i,\bbz)$ with $H^*(Z_i,\bbz)$ nor with the Chen-Ruan cohomology of an orbifold. $H^*_{orb}(\calz_i,\bbz)$ is the orbifold cohomology defined by Haefliger [@Hae84] (see also [@BG00a]). Notice, however, that we do have $H^*_{orb}(\calz_i,\bbz)\otimes_\bbz\bbq \approx H^*(Z_i,\bbz)\otimes_\bbz\bbq.$ Now each pair of positive integers $k_1,k_2$ give a Kähler form $k_1\gro_1+k_2\gro_2$ on the product. Furthermore, $[k_1\gro_1+k_2\gro_2]\in H^2_{orb}(\calz_1\times \calz_2,\bbz),$ and thus defines an $S^1$ V-bundle over the orbifold $\calz_1\times \calz_2$ whose total space is an orbifold that we denote by $\cals_1\star_{k_1,k_2} \cals_2$ and refer to as the $(k_1,k_2)$-[*join*]{} of $\cals_1$ and $\cals_2.$ Furthermore, $\cals_1\star_{k_1,k_2}
\cals_2$ admits a quasi-regular Sasakian structure [@BG05] by choosing a connection 1-form on $\cals_1\star_{k_1,k_2} \cals_2$ whose curvature is $\pi^*(k_1\gro_1+k_2\gro_2).$ This Sasakian structure is unique up to a gauge transformation of the form $\eta\mapsto \eta +d\psi$ where $\psi$ is a smooth basic function. This defines the maps in \[joinmaps\]. If $\cals_i$ are quasi-regular Sasakian structures on the compact manifolds $M_i,$ respectively, we shall use the notation $\cals_1\star_{k_1,k_2} \cals_2$ and $M_1\star_{k_1,k_2} M_2$ interchangeably depending on whether we want to emphasize the Sasakian or manifold nature of the join. Notice also that if $\gcd(k_1,k_2)=m$ and we define $(k'_1,k'_2)=(\frac{k_1}{m},\frac{k_2}{m}),$ then $\gcd(k'_1,k'_2)=1$ and $M_1\star_{k_1,k_2} M_2\approx (M_1\star_{k'_1,k'_2}
M_2)/\bbz_m.$ In this case the cohomology class $k'_1\gro_1+k'_2\gro_2$ is indivisible in $H^2_{orb}(\calz_1\times \calz_2,\bbz).$ Note also that $M_1\star_{k_1,k_2} M_2$ can be realized as the quotient space $(M_1\times M_2)/S^1(k_1,k_2)$ where the $S^1$ action is given by the map $$\label{s1action}
(x,y)\mapsto (e^{ik_2\theta}x,e^{-ik_1\theta}y).$$
We are interested in restricting the map $\star_{k_1,k_2}$ of \[joinmaps\] to the subset of smooth Sasakian manifolds, that is in the map $$\label{joinmaps2}
\star_{k_1,k_2}:\cals\calm_{2n_1+1}\times \cals\calm_{2n_2+1}\ra{1.5}
\cals\calo_{2(n_1+n_2)+1}.$$ If $M_1$ and $M_2$ are quasi-regular Sasakian manifolds, we are interested under what conditions the orbifold $M_1\star_{k_1,k_2}M_2$ is a smooth manifold. Let $\upsilon_i$ denote the order of the quasi-regular Sasakian manifolds $M_i,$ that is, $\upsilon_i$ is the lcm of the orders of the leaf holonomy groups of $M_i.$ The following proposition is essentially Proposition 4.1 of [@BG00a]:
\[smooth\] For each pair of relatively prime positive integers $k_1,k_2$, the orbifold $M_1\star_{k_1,k_2}M_2$ is a smooth quasi-regular Sasakian manifold if and only if $\gcd(\upsilon_1k_2,\upsilon_2k_1)=1.$ In particular, if $M_i$ are regular Sasakian manifolds, then so is $M_1\star_{k_1,k_2}M_2.$
Generally, given two known Sasakian manifolds $M_1$ and $M_2,$ it can be quite difficult to compute the diffeomorphism type of $M_1\star_{k_1,k_2}M_2,$ but some information can be obtained. For example, we have
\[assocVbunjoin\] Let $M_1$ and $M_2$ be compact quasi-regular Sasakian manifolds and assume that $\gcd(\upsilon_1k_2,\upsilon_2k_1)=1.$ Then $M_1\star_{k_1,k_2}M_2$ is the associated $S^1$ orbibundle over $\calz_1$ with fibre $M_2/\bbz_{k_2}.$ In particular, if $M_1$ is regular and $k_2=1$ then for each positive integer $k,$ $M_1\star_{k,1}M_2$ is an $M_2$-bundle over the Kähler manifold $Z_1.$
Following [@WaZi90] we break up the $S^1$ action on $M_1\times M_2$ into stages. First divide by the subgroup $\bbz_{k_2}$ of the circle group $S^1(k_1,k_2)$ defined by Equation \[s1action\] giving $M_1 \times (M_2/\bbz_{k_2}).$ Letting $[y]\in M_2/\bbz_{k_2}$ denote the equivalence class of $y\in M_2,$ we see that the quotient group $S^1/\bbz_{k_2}$ acts on $M_1 \times M_2/\bbz_{k_2}$ by $(x,[y])\mapsto
(e^{i\theta}x,[e^{-i\frac{k_1}{k_2}\theta}y])$ which identifies $M_1\star_{k_1,k_2}M_2$ as the orbibundle over $\calz_1$ with fibre $M_2/\bbz_{k_2}$ associated to the principal $S^1$ orbibundle $\pi_1:M_1\ra{1.5} \calz_1.$ This proves the result.
Recall [@BG05] the [*type*]{} of a Sasakian structure. A Sasakian structure $(\xi,\eta,\Phi,g)$ is said to be of [*positive (negative) type*]{} if the first Chern class $c_1(\calf_\xi)$ of the characteristic foliation is represented by a positive (negative) definite $(1,1)$-form. If either of these two conditions is satisfied $(\xi,\eta,\Phi,g)$ is said to be of [*definite type*]{}, and otherwise $(\xi,\eta,\Phi,g)$ is of [*indefinite type*]{}. $(\xi,\eta,\Phi,g)$ is said to be of [*null type*]{} if $c_1(\calf_\xi)=0.$ We often just say ‘a positive Sasakian structure’ instead of ‘a Sasakian structure of positive type’, etc. It will also be convenient to write $c_1(\cals)$ instead of $c_1(\calf_\xi)$ even though $c_1$ is independent of the Sasakian structure in the deformation class $\gF(\xi)$ [@BG05].
\[typeprop\] The $(k_1,k_2)$-join of two positive, negative, or null compact quasi-regular Sasakian manifolds is positive, negative, or null, respectively.
This follows from the fact that for any quasi-regular Sasakian structure on a compact manifold $M$ we have an orbifold submersion $\pi:M\ra{1.5} \calz$ satisfying $c_1(\calf_\xi)=\pi^*c_1^{orb}(\calz)$ as real cohomology classes. So the sign or vanishing of $c_1(\calf_\xi)$ and $c_1^{orb}(\calz)$ coincide. Furthermore, for any pair of integers $(k_1,k_2)$ we have $$c_1(\cals_1\star_{k_1,k_2} \cals_2)=\pi^*c_1^{orb}(\calz_1\times \calz_2)=
\pi^*c_1^{orb}(\calz_1) +\pi^*c_1^{orb}(\calz_2)=c_1(\cals_1)+c_1(\cals_2).$$ Now suppose that the Sasakian structures $\cals_1$ and $\cals_2$ are both definite of the same type. Then $c_1(\cals_1)+c_1(\cals_2)$ can be represented by either a positive definite or negative definite basic $(1,1)$ form. The null case is clear.
Next we give examples of Wang and Ziller [@WaZi90] where the topology can be ascertained, even the homeomorphism and diffeomorphism type in certain cases.
\[nontrivialsks2\] The Wang-Ziller manifolds: Let $M^{p_1,p_2}_{k_1,k_2}$ denote $S^{2p_1+1}\star_{k_1,k_2}S^{2p_2+1}.$ This is the $S^1$-bundle over $\bbc\bbp^{p_1}\times \bbc\bbp^{p_2}$ whose first Chern class is $k_1[\gro_1]+k_2[\gro_2]$ where $\gro_i$ is the standard Kähler class of $H^*(\bbc\bbp^{p_i},\bbz)$ and $k_i\in \bbz^+.$ By Proposition \[smooth\] $M^{p_1,p_2}_{k_1,k_2}$ admits regular Sasakian structures, and by Proposition \[typeprop\] they are positive. Furthermore, if $\gcd(k_1,k_2)=1$ (which we assume hereafter) the manifolds $M^{p_1,p_2}_{k_1,k_2}$ are simply connected. To analyze the manifolds $M^{p_1,p_2}_{k_1,k_2}$ we follow Wang and Ziller [@WaZi90] and consider the free $T^2$ action on $S^{2p_1+1}\times S^{2p_2+1}$ defined by $({{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}})\mapsto
(e^{i\theta_1}{{\mathbf x}},e^{i\theta_2}{{\mathbf y}})$ where $({{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}})\in \bbc^{p_1+1}\times
\bbc^{p_2+1}.$ The quotient space is $\bbc\bbp^{p_1}\times \bbc\bbp^{p_2},$ and $M^{p_1,p_2}_{k_1,k_2}$ can be identified with the quotient of $S^{2p_1+1}\times S^{2p_2+1}$ by the circle defined by $({{\mathbf x}},{{\mathbf y}})\mapsto (e^{ik_2\theta}{{\mathbf x}},e^{-ik_1\theta}{{\mathbf y}}).$ Now the free part of $H^2(M^{p_1,p_2}_{k_1,k_2},\bbz)$ has a single generator $\grg,$ and letting $\pi:
M^{p_1,p_2}_{k_1,k_2}\ra{1.3}
\bbc\bbp^{p_1}\times \bbc\bbp^{p_2}$ denote the natural bundle projection, we see that the classes $[\gro_i]$ pull back as $\gri_*\pi^*[\gro_1]=k_2\grg,\gri_*\pi^*[\gro_2]=-k_1\grg.$ Here by abuse of notation we let $\pi^*[\gro_i]$ also denote the basic classes in $H^2_B(\calf_\xi).$ Furthermore, the basic first Chern class is $c_1(\calf_\xi)=(p_1+1)\pi^*[\gro_1]+(p_2+1)\pi^*[\gro_2]$, so we get $$c_1(\cald)=\gri_*c_1(\calf_\xi)=(p_1+1)\gri_*\pi^*[\gro_1]+(p_2+1)\gri_*\pi^*[\gro_2]
=(k_2(p_1+1)-k_1(p_2+1))\grg.$$ Thus, we have $$\label{spinformula}
w_2(M^{p_1,p_2}_{k_1,k_2})= (k_2(p_1+1)+k_1(p_2+1))\grg \mod 2.$$ In certain cases one can determine the manifold completely [@WaZi90]. For example, consider $p_1=k_2=1,p_2=q,k_1=k$ in which case $M^{1,q}_{k,1}$ is an $S^{2q+1}$-bundle over $S^2.$ The $S^k$-bundles over $S^2$ are classified by $\pi_1(SO(k+1))\approx
\bbz_2$ [@Stee51]. So there are precisely two $S^{2q+1}$-bundles over $S^2,$ and they are distinguished by $w_2.$ From Equation we get $w_2(M^{1,q}_{k,1})= k(q+1)\grg \mod 2.$ Thus, if $q$ is odd or $k$ is even, we get the trivial bundle $S^2\times S^{2q+1};$ whereas, if $q$ is even and $k$ is odd, we get the unique non-trivial $S^{2q+1}$-bundle over $S^2.$ This gives an infinite number of distinct deformation classes of regular positive Sasakian structures on these manifolds. In dimension five $(p_1=p_2=1)$ we can do somewhat better. In fact for any pair of relatively prime positive integers $(k_1,k_2)$ $M^{1,1}_{k_1,k_2}$ is diffeomorphic to $S^2\times S^3;$ whereas later in Section we construct a positive Sasakian structure on the non-trivial $S^3$-bundle over $S^2$ as well as a family of indefinite Sasakian structures. Notice that in this case $c_1(\cald)=2(k_1-k_2)\grg.$
Summarizing from this example gives
\[WZcor\] The manifolds $M^{p,q}_{k_1,k_2}$ all admit Sasakian metrics with positive Ricci curvature. In particular, the manifolds $S^2\times S^{2q+1}$ as well as the non-trivial $S^{2q+1}$-bundle over $S^2$ admit Sasakian metrics of positive Ricci curvature.
Wang and Ziller [@WaZi90] were able to prove the existence of positive Einstein metrics on these manifolds. As we have shown these manifolds always admit positive Sasakian metrics, but the Einstein metrics on $S^2\times S^{2q+1}$ are not generally Sasakian-Einstein. For example, to get a metric a particular join is necessary [@BG00a]. The Wang-Ziller construction gives metrics on $S^3\star_{2,q+1}S^{2q+1}$ for $q$ even, and $S^3\star_{1,\frac{q+1}{2}}S^{2q+1}$ for $q$ odd. These are all non-trivial fibre bundles over $S^2$ whose fibres are the appropriate lens spaces.
We are interested in when the join of two Sasakian $\eta$-Einstein manifolds of the same type is a Sasakian $\eta$-Einstein manifold of that type. In the case of structures this was described in [@BG00a]. In that case we had to choose the pair $(k_1,k_2)$ to be the relative Fano indices of the two Sasakian manifolds. The concept of index applies equally well to the negative definite case, but the name Fano is inappropriate. So assuming that $c_1^{orb}(\calz)$ is either positive or negative definite, we write $|c_1^{orb}(\calz)|$ to mean $c_1^{orb}(\calz)$ in the positive case and $-c_1^{orb}(\calz)$ in the negative case. Then we can define the [*divisibility index*]{} or just [*index*]{} of the polarized Kähler orbifold $(\calz,|c_1^{orb}(\calz)|)$ to be the largest integer $I=I(\calz)$ such that $c_1^{orb}(\calz)/I$ defines an integral class in $H^2_{orb}(\calz,\bbz).$ We also say that the polarized Kähler orbifold $(\calz,|c_1^{orb}(\calz)|)$ is [*indivisible*]{}. Thus, if $c_1^{orb}(\calz)$ is represented by either a positive definite or negative definite $(1,1)$-form, there is a unique indivisible polarized Kähler orbifold $(\calz,|c_1^{orb}(\calz)|/I)$ that gives rise to a quasi-regular Sasakian orbifold structure $\cals.$ So we can consider the index $I$ to be an invariant of the Sasakian structure $\cals$ and write $I=I(\cals)$ as well. In this regard, we also say that a quasi-regular definite Sasakian structure $\cals$ on $M$ is [*indivisible*]{}. By Theorem 2.1 of [@BG00a] indivisible positive quasi-regular Sasakian manifolds are simply connected. For $i=1,2$ we define the [*relative indices*]{} of a pair of quasi-regular definite Sasakian structures $(\cals_1,\cals_2)$ of the same type by $$l_i= \frac{I(\cals_i)}{\gcd(I(\cals_1),I(\cals_2))}.$$ Then, $\gcd(l_1,l_2)=1,$ and if $\gcd(\upsilon_1l_2,\upsilon_2l_1)=1,$ then $M_1\star_{l_1,l_2}M_2$ is a smooth indivisible Sasakian manifold. If in addition $M_1$ and $M_2$ are both positive Sasakian manifolds, $M_1\star_{l_1,l_2}M_2$ is a simply connected positive Sasakian manifold.
We now consider the join of two Sasakian $\eta$-Einstein manifolds. The case of positive $\eta$-Einstein manifolds is essentially the same as for manifolds. Of course, in the positive case there are obstructions to satisfying the Monge-Ampère equation on a compact Kähler orbifold or the transverse Monge-Ampère equation on a Sasakian manifold; whereas, in both the negative case and null cases, there are no such obstructions. So for any null Sasakian structure or negative Sasakian structure such that $c_1(\calf_\xi)$ is a multiple of $[d\eta]_B$ on a compact manifold there exists a compatible Sasakian $\eta$-Einstein metric.
\[etaEjoin\] Let $l_i$ be the relative indices for a pair of quasi-regular definite Sasakian $\eta$-Einstein manifolds $M_i$ of the same type, respectively. Then the join $M_1\star_{l_1,l_2}M_2$ admits a quasi-regular Sasakian $\eta$-Einstein structure of that type.
We can now obtain new metrics by combining Proposition \[assocVbunjoin\] with the results in [@BGK05; @BGKT05; @GhKo05]. For example take $M_1=S^3$with its canonical round sphere Sasakian structure, and $M_2=S^5_{{\mathbf w}}$ with one of the 68 deformation classes of structures on $S^5$ found in [@BGK05] or one of the 12 structures in [@GhKo05]. Let $L^5(l_2)$ denote the lens space $S^5/C_{l_2}$ where $C_{l_2}\approx \bbz_{l_2}$ is the cyclic subgroup of the circle group $S^1_{{\mathbf w}}$ generated by the Reeb vector field of the corresponding Sasakian structure, and $l_1$ is the reduced Fano index of $S^5_{{\mathbf w}}$ with respect to $S^3.$ It is straightforward to compute $l_2=l_2({{\mathbf w}})$ as a function of ${{\mathbf w}}.$ Then we have
\[s2s5\] If $\gcd(l_2,\gru_2)=1$ then $S^3\star_{l_1,l_2}S^5_{{\mathbf w}}$ is the total space of the fibre bundle over $S^2$ with fibre the lens space $L^5(l_2),$ and it admits metrics. In particular, for 16 different weight vectors ${{\mathbf w}}$, the manifold $S^3\star_{2,1}S^5_{{\mathbf w}}$ is homeomorphic to $S^2\times S^5$ and admits Sasakian-Einstein metrics including one 10-dimensional family. Moreover, for 3 different weight vectors ${{\mathbf w}}$, the manifold $S^3\star_{1,1}S^5_{{\mathbf w}}$ is homeomorphic to $S^2\times S^5$ and admits Sasakian-Einstein metrics.
As mentioned above this is constructed using Proposition \[assocVbunjoin\] with $M_1=S^3$ with its standard round sphere structure, and $M_2$ one of the structures on $S^5$ mentioned above. So the first statement follows. To prove the second statement we need to compute the relative indices. Since $I(S^3)=2$ for the standard Sasakian structure on $S^3$, we need to consider two cases, namely when $I(S^5_{{\mathbf w}})=1,$ or $2.$ In both cases the relative index $l_2=1,$ so we have $S^3\star_{l_1,1}S^5_{{\mathbf w}}$ which is an $S^5$ bundle over $S^2.$ These are classified by their second Stiefel-Whitney class $w_2.$ But by construction the orbifold first Chern class of $\bbc\bbp^1\times \calz$ is proportional to the first Chern class of the $S^1$ orbibundle defining $S^3\star_{l_1,1}S^5_{{\mathbf w}}.$ This implies that $w_2(S^3\star_{l_1,1}S^5_{{\mathbf w}})$ vanishes [@BGN03a]. Now all of the Sasakian structures on $S^5$ can be represented as links of Brieskorn-Pham polynomials of the form $f=z_0^{a_0}+z_1^{a_1}+z_2^{a_2}+z_3^{a_3}$ or deformations thereof. So we need to compute the Fano index $I$ for the 68 Brieskorn polynomials representing $S^5$ that admit metrics found in [@BGK05], and the 12 found in [@GhKo05]. Now it is easy to see that in terms of the Brieskorn exponents the Fano index takes the form $$I={\rm lcm}(a_0,a_1,a_2,a_3)\bigl(\sum_{i=0}^3\frac{1}{a_i}-1\bigr).$$ It is easy to write a Maple program to determine the Fano index of the 80 cases. There are 16 with $I=1$ and 3 with $I=2$ giving 19 in all. For example the 10 parameter family given by Example 41 in [@BGK05] has ${{\mathbf a}}=(2,3,7,35),$ and one easily sees that $I=1.$
We remark that only the $S^5_{{\mathbf w}}$ found in [@BGK05] give rise to metrics on $S^2\times S^5;$ the ones found in [@GhKo05] all have Fano index greater than $2$ and give non-trivial lens spaces. In fact the largest $l_2$ obtained is $89.$ Generally, assuming $\gcd(l_2,\gru_2)=1$, an easy spectral sequence argument shows that the manifolds $S^3\star_{l_1,l_2}S^5_{{\mathbf w}}$ are simply connected with the rational homology type of $S^2\times S^5,$ but with $H^4(S^3\star_{l_1,l_2}S^5_{{\mathbf w}},\bbz)\approx
\bbz_{l_2}.$
It is now quite straightforward to apply Proposition \[assocVbunjoin\] to many other cases. For example, we can consider the join $S^3\star_{2,1} k(S^2\times S^3)_{{\mathbf w}}$ or $S^3\star_{1,1}k(S^2\times S^3)_{{\mathbf w}}$ where $k(S^2\times
S^3)_{{\mathbf w}}$ is any of the manifolds consider in [@BGN03c; @BGN02b; @BG03] with Fano index $I=1$ in the first case, and $I=2$ in the second. This gives metrics on manifolds whose rational cohomology can be determined as in [@BG00a]. The higher index cases in [@BGN03c] can also be treated as long as the relative index $l_2$ is relatively prime to the order of the Sasakian structure of $k(S^2\times
S^3)_{{\mathbf w}}.$
Recall (cf. [@BG05; @BGM06]) that the real Heisenberg group $\gH_{2n+1}(\bbr)$ admits a homogeneous Sasakian structure with its standard 1-form $\eta= dz-\sum_iy^idx^i.$ As a manifold $\gH_{2n+1}(\bbr)$ is just $\bbr^{2n+1}$ which can be realized in terms of $n+2$ by $n+2$ nilpotent matrices of the form $$\label{Heisenbergmatrix}
\left(
\begin{matrix}1 &x_1 &\cdots &x_n& z \\
0 &1 &0 &\cdots & y_1\\
\vdots && \ddots & \cdots & \vdots \\
0 & \cdots & 0&1 & y_n \\
0 &\cdots &0 & 0& 1
\end{matrix}
\right).$$ If we consider the discrete subgroup $\gH_{2n+1}(\bbz)$ of $\gH_{2n+1}(\bbr)$ defined by the matrices \[Heisenbergmatrix\] with integer entrees, the quotient manifold $\caln_{2n+1}
=\gH_{2n+1}(\bbr)/\gH_{2n+1}(\bbz)$ is a nilmanifold with an induced Sasakian structure. As a coset space it is also a homogeneous manifold, but the homogeneous structure and Sasakian structure are incompatible. The Reeb vector field generates the one dimensional center $\gZ(\gH_{2n+1}(\bbr))$ of the group $\gH_{2n+1}(\bbr),$ and thus $\gZ(\gH_{2n+1}(\bbr))$ induces an $S^1$ action on the quotient space $\caln_{2n+1}.$ This $S^1$ is the connected component of the group $\gA\gu\gt$ of Sasakian automorphisms of $\caln_{2n+1}$ and makes $\caln_{2n+1}$ the total space of an $S^1$ bundle over the principally polarized Abelian variety $\cala =T^{2n}$ with its standard complex structure. One can obtain many regular Sasakian structures on $\caln_{2n+1}$ by considering it as a circle bundle over a polarized Abelian variety and deforming the complex structure. Now we can form the join $\caln_{2n+1}\star_{k_1,k_2} M$ where $M$ is a regular Sasakian manifold which by Proposition \[assocVbunjoin\] can be thought of as an $M/\bbz_{k_2}$-bundle over $T^{2n}.$
Recall that a locally conformal Kähler manifold is a complex manifold which admits a covering endowed with a Kähler metric with respect to which the group of deck transformations acts by holomorphic homotheties (cf. [@DrOr98]). The subclass of Vaisman manifolds can be characterized in terms of Sasakian geometry as follows (cf. [@OrVe03]): Any compact Vaisman manifold $P$ is a suspension over a circle, with fibre a Sasakian manifold $M$. Moreover, there exist a Sasakian automorphism $\varphi$ of $M$ and a positive $q$ such that $P$ is isomorphic with the quotient of the Riemannian cone $(M\times
\mathbb{R}_+, t^2g_M+dt^2)$ by the cyclic group generated by $(x, t)\mapsto
(\varphi(x),qt)$.It is clear from the definition that the product of two l.c.K. structures is not, in general, l.c.K. Moreover, the product of two Vaisman manifolds might not be Vaisman: *e.g.* the product of two Hopf surfaces has $b_1=2$ which prevents it to admit a Vaisman structure, for which $b_1$ should be odd. Instead, we can combine the join construction with the structure theorem to define a join of quasi-regular compact Vaisman manifolds. Note that, in fact, this is not restrictive, since any compact Vaisman structure can be deformed to a quasi-regular one [@OrVe05]. Summing up, we have:
Let $P_1, P_2$ be two compact, quasi-regular Vaisman manifolds and let $M_1, M_2$ be the respective Sasakian manifolds provided by the structure theorem. Then, for each $k_1, k_2\in
\mathbb{Z}$, the suspension over the circle with fibre $M_1\star_{k_1,k_2}M_2$ is the [**join**]{} of $P_1$ and $P_2$.
Contact Fibre Bundles and Toric Sasakian Structures {#contfib}
===================================================
The aim of this section is to briefly discuss a construction due to Lerman [@Ler04b] that allows one to construct K-contact structures on the total space of a fibre bundle whose fibres are K-contact. This construction generalizes the join construction described in Section \[joinsection\] as well as the fibre join construction of Yamazaki [@Yam99]. Actually one can work within the pure contact setting, and it is the contact analog of symplectic fibre bundles described in [@GuLeSt96]. Recall that a [*contact structure*]{} on an oriented manifold $M$ is an equivalence class of 1-forms $\eta$ which satisfy $\eta\wedge (d\eta)^n\neq
0,$ where two such forms $\eta,\eta'$ are equivalent if there is a nowhere vanishing smooth function $f$ such that $\eta'=f\eta.$ Alternatively, a contact structure is a maximally non-integrable codimension one subbundle $\cald$ of the tangent bundle $TM.$ The relation between the two descriptions is $\cald=\ker~\eta.$ We denote a contact manifold by the pair $(M,\cald)$, and let $\gC\go\gn(M,\cald)$ denote the group of contactomorphisms of $(M,\cald),$ that is, the subgroup of the group of diffeomorphisms of $M$ leaving the contact bundle $\cald$ invariant. The contact manifold $(M,\cald)$ is said to be [*co-oriented*]{} if the subbundle $\cald$ is oriented. The subgroup of $\gC\go\gn(M,\cald)$ which fixes the orientation is denoted by $\gC\go\gn(M,\cald)^+.$ Here is Lerman’s definition of a contact fibre bundle.
\[contfibdef\] A fibre bundle $F\ra{1.5}M\fract{\pi}{\ra{1.5}} B$ is called a [**contact fibre bundle**]{} if
1. $F$ is a co-oriented contact manifold with contact bundle $\cald.$
2. There are an open cover $\{U_i\}$ of $B$ and local trivializations $\phi_i:\pi^{-1}(U_i)\ra{1.5} U_i\times F$ such that for every point $p\in U_i\cap U_j$ the transition functions $\phi_j\circ \phi^{-1}_i|_{\{p\}\times F}$ are elements of $\gC\go\gn(F,\cald)^+.$
We need the notion of fatness of a bundle due to Weinstein [@Wei80]. Let $\gra$ be a connection 1-form in a principal bundle $P(M,G)$ with Lie group $G,$ and let $\grO=D\gra$ denote its curvature 2-form. Let $S\subset \gg^*$ be any subset in the dual $\gg^*$ of the Lie algebra $\gg$ of $G.$ We say that the connection $\gra$ is [*fat on $S$*]{} if the bilinear map $$\label{fateqn}
\mu\circ \grO:\calh P\times \calh P: \ra{2.5} \bbr$$ is non-degenerate for all $\mu\in S.$ In particular, if $G$ is a torus, the bundle $\pi:P\rightarrow B$ is identified, up to a gauge transformation, by a connection form $A$ such that $dA=\pi^*\omega$ with $[\omega]\in H^2(B,\bbz)$. Then, if $\omega$ is non-degenerate, that is a symplectic form, $A$ is certainly fat on the image of the moment map.
We first recall the main lines of the construction, not in full generality, but adapted to our needs. Let $\pi:P\rightarrow B$ be a principal $G$-bundle endowed with a connection $A$ (we don’t distinguish between the connection and its 1-form). Let $F$ be a K-contact manifold, with fixed contact form $\eta_F$ and Reeb field $\xi_F$. Suppose $G\subset \mathrm{Aut}(F,\eta)$, *i.e.* it acts (from the left) on $F$ by strong contactomorphisms and denote by $\Psi:F\rightarrow
\mathfrak{g}^*$ the associated momentum map. Then Lerman proves:
[@Ler04b] In the above setting, if the connection $A$ is fat at all the points of the image of the momentum map $\Psi$, then the total space $M$ of the associated bundle $P\times_GF$ admits a $K$-contact structure.
We are interested in the case that the underlying almost CR structure of the K-contact structure is integrable. In this case the manifold $P\times_GF$ will be Sasakian. One way of guarantying this occurs in the toric setting, so we now give a brief review of toric contact geometry. This was begun in [@BM93], continued in [@BG00b], and completed in [@Ler02a]. Let $(M,\cald)$ be a co-oriented contact manifold,
\[toriccontact\] A [**toric contact manifold**]{} is a triple $(M,\cald,T^{n+1})$ where $(M,\cald)$ is an a co-oriented contact manifold of dimension $2n+1$ with an effective action $$\cala:T^{n+1}\ra{1.5} \gC\go\gn(M,\cald)^+$$ of a $(n+1)$-torus $T^{n+1}.$
In [@BG00b] the first two authors introduced the notion of a contact toric structure of Reeb type.
\[Reebtype\] We say that a torus action $\cala:T^{n+1}\ra{1.3} \gC\go\gn(M,\cald)^+$ is of [**Reeb type**]{} if there are a contact 1-form $\eta$ of the contact structure $\cald$ and an element $\varsigma\in \gg$ such that $X^\varsigma$ is the Reeb vector field of $\eta.$
Fixing a contact form $\eta$ it is easy to see that the action $\cala$ of $T^{n+1}$ is of Reeb type if and only if there is an element $\grt$ in the Lie algebra $\gt_{n+1}$ of $T^{n+1}$ such that $\eta(X^\grt) >0.$ Note that when $T^{n+1}$ acts properly we can always fix a contact 1-form $\eta$ without loss of generality by using a slice theorem. In this case the relevant group is the subgroup $\gC\go\gn(M,\eta)\subset
\gC\go\gn(M,\cald)^+$ of contactomorphisms leaving $\eta$ invariant. We are now ready for
\[Sasfibre\] Let $F^{2n+1}$ be a compact toric contact manifold of Reeb type and with torus $T^{n+1}\subset \gC\go\gn(F,\eta)$. Let $\pi:P\rightarrow B$ be a principal $T^{n+1}$ bundle over a toric compact symplectic manifold $B$. Then $P\times_{T^{n+1}}F$ is a toric Sasakian manifold.
Choosing a connection $A$ as above whose curvature is non-degenerate, this will be fat and Lerman’s construction applies. From [@BG00b], $F$ has a compatible Sasakian structure, in particular it is $K$-contact. Note that this Sasakian structure is toric. Then by [@Ler04b], in our hypothesis, $P\times_{T^{n+1}}F$ has a $K$-contact structure. We claim that this is toric, of Reeb type, and hence the result follows by applying again [@BG00b]. To prove our claim, we show that:
1. The Hamiltonian action of $T^m$ on $B$ ($\dim B=2m$) lifts to a $T^m$ action on $P$.
2. This lifted action extends to $P\times_{T^{n+1}}F$ preserving the contact form.
3. The action of $T^m$ on $P\times_{T^{n+1}}F$ commutes with the action of $T^{n+1}$, hence, as it leaves the contact form $\eta$ invariant, it induces an action of $T^{n+m+1}$ on $P\times_{T^{n+1}}F$. Then we only need to see that the Reeb field of $P\times_{T^{n+1}}F$ is generated by the $T^{n+1}$ action.
To prove (i), it is enough to show that $T^m$ lifts to an action that preserves the fat connection $A$. Denote $\{Y_i\}$ the generators of the $T^m$ action on $B$. We need to construct lifts $\tilde Y_i$ on $P$ such that ${\cL}_{\tilde Y_i}A=0$. Define them as $$\tilde Y_i=\hat Y_i+a^\alpha_iX_\alpha,$$ where the $\hat{}$ refers to horizontal lifts, $X_\alpha$ are vertical fields and the functions $a_i^\alpha$ need to be determined. If we let $\{e_\alpha\}$ be a basis of the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{t}^{n+1}$ of $T^{n+1}$, then, as $A$ is a $T^{n+1}$-connection, we have $$A(\tilde Y_i)=a^\alpha_iA(X_\alpha)=a^\alpha_ie_\alpha.$$ On the other hand, we want the functions $a^\alpha_i$ to be solutions of the equation $${\tilde Y_i}\rfloor dA+d({\tilde Y_i}\rfloor A)=0,$$ and hence $$d(a^\alpha_i)=-{\tilde Y_i}\rfloor A.$$ As $Y_i$ are Hamiltonian, $Y_i\rfloor\omega^\alpha=dF^\alpha_i$, thus $$dF^\alpha_i=Y_i\rfloor\omega^\alpha={\tilde Y_i}\rfloor A.$$ All in all $da^\alpha_i=-dF^\alpha_i$ and we may take $a^\alpha_i=-F^\alpha_i$.
For (ii), as $T^m$ preserves $A$ and $\eta_F$ (the action of $T^m$ on $F$ is trivial), $T^m$ preserves the contact form $\eta$ on $P\times_{T^{n+1}}F$.
Suppose now that $F$ is regular and let $B_F$ the basis of its Boothby-Wang fibration. Also, suppose that for a torus $T$ (not necessarily of maximal dimension) $P\times_TF$ has a Sasakian structure. As we have seen above, this is the case when $P$ and $B$ are toric. Lerman only constructs the contact structure on $P\times_TF$, but it can be seen that a contact form adapted to this is written on $P\times F$ as $\eta=f_A\cdot A +\eta_F$ for some function $f_A$ and hence $$\begin{split}
d\eta&=df_A\wedge A+f_AdA+d\eta_F\\
&=df_A\wedge A+f_A\omega_P+\omega_{B_F}
\end{split}$$ Here $\omega_P$ and $\omega_{B_F}$ are $(1,1)$ forms. Splitting $df_A$ and $A$ into their $(0,1)$ and $(1,0)$ components, we see that $d\eta$ has a $(2,0)$ component, namely $df_A^{(1,0)}\wedge A^{(1,0)}$, if and only if $df_A^{(1,0)}$ and $A^{(1,0)}$ are linearly independent, which clearly happens when on $B\times B_F$ we take the product complex structure. But in this case $d\eta=\pi^*\omega$ for the Kähler form of $B\times B_F$ and it has to be of type $(1,1)$. So, if the complex structure on $B\times B_F$ is the product one, then necessarily $f_A=const.$ For $T=S^1$, this corresponds to the above described join. Hence, the join is a particular case of Lerman’s construction.
Toric Sasakian 5-Manifolds
==========================
We begin this section by recalling fundamental results of Smale and Barden concerning classification of compact smooth simply-connected $5$-manifolds [@Sm62; @Bar65]. Remarkably, any such manifold is completely determined by $H_2(M,\bbz)$ and the second Stiefel-Whitney class map $w_2$. In particular, the smooth structure on a closed simply-connected $5$-manifold is unique.
\[BardenInvariant\] Let $M$ be a compact, smooth, oriented, $1$-connected $5$-manifold. Write $H_2(M,\bbz)$ as a direct sum of cyclic groups of prime power order $$\label{BaSm-dec}
H_2(M,\bbz)=\bbz^k\bigoplus_{p,i} \bigl(\bbz_{p^i}\bigr)^{c(p^i)}$$ where $k=b_2(M)$, and $c(p^i)=c(p^i,M)$. The non-negative integers $k, c(p^i)$ are determined by $H_2(M,\bbz)$ but the subgroups $\bbz_{p^i}\subset H_2(M,\bbz)$ are not unique. One can choose the decomposition (\[BaSm-dec\]) such that the second Stiefel–Whitney class map $$w_2:H_2(M,\bbz)\to \bbz_2$$ is zero on all but one summand $\bbz_{2^j}$. The value $j$ is unique, denoted by $i(M)$, and called the [**Barden invariant**]{} of $M$. It can take on any value $j$ for which $c(2^j)\neq 0$, besides $0$ and $\infty$. Alternatively, $i(M)$ is the smallest $j$ such that there is an $\alpha\in H_2(M,\bbz)$ such that $w_2(\alpha)\neq 0$ and $\alpha$ has order $2^j$.
The following theorem was proved by Smale [@Sm62] in the spin case in when $w_2=0$ implying $i=0$. Subsequent generalization with no assumption on $w_2$ is due to Barden [@Bar65]. We shall formulate it here using Barden’s notation.
\[Barden-Smale-Theorem\] The class $\calb$ of simply connected, closed, oriented, smooth, 5-manifolds is classifiable under diffeomorphism. Furthermore, any such $M$ is diffeomorphic to one of the spaces $$\label{Barden-decomposition}
M_{j;k_1,\ldots,k_s}=X_j\#M_{k_1}\#\cdots \#M_{k_s},$$ where $-1{\leqslant}j{\leqslant}\infty,$ $s{\geqslant}0$, $1<k_1$ and $k_i$ divides $k_{i+1}$ or $k_{i+1}=\infty$. A complete set of invariants is provided by $H_2(M,\bbz)$ and $i(M)$ and the manifolds $X_{-1},X_0,X_j,X_\infty,M_j,M_\infty$ are characterized as follows
$M$ $H_2(M,\bbz)$ $i(M)$
-------------------------- ------------------------------ ----------
$X_{-1}=SU(3)/SO(3)$ $\bbz_2$ $1$
$M_0=X_0=S^5$ $0$ $0$
$X_j$, $0<j<\infty$ $\bbz_{2^j}\oplus\bbz_{2^j}$ $j$
$X_\infty$ $\bbz$ $\infty$
$M_k$, $0<k<\infty$ $\bbz_k\oplus\bbz_k$ $0$
$M_\infty=S^2\times S^3$ $\bbz$ $0$
In this section we would like to investigate the question which of the manifolds in $\calb$ admit toric Sasakian structures. We begin with an important example.
[**\[Circle Bundles over Hirzebruch surfaces\]**]{} We shall construct infinite families of deformation classes of toric Sasakian structures on circle bundles over Hirzebruch surfaces. The total space $M$ of any such circle bundle must have $b_1(M)=0$ and $b_2(M)=1.$ Theorem \[Barden-Smale-Theorem\] implies that there are precisely two 5-manifolds in $\calb$ with $b_2=1.$ They are $M_\infty=S^2\times S^3$ and $X_\infty$, the non-trivial $S^3$-bundle over $S^2$. They both have $H_2(M,\bbz)=\bbz$ and are distinguished by their Barden invariant.
Recall the Hirzebruch surfaces $S_n$ (cf. [@GrHa78], pgs 517-520) are realized as the projectivizations of the sum of two line bundles over $\bbc\bbp^1,$ which we can take as $$S_n=\bbp\bigl(\calo \oplus\calo(n)\bigr).$$ They are diffeomorphic to $\bbc\bbp^1\times \bbc\bbp^1$ if $n$ is even, and to the blow-up of $\bbc\bbp^2$ at one point, which we denote as $\widetilde{\bbc\bbp}^2,$ if $n$ is odd. For $n=0$ and $1$ we get $\bbc\bbp^1\times \bbc\bbp^1$ and $\widetilde{\bbc\bbp}^2,$ respectively. Now ${\rm Pic}(S_n)\approx \bbz\oplus \bbz,$ and we can take the Poincaré duals of a section of $\calo(n)$ and the homology class of the fibre as its generators. The corresponding divisors can be represented by rational curves which we denote by $C$ and $F,$ respectively satisfying $$C\cdot C=n, \qquad F\cdot F=0,\qquad C\cdot F=1.$$ Let $\gra_1$ and $\gra_2$ denote the Poincaré duals of $C$ and $F$, respectively. The classes $\gra_1$ and $\gra_2$ can be represented by $(1,1)$ forms $\gro_1$ and $\gro_2,$ respectively, so that the $(1,1)$ form $\gro_{l_1,l_2}=l_1\gro_1 +l_2\gro_2$ determines a circle bundle over $S_n$ whose first Chern class is $[\gro_{l_1,l_2}].$ We thus have circle bundles depending on a triple of integers $(l_1,l_2,n),$ with $n$ non-negative, $$S^1\ra{1.7}M_{l_1,l_2,n}\fract{\pi}{\ra{1.7}}S_n.$$ Now in order that $M_{l_1,l_2,n}$ admit a Sasakian structure it is necessary that $\gro_{l_1,l_2}$ be a positive $(1,1)$ form, that is, $\gro_{l_1,l_2}$ must lie within the Kähler cone $\calk(S_n).$ The conditions for positivity are by Nakai’s criterion,
1. $\gro_{l_1,l_2}^2>0,$
2. $\int_D\gro_{l_1,l_2} > 0$ for all holomorphic curves $D,$
which in our case give $l_1,l_2>0.$
Next we determine the diffeomorphism type of $M_{l_1,l_2,n}.$ Since the Kähler class $[\gro_{l_1,l_2}]$ transgresses to the derivative of the contact form, $d\eta_{l_1,l_2},$ we see that $\pi^*\gra_1 =-l_2\grg$ and $\pi^*\gra_2=l_1\grg$ where $\grg$ is a generator of $H^2(M_{l_1,l_2,n},\bbz)\approx \bbz.$ Now the first Chern class of $S_n$ is [@GrHa78] $$\label{HirChern}
c_1(S_n)=2\gra_1-(n-2)\gra_2,$$ which pulls back to the basic first Chern class on $M_{l_1,l_2,n}.$ So the first Chern class of the contact line bundle $\cald$ is given by $$\label{HirChern2}
c_1(\cald)=-[2l_2-l_1(2-n)]\grg.$$ If we take the integers $l_1,l_2$ to be relatively prime then the manifold $M_{l_1,l_2,n}$ will be simply connected. Furthermore, since $M_{l_1,l_2,n}$ has a regular contact structure, there is no torsion in $H_2(M_{l_1,l_2,n},\bbz)$ [@Gei91]. Thus, by Theorem \[Barden-Smale-Theorem\] $M_{l_1,l_2,n}$ is either $S^2\times S^3$ or $X_\infty,$ depending on whether $M_{l_1,l_2,n}$ is spin or not. But we have $w_2(M_{l_1,l_2,n})\equiv nl_1 \mod~2,$ so $M_{l_1,l_2,n}$ is diffeomorphic to $S^2\times S^3$ if $nl_1$ is even, and to $X_\infty$ if $nl_1$ is odd. Now that we have identified the manifolds $M_{l_1,l_2,n}$, we wish to distinguish the deformation classes of Sasakian structures that live on them. Thus, we consider the equivalence classes of regular homologous Sasakian structures $\gF_{l_1,l_2,n}$ [@BGN03b; @BG05]. We have arrived at
\[circlebunHir1\] For each triple of positive integers $(l_1,l_2,m)$ satisfying $\gcd(l_1,l_2)=1,$ the manifold $S^2\times S^3$ admits the following deformation classes of regular Sasakian structures $\gF_{l_1,l_2,2m}$ and $\gF_{2l_1,l_2,2m+1}.$
\[circlebunHir2\] For each triple of positive integers $(l_1,l_2,m)$ satisfying $\gcd(l_1,l_2)=1,$ the manifold $X_\infty$ admits the deformation classes of regular Sasakian structures $\gF_{2l_1-1,l_2,2m-1}.$
Now we have
\[toricHir\] The deformation classes of Sasakian structures described in Theorems \[circlebunHir1\] and \[circlebunHir2\] are all toric.
As in [@Aud94] we describe Hirzebruch surfaces $S_n$ as smooth algebraic subvarieties of $\bbc\bbp^1\times \bbc\bbp^2$, viz. $$S_n =\{[u_0,u_1],[v_0,v_1,v_2] ~|~u_0^nv_1=u_1^nv_0\}\subset \bbc\bbp^1\times
\bbc\bbp^2.$$ Now $S_n$ admits the action of a complex 2-torus by $$([u_0,u_1],[v_0,v_1,v_2])\mapsto ([\grt u_0,\grz
u_1],[\grz^{-n}v_0,\grt^{-n}v_1,\grt^{-n}\grz^{-n}v_2]).$$ The homology class $F$ is represented by the rational curve $([a,b],[0,0,1]),$ while $C$ is represented by $([a,b],[a^n,b^n,0]),$ and it is easy to check that these rational curves are invariant under $\bbc^*\times \bbc^*$-action given above. It follows that for each admissible value of $(l_1,l_2)$ the Kähler form $\gro=l_1\gro_1+l_2\gro_2$ is invariant under the toral subgroup $\gT_2$ of $\bbc^*\times \bbc^*$. Furthermore, the action of $\gT_2$ is Hamiltonian and hence, it lifts to a $\gT_2$ in the automorphism group of the Sasakian structure. This together with the $S^1$ generated by the Reeb vector field $\xi_{l_1,l_2}$ gives $M_{l_1,l_2,n}$ a toric Sasakian structure.
\[Hirzremark\] The existence of toric Sasakian structures on $S^2\times S^3$ and $X_\infty$ also follows from Theorem \[Sasfibre\] as well as Theorem \[toricSas5man\] below.
Next we briefly discuss which toric Sasakian structures $\gF_{l_1,l_2,n}$ belong to equivalent contact structures. It is convenient to make a change of basis of $H^2(S_n,\bbz).$ For simplicity we consider the case $n=2m$ so $S_{2m}$ is diffeomorphic to $S^2\times S^2.$ For $i=1,2$ we let $\grs_i$ denote the classes in $H^2(S^2\times
S^2,\bbz)$ given by pulling back the volume form on the $i^{th}$ factor. Writing the Kähler class $[\gro]=
a_1\grs_1+a_2\grs_2$ in terms of the this basis, we see that $$a_1=l_1m+l_2, \qquad a_2=l_1,$$ and the positivity condition becomes $a_1> ma_2>0.$ We denote the corresponding deformation classes of toric Sasakian structures on $S^2\times S^3$ by $\gF(a_1,a_2,m).$ The integers $a_1,a_2$ are written as $a,b$ in [@Kar03] and [@Ler03b]. In terms of the $a_i$ the first Chern class \[HirChern2\] simplifies to $c_1(\cald)=
2(a_1-a_2)\grg.$ Thus, $\gF(a_1,a_2,m)$ and $\gF(a'_1,a'_2,m')$ belong to non-isomorphic contact structures if $a'_1-a'_2\neq a_1-a_2.$ The following theorem is due to Lerman [@Ler03b].
\[circlebunHir3\] For every pair of relatively prime integers $(a_1,a_2)$ there are $\lceil \frac{a_2}{a_1}\rceil$ inequivalent regular toric Sasakian structures on $S^2\times S^3$ having the same contact form $\eta_{a_1,a_2}.$ However, for each integer $m=0,\cdots, \lceil \frac{a_2}{a_1}\rceil$ the structures $\gF(a_1,a_2,m)$ are inequivalent as toric contact structures.
Here $\lceil a \rceil$ denotes the smallest integer greater than or equal to $a.$ The essence of Theorem \[circlebunHir3\] is that $\lceil\frac{a_2}{a_1}\rceil$ is precisely the number of non-conjugate maximal tori in the contactomorphism group $\gC\go\gn(S^2\times S^3,\eta_{a_1,a_2})$ [@Kar03; @Ler03b].
We now begin the discussion of the general toric case. It turns out that even asking for just an effective $T^3$ action on $M$ severely restricts its topology. Recall the following classification theorem of Oh [@Oh83]:
\[Ohthm\] Let $M$ be a closed simply connected 5-manifold with an effective $T^3$-action. Then $M$ has no 2-torsion. In particular, $M$ is diffeomorphic to $S^5, k(S^2\times S^3)$ or $X_\infty\#(k-1)(S^2\times S^3)$, where $k=b_2(M){\geqslant}1$. Conversely, all these manifolds admit effective $T^3$ actions.
In particular, there are infinitely many Sasakian 5-manifolds (even Sasakian-Einstein) which do not admit any toric contact structure. In [@Yam01] Yamazaki proved that all Oh’s toric 5-manifolds also admit compatible K-contact structures. But then the main theorem in [@BG00b] can be used to strengthen this to
\[toricSas5man\] Let $M$ be a closed simply connected 5-manifold with an effective $T^3$-action. Then $M$ admits toric Sasakian structures and is diffeomorphic to $S^5, k(S^2\times S^3)$ or $X_\infty\#(k-1)(S^2\times S^3)$, where $k=b_2(M){\geqslant}1.$
Further recall that Geiges [@Gei91] showed that the torsion in $H_2(M^5,\bbz)$ is the only obstruction to the existence of a [*regular*]{} contact structure on $M$. So the question arises whether, for a given $M$ in Theorem \[toricSas5man\] there exist a regular Sasakian structures compatible with some toric contact structure. We answer this in the affirmative by giving an explicit construction as circle bundles over the blow-ups of the Hirzebruch surfaces.
It is well-known [@Ful93] that the smooth toric surfaces are all obtained by blowing-up Hirzebruch surfaces at the fixed points of the $T^2$ action. Begin with a Hirzebruch surface $S_n$ and blow-up $S_n$ at one of the 4 fixed points of the $T^2$ action. This gives a smooth toric surface $S_{n,1}$ which can be represented by a Delzant polytope with 5 vertices. Repeat this procedure inductively to obtain smooth algebraic toric surfaces $S_{n,k}$ whose Delzant polytope has $k+4$ vertices. Choose a Kähler class $[\gro]$ lying on the Neron-Severi lattice, and construct the circle bundle $\pi_{n,k}:M_{n,k}\ra{1.3} S_{n,k}$ whose Euler class is $[\gro].$ The Kähler form can be chosen to be invariant under the $T^2$ action, and we can choose a $T^2$ invariant connection $\eta$ in $\pi_{n,k}:M_{n,k}\ra{1.3} S_{n,k}$ whose curvature form satisfies $d\eta=\pi_{n,k}^*\gro.$ This gives a regular Sasakian structure $\cals=(\xi,\eta,\Phi,g)$ on $M_{n,k},$ and by Theorem \[Barden-Smale-Theorem\] $M_{n,k}$ is diffeomorphic to either $(k+1)(S^2\times S^3)$ or $X_\infty\#k (S^2\times S^3).$ Since $H^1(S_{n,k},\bbz)=0$ the torus action $T^2$ lifts to a $T^2$ action in the automorphism group of the Sasakian structure $\cals$ (cf. [@BG05]) which together with the circle group generated by the Reeb field $\xi$ makes $\cals$ a regular toric Sasakian structure.
It remains to show that all of the manifolds in $\calb$ with no 2-torsion occur. For this we need to compute the second Stiefel-Whitney class $w_2(M_{n,k})$ which is the mod 2 reduction of the first Chern class of contact bundle $\cald_{n,k}$ of $M_{n,k}.$ First we give a Kähler form of the complex manifolds $S_{n,k}$ constructed in the paragraph above. Let $\tilde{\gro}_{l_1,l_2}, \tilde{\gro}_1,\tilde{\gro}_2$ denote the proper transform of $\gro_{l_1,l_2},\gro_1,\gro_2$ respectively. Then the Kähler form on $S_{n,k}$ can be written as $$\label{Kahblowup}
\tilde{\gro}_{l_1,\cdots,l_{k+2}} = \sum_il_i \tilde{\gro}_i$$ where $\tilde{\gro}_{i+2}$ is the $(1,1)$ form representing the Poincaré duals $\tilde{\gra_{i+2}}$ of the exceptional divisors $E_i.$ Then writing the Kähler class as $\sum_{i=1}^kl_{i}\tilde{\gra}_{i}$, the positivity condition becomes $$\label{posblowup}
0<\sum_{i=1}^kl_{i}\tilde{\gra}_{i}\cup
\sum_{i=1}^kl_{i}\tilde{\gra}_{i}=l_1(2l_2+nl_1)-\sum_{i=1}^kl_{i+1}^2.$$ So $\tilde{\gro}_{l_1,\cdots,l_{k+2}}$ defines a Kähler metric if this inequality is satisfied. Here we have used the fact the exceptional divisor is in the kernel of the corresponding blow-up map. Define the integer valued $k+2$-vector ${{\mathbf l}}=(l_1,\cdots,l_{k+2}).$ It is convenient to choose ${{\mathbf l}}=(1,l_2,1,\cdots,1)$ in which case the positivity condition becomes $2l_2+n>k.$ For simplicity we denote the corresponding Kähler form by $\tilde{\gro}_{l_2}.$
Next we need to compute the first Chern class of $\cald_{n,k}.$ This is $\pi_{n,k}^*c_1(S_{n,k})$ modulo the transgression of the Kähler class on $S_{n,k},$ that is, modulo the relation $\pi_{n,k}^*\sum_{i=1}^{k+2}l_i\tilde{\gra}_i =0.$ Let $\grb_1,\cdots,\grb_{k+1}$ be a basis for $H^2(M_{n,k},\bbz),$ and write $\pi_{n,k}^*\tilde{\gra_i}=\sum_{j=1}^{k+1}m_{ij}\grb_j.$ We need to choose the $k+2$ by $k+1$ matrix $(m_{ij})$ such that $$\label{mlortho}
\sum_{i=1}^{k+2}l_im_{ij}=0.$$ Now using Equation \[HirChern\] we have $$\label{c1blowup}
c_1(S_{n,k})=2\tilde{\gra}_1-(n-2)\tilde{\gra}_2-\sum_{i=1}^k\tilde{\gra}_{k+2}$$ which gives $$\label{c1blowup2}
\pi_{n,k}^*c_1(S_{n,k})=2\sum_jm_{1j}\grb_j-(n-2)\sum_jm_{2j}\grb_j-\sum_{i=3}^{k+2}
\sum_jm_{ij}\grb_j.$$ We now make a judicious choice of the matrix $(m_{ij}).$ $$\label{mmatrix}
(m_{ij}) =\left(
\begin{matrix}
-l_2 & 2 & 2 & \cdots & 2 \\
1 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\
0 & -2 & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\
\vdots & 0 & \ddots & 0 & 0 \\
\vdots& \vdots & \cdots & -2 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & -2
\end{matrix}
\right)$$ The orthogonality condition \[mlortho\] is satisfied and Equation \[c1blowup\] becomes $$\pi_{n,k}^*c_1(S_{n,k})= 2l_2\grb_1 -6(\grb_2+\cdots \grb_{k+1}) -(n-2)\grb_1.$$ It follows that $w_2(M_{n,k})\equiv n\mod 2.$
We have arrived at
\[toricSas5man2\] Let $S_{n,k}$ be the equivariant $k$-fold blow-up of the Hirzebruch surface $S_n.$ Let $\pi_{n,k}:M_{n,k}\ra{1.5} S_{n,k}$ be the circle bundle defined by the integral Kähler form $\tilde{\gro}_{l_2}.$ Then for each positive integer $l_2$ satisfying $2l_2+n>k,$ the manifold $M_{n,k}$ admits a toric regular Sasakian structure, $M_{n,k}$ is diffeomorphic to $k(S^2\times S^3)$ if $n$ is even, and if $n$ is odd it is diffeomorphic to $X_\infty\#(k-1)(S^2\times S^3).$ Thus, every regular contact 5-manifold admits a toric regular Sasakian structure.
With more analysis one can make a count of inequivalent deformation classes of toric Sasakian structures on the manifolds $k(S^2\times S^3)$ and $X_\infty\#(k-1)(S^2\times S^3)$ as done in Theorems \[circlebunHir1\] and \[circlebunHir2\].
We close this section with a brief discussion of toric Sasakian-Einstein structures. It is well-known that $S^5$ and $S^2\times S^3$ have homogeneous, hence regular, Sasakian-Einstein structures. Both of these are clearly toric. First inhomogeneous examples of explicit toric Sasakian-Einstein structures on $S^2\times S^3$ were obtained by Gauntlett et al. [@GMSW04a; @MaSp06]. These metrics are of cohomogeneity 1 with $U(2)\times
U(1)$ acting by isometries. In fact, Gauntlett et al. construct infinite families of toric Sasakian-Einstein structures parameterized by two relatively prime integers $p>q$. When $4p^2-3q^2=n^2$ their examples are quasi-regular, i.e., the Reeb vector field has closed orbits. Otherwise the Sasakian-Einstein structure is not quasi-regular. These new examples were further generalized by Cvetič et al. [@CLPP05] (see also [@MaSp05b]) who found toric Sasakian-Einstein metrics on $S^2\times S^3$ of cohomogeneity 2.
This raises a natural question: Do all spin manifolds of Theorem \[toricSas5man\] admit a toric Sasakian-Einstein structure? Since simply connected Sasakian-Einstein spaces are necessarily spin, $X_\infty\#(k-1)(S^2\times S^3)$ must be excluded. It is known that $S^5$ and $k(S^2\times S^3)$ admit families of quasi-regular Sasakian-Einstein structures for any $k$ [@BGN03c; @BGK05; @Kol04]. But most of these metrics have only a one-dimensional isometry group. However, it turns out that $S^2\times S^3$ is by no means special in this respect: there exist families of toric Sasakian-Einstein structures on $k(S^2\times S^3)$ for arbitrary $k$. This has just recently been proven in [@CFO07; @FOW06], and a bit earlier van Coevering [@Coe06] proved this result for $k$ odd.
\[2\][ [\#2](http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=#1) ]{} \[2\][\#2]{}
[GMSW04]{}
M. Audin, *Symplectic and almost complex manifolds*, Holomorphic curves in symplectic geometry, Progr. Math., vol. 117, Birkhäuser, Basel, 1994, With an appendix by P. Gauduchon, pp. 41–74.
D. Barden, *Simply connected five-manifolds*, Ann. of Math. (2) **82** (1965), 365–385.
C. P. Boyer and K. Galicki, *A note on toric contact geometry*, J. Geom. Phys. **35** (2000), no. 4, 288–298.
, *On [S]{}asakian-[E]{}instein geometry*, Internat. J. Math. **11** (2000), no. 7, 873–909.
Charles P. Boyer and Krzysztof Galicki, *New [E]{}instein metrics on [$8\#(S^2\times S^3)$]{}*, Differential Geom. Appl. **19** (2003), no. 2, 245–251.
C. P. Boyer and K. Galicki, *[Sasakian Geometry]{}*, Oxford Mathematical Monographs, Oxford University Press, to appear, Oxford, 2006.
C. P. Boyer, K. Galicki, and J. Kollár, *Einstein metrics on spheres*, Ann. of Math. (2) **162** (2005), no. 1, 557–580.
C. P. Boyer, K. Galicki, J. Koll[á]{}r, and E. Thomas, *Einstein metrics on exotic spheres in dimensions 7, 11, and 15*, Experiment. Math. **14** (2005), no. 1, 59–64.
C. P. Boyer, K. Galicki, and P. Matzeu, *[On Eta-Einstein Sasakian Geometry]{}*, Comm. Math. Phys. **262** (2006), 177–208.
C. P. Boyer, K. Galicki, and M. Nakamaye, *Sasakian-[E]{}instein structures on [$9\#(S^2\times S^3)$]{}*, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. **354** (2002), no. 8, 2983–2996 (electronic).
, *On the geometry of [S]{}asakian-[E]{}instein 5-manifolds*, Math. Ann. **325** (2003), no. 3, 485–524.
, *Sasakian geometry, homotopy spheres and positive [R]{}icci curvature*, Topology **42** (2003), no. 5, 981–1002.
Charles P. Boyer, Krzysztof Galicki, and Michael Nakamaye, *On positive [S]{}asakian geometry*, Geom. Dedicata **101** (2003), 93–102.
A. Banyaga and P. Molino, *Géométrie des formes de contact complètement intégrables de type toriques*, Séminaire Gaston Darboux de Géométrie et Topologie Différentielle, 1991–1992 (Montpellier), Univ. Montpellier II, Montpellier, 1993, pp. 1–25.
K. Cho, A. Futaki, and H. Ono, *[Uniqueness and examples of compact toric [S]{}asaki-[E]{}instein metrics]{}*, preprint, arXiv:math.DG/0701122 (2007).
M. Cveti[č]{}, H. L[ü]{}, Don N. Page, and C. N. Pope, *New [E]{}instein-[S]{}asaki spaces in five and higher dimensions*, Phys. Rev. Lett. **95** (2005), no. 7, 071101, 4.
S. Dragomir and L. Ornea, *Locally conformal [K]{}ähler geometry*, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 155, Birkhäuser Boston Inc., Boston, MA, 1998.
W. Fulton, *Introduction to toric varieties*, Annals of Mathematics Studies, vol. 131, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1993, The William H. Roever Lectures in Geometry.
A. Futaki, H. Ono, and G. Wang, *[Transverse Kähler geometry of Sasaki manifolds and toric Sasaki-Einstein manifolds]{}*, preprint: arXiv:math.DG/0607586 (2006).
H. Geiges, *Contact structures on [$1$]{}-connected [$5$]{}-manifolds*, Mathematika **38** (1991), no. 2, 303–311 (1992).
P. Griffiths and J. Harris, *Principles of algebraic geometry*, Wiley-Interscience \[John Wiley & Sons\], New York, 1978, Pure and Applied Mathematics.
A Ghigi and J. Kollár, *[Kähler Einstein metrics on orbifolds and Einstein metrics on Spheres]{}*, arXiv:math.DG/0507289 (2005).
V. Guillemin, E. Lerman, and S. Sternberg, *Symplectic fibrations and multiplicity diagrams*, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996.
J. P. Gauntlett, D. Martelli, J. Sparks, and D. Waldram, *Sasaki-[E]{}instein metrics on [$S^2\times S^3$]{}*, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. **8** (2004), no. 4, 711–734.
A. Haefliger, *Groupoïdes d’holonomie et classifiants*, Astérisque (1984), no. 116, 70–97, Transversal structure of foliations (Toulouse, 1982).
A. Haefliger and [É]{}. Salem, *Actions of tori on orbifolds*, Ann. Global Anal. Geom. **9** (1991), no. 1, 37–59.
Y. Karshon, *Maximal tori in the symplectomorphism groups of [H]{}irzebruch surfaces*, Math. Res. Lett. **10** (2003), no. 1, 125–132.
J. Kollár, *[Einstein metrics on connected sums of $S^2\times S^3$]{}*, arXiv:math.DG/0402141 (2004).
M. Kreck and S. Stolz, *A diffeomorphism classification of [$7$]{}-dimensional homogeneous [E]{}instein manifolds with [${\rm
SU}(3)\times{\rm SU}(2)\times{\rm U}(1)$]{}-symmetry*, Ann. of Math. (2) **127** (1988), no. 2, 373–388.
E. Lerman, *Contact toric manifolds*, J. Symplectic Geom. **1** (2002), no. 4, 785–828.
, *Maximal tori in the contactomorphism groups of circle bundles over [H]{}irzebruch surfaces*, Math. Res. Lett. **10** (2003), no. 1, 133–144.
, *Contact fiber bundles*, J. Geom. Phys. **49** (2004), no. 1, 52–66.
, *Homotopy groups of [$K$]{}-contact toric manifolds*, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. **356** (2004), no. 10, 4075–4083 (electronic).
P. Molino, *Riemannian foliations*, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 73, Birkhäuser Boston Inc., Boston, MA, 1988, Translated from the French by Grant Cairns, With appendices by Cairns, Y. Carrière, É. Ghys, E. Salem and V. Sergiescu.
D. Martelli and J. Sparks, *Toric [S]{}asaki-[E]{}instein metrics on [$S\sp
2\times S\sp 3$]{}*, Phys. Lett. B **621** (2005), no. 1-2, 208–212.
, *Toric geometry, [S]{}asaki-[E]{}instein manifolds and a new infinite class of [A]{}d[S]{}/[C]{}[F]{}[T]{} duals*, Comm. Math. Phys. **262** (2006), 51–89.
H. S. Oh, *Toral actions on [$5$]{}-manifolds*, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. **278** (1983), no. 1, 233–252.
L. Ornea and M. Verbitsky, *Structure theorem for compact [V]{}aisman manifolds*, Math. Res. Lett. **10** (2003), no. 5-6, 799–805.
, *An immersion theorem for [V]{}aisman manifolds*, Math. Ann. **332** (2005), no. 1, 121–143.
S. Smale, *On the structure of [$5$]{}-manifolds*, Ann. of Math. (2) **75** (1962), 38–46.
N. Steenrod, *The [T]{}opology of [F]{}ibre [B]{}undles*, Princeton Mathematical Series, vol. 14, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N. J., 1951.
C. van Coevering, *[Toric Surfaces and Sasakian-Einstein 5-manifolds]{}*, SUNY at Stony Brook Ph.D. Thesis. preprint, arXiv:math.DG/0607721 (2006).
A. W. Wadsley, *Geodesic foliations by circles*, J. Differential Geometry **10** (1975), no. 4, 541–549.
A. Weinstein, *Fat bundles and symplectic manifolds*, Adv. in Math. **37** (1980), no. 3, 239–250.
M. Y. Wang and W. Ziller, *Einstein metrics on principal torus bundles*, J. Differential Geom. **31** (1990), no. 1, 215–248.
T. Yamazaki, *A construction of [$K$]{}-contact manifolds by a fiber join*, Tohoku Math. J. (2) **51** (1999), no. 4, 433–446.
, *On a surgery of [$K$]{}-contact manifolds*, Kodai Math. J. **24** (2001), no. 2, 214–225.
[^1]: During the preparation of this work the first two authors were partially supported by NSF grants DMS-0203219 and DMS-0504367.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We point out that, if one accepts the view that the standard second on an atomic clock is dilated at low gravitational potential (ordinary gravitational time dilation), then the standard meter must also be dilated at low gravitational potential and by the same factor (gravitational space dilation). These effects may be viewed as distortions of the time and length standards by the gravitational field, and measurements made with these distorted standards can be “corrected” by means of a conformal transformation applied to the usual spacetime metric of general relativity. Because the amount of gravitational time dilation depends on the location of the observer, the “correction” of the metric is specific to a particular observer, and we arrive at a “single-observer” picture (or SO-picture) of events in a static gravitational field. The surprising feature of this single-observer picture is a substantial simplification of interpretation and formalism for numerous phenomena in a static gravitational field as compared to the conventional “many-observer” interpretation (or MO-picture) of general relativity. The principle results of the single-observer picture include: (1) the speed of light has the invariant value $c$ everywhere (as it does in the MO-picture), (2) light rays propagate on geodesics of the single-observer three-space, (3) the relativistic radar echo delay, when a massive body is brought near the radar propagation path, is attributed to an increase in the three-space distance between transmitter and target, (4) the gravitational bending of light and the precession of perihelion are due solely to the curvature of the single-observer’s three-space, (5) particle motion in a static gravitational field is closely analogous to that in Newtonian mechanics permitting a clear comparison of classical and relativistic motions without approximation, (6) the *exact* field equation for the “gravitational potential” in the single-observer picture is the linear Poisson equation of Newtonian gravitation theory, (7) the three-space Maxwell equations in the single-observer picture have the same vector forms as in flat space (not so in the many-observer picture), (8) as a consequence of (7), many standard electrodynamic results, such as Ampere’s law and Faraday’s law are valid in the single-observer three-space, (9) a solar-system test of gravitational space dilation is suggested that seems to be within the capability of existing technology, and finally (10) thermal equilibrium in a gravitational field is characterized by uniform temperature in the SO-picture (not so in the standard MO-picture).'
author:
- 'Richard J. Cook'
title: '**Gravitational Space Dilation**'
---
INTRODUCTION\[sec:Intro\]
=========================
We motivate the viewpoint taken in this paper with the following “Parable of the self-centered observer."
> *A “self-centered” observer at $O$ in a static gravitational field $$d\bar{s}^{2}=\bar{g}_{00}c^{2}d\bar{t}^{2}+\bar{g}_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j},
> \label{Metric}$$ observes a standard clock at rest at point $P$ ticking slower than his own standard clock of identical construction (gravitational time dilation). Being intolerant of other viewpoints, observer $O$ concludes that the observer at $P$ uses a faulty time standard and that a correction of $P$’s time measurement is required.*
>
> *Observer $O$ also concludes that the length standard used by observer $P$ is in error because the standard meter is defined as the distance light travels in time $\tau_{m}=(1/299,792,458)\ s$ at the defined speed $c$ of exactly $299,792,458\ m/s$, and so an error in time measurement by $P$ translates into an error in his length standard (the length standard at $P$ is “too long”, in the view of observer $O$, because $P$’s slow clock allows light to travel too long a time in defining his standard).*
The scale change described by equations (\[ScalingLaws\]) is represented in spacetime notation by the conformal transformation $ds^{2}=d\bar{s}^{2}/\mathcal{R}^{2}$ of metric (\[Metric\]). Under this transformation the proper time $d\bar{\tau}$ \[$= (-d\bar{s}^{2}/c^{2})^{1/2}$\] of observer $P$ goes over into the proper time $d\tau$ \[$=(-ds^{2}/c^{2})^{1/2}$\] of observer $O$ as in Eq. (\[timescale\]), and the proper distance $d\bar{\ell}$ ($d\bar{\ell}^{2}=\bar{g}_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}$) of observer $P$ goes over into the proper distance $d\ell$ of observer $O$ in accordance with Eq. (\[lengthscale\]). Therefore the “correct” metric in the view of our self-centered observer (“corrected” for gravitational time dilation) reads $$\begin{aligned}
ds^{2}&=& d\bar{s}^{2}/\mathcal{R}^{2} \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{\bar{g}_{00}(P)c^{2}d\bar{t}^{2}}{[\bar{g}_{00}(P)/\bar{g}_{00}(O)]}
+\frac{\bar{g}_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}}{\mathcal{R}^{2}} \nonumber \\
&=& -c^{2}dt^{2}+g_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j},
\label{SOtrans}
\end{aligned}$$ where we have trivially rescaled the coordinate time by a constant factor depending on $O$’s location ($t=[-\bar{g}_{00}(O)]^{1/2}\bar{t}$), and have identified $$g_{ij}=\bar{g}_{ij}/\mathcal{R}^{2}
\label{spacemetric}$$ as the spatial metric tensor observer $O$ would regard as correct ($d\ell^{2}=g_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}$ is the appropriate spatial metric in observer $O$’s opinion).
The usual spacetime picture in general relativity (the one based on metric $d\bar{s}^{2}$) is operationally founded on the notion of a large number of observers distributed over space; each making local measurements with locally defined standards of time and length (the “ten thousand local witnesses” in the words of Taylor and Wheeler) [@Taylor]. We shall refer to this as the “many-observer picture” (MO-picture) and the associated metric $d\bar{s}^{2}$ as the metric of *many-observer spacetime* (or *MO-spacetime* for short), and we shall call the spatial section with metric $d\bar{\ell}^{2}=\bar{g}_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}$ *many-observer space* (or *MO-space*). Similarly we shall refer to the picture based on the metric $ds^{2}$ as the *single-observer picture* (or *single-observer spacetime*, or *SO-spacetime*), and we shall call the spatial section with metric $d\ell^{2}=g_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}$ *Gaussian space* (or *SO-space or G-space*). The reason for calling the single-observer space “Gaussian space” will become apparent in Sec. \[sec:LightRays\] \[We are using the over-bar to denote the standard MO-picture variables and no over-bar for SO-picture variables because most of the equations to follow are in the SO-picture and the notation is thereby simplified. We use the same (unbarred) spatial coordinates $x^{i}$ in both pictures.\].
One purpose of the present paper is to show that gravitational space dilation, like gravitational time dilation, is measurable (at least in principle) and that the relativistic radar echo delay experiment may be interpreted as a test of gravitational space dilation. A second purpose of this paper is to show that the single-observer picture is convenient for the calculation and interpretation of various results in general relativity. But before doing so, we address an objection that may already be in the mind of the reader.
Generally speaking, measurement from a distance is problematic in general relativity. Therefore we should like to emphasize that the single-observer picture does not involve actual measurement from a distance. In a static gravitational field, regular light pulses from a stationary beacon cross any stationary point at the same rate they are emitted (in coordinate time) because each pulse traverses an identical time-independent field. Therefore slave clocks distributed at rest over space and ticking each time they receive a beacon pulse from $O$ all tick at the same rate (no gravitational slowing), and any one of them can be used to reproduce $O$’s time and length standards at its location. Observer $O$’s time unit transferred to $P$ is the time between ticks on the slave clock at $P$, and observer $O$’s length standard transferred to $P$ is the distance light travels at $P$ in time $\tau_{m}$ (=1/299,792,458 seconds) *as read on the slave clock at $P$*. The metric $ds^{2}$ describes the results of measurements made locally with the slave-clock standards, whereas the metric $d\bar{s}^{2}$ describes the results of measurements made with time and length standards based on local freely-running, gravitationally-slowed clocks. Strictly speaking, this is what we mean when we say that $O$ applies his own time and length standards at $P$. It is the same logic used in comparing clock rates in the gravitational time-dilation experiment. Therefore, no actual measurement from a distance is involved, though, for convenience, we shall often speak loosely in such terms.
Incidentally, the slave clock readings determine a time at each point of space. If the slave clocks are synchronized by the Einstein synchronization procedure, then they read the coordinate time $t$ ($=[-\bar{g}_{00}(O)]^{1/2}\bar{t}$) introduced above for the metric $ds^{2}$. This is an operational definition of the time $t$.
The metrics $d\bar{s}^{2}$ and $ds^{2}$ are physically equivalent and conformally equivalent. They represent the same spacetime geometry measured with different standards of length and time [@Remark]. Nevertheless, we shall refer to the different picture as “different spacetimes” because “invariants” such as the curvature scalars $\bar{R}$ and $R$ have different values in the two pictures and the metrics $d\bar{s}^{2}$ and $ds^{2}$ are not related by a coordinate transformation.
One important result which is the same in both the single-observer and many-observer pictures concerns the local speed of light. In MO-spacetime the local speed of light is everywhere $c$: $d\bar{\ell}/d\bar{\tau}_{0} =c$ or $d\bar{s}=0$ (here $d\bar{\tau}_{0}$ is the proper time on a local freely-running rest clock). Under the transformation (\[timescale\])-(\[lengthscale\]) \[or (\[SOtrans\])\] the local light speed retains this value: $d\ell/d\tau_{0}=(d\bar{\ell}/\mathcal{R})/(d\bar{\tau}_{0}/\mathcal{R})
=d\bar{\ell}/d\bar{\tau}_{0} =c$ (or $ds=0$), where now $d\tau_{o}=dt$ is local slave-clock time, or “observer $O$’s time” when we speak loosely. Hence we have
> **Result I:** *In the single-observer picture the speed of light $d\ell/dt$ has the invariant value $c$ everywhere and at all times.*
The same argument shows that *any* speed has the same value in MO-space and in SO-space (or Gaussian space), i.e., $v=\bar{v}$.. Note that, according to metric (\[SOtrans\]), the single-observer rest-clock proper time $\tau_{0}$ is the same as the coordinate time $t$, and we use the two interchangeably.
In Sec. \[sec:LightRays\] we show that light rays follow geodesics of the single-observer three space (geodesics of Gaussian space) and discuss some simple consequences of this result. Sec. \[sec:RadarDelay\] addresses the radar propagation problem, and concludes that radar from $O$ directly measures the single-observer distance $\int d\ell$, and the relativistic radar echo delay experiment [@Shapiro] may be interpreted as an increase in this distance as the solar mass comes near the radar propagation path. Sec. \[sec:ParticleMotion\] treats particle motion in a static gravitational field. Here we find a close analogy between particle motion in Gaussian space and that in Newtonian gravitational mechanics. This permits a clear comparison of classical and relativistic motions *without introducing approximations*, e.g., perihelion precession is attributed solely to the curvature of Gaussian space in the SO-picture. In Sec. \[sec:GravitationalPotential\], we find that the gravitational acceleration of a particle at rest in Gaussian space, $\mathbf{g}_{0}=-\nabla \Phi$, is determined by the linear Poisson equation $\nabla^{2}\Phi=-4\pi G\rho_{g}$ of Newtonian gravitation theory (here seen to be an exact relativistic result)—the only difference between the Newtonian and relativistic gravitation theories being the non-Euclidean geometry of the Gaussian three-space and an energy dependent factor $(\bar{m}c^{2}/E)^{2}$ in the gravitational acceleration $\mathbf{g}=-(\bar{m}c^{2}/E)^{2}\nabla \Phi$ when the particle velocity is nonzero. In Sec. \[sec:Electrodynamics\], the three-space Maxwell equations are derived for Gaussian space and are found to have the same vector forms as in flat space (not so in the MO-picture). This leads to a number of electromagnetic theorems, e.g., Amperes law and Faraday’s law, that hold in Gaussian space but do not hold in the usual MO-picture. In Sec. \[sec:DilationTest\] we suggest a solar-system test of gravitational space dilation involving radar measurements. Sec. \[sec:Applications\] presents a number of applications of the space-dilation formalism chosen to illustrate how very different the physical interpretations of phenomena can be in the MO- and SO-pictures. The paper concludes in Sec. \[sec:Conclusion\] with a summary of results.
\[sec:LightRays\]LIGHT RAYS AS SPATIAL GEODESICS
================================================
Fermat’s principle in MO-space [@Misner] states that, in a static gravitational field, the path taken by light between points $P_{1}$ and $P_{2}$ is the one that minimizes the *coordinate time* elapsed in propagating between the two points, $$\delta\int_{P_{1}}^{P_{2}}d\bar{t} = 0 .
\label{timeInt}$$ Using the null condition $d\bar{s}^{2}= 0$ and (\[Rate\]) in Eq. (\[Metric\]), we find that (\[timeInt\]) can be written as $$\delta\int_{P_{1}}^{P_{2}}\left[\frac{\bar{g}_{ij}}{\mathcal{R}^{2}} \frac{dx^{i}}{dq}
\frac{dx^{j}}{dq} \right]^{1/2} dq = 0
\label{intmod}$$ for any parameterization $x^{i}(q)$ of the path between $P_{1}$ and $P_{2}$. But Eq. (\[intmod\]) is precisely the condition for the single-observer path length between the two points to be minimum, $$\delta\int_{P_{1}}^{P_{2}} d\ell = 0,
\label{spaceint}$$ where $d\ell^{2} = g_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}$ is the spatial part of the single-observer metric (\[SOtrans\]).
> **Result II:*** Light rays in a static gravitational field are geodesics of the single-observer spatial metric $d\ell^{2} = g_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}$, i.e., geodesics of Gaussian space.*
This result can be understood by noting that, in a space where the light speed $d\ell/dt = c$ is everywhere the same *and the differential $dt$ is exact* (so that the speed $d\ell/dt$ is integrable), a principle of least time is equivalent to a principle of least distance. This does not hold true in MO-space where, although each local observer measures the same light speed $d\bar{\ell}/d\bar{\tau}_{0} = c$, the clocks of different observers run at different rates (the local proper time differential $d\bar{\tau}_{0}$ is not exact) and it cannot be concluded that the MO-space distance is least. Indeed, it is well known that light rays *do not* travel the geodesics of the spatial metric $d\bar{\ell}^{2}=\bar{g}_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}$ of MO-space.
Let us apply Result II to the Schwarzschild line element $$d\bar{s}^{2}=-(1-2m/r)c^{2}d\bar{t}^{2}+\frac{dr^{2}}{(1-2m/r)}
+r^{2}d\Omega^{2}.
\label{eq.Scharz}$$ where $d\Omega^{2}=d\theta^{2}+sin^{2}\theta d\phi^{2}$. The rate of a clock at rest at $P$ (coordinates $r, \theta, \phi$) as viewed by an observer $O$ at $r_{0}= \infty$ \[Eq. (\[Rate\])\] is $$\mathcal{R}=\left(1-\frac{2m}{r} \right)^{1/2} .
\label{SchRate}$$ Hence the spatial part of the single-observer metric (\[SOtrans\]), specialized to the $ \theta = \pi /2 $ plane, reads $$d\ell^{2}=\frac{1}{(1-2m/r)} \left[
\frac{dr^{2}}{(1-2m/r)} +r^{2}d\phi^{2} \right] .
\label{3Dmetric1}$$ Using $\phi$ as the parameter for the trajectory $r(\phi)=1/u(\phi)$, we easily obtain the two-space geodesic equation in this Gaussian space: $$\frac{d^{2}u}{d\phi^{2}} +u=3mu^{2}.
\label{orbit.eq}$$ This is the familiar trajectory equation for light in the gravitational field of the sun (in which case $m=1.48\ km$), here obtained as a spatial geodesic of G-space. The complete description of light propagation for the single observer consists of the trajectory $r(\phi)$ together with Result I stating that light travels this trajectory with speed $d\ell/dt = c$. (Here the single-observer time $t$ is just the coordinate time $\bar{t}$ because the observer is at infinity.).
The *interpretation* of light deflection is simple in Gaussian space. According to Result II, light is bent by a static gravitational field solely because it is traveling the shortest path in the non-Euclidean G-space with metric $$d\ell^{2}= \frac{1}{(1-2m/r)}
\left[\frac{dr^{2}}{(1-2m/r)}+
r^{2}d\Omega^{2}\right] ,
\label{3metric}$$ where $d\Omega^{2}=d\theta^{2}+ sin^{2}\theta d\phi^{2}$ (Here we are not restricted to the $\theta = \pi /2$ plane.)
> **MO-Picture Interpretation:** The interpretation of light deflection in MO-spacetime is more complicated. In several books on general relativity we find diagrams suggesting that gravitational light deflection may be attributed to the non-Euclidean nature of three-space, but we are often not warned that “the light ray is not a geodesic line in three-dimensional space” (the quote is from Pauli [@Pauli]). In Will [@Will1] we correctly learn that half of the light deflection may be attributed to the non-Euclidean MO-space and half to the principle of equivalence applied in a sequence of freely falling reference frames along the ray, as first employed by Einstein [@Einstein1].
We now see that *light rays as spatial geodesics* is a valid concept provided we adopt the “self-centered” view of the single observer who uses his own length standard for distance measurement throughout space in place of the locally defined standards.
A rewording of Result II states that the three-velocity $c^{k}=dx^{k}/dt$ of a photon (the tangent vector to the light ray) undergoes parallel transport in G-space. This follows from Result II by taking $q=t$ as the affine parameter for the ray $x^{k}(t)$. The three-space geodesic equation \[$d^{2}x^{k}/dt^{2}+\Gamma^{k}_{ij}(dx^{i}/dt)(dx^{j}
/dt) = 0$\] is then the equation of parallel transport \[$dc^{k}/dt = -\Gamma^{k}_{ij}c^{i}dx^{j}/dt$\] for the photon three-velocity $c^{k}$ in G-space, and the parallel transport of $c^{k}$ leaves the magnitude of this three-vector invariant at value $c$ (Result I).
Because the geodesics of G-space are the paths of light rays, the non-Euclidean features of this space are measurable optically. Fig. \[fig1\] shows three intersecting light rays, each bent by the sun’s gravitational field.
![\[fig1\]Three gravitationally bent light rays form a triangle $ABC$ about the sun. The sum of the interior angles is greater than two right angles. This shows directly that the single-observer three-space (G-space) is non-Euclidean, because the light rays are geodesics of G-space.](RAYTRIANGLE.pdf){width="1.75in"}
The interior angles of the triangle formed by these rays sum to greater than $\pi$ radians; an earmark of non-Euclidean geometry. Therefore, the measured deflection of light by the sun’s gravitational field is *direct* evidence for the curvature of G-space (It is not *direct* evidence for a non-Euclidean MO-space, because light rays are not geodesics of MO-space).
In Euclidean geometry, a “biangle” is a rather uninteresting closed figure with two equal sides, two equal angles ($\alpha = \beta = 0$), and zero area (two overlapping line segments). However, in non-Euclidean geometry, the biangle can open into a non-trivial figure with finite area and finite vertex angles. The “football shaped” figure formed by two lines of longitude on a sphere meeting at the poles is an example of a non-trivial biangle; an “equilateral biangle”.
Two light rays diverging from a point and brought back together by the gravitational attraction of a mass $M$, as in Fig. \[fig2\], form a biangle in the G-space of observer $O$.
![\[fig2\]Two light rays diverging from source $S$ are bent by the gravitational field of mass $M$ and intersect at observer $O$. The closed two-sided figure with vertex angles $\alpha$ and $\beta$ is a non-trivial “biangle” in the G-space of observer $O$. The existence of a non-trivial biangle (geodesics initially diverging from a point and then coming together) implies that this G-space is non-Euclidean. It follows that the double images of a quasar produced by gravitational lensing offer *direct* evidence for a non-Euclidean G-space.](Biangle.pdf){width="3in"}
The existence of a biangle with non-zero vertex angles implies that the G-space around mass $M$ is non-Euclidean. We may conclude that the double (or multiple) images of quasars, formed by gravitational lensing also provide *direct* evidence for a non-Euclidean G-space geometry.
Probably the first attempt to detect non-Euclidean features of three-dimensional space was that of Carl Friedrich Gauss. It is reported that Gauss used light beams between mountain tops in an attempt to detect a deviation from the Euclidean theorem stating that the sum of the interior angles of a triangle equals two right angles [@Bonola]. In this experiment Gauss found it natural to assume that light propagates along geodesics of the three-space. Because the geodesic character of light rays is the central feature of the single-observer three space, it seems natural to refer to this space as “Gaussian space” (or “G-space” for short) as we have been doing already for a while now.
We note in passing that, when a carpenter looks along the edge of a piece of lumber to see if it is “straight,” he is using the Gaussian-space definition of “straight,” namely the path of a light ray as the straightest possible curve in three-dimensional space.
\[sec:RadarDelay\]RADAR ECHO DELAY
==================================
Consider the G-space distance $\ell$ measured along a light ray from the observer at $O$ to the point $P$. Because the single observer at $O$ sees the same light speed $d\ell/dt = c$ everywhere (and because the differential $dt$ is exact, i.e., the derivative $d\ell/dt$ is integrable), it follows that the distance $\ell$ is traversed in time $\Delta t =
\ell / c$. If light travels from $O$ to $P$ and back to $O$, the total elapsed time on the clock at $O$ is given by $\Delta t = 2\ell /c$, or $\ell = c \Delta t/2$, namely the radar range formula. We thus arrive at
> **Result III:*** The G-space distance measured along a light ray from observer $O$ to point $P$ (the geodesic distance determined by the spatial metric $d\ell^{2}= g_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}$) is the radar distance from $O$ to $P$ measured using a radar unit at $O$.*
This is a useful observation. It tells us that, in a static gravitational field, when a single observer chooses length and time standards throughout space consistent (in his view) with his own local standards, his natural measure of distance is radar distance. This singles out radar distance as more natural for the single observer than the other possible distance measures (MO-space proper distance, luminosity distance, angular diameter distance, etc.). By the same token, radar is the natural tool for measuring the G-space geometry, since it measures G-space distance directly, at least along light rays from $O$ (actually the G-space metric for observer $O$ is measured by radar from any point and in any direction so long as the radar at that point uses the local slave-clock time $t$ to measure the radar echo delay).
The relativistic radar echo delay has a simple interpretation in G-space. Consider the Schwarzschild geometry in isotropic coordinates: $$\begin{aligned}
d\bar{s}^{2}&=&-\left(\frac{1-m/2\rho}{1+m/2\rho}\right)^{2}c^{2}d\bar{t}^{2} \nonumber \\
& &+\left(1+m/2\rho\right)^{4}\left(dx^{2}+dy^{2}+dz^{2}\right).
\label{isoScharz}
\end{aligned}$$ Here $x, y, z$ are rectangular coordinate markers and $\rho = \left(x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}\right)^{1/2}$.
To an observer at infinity ($\rho_{0}= \infty$), a stationary clock at radial coordinate $\rho$ runs at the rate $$\mathcal{R} = \frac{\left(1-m/2\rho\right)}{\left(1+m/2\rho\right)}.
\label{isorate}$$ Hence the G-space geometry is described by the metric $$d\ell^{2}= \frac{d\bar{\ell}^{2}}{\mathcal{R}^{2}}=\frac{(1+m/2\rho)^{6}}{(1-m/2\rho)^{2}}
\left(dx^{2}+dy^{2}+dz^{2}\right).
\label{iso3D}$$
Consider the geodesic distance in G-space from Earth (point $E$) to Mars (point $M$) when Mars is near superior conjunction and the radar path $EM$ passes near the sun, as in Fig. \[fig3\].
![\[fig3\]Radar propagates from Earth (E) to Mars (M) and back. The radar path length in Gaussian space is longer when the sun is near the propagation path (superior conjunction) than when the sun is far removed from the propagation path. This accounts for the relativistic radar echo delay.](RadarPath.pdf){width="3in"}
In the absence of the sun ($m = 0$), or when the sun is far from the radar propagation path, the G-space metric (\[iso3D\]) is Euclidean ($d\ell^{2}_{0}=dx^{2}+dy^{2}+dz^{2}$), and the geodesic path from $E$ to $M$ is a straight line of some length $\ell_{0}$. With the sun in place near the propagation path ($m=GM_{\odot}/c^{2}$), the G-space metric is given by (\[iso3D\]), and the geodesic distance from $E$ to $M$ is increased to $\ell=\int_{E}^{M}d\ell$. Because the speed of light is everywhere $c$ for the single observer, the increase in path length from $E$ to $M$ causes an additional radar delay $\delta
t= 2(\ell-\ell_{0})/c$ over and above what would be expected in Euclidean space. This is the excess delay measured in the Shapiro relativistic radar echo experiment [@Shapiro].
> **Result IV:*** In the single-observer picture, the relativistic radar echo delay is attributed to an increase in distance between the transmitter and target when a large mass (e.g.,the sun) is brought near the radar propagation path.*
Both the bending of light and the excess radar echo delay are nicely pictured by embedding the $\theta = \pi/2$ plane of G-space in Euclidean three-space. The embedding diagram is sketched in Fig. \[fig4\].
![\[fig4\]Embedding diagram for the $\theta=\pi/2$ plane of G-space in the neighborhood of the sun (schematic and not to scale). A light ray passing near the sun is deflected because it travels a geodesic path on the embedding surface. A radar pulse is delayed because the sun increases the geodesic distance from Earth $E$ to Mars $M$ when it is near the radar propagation path. The increased distance is attributed to the depression of the embedding surface near the sun.](Embedding.pdf){width="3in"}
The curvature of the surface causes deflection of a light ray (a G-space geodesic) and the increased distance from $E$ to $M$ is due to the depression of the surface near the mass $M_{\odot}$.
> **MO-Picture Interpretation** Interpretation of the radar delay is more complicated in MO-spacetime. In MO-space, half of the delay is attributed to an increased path length and half to gravitational time dilation along the propagation path [@Will2].
\[sec:ParticleMotion\]PARTICLE MOTION IN G-SPACE
================================================
It is of interest to learn how material particles move in the three-space for which light rays define geodesics. We find that the single-observer picture of particle motion is very much closer in spirit to Newtonian mechanics than to the usual formulation in general relativity. This allows a clear comparison of Newtonian and relativistic motions *without approximation*.
Equations of motion
-------------------
Particles travel on geodesics of MO-spacetime: $$\delta\int_{}^{}d\bar{\tau} = 0 ,
\label{minproptime}$$ where $\bar{\tau}$ is the proper time at the moving particle as measured with a locally defined time standard (MO-picture). Using equation (\[timescale\]), $d\bar{\tau}=\mathcal{R}d\tau$, and noting that the proper time in the SO-picture ($d\tau^{2}=-ds^{2}/c^{2}$) obeys the same motional time dilation formula as in special relativity, $$d\tau = \sqrt{1-v^{2}/c^{2}}dt,
\label{TimeDilation}$$ where $v^{2}=d\ell^{2}/dt^{2}=g_{ij}(dx^{i}/dt)(dx^{j}/dt))$ is the squared speed of the particle in G-space, equation (\[minproptime\]) indicates that particle motion is derivable from the three-space Lagrangian $$\begin{aligned}
L &=&-\bar{m}c^{2}\mathcal{R}\left(1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}\right)^{1/2}
\nonumber \\
&=&-\bar{m}c^{2}\mathcal{R}\left(1-\frac{g_{ij}}
{c^{2}}\frac{dx^{i}}{dt}
\frac{dx^{j}}{dt}
\right)^{1/2} ,
\label{lagrang}\end{aligned}$$ here written in terms of G-space variables. We have added the inessential constant factor $-\bar{m}c^{2}$ for later convenience of interpretation, where $\bar{m}$ is the rest mass in the MO-picture (a constant). From this Lagrangian we obtain the momentum $$\begin{aligned}
p_{k}&=&\frac{\partial L}{\partial (dx^{k}/dt)} \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{\bar{m}\mathcal{R}v_{k}}{\sqrt{1-v^{2}/c^{2}}}
\label{Momentum}\end{aligned}$$ conjugate to coordinate $x^{k}$, where $v_{k}=g_{ki}v^{i}=g_{ki}dx^{i}/dt$. The Hamiltonian $$\begin{aligned}
H&=& p_{k}v^{k}-L \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{\bar{m}c^{2}\mathcal{R}}{\sqrt{1-v^{2}/c^{2}}} \nonumber \\
&=& E,
\label{Ham}\end{aligned}$$ is the conserved energy E of the particle. Note that in Gaussian space indices are lowered and raised with $g_{ij}$ and it’s inverse $g^{ij}$, respectively. From the Lagrangian (\[lagrang\]) there follows the equation of motion in G-space $$\frac{d^{2}x^{k}}{dt^{2}}+\Gamma^{k}_{\ ij}
\frac{dx^{i}}{dt}\frac{dx^{j}}{dt}
=-\left( \frac{\bar{m}c^{2}}{E}\right)^{2}
\frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial x_{k}} ,
\label{equmotion}$$ where $\Gamma^{k}_{\ ij}=(1/2)g^{kl}(\partial_{j}g_{li}+
\partial_{i}g_{lj}-\partial_{l}g_{ij})$ are the G-space Christoffel symbols, we have used the constancy of $E$ in the derivation, and $$\Phi = \frac{1}{2}c^{2}\mathcal{R}^{2}
\label{Newtonian}$$ is the “Newtonian gravitational potential” in G-space (the justification for this terminology will become apparent in Sec. \[sec:GravitationalPotential\]). From Eq. (\[equmotion\]) we see that, as the particle approaches light speed ($E >> \bar{m}c^{2}$), the term on the right vanishes and the particle moves on a geodesic of G-space, as do photons.
Notice that the Lagrangian $$L=-mc^{2}\sqrt{1-v^{2}/c^{2}} ,
\label{Lagr}$$ the energy $$E=\frac{mc^{2}}{\sqrt{1-v^{2}/c^{2}}}=\sqrt{c^{2}p^{2}+m^{2}c^{4}} ,
\label{Ener}$$ and the momentum $$\mathbf{p}=\frac{m\mathbf{v}}{\sqrt{1-v^{2}/c^{2}}}
\label{Mo}$$ in G-space all have the same forms as in special relativity, provided we identify the position-dependent quantity $$m(\mathbf{x})=\bar{m}\mathcal{R}(\mathbf{x})
\label{RestMass}$$ as the *rest mass of the particle in the SO-picture*. On this interpretation, the position-dependent rest energy of the particle, $mc^{2}=\bar{m}c^{2}\mathcal{R}$, plays the role of a gravitational potential energy in G-space, as can be seen in the non-relativistic ($v^{2} \ll c^{2}$) limits of the lagrangian (\[Lagr\]) \[$L=mv^{2}/2-m(\mathbf{x})c^{2}$\] and the energy (\[Ener\]) \[$E=mv^{2}/2 +m(\mathbf{x})c^{2}$\].
In fact, the interpretation of the rest energy $m(\mathbf{x})c^{2}$ as a gravitational potential energy is fully relativistic. The G-space energy $E$ and three-momentum $p^{i}$ combine to form a four-vector momentum $$P^{\mu}=(\frac{E}{c}, p^{i}) = m\frac{dx^{\mu}}{d\tau} ,
\label{FourMomentum}$$ in the SO-picture. This is related to the MO-picture momentum $\bar{P}^{\mu}\equiv
\bar{m}dx^{\mu}/d\bar{\tau}$ by the conformal transformation law $$P^{\mu}=\mathcal{R}^{2}\bar{P}^{\mu} .
\label{MomentumTrans}$$ In the absence of non-gravitational forces, the four-momentum $\bar{P}^{\mu}$ is parallel transported in MO-spacetime \[$ d\bar{P}^{\mu}/d\bar{\tau}+\bar{\Gamma}^{\mu}_{\ \alpha
\beta}\bar{P}^{\alpha}dx^{\beta}/d\bar{\tau}=0$\]. But this equation is *not* conformally invariant. In the SO-picture, the four-momentum (\[FourMomentum\]) obeys the equation of motion $$\frac{DP^{\mu}}{d\tau} \equiv \frac{dP^{\mu}}{d\tau}+\Gamma^{\mu}_{\ \alpha \beta}P^{\alpha}
\frac{dx^{\beta}}{d\tau}=-\frac{\partial (mc^{2})}{\partial x_{\mu}}
\label{EOMmomentum}$$ in which the rest energy $m(\mathbf{x})c^{2}$ manifestly plays the role of a scalar potential energy.
> **Result V:** *Although there is no true gravitational force in the MO-picture, i.e., the momentum $\bar{P}^{\mu}$ obeys the “law of inertia” $D\bar{P}^{\mu}/d\bar{\tau}=0$ and is constant in a local inertial frame, the momentum $P^{\mu}=\mathcal{R}^{2}\bar{P}^{\mu}$ of the SO-picture changes due to the action of a gravitational four-force $f^{\mu}=-\partial V/\partial x_{\mu}$ derivable from a scalar potential $V=m(\mathbf{x})c^{2}$ that is the rest energy of the particle in this picture:* $$\frac{DP^{\mu}}{d\tau}\equiv\frac{dP^{\mu}}{d\tau}+
> \Gamma^{\mu}_{\ \alpha \beta}P^{\alpha}
> \frac{dx^{\beta}}{d\tau}=-\frac{\partial V}{\partial x_{\mu}} .
> \label{EOMmomentum}$$
Notice that the “Newtonian gravitational potential” $\Phi$, the “gravitational potential energy” $V$, and the “atomic rest-clock rate” $\mathcal{R}$ all contain the same information: $$\frac{2\Phi}{c^{2}}=\left(\frac{V}{\bar{m}c^{2}}\right)=\mathcal{R}^{2} .
\label{Relation}$$ The potential energy $V(\mathbf{x})$ determines the rate of change of momentum $P^{\mu}$, the gravitational potential $\Phi$ (together with the particle mass $\bar{m}$ and its energy $E$) determine the three-acceleration of the particle in G-space \[Eq. (\[equmotion\])\], and the scale factor $\mathcal{R}(\mathbf{x})$ is the ticking rate of a free-running atomic clock on the time scale of observer O’s local clock.
Newtonian Analogy
-----------------
The exact relativistic equation of motion in G-space (\[equmotion\]) is quite similar to the Newtonian equation of motion in curvilinear coordinates $$\frac{d^{2}x^{k}}{dt^{2}}
+\Gamma^{k}_{ij}
\frac{dx^{i}}{dt}\frac{dx^{j}}{dt}
= -\frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial x_{k}} .
\label{Newteqn}$$ Formally, the only difference is the constant factor $(\bar{m}c^{2}/E)^{2}$ on the right in the G-space equation (\[equmotion\]). When the particle moves slowly ($E \approx
\bar{m}c^{2}$), the two equations are formally identical, and when the particle moves fast ($E \gg \bar{m}c^{2}$), the factor $(\bar{m}c^{2}/E)^{2}$ turns off the gravitational acceleration. The quantity on the left in equation (\[equmotion\]) is the acceleration of the particle in G-space (the absolute acceleration), which, in this case, is the acceleration due to gravity $g^{k}$ in G-space. Thus we have
> **Result VI:** *For a slowly moving particle ($E \approx
> \bar{m}c^{2}$), the acceleration due to gravity in Gaussian space is derivable from the “Newtonian gravitational potential” $\Phi=c^{2}\mathcal{R}^{2}/2$ as* $$\mathbf{g}_{0}=-\nabla \Phi .
> \label{RestGravAccel}$$ *As the speed of the particle increases, the gravitational acceleration $\mathbf{g}$ decreases by the factor $(\bar{m}c^{2}/E)^{2}$ which is a constant of the motion:* $$\mathbf{g} = \left(\frac{\bar{m}c^{2}}{E}\right)^{2}\mathbf{g}_{0} .
> \label{GravAccel}$$ *As the particle approaches the speed of light ($E\gg
> \bar{m}c^{2}$), the gravitational acceleration tends to zero and the trajectory of the particle approaches a G-space geodesic.*
Result VI helps to clarify certain curious results of general relativity. Consider the problem depicted in Fig. \[fig5\], which is said to have puzzled Einstein some years after the development of general relativity.
![\[fig5\]The straight path from $A$ to $B$ passes through mass $M$. With the mass in place, light takes longer to propagate from $A$ to $B$ than without the mass present, whereas a non-relativistic material particle travels from $A$ to $B$ faster with $M$ present than without. How can light be slowed and particles hastened along the same path in the same gravitational field?](ThroughMass.pdf){width="3in"}
Light propagating from $A$ to $B$ through the mass $M$ has its propagation time delayed from what it would be without the mass present, but a non-relativistic particle traveling the same path arrives at $B$ sooner than it would without the mass $M$ present. *How can light be slowed and particles be hastened along the same path in the same gravitational field?* In the SO-picture the answer is clear. The delay for light, as for radar, is due to the increased G-space distance between $A$ and $B$ when the mass $M$ is in place. The material particle must also travel the longer path between $A$ and $B$, but unlike the photon which experiences no gravitational acceleration in G-space ($\mathbf{g}=0$), a slow material particle experiences the Newtonian acceleration $\mathbf{g}_{0}=-\nabla \Phi$, which increases the particle’s speed as it nears and crosses the mass $M$, thus decreasing the travel time. Hence the particle arrives sooner and the photon later because the particle experiences a gravitational acceleration in G-space and the photon does not.
> **MO-Picture Interpretation:** For comparison, we note that the acceleration due to gravity in MO-space (the absolute acceleration on the time scale of the coordinate time $\bar{t}$), $$\begin{aligned}
> \bar{g}^{k}&=& \frac{d^{2}x^{k}}{d\bar{t}^{2}}+\bar{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}\frac{dx^{i}}{d\bar{t}}
> \frac{dx^{j}}{d\bar{t}} \nonumber \\
> &=& -\frac{\partial \bar{\phi}}{\partial x_{k}}+\frac{1}{\bar{\phi}}
> \left(\frac{\partial \bar{\phi}}{\partial x^{i}}
> \frac{dx^{i}}{d\bar{t}}\right)\frac{dx^{k}}{d\bar{t}} ,
> \label{MOequMotion}
> \end{aligned}$$ is not the gradient of a scalar potential alone, but in addition contains a velocity-dependent term that enforces the speed limit $d\bar{\ell}/d\bar{\tau}_{0}\le c$ in MO-space \[here $\bar{\Gamma}^{k}_{ij}=(1/2)\bar{g}^{kl}(\partial_{j}\bar{g}_{li}+
> \partial_{i}\bar{g}_{lj}-\partial_{l}\bar{g}_{ij})$ are the Christoffel symbols in MO-space and $$\bar{\phi}=-\frac{1}{2}c^{2}\bar{g}_{00}
> \label{MOpotential}$$ is the low-speed gravitational potential in this space\].
There are two fundamental differences between the G-space equation of motion (\[equmotion\]) and the Newtonian equation of motion (\[Newteqn\]). The first (a local difference) is the factor $(\bar{m}c^{2}/E)^{2}$ discussed above. The second difference (a global one) is the curvature of Gaussian space for equation (\[equmotion\]) whereas the space for the Newtonian equation (\[Newteqn\]) is flat. In the following section we learn that this difference accounts for the perihelion precession of planetary orbits.
Relativistic Kepler Problem
---------------------------
In Schwarzschild geometry (\[eq.Scharz\]), the “Newtonian gravitational potential” (\[Newtonian\]) for an observer at infinity is $$\Phi=-\frac{GM}{r}+\frac{c^{2}}{2} .
\label{schwzpot}$$ Apart from the additive constant $c^{2}/2$, this is formally identical to the Newtonian gravitational potential for this problem \[the additive constant is, of course, arbitrary in Newtonian theory, but fixed by equations (\[Rate\]) and (\[Newtonian\]) in the SO-picture of general relativity\]. The gravitational acceleration in G-space, Eq. (\[GravAccel\]), reads $$\mathbf{g}=\left(\frac{\bar{m}c^{2}}{E}\right)^{2}\nabla
\left(\frac{GM}{r}\right) .
\label{GravAccelII}$$ The constant factor $(\bar{m}c^{2}/E)^{2}$ in this equation is equivalent to a change of the central mass $M$ by this factor; a change which is entirely negligible for planetary motions in the solar system (the change is less than one part in $10^{7}$ for planet Mercury in the sun’s field, and $M_{\odot}$ is known only to about four significant figures anyway). Moreover, a small change in the strength of the Newtonian inverse-square acceleration makes no contribution to the perihelion motion (such a change acting alone still gives closed elliptical orbits). Therefore, the precession of perihelion can only be attributed to the non-Euclidean character of G-space:
> **Result VII:** *In the single-observer picture, the relativistic precession of perihelion of planetary orbits is due exclusively to the curvature of Gaussian space.*
Let us show this explicitly. In the $\theta = \pi/2$ plane of Schwarzschild space, we write the G-space metric, Eq.(\[3Dmetric1\]), as $$d\ell^{2} = \frac{1}{(1-2m^{*}/r)} \left[
\frac{dr^{2}}{(1-2m^{*}/r)} + r^{2}d\phi^{2} \right] .
\label{mmetric}$$ with a star on $m^{*}$ so that we can “turn off” the curvature of G-space by setting $m^{*} = 0$, without changing the gravitational potential (\[schwzpot\]) \[this is, of course, an artificial procedure, but one that allows us to isolate the effect of G-space curvature\].
The orbit equation for the variable $u(\phi) = 1/r(\phi)$ is derived from from the equation of motion (\[equmotion\]) in the usual way. The result is $$\frac{d^{2} u}{d\phi^{2}} + u = \frac{GM}{h^{2}} +
3m^{*} u^{2},
\label{orbpara}$$ where $$h = \frac{r^{3}}{r-2m^{*}} \left( \frac{d \phi}{dt}
\right)
\approx r^{2}\frac{d\phi}{dt}
\label{const}$$ is a constant of the motion (the angular momentum per unit mass), and we have replaced $(\bar{m}c^{2}/E)^{2}$ by unity because the difference is negligible for any planetary motion in the solar system.
The first term on the right in (\[orbpara\]) (the Newtonian term) comes from the potential (\[schwzpot\]), whereas the second term (the relativistic term) comes from the G-space metric (\[mmetric\]) and gives rise to the observed advance of perihelion. But, if we turn off the curvature of G-space by setting $m^{*} = 0$, equation (\[orbpara\]) is then the Newtonian orbit equation with no precession of perihelion. In this sense the precession \[$\delta\phi = 6\pi
m^{*}/a(1-\epsilon^{2})$ per revolution, where $a$ is the semi-major axis and $\epsilon$ the eccentricity of the orbit\] is a direct measure of the curvature of G-space.
> **MO-Picture Interpretation:** Interpretation of perihelion precession is more complicated in MO-spacetime. Will [@Will3] identifies three separate significant contributions to the perihelion precession (three significant terms in the PPN expansion): (1) curvature of MO-space, (2) a velocity dependent part of the gravitational force, and (3) a non-linear term proportional to the square of the gravitational potential; the relative contribution of these effects being coordinate dependent.
It is noteworthy that the single-observer interpretation attributes the perihelion advance to a single cause (the curvature of G-space) and this interpretation is exact rather than approximate.
\[sec:GravitationalPotential\]THE GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL IN GAUSSIAN SPACE
===========================================================================
Let us derive the field equation for the “Newtonian gravitational potential” $$\Phi=\frac{1}{2}c^{2}\mathcal{R}^{2}
\label{NewtPotential}$$ in G-space. The exact result is surprisingly simple and familiar.
To begin, the metric $d\bar{s}^{2}$ in the MO-picture is written in terms of G-space variables as $$d\bar{s}^{2}=\mathcal{R}^{2}ds^{2}=\mathcal{R}^{2}\left(-c^{2}dt^{2}
+g_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}\right) .
\label{MOmetrictwo}$$ Hence the metric tensor in the MO-picture reads $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{g}_{00}&=& -\mathcal{R}^{2} , \nonumber \\
\bar{g}_{ij}&=& \mathcal{R}^{2}g_{ij} , \nonumber \\
\bar{g}_{0i}&=& \bar{g}_{i0} = 0 .
\label{MetricTensor}\end{aligned}$$ From this we construct the 00-component of the Ricci tensor in the MO-picture. The result, $$\bar{R}_{00}=\frac{1}{2\mathcal{R}^{2}}\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}
\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{k}}\left(\sqrt{g}g^{kl}
\frac{\partial \mathcal{R}^{2}}{\partial x^{l}}\right)\right]
=\frac{\nabla^{2}\Phi}{c^{2}\mathcal{R}^{2}} ,
\label{R00}$$ is the left hand side of the Einstein equation $$\bar{R}_{00}=8\pi G(\bar{T}_{00}-\bar{g}_{00}\bar{T}/2)/c^{4}.
\label{00Einstein}$$ To evaluate the right hand side of this equation in the SO-picture we need the conformal transformation law for the stress-energy tensor $\bar{T}_{\alpha\beta}$. The simple case of pressureless fluid ($\bar{T}^{\mu\nu}=\bar{\rho}_{0}\bar{U}^{\mu}\bar{U}^{\nu}$) determines this transformation law as follows. The transformation for the mass density in the rest frame of the fluid \[which is $\bar{\rho}_{0}=d\bar{m}/(d\bar{\ell})^{3}$ in the MO-picture and $\rho_{0}=dm/(d\ell)^{3}$ in the SO-picture\] is determined by the transformation laws for mass ($dm=\mathcal{R}d\bar{m}$) and length ($d\ell=d\bar{\ell}/\mathcal{R}$): $$\rho_{0}=\mathcal{R}^{4}\bar{\rho}_{0} .
\label{RhoTrans}$$ The transformation for the fluid four-velocity $\bar{U}^{\mu}$ \[which is $\bar{U}^{\mu}=dx^{\mu}/d\bar{\tau}$ in the MO-picture and $U^{\mu}=dx^{\mu}/d\tau$ in the SO-picture\] is determined by the transformation law for proper time ($d\bar{\tau}=\mathcal{R}d\tau$): $$U^{\mu}=\mathcal{R}\bar{U}^{\mu} .
\label{FourTrans}$$ Hence the stress-energy tensor in the SO-picture, $T^{\mu\nu}\equiv
\rho_{0}U^{\mu}U^{\nu}$, is related to the stress-energy tensor $\bar{T}^{\mu\nu}=\bar{\rho}_{0}\bar{U}^{\mu}\bar{U}^{\nu}$ of the MO-picture as $$T^{\mu\nu}=\mathcal{R}^{6}\bar{T}^{\mu\nu} ,
\label{StressTrans}$$ and lowering indices with the metric, which transforms as $g_{\alpha\beta}=\bar{g}_{\alpha\beta}/\mathcal{R}^{2}$, gives $T_{\mu\nu}=\mathcal{R}^{2}\bar{T}_{\mu\nu}$ and $T=T^{\mu}_{\mu}=\mathcal{R}^{4}\bar{T}$. All of these conformal transformation rules are consistent with the general transformation rule derived in the Appendix. Finally, the 00-component of Einstein’s equation (\[00Einstein\]) becomes the field equation for the gravitational potential $\Phi$ in Gaussian space:
> **Result VIII:** *The acceleration due to gravity for a particle at rest in Gaussian space, $\mathbf{g}_{0}=-\nabla\Phi$, is derivable from a potential $\Phi$ which satisfies the same linear Poisson equation as in Newtonian gravitation theory,* $$\nabla^{2}\Phi =4\pi G\rho_{g} ,
> \label{Poisson}$$ *with active gravitational mass density* $$\rho_{g}=(2T_{00}-g_{00}T)/c^{2}
> \label{GravMass}$$ *acting as the source of gravitational field. This is the ultimate justification for calling $\Phi$ the “Newtonian gravitational potential”.*
In view of this result, the equations for the “Newtonian gravitational field” $\mathbf{g}_{0}$ in G-space can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\nabla\cdot\mathbf{g}_{0}&=& -4\pi G\rho_{g} , \nonumber \\
\nabla \times \mathbf{g}_{0} &=& 0 .
\label{GravFieldEQUS}\end{aligned}$$ The first of these, when integrated over a volume $V$ with closed surface $S$, gives the gravitational Gauss law in G-space:
> **Result IX:** *The flux of $\mathbf{g}_{0}$ through any closed surface $S$ in G-space equals $4\pi G$ times the total active gravitational mass $M_{g}$ inside the surface:* $$\oint_{S} \mathbf{g}_{0}\cdot d\mathbf{a} = 4\pi GM_{g} ,
> \label{GaussLaw}$$ *where* $$M_{g}=\int_{V} \rho_{g}\sqrt{g}d^{3}x .
> \label{GravMass}$$
This result follows because the divergence theorem holds true in a non-Euclidean three-space as well as a Euclidean one.
Result IX may be used to operationally define the mass $M_{g}$ inside a closed surface in G-space in terms of the field $\mathbf{g}_{0}$ on that surface (without the space being asymptotically flat), or to calculate the gravitational field $\mathbf{g}_{0}$ in cases of simple symmetry, just as the electric field is calculated using the electrostatic Gauss law in a flat space.
> **MO-Picture Interpretation** For comparison, we note that the *exact* field equation for the “gravitational potential” $\bar{\phi}=-c^{2}\bar{g}_{00}/2$ in MO-space (the potential whose gradient $\bar{g}_{k}=-\partial
> \bar{\phi}/\partial x^{k}$ is the rest acceleration due to gravity in this space) is the 00-component of Einstein’s equation $\bar{R}_{\mu\nu}=(8\pi
> G/c^{2})(\bar{T}_{\mu\nu}-\bar{g}_{\mu\nu}\bar{T}/2)$, namely the non-linear equation $$\bar{\nabla}^{2}\bar{\phi}-
> \frac{\bar{\nabla}\bar{\phi}\cdot \bar{\nabla}\bar{\phi}}{2\bar{\phi}}
> =4\pi G\bar{\rho}_{g} ,
> \label{MOPoisson}$$ where $\bar{\rho}_{g}= (2\bar{T}_{00}-\bar{g}_{00}\bar{T})/c^{2}$ is the density of active gravitational mass in MO-space. There do not appear to be any simple exact results in the MO-picture analogous to Results VIII and IX in SO-space.
The linear Poisson equation (\[Poisson\]) for the gravitational potential $\Phi$ in G-space is an exact, fully relativistic result valid for any static gravitational field. This result is surprising because the Einstein equation, from which it is derived, is clearly non-linear.
\[sec:Electrodynamics\]ELECTRODYNAMICS
======================================
In MO-spacetime the electromagnetic field $\bar{F}_{\mu \nu}$ is governed by Maxwell’s equations
\[MOMaxwells\] $$\bar{\nabla}_{\omega}\bar{F}_{\mu \nu}+
\bar{\nabla}_{\nu}\bar{F}_{\omega\mu}+
\bar{\nabla}_{\mu}\bar{F}_{\nu \omega} = 0,
\label{MOmax1}$$ and $$\bar{\nabla}_{\nu}\bar{F}^{\mu\nu}=-\frac{4\pi}{c}\bar{J}^{\mu},
\label{MOmax2}$$
where $\bar{J}^{\mu}=(c\bar{\rho}, \bar{\mathbf{j}})/\sqrt{-\bar{g}_{00}}$ is the four-current density, determined by the charge density $\bar{\rho}$ and current density $\bar{\mathbf{j}}$ in MO-space and $\bar{\nabla}_{\omega}$ is the covariant derivative based on the MO-metric $\bar{g}_{\alpha\beta}$. The motion of a particle of charge $\bar{q}$ and mass $\bar{m}$ is described by the Lorentz equation of motion $$\frac{d\bar{P}^{\mu}}{d\bar{\tau}}+\bar{\Gamma}^{\mu}_{\ \alpha\beta}
\bar{P}^{\alpha}\frac{dx^{\beta}}{d\bar{\tau}}=
\frac{\bar{q}}{c}{{\bar{F}}^{\mu}}_{ \ \nu}\frac{dx^{\nu}}{d\bar{\tau}},
\label{MOeom}$$ where $\bar{P}^{\mu}= \bar{m}dx^{\mu}/d\bar{\tau}$ is the four-momentum of the particle and $\bar{\tau}$ it’s proper time.
The Maxwell equations (\[MOMaxwells\]) are *conformally invariant*. By this is meant that, if under the conformal transformation $g_{\alpha\beta}=\bar{g}_{\alpha\beta}/\mathcal{R}^{2}$ the field tensor and current density transform as $$F_{\mu\nu}=\bar{F}_{\mu\nu}
\label{FT}$$ and $$J^{\mu}=\mathcal{R}^{4}\bar{J}^{\mu},
\label{CD}$$ respectively \[or equivalently ${F^{\mu}}_{\nu}=\mathcal{R}^{2}{{\bar{F}}^{\mu}}_{ \nu}$ (or $F^{\mu\nu}=\mathcal{R}^{4}\bar{F}^{\mu\nu}$) and $J_{\mu}=\mathcal{R}^{2}\bar{J}_{\mu}$\], then, after the conformal transformation, Maxwell’s equations have the same four-space forms as before, namely
\[SOMaxwells\] $$\nabla_{\omega}F_{\mu
\nu}+\nabla_{\nu}F_{\omega\mu}+
\nabla_{\mu}F_{\nu \omega} = 0,
\label{SOmax1}$$ and $$\nabla_{\nu}F^{\mu\nu}=-\frac{4\pi}{c}J^{\mu},
\label{SOmax2}$$
where $\nabla_{\nu}$ is the covariant derivative appropriate to the SO-metric $g_{\alpha\beta}$ and $J^{\mu}=(c\rho, \mathbf{j})$ is the four-current density in SO-spacetime.
The equation of motion (\[MOeom\]) is *not* conformally invariant. In SO-spacetime the equation of motion reads $$\frac{dP^{\mu}}{d\tau}+\Gamma^{\mu}_{\ \alpha\beta}
P^{\alpha}\frac{dx^{\beta}}{d\tau}=-\frac{\partial V}{\partial
x_{\mu}}+\frac{q}{c}{F^{\mu}}_{\nu}\frac{dx^{\nu}}{d\tau} ,
\label{SOeom}$$ where $V(\mathbf{x})=m(\mathbf{x})c^{2}$ is the rest energy of the particle in this picture, and we have used ${F^{\mu}}_{\nu}=
\mathcal{R}^{2}{{\bar{F}}^{\mu}}_{\nu}$, $d\tau=d\bar{\tau}/\mathcal{R}$, $P^{\mu}=\mathcal{R}^{2}\bar{P}^{\mu}$, and $q=\bar{q}$ in the derivation. The charges $q$ and $\bar{q}$ in the SO- and MO-pictures, respectively, are set equal to one another (as opposed to some other transformation law $q=\mathcal{R}^{s}\bar{q}$ with $s\ne 0$) so that the mere motion of a single charge does not violate charge conservation in the SO-picture. This also follows from the charge conservation law $\nabla_{\mu}J^{\mu}=0$ in SO-spacetime, which is derivable from (\[SOmax2\]).
This completes the four-space formulation of classical electrodynamics in the SO-picture. But our interest here centers on the forms taken by Maxwell’s equations in the Gaussian three-space and how these compare with the corresponding equations in MO-space. As we shall see, the conformal invariance of the 4-space Maxwell equations does not imply that the 3-space Maxwell equations are the same in the MO- and SO-pictures because the metric elements $\bar{g}_{00}$ and $g_{00}$ ($=-1$) are different in the two pictures.
Maxwell’s Equations in MO-Space
-------------------------------
There have been several three-space (or “3+1”) formulations of Maxwell’s equations in the MO-picture, all of which seem to have certain “unphysical” features. Here we consider two of them.
Perhaps the earliest formulation is the one in which the electrodynamic equations in a static gravitational field are formally identical to the Maxwell equations in a material medium:
\[MO3Maxwells\] $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{\nabla}\cdot\tilde{\mathbf{D}}&=&4\pi \tilde{\rho} ,
\label{MatMax1} \\
\bar{\nabla}\cdot\tilde{\mathbf{B}}&=&0 ,
\label{MatMax2} \\
\bar{\nabla}\times\tilde{\mathbf{H}}-\frac{1}{c}
\frac{\partial \tilde{\mathbf{D}}}{\partial \bar{t}}
&=&\frac{4\pi}{c}\tilde{\mathbf{j}} ,
\label{MatMax3} \\
\bar{\nabla}\times\tilde{\mathbf{E}}+\frac{1}{c}
\frac{\partial \tilde{\mathbf{B}}}{\partial \bar{t}}&=&0 ,
\label{MatMax4}\end{aligned}$$
with constitutive relations $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{\mathbf{D}}&=&\frac{\tilde{\mathbf{E}}}{\sqrt{-\bar{g}_{00}}}
=\tilde{\epsilon}\tilde{\mathbf{E}} ,
\label{Dconst} \\
\tilde{\mathbf{H}}&=&\frac{\tilde{\mathbf{B}}}{\sqrt{-\bar{g}_{00}}}
=\frac{\tilde{\mathbf{B}}}{\tilde{\mu}} ,
\label{Hconst}\end{aligned}$$ corresponding to a medium with “dielectric constant” $\tilde{\epsilon}$ and “magnetic permeability” $\tilde{\mu}$ given by $$\tilde{\epsilon}=\frac{1}{\tilde{\mu}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{-\bar{g}_{00}}} .
\label{Constitutive}$$ In equations (\[MO3Maxwells\]), $\bar{\nabla}\cdot\tilde{\mathbf{D}}$ and $\bar{\nabla}\times\tilde{\mathbf{E}}$ are the divergence and curl in MO-space (the three-space with metric $\bar{g}_{ij}$). Equations (\[MO3Maxwells\]) are derived and studied in Landau and Lifshitz [@Landau]. We shall refer to them as the “material Maxwell equations”.
It is pleasant that the Maxwell equations (\[MO3Maxwells\]) take the familiar forms for electrodynamics in a material medium, but the interpretations of $\tilde{\epsilon}$ as a dielectric constant and of $\tilde{\mu}$ as a magnetic permeability of space are without physical foundation (empty space contains neither the electric charges to be a dielectric medium nor the electric currents to be a magnetic one). Moreover, the electric field $\tilde{\mathbf{E}}$ in the material Maxwell equations is not the electric field measured locally (it is more a formal field than a physical one). For these reasons, the material Maxwell equations must be viewed as “unphysical”.
An important step toward physical clarity was taken by Thorne and Macdonald [@Thorne1] and others [@Thorne2], in connection with the membrane paradigm for black holes. In this approach, the electric and magnetic fields $$\bar{E}^{k}=\frac{{\bar{F}}^{k}_{ 0}}{\sqrt{-\bar{g}_{00}}}
=\frac{\tilde{E}^{k}}{\sqrt{-\bar{g}_{00}}}
\label{LocalE}$$ and $$\bar{B}^{k}=\frac{1}{2}\bar{e}^{k}_{ij}\bar{F}^{ij}=\tilde{B}^{k},
\label{LocalB}$$ are those measured locally using the traditional time and length standards of the MO-picture. For these fields, the three-space Maxwell equations read
\[MOKipMaxwells\] $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{\nabla}\cdot\bar{\mathbf{E}}&=&4\pi\bar{\rho} ,
\label{LocalMax1} \\
\bar{\nabla}\cdot\bar{\mathbf{B}}&=&0 ,
\label{LocalMax2} \end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{c}\frac{\partial \bar{\mathbf{B}}}{\partial \bar{t}}
&=&-\bar{\nabla}\times(\alpha\bar{\mathbf{E}}) ,
\label{LocalMax3} \\
\frac{1}{c}\frac{\partial \bar{\mathbf{E}}}{\partial \bar{t}}
&=&\bar{\nabla}\times (\alpha\bar{\mathbf{B}})-\frac{4\pi}{c}\alpha\bar{\mathbf{j}} ,
\label{LocalMax4}\end{aligned}$$
where $\alpha=\sqrt{-\bar{g}_{00}}$ is called the “lapse function,” and $\bar{\rho}$ ($= \tilde{\rho}$) and $\bar{\mathbf{j}}$ ($=\tilde{\mathbf{j}}/\sqrt{-\bar{g}_{00}}$) are the locally measured charge and current densities.
Equations (\[MOKipMaxwells\]) are not in the form of Maxwell’s equations for a material medium. However, they do ascribe electric and magnetic properties to empty space, e.g., the Schwarzschild surface behaves in many respects like a conducting membrane, and this is often useful, though in reality there are no electric currents in this surface.
It is desirable, for aesthetic as well as practical reasons, to have a three-space formulation of Maxwell’s equations that is “true to the physics” in the sense that it does not assign electric or magnetic properties to empty space where there are no charges or currents. In the next section we show that the SO-picture provides such a formulation.
Maxwell’s Equations in Gaussian Space
-------------------------------------
In order to define electric and magnetic fields appropriate to the SO-picture, we multiply equation of motion (\[SOeom\]) by $d\tau/dt=mc^{2}/E$ and note that, for the SO-metric (\[SOtrans\]), only the spatial components $\Gamma^{k}_{\ ij}$ of the Christoffel symbols $\Gamma^{\mu}_{\ \alpha\beta}$ are non-zero. The spatial components of the result are $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{Dp^{k}}{dt}&\equiv&\frac{dp^{k}}{dt}+\Gamma^{k}_{\ ij}p^{i}\frac{dx^{j}}{dt} \nonumber \\
&=&-\left(\frac{mc^{2}}{E}\right)\frac{\partial V}{\partial x_{k}}
+q\left ({F^{k}}_{0}+\frac{v^{j}}{c}{F^{k}}_{j}\right) ,
\label{GEOM}\end{aligned}$$ and the time component reads $$\frac{DP^{0}}{dt}=\frac{d}{dt}\left(\frac{E}{c}\right)=\frac{q}{c}F^{0}_{\ j}v^{j} ,
\label{TimeComp}$$ where $v^{j}\equiv dx^{j}/dt$, $p^{k}=mdx^{k}/d\tau$, $E=mc^{2}/\sqrt{1-v^{2}/c^{2}}$ (no longer a constant of the motion), and, as before, $m=\bar{m}\mathcal{R}$ and $q=\bar{q}$. Note that the “Newtonian gravitational three-force” $F^{k}_{G}=-(mc^{2}/E)\partial V/\partial x_{k}$ vanishes as the particle speed approaches $c$ (as $E/mc^{2}\rightarrow \infty$), and the electromagnetic three-force has the Lorentz form \[$F^{k}=q(E^{k}+e^{k}_{\ ij}v^{i}B^{j}/c)$\] if and only if the electric and magnetic fields in G-space are defined as $$\begin{aligned}
E^{k}&\equiv&{F^{k}}_{0}=\mathcal{R}^{3}\bar{E}^{k} ,
\label{GE} \\
B^{k}&\equiv&\frac{1}{2}e^{k}_{\ ij}F^{ij}=\mathcal{R}^{2}\bar{B}^{k} ,
\label{GB}\end{aligned}$$ and so $$\begin{aligned}
E_{i}&=&g_{ij}E^{j}=F^{0}_{\ \ i} , \label{Elow} \\
F^{i}_{\ j}&=&e^{i\ k}_{\ j}B_{k} , \label{MagPart}\end{aligned}$$ where $e_{kij}$ is the permutation tensor in G-space \[$e_{kij}=\sqrt{g}\epsilon_{kij}$ and $e^{k}_{\ ij}=g^{kl}e_{lij}$, where $\epsilon_{ijk}$ is the permutation symbol and $g=det(g_{ij})$\]. Thus we have
> **Result X:** *The equations of motion in Gaussian space read* $$\frac{d\mathbf{p}}{dt}=-\left(\frac{mc^{2}}{E}\right)\nabla V
> +q\left(\mathbf{E}+\frac{\mathbf{v}}{c}\times\mathbf{B}\right) ,
> \label{GspaceEOM}$$ $$\frac{dE}{dt}=q\mathbf{E}\cdot\mathbf{v} ,
> \label{EnergyEOM}$$ *where $d\mathbf{p}/dt$ is the absolute derivative in G-space of the three-momentum $\mathbf{p} =m\mathbf{v}/\sqrt{1-v^{2}/c^{2}}$ and the electric and magnetic fields in Gaussian space, $\mathbf{E}$ and $\mathbf{B}$, are related to the electric and magnetic fields $\bar{\mathbf{E}}$ and $\bar{\mathbf{B}}$ measured locally in MO-space by the conformal transformations* $$\begin{aligned}
> \mathbf{E}&=&\mathcal{R}^{3}\bar{\mathbf{E}} ,
> \label{GspaceE} \\
> \mathbf{B}&=&\mathcal{R}^{2}\bar{\mathbf{B}} .
> \label{GspaceB}\end{aligned}$$ *The gravitational force $\mathbf{F}_{G}=-(mc^{2}/E)\nabla V$ in Gaussian space tends to zero as $v\rightarrow c$ because $E\rightarrow \infty$ in this limit.*
Just as $\bar{\mathbf{E}}$ and $\bar{\mathbf{B}}$ are the locally measured fields in MO-space (measured using length and time standards based on a local free-running atomic clock), $\mathbf{E}$ and $\mathbf{B}$ are locally measured fields in the SO-picture (measured using time and length standards based on a local clock that is slaved to our single-observer’s clock by time signals). Thus $\mathbf{E}$ and $\mathbf{B}$ are the physically correct local fields in the view of our self-centered observer (the fields are “corrected” for time and space dilation at the location under consideration). Using (\[GspaceE\]) and (\[GspaceB\]) in equations (\[MOKipMaxwells\]) and expanding those equations in terms of G-space variables (specifically going over to G-space covariant derivatives in place of MO-space ones), we obtain the Maxwell equations in G-space:
> **Result XI:** *The Maxwell equations in Gaussian space,*
>
> \[GaussMaxwells\] $$\begin{aligned}
> \nabla\cdot\mathbf{E} &=& 4\pi\rho ,
> \label{SOmax1} \\*
> \nabla\cdot\mathbf{B} &=& 0 ,
> \label{SOMax2} \\*
> \nabla\times\mathbf{B} -
> \frac{1}{c}\frac{\partial\mathbf{E}}{\partial
> t} &=& \frac{4\pi}{c} \mathbf{j} ,
> \label{SOmax3} \\*
> \nabla\times\mathbf{E} + \frac{1}{c}
> \frac{\partial\mathbf{B}}{\partial
> t} &=& 0 ,
> \label{SOmax4}\end{aligned}$$
>
> *are formally identical to the Maxwell equations in the absence of a gravitational field; the only difference being the divergence and curl in these equations are the ones appropriate to the non-Euclidean G-space metric $g_{ij}$ instead of the flat-space metric of classical physics. The charge and current densities in Gaussian space are expressed in terms of those measured locally in the MO-picture by the conformal transformation laws* $$\begin{aligned}
> \rho&=&\mathcal{R}^{3}\bar{\rho} ,
> \label{GspaceRoh} \\
> \mathbf{j}&=&\mathcal{R}^{4}\bar{\mathbf{j}} .
> \label{GspaceJ}\end{aligned}$$
The charge and current densities in G-space, equations (\[GspaceRoh\]) and (\[GspaceJ\]), are the physically correct ones in the view of our single observer: $\rho$ is the charge per unit volume as measured with the single-observer length standard and $\mathbf{j}$ is $\rho$ times the velocity of this charge measured using single-observer time $t$.
Equations (\[SOmax1\])-(\[SOmax4\]) show that, in G-space, the dielectric constant and magnetic permeability of the vacuum are unity everywhere ($\bar{\epsilon} = \bar{\mu} = 1$), and *there are no fictitious electric or magnetic properties of empty space in this picture.*
**Gauss’ law, Faraday’s law, and Ampere’s law in Gaussian Space**
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the non-Euclidean G-space the integral theorems of Gauss and Stokes’ apply in there usual forms: $$\int_{V}\nabla\cdot\mathbf{W}dv =
\oint_{S}\mathbf{W}\cdot d\mathbf{a},
\label{GaussLaw}$$ $$\int_{S}(\nabla\times\mathbf{W})\cdot d\mathbf{a} =
\oint_{C}\mathbf{W}\cdot d\mathbf{l},
\label{StokesLaw}$$ where $\mathbf{W}$ is any well behaved vector field, $V$ is a volume in G-space (with volume element $dv =
\sqrt{g}d^{3}x$) bounded by the closed surface $S$ in (\[GaussLaw\]). In Eq. (\[StokesLaw\]) $S$ is an open surface with area element $d\mathbf{a}$ bounded by the closed contour $C$ with displacement element $d\mathbf{l}$ along the contour.
Applying these theorems to the Maxwell equations (\[GaussMaxwells\]), we obtain the integral forms of Maxwell’s equations in G-space:
\[Gauss3Maxwells\] $$\begin{aligned}
\oint_{S}\mathbf{E}\cdot d\mathbf{a} &=& 4\pi
\int_{V}\rho dv,
\label{IntMax1} \\*
\oint_{S}\mathbf{B}\cdot d\mathbf{a} &=&0,
\label{IntMax2} \\*
\oint_{C}\mathbf{E}\cdot d\mathbf{l} &=&
-\frac{1}{c}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{S}\mathbf{B}\cdot d\mathbf{a},
\label{IntMax3} \\*
\oint_{C}\mathbf{B}\cdot d\mathbf{l} &=&
\frac{4\pi}{c}\int_{S}\mathbf{j}\cdot d\mathbf{a}+
\frac{1}{c}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{S}\mathbf{E}\cdot d\mathbf{a},
\label{IntMax4}\end{aligned}$$
Thus we have the following electromagnetic laws in Gaussian space which are familiar from flat-space electrodynamics:
> **Result XII (Gauss’ Law):** *The flux of the electric field through any closed surface in G-space is $4\pi$ times the total charge inside the surface.*
> **Result XIII (No Magnetic Monopoles):** *The flux of the magnetic field through any closed surface in G-space is zero.*
> **Result XIV (Faraday’s Law):** *The electromotive force (the line integral of $\mathbf{E}$ around the closed contour $C$) is $-1/c$ times the rate of change of the flux of $\mathbf{B}$ through any surface $S$ having the contour $C$ as edge.*
> **Result XV (Ampere’s Law):** *The line integral of $\mathbf{B}$ around a closed contour $C$ equals $4\pi/c$ times the total current passing through the contour, including the displacement current* $$I_{D} = \frac{1}{4\pi}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{S}\mathbf{E}\cdot
> d\mathbf{a}.
> \label{DispCurr}$$
These results imply that Faraday’s picture of electric and magnetic field lines is applicable in G-space. As in flat space, these laws are useful for the calculation of electric and magnetic fields when the symmetry of the problem is simple. The only substantive change is that lengths of contours and areas of surfaces are calculated using the non-Euclidean G-space metric instead of the flat-space metric of classical electrodynamics.
> **MO-Picture Interpretation:** It is important to note that, generally speaking, Results XII through XV do not hold true in MO-space:
- Result XII implies that electric field lines in G-space start on positive charges, end on negative charges, or go off to spatial infinity (if such exits). That is to say, electric field lines do not start or end in empty space \[this is not the case in MO-space where electric field lines can begin or end in empty space due to an inhomogeneous dielectric constant of the vacuum\].
- Result XIII states that magnetic field lines neither begin nor end in G-space. This means, as in Euclidean space, that either magnetic field lines form closed loops or else they go off to spatial infinity (if such exits) \[this result does not apply in MO-space where an inhomogeneous permeability of empty space can cause magnetic field lines to begin or end in vacuum\].
- Result XIV, Faraday’s Law, applies in MO-space as well as G-space when we employ the material Maxwell equations (\[MOMaxwells\]), but does not apply in MO-space when using the Maxwell equations for locally measured fields (\[MOKipMaxwells\]).
- Result XV, Ampere’s Law with displacement current, does not apply in MO-space for either the material Maxwell equations (\[MOMaxwells\]) or the Maxwell equations for locally measured fields (\[MOKipMaxwells\]).
\[sec:DilationTest\]A POSSIBLE DIRECT TEST OF GRAVITATIONAL SPACE DILATION
==========================================================================
The formalism of gravitational space dilation is based on the scaling laws
\[Scaling2\] $$\begin{aligned}
d\tau&=&\frac{d\bar{\tau}}{\mathcal{R}} ,
\label{TimeDilation} \\
d\ell&=&\frac{d\bar{\ell}}{\mathcal{R}} ,
\label{SpaceDilation}\end{aligned}$$
relating the locally measured time $d\bar{\tau}$ and length $d\bar{\ell}$ to the time $d\tau$ and length $d\ell$ measured by a distant observer $O$. As noted earlier, Eq. (\[TimeDilation\]) has been well tested in gravitational time dilation experiments.
In the present section we show that, in principle, space dilation \[Eq. (\[SpaceDilation\])\] can also be measured directly, and that a solar-system test of space dilation seems to be within the capability of current technology.
But hasn’t space dilation already been tested in the relativistic radar echo delay experiment? Placing the sun’s mass near the radar propagation path increases the length of that path in Gaussian space and this nicely accounts for the additional radar delay. Isn’t this a direct test of gravitational length dilation? The answer to these questions is in the negative. The radar delay experiment measures the difference in radar path length (G-space distance) with the sun “near to” and “far from” the radar propagation path, whereas the space dilation formula (\[SpaceDilation\]) relates the proper lengths $d\bar{\ell}$ and $d\ell$ of a single spatial interval measured by local and distant observers (the proper lengths in the MO- and SO-pictures, respectively) in a single fixed gravitational field. These are quite different concepts and should not be confused. To test the space dilation formula (\[SpaceDilation\]) one must measure $d\bar{\ell}$ and $d\ell$ independently and then determine whether or not these results are related by equation (\[SpaceDilation\]). Fortunately, the two lengths $\bar{\ell}$ and $\ell$ (they are, of course, finite in any experiment) can both be measured by means of radar. The MO-picture proper length $\bar{\ell}$ is the radar distance measured locally by a radar located, say, at one end of the interval $\bar{\ell}$ with a transponder at the other end (we assume that the gravitational potential is essentially constant over this length). And, as shown in Sec. \[sec:RadarDelay\], the SO-proper length $\ell$ of the same spatial interval is measured by a radar located at our distant observer $O$, perhaps using transponders at both ends of the interval $\bar{\ell}$ (or $\ell$)
In a solar-system experiment this might be accomplished as depicted in Fig. \[fig6\].
![\[fig6\]Spacecraft $A$ uses radar to locally measure the distance $\bar{\ell}$ to spacecraft $B$ in the sun’s gravitational field and transmits this information to Earth. This is the proper distance in the MO-picture. Observer $O$ on Earth uses radar to measure the same displacement $AB$ from his distant location and obtains the dilated value $\ell=\bar{\ell}/\mathcal{R}$. In this way the space-dilation formula (\[SpaceDilation\]) may be tested, at least in principle and perhaps in practice.](DilationTest.pdf){width="3in"}
Two spacecraft, $A$ and $B$, orbit the sun with proper distances $\bar{\ell}$ and $\ell$ between them in the MO- and SO-pictures, respectively. $A$ and $B$ are equipped with radar transponders and $A$ also has an on-board radar for measuring the distance $\bar{\ell}$ to $B$, and a radio transmitter for sending this information to Earth. At the moment under consideration, $A$, $B$, and Earth lie on a G-space geodesic (a light ray) so that radar from earth measures the G-space distance $\ell$ directly. In this way $\bar{\ell}$ and $\ell$ for the interval $AB$ are independently measured and one can check that the space dilation formula $\ell=\bar{\ell}/\mathcal{R}$ is satisfied.
This is, of course, an extremely idealized experiment. In practice, the spacecraft $A$ and $B$ would not be lined up so neatly, and the Earth-based observer would measure the projection $\ell cos\theta$ of the length $\ell$ onto his line of sight, requiring knowledge of the angle $\theta$ between $AB$ and the line $OA$ extended (presumably this could be obtained from orbital calculations). Then there is the problem of the motions of $A$, $B$, and Earth during the propagation of radar pulses, and so on. Therefore, our description of the experiment is very crude indeed. Nevertheless, an order-of-magnitude estimate based on the accuracy achieved in passed radar delay experiments suggests that such an experiment might be within the capability of existing technology.
\[sec:Applications\]APPLICATIONS
================================
In this section we apply the single-observer formalism to a number of simple problems chosen to emphasize how very different physical interpretations can be in the MO- and SO-pictures.
Photon Frequency
----------------
In the MO-picture, an electromagnetic wave (or photon) propagating from point $A$ to point $B$ in a static gravitational field experiences a change in frequency from $\bar{f}_{A}$ to $\bar{f}_{B}$ described by the gravitational red-shift formula $$\frac{\bar{f}_{A}}{\bar{f}_{B}}=
\frac{\mathcal{R}(A)}{\mathcal{R}(B)}=
\sqrt{\frac{\bar{g}_{00}(A)}{\bar{g}_{00}(B)}} .
\label{RedShift}$$
The fundamental scaling law $\tau=\bar{\tau}/\mathcal{R}$ for time intervals from the MO-picture to the SO-picture implies the scaling law $f=\mathcal{R}\bar{f}$ for frequencies. Hence the gravitational red-shift relation (\[RedShift\]) becomes $$f_{A}=f_{B}
\label{SOredshift}$$ in Gaussian space (these are the frequencies measured with slave-clock time standards at $A$ and $B$).
> **Result XVI:** *In the SO-picture, the frequency and wavelength of an electromagnetic wave (or photon) are unchanged by propagation in a static gravitational field.*
In G-space the wavelength $\lambda=c/f$ is also unchanged because $c$ and $f$ are unchanged (our single observer holds the view that the frequency shift in the MO-picture is a spurious effect resulting from the use of local time standards that run at different rates at different points in the gravitational field, as opposed to using a single global time that increases at the same rate everywhere).
Because the photon frequency $f$ is unchanged by propagation in the SO-picture, the photon energy $E=hf$ is also unchanged. The relevant conformal transformation laws are $f=\mathcal{R}\bar{f}$, $h=\bar{h}$, and $E=\mathcal{R}\bar{E}$, i.e., Plank’s constant is the same in the two pictures (see Appensix A for a derivation). The gravitational “red shift” in the SO-picture is attributed to a change in atomic rest energy with position \[$mc^{2}=\bar{m}\mathcal{R}(\mathbf{x})c^{2}$\]. Each energy level of the atom changes in this way with position and, therefore, an atomic transition that is in resonance with light of frequency $f$ at one point of space will not be in resonance with the same light wave when moved to a different location. The change in an atomic energy level is the work done in lifting the atom (quasistatically) against the “Newtonian gravitational force” $\mathbf{F}=-\nabla V=-\nabla (mc^{2})$. Hence, in the SO-picture, there is no “gravitational red shift of light” but instead a shift of atomic energy levels $E_{n}=m_{n}c^{2}$. In the SO-picture, the position-dependent energy levels of the atom $E_{n}(\mathbf{x})$ show themselves in two ways: (1) the principle of virtual work tells us that an atom in state $n$ experiences a gravitational force $\mathbf{F}=-\nabla E_{n}$, and (2) the change in atomic transition frequencies $\omega_{nm}=(E_{n}-E_{m})/\hbar$ accounts for the gravitational “red shift” observations.
Falling Toward a Black Hole
---------------------------
Consider a particle falling radially inward from rest at $r=\infty$ to a spherical black hole of Schwarzschild radius $r_{s}=2m$. At radial coordinate $r$ it’s inward velocity on the time scale of a distant observer (proper distance $d\bar{\ell}$ traveled in coordinate time $d\bar{t}$) is $$\bar{v}_{r}=-\frac{d\bar{\ell}}{d\bar{t}}=\sqrt{\frac{2mc^{2}}{r}\left(1-\frac{2m}{r}\right)} .
\label{MOradialVelocity}$$ This well-known result in the MO-picture states that the speed of the falling particle first increases and then tends to zero as $r\rightarrow 2m$ in such a way that the particle never crosses the Schwarzschild sphere at $r=2m$. It hovers just outside of this sphere indefinitely. In fact, the acceleration of the particle on this time scale, $$\bar{g}_{r}=\frac{d\bar{v}_{r}}{d\bar{t}}=
\frac{mc^{2}}{r^{2}}\left(\frac{4m}{r}-1\right)\sqrt{1-\frac{2m}{r}} ,
\label{SchwarzAccel}$$ is radially outward ($\bar{g}_{r}>0$) for $r<4m$! It is this “repulsive gravitational acceleration” that slows the particle and prevents it from crossing the Schwarzschild sphere. Such is the accepted description of falling-particle motion for a distant observer in the MO-picture. It is a counter intuitive description if our intuition tells us that the gravitational acceleration ought always to be inward.
In the SO-picture, the speed of the falling particle increases monotonically on the time scale $t=\bar{t}$ of the observer at infinity, $$v_{r}=-\frac{d\ell}{dt}=-\sqrt{\frac{2mc^{2}}{r}} ,
\label{SOvelocity}$$ fortuitously having the same form as in Newtonian mechanics, with no outward gravitational acceleration (the velocity increases to $v_{r}=c$ at $r=2m$). *How can this velocity of fall possibly be consistent with the distant observer’s observation that the particle never reaches the Schwarzschild surface?* The answer is that, whereas the proper distance from any initial radial coordinate $r=r_{0}$ to $r=2m$, namely $$\bar{\ell}=\int_{2m}^{r_{0}}d\bar{\ell}=\int_{2m}^{r_{0}}\frac{dr}{\sqrt{1-2m/r}} ,
\label{MOdistance}$$ is finite in the MO-picture, the same interval ($2m$, $r_{0}$) has infinite proper length $$\ell=\int_{2m}^{r_{0}}d\ell=\int_{2m}^{r_{0}}\frac{dr}{1-2m/r}=\infty
\label{SOdistance}$$ in the SO-picture. So the particle never reaches the Schwarzschild surface in the SO-picture simply because the G-space distance to that surface is infinitely great. This conclusion is consistent with radar measurements made from any finite radial coordinate $r=r_{0}$. Because proper distance in the SO-picture is radar distance, the radar distance to the falling particle increases without bound as the particle approaches $r=2m$, and there is never a radar return from the Schwarzschild sphere, as one would expect for an infinitely distant object.
Propagation of Photon Polarization
----------------------------------
In local Cartesian coordinates at an arbitrary point of G-space, the Maxwell equations (\[GaussMaxwells\]) are identical in form to the vacuum Maxwell equations in flat space with rectangular coordinates. In these coordinates, light travels along straight lines at speed $c$ (at least in geometrical-optics approximation), and straight-line propagation in local Cartesian coordinates is equivalent to geodesic propagation in G-space. Hence, in the SO-picture, light is bent only by the curvature of G-space and not by the fictitious dielectric or magnetic properties of the vacuum (these contribute to the light deflection when analyzed using Maxwell’s equations in the MO-picture).
To say that light rays follow geodesics of G-space is to say that the tangent unit vector to the ray $\hat{\mathbf{k}}$ is parallel propagated along the ray. The unit electric polarization vector $\hat{\mathbf{e}}$ of a linearly polarized light ray, e.g., a laser beam, also undergoes parallel transport along the ray because it is unchanged by propagation in local Cartesian coordinates, and so does the magnetic polarization vector $\hat{\mathbf{b}}$, which is orthogonal to the other two unit vectors. Therefore we have
> **Result XVII:** *The tangent unit vector $\hat{\mathbf{k}}$, the electric polarization unit vector $\hat{\mathbf{e}}$, and the magnetic polarization unit vector $\hat{\mathbf{b}}$ of a linearly polarized light ray form an orthonormal set of three-vectors all of which undergo parallel transport along the ray in Gaussian space.*
In MO-space there does not appear to be any comparably simple three-vector picture of the propagation of polarization.
Interferometry in a Gravitational Field
---------------------------------------
Light beams from a coherent source $S$ travel two distinct paths (path $A$ and path $B$) in a static gravitational field to the point $P$ where they interfere. The intensity of interference at $P$ depends on the phase difference of the two beams arriving there. Because wavelength $\lambda$ is constant along a ray in the SO-picture, the phase accumulated in propagating from $S$ to $P$ is proportional to the path length $\ell$ in this picture ($\phi=2\pi
\ell/\lambda$). Thus the phase difference of the interfering beams, $\Delta\phi=2\pi
(\ell_{A} -\ell_{B})/\lambda$, is determined by the path length difference $\ell_{A}-\ell_{B}$ in G-space. \[In MO-space the wavelength changes as the light propagates and the calculation of phase difference is a bit more complicated, and the result is *not* proportional to the proper path length difference $\bar{\ell}_{A}-\bar{\ell}_{B}$\].
What You Calculate is What You See
----------------------------------
We should emphasize that the single-observer picture describes that which the single observers sees directly \[“What You Calculate Is What You See” (WYCIWYS)\]. The effects of spacetime dilation are already included in the formalism, and it is not necessary to correct for these effects at the end of a calculation, as sometimes must be done in the MO-picture when translating locally calculated results for comparison with observation from a distance. A couple of examples will clarify this point.
Suppose the local observer at $P$ measures a magnetic field $\bar{B}$ and constructs a simple clock by placing electrons in this field which, according to the Lorentz force law, orbit at the cyclotron frequency $\bar{\omega}_{c}=e\bar{B}/\bar{m}_{e}$. For the distant observer at $O$, Eq. (\[GspaceB\]) indicates the magnetic field is $B=\mathcal{R}^{2}\bar{B}$, and the mass of the electron for this observer is $m_{e}=\mathcal{R}\bar{m}_{e}$ (the charge is the same in both pictures: $q=\bar{q}=e$). Using the same Lorentz force law, observer $O$ calculates cyclotron frequency $$\omega_{c}=\frac{eB}{m_{e}}=\frac{e\mathcal{R}^{2}\bar{B}}{\bar{m}_{e}\mathcal{R}}
=\mathcal{R}\bar{\omega}_{c} ,
\label{CyclotronFrequency}$$ which is the red shifted frequency seen by this observer.
If our single observer uses Maxwell equations in G-space to calculate electromagnetic phenomena, the results of the calculations are automatically time-scaled to what he observes (WYCIWYS). No additional correction for spacetime dilation is necessary (there is, of course, a retardation delay in observing the result due to the finite light propagation speed).
As a second example, consider the transition frequencies of the Schrödinger hydrogen atom, which for the local observer are $$\bar{\omega}_{nm}=\frac{\bar{m}_{e}\bar{e}^{4}}{2\bar{\hbar}^{3}}\left(\frac{1}{m^{2}}-\frac{1}{n^{2}}\right) .
\label{TransFrequency}$$ The charge, mass, and Plank constant scale to the SO-picture as $e=\bar{e}$, $m_{e}=\mathcal{R}\bar{m}_{e}$, and $\hbar=\bar{\hbar}$, respectively. Hence, using the same Schrödinger equation, observer $O$ calculates transition frequencies $$\omega_{nm}=\frac{m_{e}e^{4}}{2\hbar^{3}}\left(\frac{1}{m^{2}}-\frac{1}{n^{2}}\right)
=\mathcal{R}\bar{\omega}_{nm} ,
\label{SOTransFrequency}$$ in agreement with the gravitational red-shift formula, but only if the photon frequency does not change while propagating in Gaussian space, as deduced earlier in this section.
Thermodynamic Equilibrium in Gaussian Space
-------------------------------------------
It is a fundamental result of classical thermodynamics that two systems in thermal contact are in thermal equilibrium when their temperatures (among other things) are equal. For example, the atmosphere of a planet in thermal equilibrium has constant temperature throughout.
It is surprising, therefore, to learn that, in general relativity, this in *not* the case. In Tolman’s classic volume [@Tolman], we find that thermal equilibrium for a static fluid sphere held together by gravity is characterized by a position-dependent temperature $\bar{T}(\mathbf{x})$, $$\frac{\bar{T}(\mathbf{x})}{\bar{T}(\mathbf{x}_{0})}=\sqrt{\frac{\bar{g}_{00}(\mathbf{x}_{0})}{\bar{g}_{00}(\mathbf{x})}}=\frac{1}{\mathcal{R}(\mathbf{x})} ,
\label{TempBar}$$ where $\bar{T}(\mathbf{x}_{0})$ is the temperature at the position $\mathbf{x}_{0}$ of observer $O$. This means, for example, that the temperature of an equilibrium atmosphere in Schwarzschild geometry is larger the closer we are to the Schwarzschild surface at $r=2m$. This is thermal equilibrium in the MO-picture.
The equilibrium temperature distribution in the SO-picture is different from that in the MO-picture. To determine the conformal transformation law for temperature, we first note that the number of states accessible to a system $\Omega$, or the “disorder” of the system, as measured by the entropy $$S=-k_{B}\sum_{n}P_{n}lnP_{n}=k_{B}ln\Omega
\label{Entropy}$$ is clearly independent of the time and length standards chosen by an observer. Therefore the Boltzmann constant must be the same in the MO and SO pictures, $$k_{B}=\bar{k}_{B}.
\label{Boltzmann}$$ Then the quantity $k_{B}T$, with dimensions of energy, necessarily transforms as $$k_{B}T=\mathcal{R}(\bar{k}_{B}\bar{T}),
\label{ThermTrans}$$ (see Appendix A for justification) and, in view of (\[Boltzmann\]), the transformation law for temperature reads $$T=\mathcal{R}\bar{T}.
\label{TempTrans}$$ Thus, recalling that $\mathcal{R}(\mathbf{x}_{0})=1$, the condition for thermal equilibrium, Eq. (\[TempBar\]), transformed to the SO-picture becomes the following result.
> **Result XVIII:** *A simple one-component fluid in hydrostatic equilibrium is in thermal equilibrium when its temperature, in the SO-picture, is constant throughout the fluid.*
This result is in marked contrast to the MO-picture result (\[TempBar\]), where thermal equilibrium is characterized by a higher temperature at lower gravitational potential. The SO-picture returns constant temperature to its classical role as determiner of thermal equilibrium.
The equilibrium atmosphere presents a clear example of the “What You Calculate Is What You See” (WYCIWYS) principle of the SO-picture. A black body at a point $P$ of low gravitational potential and in thermal equilibrium with an atmosphere at temperature $T$, radiates as a black body of this temperature according to observer $O$ who measures the spectrum of the radiation received from the body at $P$, and concludes it is at the same temperature as the atmosphere at his location.
The conventional relativist using the MO-picture disagrees with this conclusion. He believes that the black body at $P$ and the atmosphere at that location are hotter than the atmosphere at $O$, because $P$ is at lower gravitational potential and the system is in thermal equilibrium. He explains observer $O$’s observations by noting that the radiation of the hot black body at $P$ is redshifted as it propagates from $P$ to $O$, and so it only appears that the black body at $P$ has the same temperature as the atmosphere at $O$. This argument does not impress the self-centered observer at $O$ because, in his SO-picture, he knows of no such effect as the gravitational redshift of light. He knows only of a shift of atomic energy levels in a gravitational field.
The two pictures are physically equivalent and make the same predictions for the result of any measurement. The pictures differ only in the position-dependent length and time standards chosen to make the measurements.
\[sec:Conclusion\]SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
========================================
The notion of gravitational space dilation derives from a single observer’s view that, when a distant observer’s standard time interval is dilated by a gravitational field, his standard length must be dilated as well and by the same factor. If this were not so, the distant observer could not understand how the local observer obtains the invariant value $c$ for the locally measured light speed. The single observer, making “corrections” for time and space dilation by means of a conformal transformation \[$g_{\alpha\beta}=\bar{g}_{\alpha\beta}/\mathcal{R}^{2}$ with $\mathcal{R}^{2}=\bar{g}_{00}(P)/\bar{g}_{00}(O)$\], arrives at the single-observer picture explored in this paper.
Perhaps the best way to summarize the qualitative results and equations of the single-observer picture is to compare these with the corresponding results and equations of classical (pre general relativity) physics. The similarities are striking:
- In the single-observer picture, as in Newtonian physics, gravitation is represented by a force. The gravitational acceleration $\mathbf{g}_{0}=-\nabla\Phi$ of non-relativistic particles ($v<<c$ or $E\approx \bar{m}c^{2}$) is derivable from a potential $\Phi$ that obeys the same *linear* Poisson equation, $$\nabla^{2}\Phi=4\pi G\rho_{g} ,
\label{ClassicalPoisson}$$ as in Newtonian theory (an *exact* fully relativistic result).
- In Gaussian space, as in the classical Euclidean space, the electromagnetic three-force takes the Lorentz form, $$\mathbf{F}=q\left(\mathbf{E}+\frac{\mathbf{v}}{c}\times\mathbf{B}\right) ,
\label{Lorentz}$$ with electric and magnetic fields that obey the vacuum Maxwell equations
\[FinalMaxwells\] $$\nabla\cdot\mathbf{E} = 4\pi\rho ,
\label{SOmax1Sum}$$ $$\nabla\cdot\mathbf{B} = 0 ,
\label{SOmax2Sum}$$ $$\nabla\times\mathbf{B} -
\frac{1}{c}\frac{\partial\mathbf{E}}{\partial
t} = \frac{4\pi}{c} \mathbf{j} ,
\label{SOmax3Sum}$$ $$\nabla\times\mathbf{E} + \frac{1}{c}
\frac{\partial\mathbf{B}}{\partial
t} = 0 ,
\label{SOmax4Sum}$$
of the same form as in Maxwell’s original flat-space theory (an *exact* relativistic result).
- In Gaussian space, as in the classical three space, light rays propagate along geodesics of the three-space geometry and the frequency of light is unaffected by propagation in a static gravitational field.
- In the single-observer picture, the energy, momentum, and Lagrangian for a particle in a static gravitational field, $$\begin{aligned}
E&=&\frac{mc^{2}}{\sqrt{1-v^{2}/c^{2}}} , \label{Engy} \\
\mathbf{p}&=&\frac{m\mathbf{v}}{\sqrt{1-v^{2}/c^{2}}} , \label{Mom} \\
L&=& -mc^{2}\sqrt{1-v^{2}/c^{2}} , \label{Lag}\end{aligned}$$ have the same forms as for a free particle in special relativity.
- As in classical physics, thermal equilibrium in the single-observer picture is characterized by uniform temperature.
These results justify our referring to the single-observer picture as the *“classical picture”* in general relativity. It is far closer in spirit to classical physics than the usual many-observer picture that is traditionally used in general relativity. Of course, the latter picture is not at all incorrect in its predictions (the two pictures are physically equivalent), but the classical picture is likely to be of interest to those who prefer to lean on their classical intuition when interpreting the results of general relativity.
There are, of course, differences between the “classical picture” in general relativity and classical physics prior to general relativity:
- In the *classical picture*, the rest mass $m=\bar{m}\mathcal{R}(\mathbf{x})$ and the rest energy $E=mc^{2}$ of a particle are position dependent in a gravitational field. The rest energy is the gravitational potential energy in this picture, and it’s gradient is the gravitational force.
The position dependence of the rest energies $E_{n}=m_{n}(\mathbf{x})c^{2}$ of an atom (the atomic energy levels) shows itself through the position-dependent transition frequencies $\omega_{nm}=(E_{n}-E_{m})/\hbar$ which account for the “gravitational redshift” of spectral lines (if the rest masses of particles were not position-dependent, cyclotron clock frequencies and atomic transition frequencies would not correctly display the gravitational time dilation effect in this picture).
- When a particle moves fast ($v\sim c$ or $E>\bar{m}c^{2}$) it’s acceleration in Gaussian space, $$\mathbf{g}=\left(\frac{\bar{m}c^{2}}{E}\right)^{2}\mathbf{g}_{0} ,
\label{GaussAccel}$$ decreases from the Newtonian value $\mathbf{g}_{0}=-\nabla\Phi$ by the factor $(\bar{m}c^{2}/E)^{2}$ and approaches zero (geodesic motion in Gaussian space) as $E\rightarrow \infty$. Thus slow particles experience the Newtonian gravitational acceleration $\mathbf{g}_{0}$, but ultra-relativistic particles (and the photon) experience no acceleration and travel on geodesics of Gaussian space.
- Perhaps most importantly, Gaussian space is curved (non-Euclidean), whereas the three-space of classical physics is flat. In the single-observer picture, three of the four classic tests of general relativity are attributed to the curvature of Gaussian space. In this picture, the precession of perihelia, the bending of light by the sun’s gravitational field, and the relativistic radar echo delay are all measures of the curvature of the the solar G-space, and these interpretations are exact and complete (as opposed to an interpretation based on a limited number of terms in a perturbation expansion). This economy of interpretation seems desirable.
Another striking feature of the single-observer picture is the independence of all electromagnetic phenomena, from the Newtonian gravitational field $\mathbf{g}_{0}=-\nabla\Phi$! Electric and magnetic fields are “distorted” from their classical values by the non-Euclidean G-space geometry (and possibly by a non-classical topology of this space), but neither the potential $\Phi$ nor it’s gradient $\mathbf{g}_{0}=-\nabla\Phi$ appear in the Maxwell equations (\[FinalMaxwells\]) in G-space, and consequently these have no affect on the fields $\mathbf{E}$ and $\mathbf{B}$ for any prescribed G-space metric $g_{ij}$. This is perhaps most clearly evident in local Cartesian coordinates where slow material particles fall with acceleration due to gravity $\mathbf{g}_{0}=-\nabla\Phi$, but the Maxwell equations (\[FinalMaxwells\]) generate and propagate electric and magnetic fields in exactly the same manner as when $\mathbf{g}_{0}=0$. This result seems to be at variance with Einstein’s original principle-of-equivalence argument for the bending of light by the “gravitational field” in an upward accelerating elevator. But we must remember that Einstein’s argument gives only half the correct light deflection in the sun’s gravitational field, as in Einstein’s calculation [@Einstein1] prior to general relativity. In the SO-picture, no part of the light deflection is attributed to the principle of equivalence in this way. The deflection is entirely due to the curvature of the Gaussian three-space.
Finally, it is noteworthy that, in Gaussian space, the results of calculations made with the Maxwell equations or particle equations of motion for phenomena at some distance from the observer $O$ require no correction for gravitational time dilation at the location of the phenomena. The temporal scale of happenings anywhere in Gaussian space is as observed from $O$ (with, of course, a retardation delay due to the finite propagation speed $c$ of the optical image from phenomenon to observer); the correction for gravitational time dilation being already included in the formalism by means of the conformal transformation.
The results of the present paper (Part I) are limited to static gravitational fields. In a second paper (Part II) we shall extend the single-observer picture (or “space dilation” picture) to the time-dependent cosmological metric.
Conformal Scaling Rules
=======================
Many physical quantities may be thought of as products of mass ($M$), length ($L$), time ($T$), charge ($Q$), and absolute temperature ($K$). Under the conformal transformation $ds^{2}=\mathcal{R}^{2}d\bar{s}^{2}$ from the MO-picture to the SO-picture, these quantities transform as $$\begin{aligned}
M&=&\mathcal{R}\bar{M} , \label{MScale} \\
L&=&\bar{L}/\mathcal{R} , \label{LScale} \\
T&=&\bar{T}/\mathcal{R} , \label{TScale} \\
Q&=&\bar{Q} .\label{QScale} \\
K&=&\mathcal{R}\bar{K}
\label{KScale}\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, if an observable $X$ has dimensions $[X]=M^{n_{M}}L^{n_{L}}T^{n_{T}}Q^{n_{Q}}K^{n_{K}}$ we may think of it as composed of $n_{M}$ factors of mass, $n_{L}$ factors of length, $n_{T}$ factors of time, $n_{Q}$ factors of charge, and $n_{K}$ factors of temperature, in which case we would expect the quantity to transform under the conformal transformation in the same way as the quantity $M^{n_{M}}L^{n_{L}}T^{n_{T}}Q^{n_{Q}}K^{n_{K}}$, namely $$X=\mathcal{R}^{n_{M}+n_{K}-n_{L}-n_{T}}\bar{X}
\label{ScalingLaw}$$ (here we are using $M$, $L$, $T$, $Q$, and $K$ both as symbols for a particular mass, length, time , charge, and temperature and as indicators of the dimensions of these quantities). We will refer to quantities that transform in this way as *fundamental* observables.
The metric $g_{\alpha\beta}$ is a fundamental observable if we follow the convention that all coordinates $x^{\mu}$ are dimensionless. The metric tensor then has dimensions of length squared, so that $ds$ ($ds^{2}=g_{\alpha\beta}dx^{\alpha}dx^{\beta}$) has dimensions of length for any coordinate displacement $dx^{\alpha}$, and $g_{\alpha\beta}=\bar{g}_{\alpha\beta}/\mathcal{R}^{2}$ follows the pattern (\[ScalingLaw\]). The inverse metric $g^{\alpha\beta}$ then has dimensions of inverse length squared and $g^{\alpha\beta}=\mathcal{R}^{2}\bar{g}^{\alpha\beta}$ also follows the rule (\[ScalingLaw\]). Such a convention is in keeping with the view that a coordinate displacement $dx^{\alpha}$ has no length until a metric is specified. This convention, together with rule (\[ScalingLaw\]), also implies that coordinates are unaffected by a change of picture ($x^{\mu}=\bar{x}^{\mu}$), and so we use the same coordinate symbol $x^{\mu}$ in both pictures because there is no need to make a distinction.
The only caution in applying the scaling rule (\[ScalingLaw\]) is that tensor components such as $P^{\mu}$ or $P_{\mu}$ often do not have the dimensions of the physical observable they represent. For example, $P^{\mu}=mdx^{\mu}/d\tau$ has dimensions $[P^{\mu}]=M/T$ and $P_{\mu}$ dimensions $[P_{\mu}]=[g_{\mu\nu}P^{\nu}]=ML^{2}/T$, neither of which are the dimensions of mass times velocity. Only the physical magnitude $P=(P_{\mu}P^{\mu})^{1/2}$ has the dimensions $ML/T$ of momentum. We are keeping factors of $c$ and $G$ in all equations, rather than setting these to unity, in order to make application of the scaling rule (\[ScalingLaw\]) more convenient.
The convention that coordinates $x^{\mu}$ are dimensionless is convenient also because it allows all components of the electromagnetic field tensor $F^{\mu}_{\;\;\nu}$ to have the same dimensions, as can be seen from the Lorentz formula $$\frac{DP^{\mu}}{d\tau}=\frac{q}{c}F^{\mu}_{\;\;\nu}\frac{dx^{\nu}}{d\tau} .
\label{LorentzDP}$$ The dimensions of $F^{\mu}_{\;\;\nu}$ are $[F^{\mu}_{\;\;\nu}]=ML/T^{2}Q$, and so the transformation rule is $F^{\mu}_{\;\;\nu}=\mathcal{R}^{2}\bar{F}^{\mu}_{\;\;\nu}$. This, together with the transformation rule $J^{\mu}=\mathcal{R}^{4}\bar{J}^{\mu}$ for $J^{\mu}$, which follows from the dimensions $[J^{\mu}]=Q/L^{3}T$ of $J^{\mu}$, are the basis of the proof that Maxwell’s equations are conformally invariant.
---------------------------- -----------------------------
PHYSICAL SCALING
CONSTANT LAW
Elementary Charge $e$ $e=\bar{e}$
Speed of Light $c$ $c=\bar{c}$
Plank’s Constant $\hbar$ $\hbar=\bar{\hbar}$
Gravitational Constant $G$ $G=\bar{G}/\mathcal{R}^{2}$
Boltzmann Constant $k_{B}$ $k_{B}=\bar{k}_{B}$
---------------------------- -----------------------------
> **Table 1:** Conformal scaling laws for fundamental constants.
The scaling law (\[ScalingLaw\]) has a number of immediate consequences for the scaling of fundamental “constants” under the transformation from the MO- to the SO-picture.. Table 1 contains the scaling laws for some of these constants. We see that the elementary charge, the speed of light, Plank’s constant, and Boltzmann’s constant are invariant under this transformation, but the gravitational “constant” changes. The scaling rule (\[ScalingLaw\]) does not say that all observables scale in this way. Only the so-called “fundamental” quantities obey this rule. If the definition of a quantity involves derivatives of fundamental quantities, then that quantity does not transform according to the scaling law (\[ScalingLaw\]), although its transformation law is still easily derived. The connection coefficients $\Gamma^{\mu}_{\;\;\alpha\beta}$ and the curvature tensor, for example, transform differently from (\[ScalingLaw\]) under a conformal transformation .
[99]{}
E.F. Taylor and J.A. Wheeler, *Spacetime Physics*, (W.H. Freeman and Company, New York, 1992), p. 39.
Any conformal transformation $ds^{2}=d\bar{s}^{2}/\mathcal{R}^{2}$ from the MO metric $d\bar{s}^{2}$ to a new metric $ds^{2}$ may be interpreted as a change in the rates of the clocks used to define the standards of time and length, where $\mathcal{R}=d\bar{\tau}/d\tau$ is the rate of the old standard clocks as measured with the new ones.
C.W. Misner, K.S. Thorne, and J.A. Wheeler, *Gravitation*, (W.H. Freeman and Company, New York, 1973), p.1108.
W. Pauli, *Theory of Relativity*, (Pergampn Press, London, 1958); reprinted by Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1981, p.155.
C.M. Will, *Theory and experiment in gravitational physics*, Revised Edition, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993), p. 170.
R. Bonola, in Non-Euclidean Geometry, trans. by H.S. Carslaw (Dover Press, 1955), pp.65-67.
I.I. Shapiro, “Fourth test of general relativity,” *Phys. Rev. Lett.* 13, 789 (1964).
C.M. Will, *Was Einstein Right?*, (Basic Books, Inc., New York, 1986), Ch.6.
ibid, Ch.5.
L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, *The Classical Theory of Fields*, (Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., Reading, Massachusetts, 1971), p. 256.
K.S. Thorne and D.A. Macdonald, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. **198**, 339 (1982).
*Black Holes: The Membrane Paradigm*, Edited by K.S. Thorn, R.H. Price, and D.A. Macdonald (Yale University Press, New Haven and London, 1986), and reference contained therein.
R.C. Tolman, *Relativity Thermodynamics and Cosmology*, (Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1987), pp. 312-313.
A. Einstein, “Über den Einfluss der Schwerkraft auf die Ausbreitung des Lichtes”, Annelen der Physik, **35** (1911); also english translation in Lorentz, H.A., A. Einstein, H. Minkowski, and H. Weyl, *The Principle of Relativity*, Dover, New York, p.97-108.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We discuss the efficiency of a heat engine operating in a nonequilibrium steady state maintained by two heat reservoirs. Within the general framework of linear irreversible thermodynamics we derive a universal upper bound on the efficiency of the engine operating at arbitrary fixed power. Furthermore, we show that a slight decrease of the power below its maximal value can lead to a significant gain in efficiency. The presented analysis yields the exact expression for this gain and the corresponding upper bound.'
author:
- Artem Ryabov
- Viktor Holubec
title: 'Maximum efficiency of steady-state heat engines at arbitrary power'
---
The Carnot efficiency $\eta_{C}=1-T_{c}/T_{h}$ [@Carnot1978; @Clausius1856] provides the upper bound on efficiency of heat engines working between two reservoirs at temperatures $T_h $ and $T_c$, $T_h>T_c$. Though crucial from the theoretical point of view [@Callen2006], practical applications of $\eta_{C}$ are rather limited, since the Carnot efficiency can be reached only when the heat engine operates reversibly. Reversible operation implies extremely long duration of the working cycle. As a result, when the engine efficiency reaches the upper bound $\eta_{C}$, the output power is zero. Appealing universality of the upper bound $\eta_{C}$, which depends solely on the two temperatures, and the needs of engineering solutions stimulated an intensive search for a more practical upper bound on the efficiency of heat engines operating *at finite power*. A promising candidate for which at least some universal properties can be derived was introduced about half century ago [@Yvon1955; @Chambadal1957; @Novikov1958], it is the efficiency *at maximum power* $\eta^{\star}$.
The upper bound on the efficiency at maximum power (EMP) in the linear response regime (linear in $\eta_{C}$) is equal to the famous Curzon-Ahlborn [@Curzon1975] formula $\eta_{CA}=1-\sqrt{T_{c}/T_{h}}$, which is to the linear order in $\eta_{C}$ equal to the half of the Carnot efficiency, $\eta_{CA} =\eta_{C}/2 + O(\eta_{C}^{2})$ [@BroeckPRL2005]. The upper bound $\eta^{\star}=\eta_C /2$ is achieved by a particular class of heat engines with strongly coupled thermodynamic fluxes. The assumption of *strong coupling* (see discussion below Eq. ) means that the heat flux is proportional to the flux, which generates work on the surrounding [@EspositoPRB2009; @EspositoPRL2009; @BroeckEurPhysJ2015].
In the present study we stay in the linear response regime (linear in $\eta_C$), however, we go beyond the regime of maximum power and study the engine efficiency *at an arbitrary power* $P$, $0\leq P\leq P^{\star}$ ($P^{\star}$ stands for the maximum power). One of the main messages is that the universal bounds on efficiency can be derived for an arbitrary $P$ and not only at the point of maximum power which was considered in several recent studies [@BroeckPRL2005; @EspositoPRB2009; @EspositoPRL2009; @BroeckEurPhysJ2015; @Schmiedl2008; @Esposito2010b; @Tomas2013], see however [@Hernandez2007; @HernandezPRE2008; @Hernandez2010; @GuoJApplPhys2012; @deTomasPRE2013; @LongPRE2012; @HolubecRyabov2015; @ViktorJSTAT] for optimal regimes other than that with maximum power. To this end we introduce relative deviations from the regime of maximum power, the relative gain in efficiency $\delta \eta$ and power $\delta P$: $$\label{delty}
\delta P = \frac{P-P^{\star}}{P^{\star}},
\qquad \delta \eta = \frac{\eta-\eta^{\star}}{\eta^{\star}},$$ where $ -1 \leq \delta P \leq 0$. Such normalization of the two principal engine characteristics allows us to derive several explicit results. One of them is that it is possible to provide a universal upper bound for the efficiency at an *arbitrary power* $P$. The bound depends explicitly on $\delta P$ and it reads $$\label{upperbound}
\eta(P) = \frac{\eta_C}{2} \left( 1 + \sqrt{-\delta P} \right) .$$ At the maximum power regime $\delta P=0$, the above formula reduces to the well known upper bound $\eta_{C}/2$ for the EMP in the linear response theory ($\eta_{C}$ small). On the other hand, for a zero power, i.e., for $\delta P \to -1$, Eq. yields the Carnot efficiency.
The upper bound on the efficiency at arbitrary power paves the way for better understanding of behavior of real-world engines and thermal plants. These devices in most cases do not operate in the regime of maximum power. Instead, the compromise between power and efficiency is chosen since decreasing the power ($\delta P<0$) can significantly enhance the efficiency as compared to $\eta^{\star}$ [@Chen2001; @DeVos1992; @Chen1994; @HolubecRyabov2015; @Dechant2016]. The upper bound predicts that significant enhancement can be achieved by a slight decrease of the power, since the relative gain in efficiency as compared to the relative power loss $$\label{dEtadP}
\frac{\delta \eta }{(-\delta P)} = \frac{ 1}{ \sqrt{-\delta P}},$$ diverges for powers near the maximum power, $P \approx P^{\star}$. Again, Eq. represents the upper bound for the relative enhancement of efficiency achieved by strong-coupling models. At an arbitrary coupling the result will differ by a constant model-dependent prefactor, see Eq. . Quite remarkably, this significant enhancement of efficiency $\delta \eta \sim \sqrt{-\delta P}$ is observed in several particular models even beyond the linear response regime , e.g. in recent studies on quantum thermoelectric devices [@Whitney2014; @Whitney2015], for a stochastic heat engine based on the underdamped particle diffusing in a parabolic potential [@Dechant2016] and also for the so called low-dissipation heat engines [@HolubecRyabov2016].
[*Steady-state heat engine.*]{} We consider the simplest steady-state model of work extraction from the heat flow [@BroeckPRL2005]. The model is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:illustr\], it comprises just two thermodynamic forces $X_1$, $X_2$ and fluxes $J_1$, $J_2$. The first thermodynamic force $X_1=F/T$ determines the work $W = -F x$ performed by the system on the surrounding, where $x$ is the conjugate variable to $F$ and $T$ stands for the system temperature. In general, the force $F$ can be of mechanical, chemical, or electrostatic origin. The corresponding thermodynamic flux is $J_1 = \dot{x}$, where the dot denotes the time derivative. The system performs work against $F$ due to the heat flux $J_2=\dot{Q}$ through the system from the hot reservoir to the cold one. The temperature of the hot reservoir $T_{h}$ is larger but comparable to the temperature of the cold reservoir $T_{\rm c}$. The temperature difference $\Delta T = T_{h}-T_{c}$ is assumed to be small as compared to $T \approx T_{c} \approx T_{h}$, hence we can write the second thermodynamic force $X_2$ to the first order in the relative temperature difference as $X_2 = 1/T_{c}-1/T_{ h} \approx \Delta T/T^{2}$.
![\[fig:illustr\] Steady-state heat engine. Part of the heat flow $\dot{Q}$ from the hot reservoir is transformed by off-diagonal elements of linear relations into the engine output power $\dot{W}$.](fig1-illustration.eps){width="0.7\columnwidth"}
Within the framework of linear irreversible thermodynamics the forces $X_1$, $X_2$ and fluxes $J_1$, $J_2$ are coupled by the linear relations $$\label{LinResp}
J_1 = L_{11}X_{1} + L_{12}X_{2},
\quad
J_2 = L_{21}X_{1} + L_{22}X_{2}.$$ Following Ref. [@KedemCaplan1965], we introduce the “degree of coupling” $q$ between the fluxes $J_{1}$ and $J_{2}$, which is defined in terms of the coefficients $L_{ij}$ as $$q^{2} = \frac{L_{12}^{2}}{L_{11}L_{22}}, \qquad
-1 \leq q \leq 1.
\label{q}$$ Physically reasonable values of $q$ follow from the requirement that the entropy production is non-negative, $\dot{S}=J_1 X_1 + J_2 X_2 \geq 0$. This implies for the Onsager coefficients $L_{ij}$ that $
L_{11} \geq 0$, $L_{22} \geq 0$, $L_{11}L_{22}-L_{12}L_{21} \geq 0$ and hence we must have $-1 \leq q \leq 1$. In the case of the so called strong coupling, $q^{2}=1$, the two fluxes are proportional to each other [@KedemCaplan1965; @BroeckPRL2005; @BroeckAdvChemPhys2007; @BroeckEurPhysJ2015]. Recently, the idea of strong coupling has been extended beyond the linear-response regime. It is essential for deriving the universal properties of EMP [@EspositoPRB2009; @EspositoPRL2009; @BroeckEurPhysJ2015] for nano-scale heat engines.
The efficiency $\eta$ and the power output $P=-F\dot{x}$ of the engine are defined as $$P=\dot{W}=-J_{1}X_{1}T,\qquad
\eta = \frac{P}{\dot{Q}}=-\frac{\Delta T}{T}\frac{J_1 X_1}{J_2 X_2}.$$ The efficiency at maximum power in the present model was derived in Ref. [@BroeckPRL2005]. For a fixed temperature difference $\Delta T$ the model contains just one optimization parameter, the external load $F$. The optimal value $X_{1}^{\star}=F^{\star}/T$ of the force $X_{1}$ follows immediately from the expression for the output power $P = -(L_{1 1} X_1 + L_{1 2}X_2 ) X_1 T$, which exhibits a maximum for $$X_1^{\star}= - \frac{ L_{12}X_{2}} {2 L_{11}}.$$ Thus the maximum power is achieved at the half of the force for which the engine stops (half of the maximal load). The maximum power and the corresponding efficiency are $$\label{PEtaMP}
P^{\star}= \frac{\eta_{C}^{2}}{4} L_{2 2} q^{2} T, \qquad \eta^{\star} = \frac{ \eta_{C}}{2} \frac{q^{2}}{2-q^{2}}.$$
![\[fig:power\] Efficiency higher than EMP $\eta^{\star}$ are achieved for higher loads $F>F^{\star}$ (or $X_{1}>X_{1}^{\star}$). On the other hand, when the external force is decreased ($X_{1}<X_{1}^{\star}$), the engine efficiency drops below $\eta^{\star}$. Plotted according to Eqs. .](fig2.eps){width="0.85\columnwidth"}
It is remarkable that the EMP $\eta^{\star}$ depends on the coupling parameter $q$ only (i.e., the linear coefficients $L_{ij}$ enter the result only in the combination given by $q$). Surprisingly, the efficiency $\eta$ for *any* power $P$, or more precisely for any $\delta P$, can be also given as a function of $q$ only. To see this it is convenient to work with quantities relative to the point of maximum power [@HolubecRyabov2015]. Then after some algebra we obtain $$\label{PEtaP}
\frac{P}{P^{\star} }= \left(2- \frac{ X_1}{ X_{1}^{\star}} \right)\frac{ X_1}{ X_{1}^{\star}},
\qquad \frac{\eta}{\eta^{\star}} = \frac{P}{P^{\star} } \frac{2-q^{2}}{2-q^{2} \frac{X_1}{X_{1}^{\star}}}.$$ The relative power $P/P^{\star}$ is given by a simple parabolic relation and it does not depend explicitly on other model parameters. On the other hand, the normalized efficiency $\eta/\eta^{\star}$ depends, similarly as the efficiency at maximum power , on the coupling strength $q$.
The two engine characteristics (\[PEtaP\]) are illustrated in Fig. \[fig:power\] for different couplings $q$. Notice that efficiencies higher than EMP $\eta^{\star}$ are achieved for higher external loads $X_{1}>X_{1}^{\star}$ (or $F>F^{\star}$). On the other hand, when the external force $F$ is decreased below its value $F^{\star}$ (or $X_{1}<X_{1}^{\star}$), the engine efficiency drops below $\eta^{\star}$. In order to express the efficiency as a function of the power we first find the relative force to be given by $$\frac{X_1}{X_{1}^{\star}} = 1\pm \sqrt{-\delta P}.$$ The plus sign corresponds to the favorable case when the external load is increased and the enhancement of efficiency occurs ($\eta>\eta^{\star}$, $X_{1}>X_{1}^{\star}$). The minus sign describes the opposite branch, where decreasing the power from its maximal value $P^{\star}$ reduces the engine efficiency ($\eta < \eta^{\star}$, $X_{1}< X_{1}^{\star}$). Using the definition of $\delta P$ from Eq. , we obtain the engine efficiency as the function of the relative power loss $(-\delta P)$: $$\label{EtaAnyQ}
\frac{\eta}{\eta^{\star}} = (1+\delta P)\frac{2-q^{2}}{2-q^{2}(1\pm \sqrt{-\delta P} )},$$ where again the plus sign corresponds to the region of enhanced efficiency $\eta>\eta^{\star}$, $X_{1}>X_{1}^{\star}$.
In the strong coupling limit we obtain bounds on possible values of the engine efficiency $$\label{EtaPSC}
\eta(P) = \frac{\eta_{C}}{2}\left( 1 \pm \sqrt{-\delta P} \right) , \quad q^{2}=1.$$ In other words, the lower and the upper bounds on the efficiency at any finite power are simply $$\label{EtaPSC2}
\frac{\eta_{C}}{2} \left( 1 - \sqrt{-\delta P} \right) \leq
\eta \leq \frac{\eta_{C}}{2} \left( 1 + \sqrt{-\delta P} \right) .$$ At this point we should make a remark concerning simple formulas , . After the pioneering work [@BroeckPRL2005] several linear models were studied with the main focus on the universality of the EMP [@Gomez-Marin2006; @Wang2012; @Apertet2012; @Sheng2013; @Izumida2014; @IzumidaNJP2015]; on the maximum efficiency [@Hernandez2007; @HernandezPRE2008; @Benenti2011; @Benenti2013; @Brander2013; @Jiang2014] or/and on other specific performance characteristics [@HernandezPRE2006; @HernandezPRE2008; @ApertetEPL2012; @BizarroPRE2008; @BizarroAJP2012; @BizarroPRE2012; @Wang2016] for specific models. For minimal non-linear irreversible models we refer to Refs. [@IzumidaEPL2012; @IzumidaEPL2013; @IzumidaPRE2015; @WangPRE2016; @Ponmurugan2016], for periodically driven engines see Refs. [@BauerPRE2016; @Proesmans2016; @Brandner2016]. However, to the best of our knowledge, the explicit form of maximum (and minimum) efficiency *at a given power* (\[EtaPSC\]) was not discussed in the literature. The formulas , represent universal bounds on the efficiency of linear irreversible models. They depend just on the upper bound for the EMP, which for all these models is equal to $\eta_{C}/2$.
Another important general feature encoded in the exact formula (\[EtaAnyQ\]) is that the engine efficiency can increase significantly when the power is changed slightly from its maximal value. Focusing on the branch of the solution for which $\eta > \eta^{\star}$, we obtain for the relative gain in efficiency: $$\label{Gainq}
\frac{\delta \eta }{(-\delta P)} \approx \frac{q^{2}}{2 -q^{2} } \frac{1}{\sqrt{-\delta P} }, \qquad \delta P \to 0^{-}.$$ The relative gain diverges when power is close to $P^{\star}$, which means that the gain in efficiency when working near maximum power is much larger then the power loss. The upper bound for this gain, $1/\sqrt{-\delta P}$, is obtained in the strong coupling limit $q^{2}\to 1$.
[*Concluding remarks.*]{} Universality of the efficiency at maximum power has been discussed rather intensively in recent years. Within the framework of linear irreversible thermodynamics, EMP is bounded by $\eta_{C}/2$. Our present work extends this universal upper bound to engines operating at arbitrary fixed power. The result is given in Eq. . In future studies it would be interesting to extend the present ideas beyond the linear regime in $\eta_C$. In the case of EMP, the quadratic term in $\eta_{C}$ turns out to be universal under assumptions of certain symmetries of non-linear response coefficients [@EspositoPRB2009; @EspositoPRL2009; @BroeckEurPhysJ2015]. We believe that similar logic can lead to the universal generalization of our result beyond the linear regime.
Equation (\[Gainq\]) tells us how much favorable it is to operate the engine at a slightly lower power than at the maximal one. In such a regime, the engine attains considerably larger efficiency than the EMP. The upper bound (\[dEtadP\]) for the gain in efficiency is obtained in the strong-coupling limit $q^{2}\to 1$, where the equality $\delta \eta = \sqrt{-\delta P}$ holds. For a finite coupling strength, the gain is controlled by the $q$-dependent prefactor. The two results (the upper bound and the actual value of the prefactor) were derived systematically from the exact expression for the efficiency . However, the scaling relation $\delta \eta \sim \sqrt{-\delta P}$ should be valid for a large class of models. To see this, let us consider a small deviation $\varepsilon$ from the point of the maximum power (in the present model $\varepsilon= X_{1}-X_{1}^{\star}$). Since the power attains its maximum at $\varepsilon=0$, the series expansion of the difference $(P-P^{\star})$ starts by the quadratic term, $(P - P^{\star}) \approx - |c| \varepsilon^{2}$. When the efficiency can be expanded as $(\eta - \eta^{\star} ) \approx a \varepsilon $, we always have $\delta \eta \sim \sqrt{-\delta P}$. Indeed, such scaling is observed in different unrelated settings [@Whitney2014; @Whitney2015; @Dechant2016; @HolubecRyabov2016]. It would be interesting to find an engine for which this scaling is violated. Then one may obtain even stronger gain in efficiency for a slight decrease of power below $P^{\star}$.
Finally, it should be noted that another class of universal results for EMP is known for the so called low-dissipation heat engines [@Sekimoto1997; @Schmiedl2008; @Esposito2010b; @Tomas2013]. In our subsequent work [@HolubecRyabov2016] we generalize the present considerations to these systems further clarifying the universality of both the derived bound and the relation (\[Gainq\]).
[56]{}ifxundefined \[1\][ ifx[\#1]{} ]{}ifnum \[1\][ \#1firstoftwo secondoftwo ]{}ifx \[1\][ \#1firstoftwo secondoftwo ]{}““\#1””@noop \[0\][secondoftwo]{}sanitize@url \[0\][‘\
12‘\$12 ‘&12‘\#12‘12‘\_12‘%12]{}@startlink\[1\]@endlink\[0\]@bib@innerbibempty [**](https://books.google.cz/books?id=J3JzXJxYZfIC), edited by , Acad[é]{}mie internationale d’histoire des sciences. Collection des travaux (, ) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1080/14786445608642141) [**](http://books.google.cz/books?id=uOiZB_2y5pIC), Student Edition (, ) in @noop [**]{} (, ) p. @noop [**]{}, Vol. (, ) @noop [****, ()]{} [****, ()](\doibase 10.1119/1.10023) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.190602) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.80.235122) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.130602) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1140/epjst/e2015-02433-8) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/0295-5075/81/i=2/a=20003) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.150603) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.87.012105) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.130602) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.77.041127) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.82.051101) [****, ()](\doibase
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4765725) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevE.93.032152) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.91.042127) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.92.052125) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/1742-5468/2014/i=5/a=P05022) [****, ()](\doibase
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(00)00055-8) [**](https://books.google.cz/books?id=saE5AQAAMAAJ), Oxford science publications (, ) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/0022-3727/27/i=6/a=011) @noop [ ()]{}, [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.130601) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.91.115425) @noop [ ()]{}, [****, ()](\doibase 10.1039/TF9656101897) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1002/9780470121917.ch6) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.74.062102) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/0295-5075/98/i=4/a=40001) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevE.85.041144) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/1751-8121/46/i=40/a=402001) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.180603) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/1367-2630/17/i=8/a=085011) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.230602) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.87.165419) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.070603) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.90.042126) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevE.73.057103) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/0295-5075/97/i=2/a=28001) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.78.021137) [****, ()](\doibase
http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.3680168) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.86.051109) [****, ()](\doibase 10.3390/e18050161) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/0295-5075/97/i=1/a=10004) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/0295-5075/101/i=1/a=10005) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.91.052140) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.93.012120) @noop [ ()]{}, [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevE.93.042112) @noop [ ()]{}, @noop [ ()]{}, [****, ()](\doibase 10.1143/JPSJ.66.3326)
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The most recent LHC data have provided a considerable improvement in the precision with which various Higgs production and decay channels have been measured. Using all available public results from ATLAS, CMS and the Tevatron, we derive for each final state the combined confidence level contours for the signal strengths in the (gluon fusion + ttH associated production) versus (vector boson fusion + VH associated production) space. These “combined signal strength ellipses” can be used in a simple, generic way to constrain a very wide class of New Physics models in which the couplings of the Higgs boson deviate from the Standard Model prediction. Here, we use them to constrain the reduced couplings of the Higgs boson to up-quarks, down-quarks/leptons and vector boson pairs. We also consider New Physics contributions to the loop-induced gluon-gluon and photon-photon couplings of the Higgs, as well as invisible/unseen decays. Finally, we apply our fits to some simple models with an extended Higgs sector, in particular to Two-Higgs-Doublet models of Type I and Type II, the Inert Doublet model, and the Georgi–Machacek triplet Higgs model.'
---
LAPTH-032/13\
LPSC1319\
LPT Orsay 13-40\
UCD-2013-3\
[ G. Bélanger$^{1}$, B. Dumont$^{2}$, U. Ellwanger$^{3}$, J. F. Gunion$^{4}$, S. Kraml$^{2}$ ]{}
Introduction {#sintro}
============
That the mass of the Higgs boson is about 125–126 GeV is a very fortunate circumstance in that we can detect it in many different production and decay channels [@atlas:2012gk; @cms:2012gu]. Indeed, many distinct signal strengths, defined as production$\times$decay rates relative to Standard Model (SM) expectations, $\mu_i\equiv (\sigma\times {\rm BR})_i/(\sigma\times {\rm BR})_i^{\rm SM}$, have been measured with unforeseeable precision already with the 7–8 TeV LHC run [@ATLAS-CONF-2013-034; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-005]. From these signal strengths one can obtain information about the couplings of the Higgs boson to electroweak gauge bosons, fermions (of the third generation) and loop-induced couplings to photons and gluons.
According to the latest measurements presented at the 2013 Moriond [@ATLAS-CONF-2013-011; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-012; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-013; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-014; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-030; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-034; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-001; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-002; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-003; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-004; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-005; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-009; @CMS-PAS-HIG-12-053; @Chatrchyan:2013yea; @Chatrchyan:2013lba] and LHCP [@Aaltonen:2013kxa; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-012; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-015] conferences, these couplings seem to coincide well with those expected in the SM. This poses constraints on various beyond the Standard Model (BSM) theories, in which these couplings can differ substantially from those of the SM. The Higgs couplings can be parametrized in terms of effective Lagrangians [@Carmi:2012yp; @Azatov:2012bz; @Espinosa:2012ir; @Klute:2012pu; @Azatov:2012wq; @Low:2012rj; @Corbett:2012dm; @Giardino:2012dp; @Alanne:2013dra; @Ellis:2012hz; @Montull:2012ik; @Espinosa:2012im; @Carmi:2012in; @Banerjee:2012xc; @Bertolini:2012gu; @Bonnet:2012nm; @Plehn:2012iz; @Elander:2012fk; @Djouadi:2012rh; @Dobrescu:2012td; @Moreau:2012da; @Cacciapaglia:2012wb; @Corbett:2012ja; @Masso:2012eq; @Azatov:2012qz; @Belanger:2012gc; @Cheung:2013kla; @Celis:2013rcs; @Belanger:2013kya; @Falkowski:2013dza; @Cao:2013wqa; @Giardino:2013bma; @Ellis:2013lra; @Djouadi:2013qya; @Chang:2013cia; @Dumont:2013wma; @Bechtle:2013xfa] whose structure depends, however, on the class of models considered, such as extended Higgs sectors, extra fermions and/or scalars contributing to loop diagrams, composite Higgs bosons and/or fermions, nonlinear realizations of electroweak symmetry breaking, large extra dimensions, Higgs–dilaton mixing and more.
When such generalized couplings are used to fit the large number of measurements of signal strengths now available in different channels, one faces the problem that the experimentally defined signal categories (based on combinations of cuts) nearly always contain superpositions of different production modes and thus errors (both systematic and statistical) in different channels are correlated. Ideally one would like to fit not to experimentally defined categories but rather to the different production and decay modes which lead to distinct final states and kinematic distributions. The five usual theoretically “pure” production modes are gluon–gluon fusion (ggF), vector boson fusion (VBF), associated production with a $W$ or $Z$ boson (WH and ZH, commonly denoted as VH), and associated production with a top-quark pair (ttH). The scheme conveniently adopted by the experimental collaborations is to group these five modes into just two effective modes ggF + ttH and VBF + VH and present contours of constant likelihood ${\cal L}$ for particular final states in the $\mu({\rm ggF + ttH})$ versus $\mu({\rm VBF + VH})$ plane. This is a natural choice for the following reasons:
Deviations from custodial symmetry, which implies a SM-like ratio of the couplings to $W$ and $Z$ gauge bosons, are strongly constrained by the Peskin–Takeuchi $T$ parameter [@Peskin:1990zt; @Peskin:1991sw] from electroweak fits [@Baak:2012kk]. Furthermore, there is no indication of such deviation from the Higgs measurements performed at the LHC [@CMS-PAS-HIG-13-005; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-034]. Hence, one can assume that the VBF and VH production modes both depend on a single generalized coupling of the Higgs boson to $V=W,Z$ and it is therefore appropriate to combine results for these two channels.
Grouping ggF and ttH together is more a matter of convenience in order to be able to present two-dimensional likelihood plots. Nonetheless, there are some physics motivations for considering this combination, the primary one being that, in the current data set, ggF and ttH are statistically independent since they are probed by different final states: ttH via $H\to b\bar b$ and ggF via a variety of other final states such as $\gam\gam$ and $ZZ^*$. While the ttH production rate depends entirely on the $Ht\bar t$ coupling, ggF production occurs at one loop and is sensitive to both the $Ht\bar t$ coupling and the $H b\bar b$ couplings as well as to BSM loop diagrams. Although in the SM limit ggF is roughly 90% determined by the $Ht\bar t$ coupling, leading to a strong correlation with the ttH process, this need not be the case in models with suppressed $Ht\bar t$ coupling and/or enhanced $Hb\bar b$ coupling and most especially in models with BSM loops. The final states in which the Higgs is observed include $\gam\gam$, $ZZ^{(*)}$, $WW^{(*)}$, $b\bar{b}$ and $\tau\tau$. However, they do not all scale independently. In particular, custodial symmetry implies that the branching fractions into $ZZ^{(*)}$ and $WW^{(*)}$ are rescaled by the same factor with respect to the SM. We are then left with two independent production modes (VBF+VH) and (ggF+ttH), and four independent final states $\gam\gam$, $VV^{(*)}$, $b\bar{b}$, $\tau\tau$. In addition, in many models there is a common coupling to down-type fermions and hence the branching fractions into $b\bar{b}$ and $\tau\tau$ rescale by a common factor, leading to identical $\mu$ values for the $b\bar b$ and $\tau\tau$ final states.
The first purpose of the present paper is to combine the information provided by ATLAS, CMS and the Tevatron experiments on the $\gam\gam$, $ZZ^{(*)}$, $WW^{(*)}$, $b\bar{b}$ and $\tau\tau$ final states including the error correlations among the (VBF+VH) and (ggF+ttH) production modes. Using a Gaussian approximation, we derive for each final state a combined likelihood in the $\mu({\rm ggF + ttH})$ versus $\mu({\rm VBF + VH})$ plane, which can then simply be expressed as a $\chi^2$. (Note that this does [*not*]{} rely on ggF production being dominated by the top loop.) We express this $\chi^2$ as \[eq:1\] \_i\^2 = a\_i(\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{}-\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{})\^2 +2b\_i(\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{}-\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{}) (\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{}-\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{}) +c\_i(\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{}-\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{})\^2 , where the upper indices ggF and VBF stand for (ggF+ttH) and (VBF+VH), respectively, the lower index $i$ stands for $\gam\gam$, $VV^{(*)}$, $b\bar{b}$ and $\tau\tau$ (or $b\bar{b}=\tau\tau$), and $\hat{\mu}_i^{\rm{ggF}}$ and $\hat{\mu}_i^{\rm{VBF}}$ denote the best-fit points obtained from the measurements. We thus obtain “combined likelihood ellipses”, which can be used in a simple, generic way to constrain non-standard Higgs sectors and new contributions to the loop-induced processes, provided they have the same Lagrangian structure as the SM.
In particular, these likelihoods can be used to derive constraints on a model-dependent choice of generalized Higgs couplings, the implications of which we study subsequently for several well-motivated models. The choice of models is far from exhaustive, but we present our results for the likelihoods as a function of the independent signal strengths $\mu_i$ in such a manner that these can easily be applied to other models.
We note that we will not include correlations between different final states but identical production modes which originate from common theoretical errors on the production cross sections [@Giardino:2013bma; @Bechtle:2013xfa] nor correlations between systematic errors due to common detector components (like EM calorimeters) sensitive to different final states (such as $\gam\gam$ and $e^-$ from $ZZ^{(*)}$ and $WW^{(*)}$). A precise treatment of these ‘2nd order’ corrections to our contours is only possible if performed by the experimental collaborations. It is however possible to estimate their importance, , by reproducing the results of coupling fits performed by ATLAS and CMS, as done for two representative cases in Appendix B. The results we obtain are in good agreement with the ones published by the experimental collaborations.
In the next Section, we will list the various sources of information used for the determination of the coefficients $a_i$, $b_i$, $c_i$, $\hat{\mu}_i^{\rm{ggF}}$ and $\hat{\mu}_i^{\rm{VBF}}$, and present our results for these parameters. In Section 3, we parametrize the signal strengths $\mu_i$ in terms of various sets of Higgs couplings, and use our results from Section 2 to derive $\chi^2$ contours for these couplings. In Section 4, we apply our fits to some concrete BSM models, which provide simple tree-level relations between the generalized Higgs couplings to fermions and gauge bosons. Our conclusions are presented in Section 5. The Appendix contains clarifying details on Eq. (\[eq:1\]) as well as a comparison with coupling fits performed by ATLAS and CMS.
Treatment of the experimental results and combined signal strength ellipses {#ssellipse}
===========================================================================
The aim of the present section is to combine the most recent available information on signal strengths from the ATLAS, CMS and Tevatron experiments for the various Higgs decay modes. In most cases, these include error correlations in the plane of the (VBF+VH) and (ggF+ttH) production modes. For practical purposes it is very useful to represent the likelihoods in these planes in the Gaussian approximation. Once the expressions for the various $\chi_i^2$ are given in the form of Eq. (\[eq:1\]), it becomes straightforward to evaluate the numerical value of $\chi^2=\sum_i \chi_i^2$ in any theoretical model with SM-like Lagrangian structure, in which predictions for the Higgs branching fractions and the (VBF+VH) and (ggF+ttH) production modes (relative to the SM) can be made.
From the corresponding information provided by the experimental collaborations one finds that the Gaussian approximation is justified in the neighborhood (68% confidence level (CL) contours) of the best fit points. Hence we parametrize these 68% CL contours, separately for each experiment, as in Eq. (\[eq:1\]).[^1] Occasionally, only a single signal rate including error bars for a specific final state is given. Using the relative contributions from the various production modes, this kind of information can still be represented in the form of Eq. (\[eq:1\]), leading to an “ellipse” which reduces to a strip in the plane of the (VBF+VH) and (ggF+ttH) production modes.
Subsequently these expressions can easily be combined and be represented again in the form of Eq. (\[eq:1\]). We expect that the result is reliable up to $\chi_i^2 \lsim 6$ (making it possible to derive 95% CL contours), but its extrapolation to (much) larger values of $\chi_i^2$ should be handled with care.
Starting with the $H\to \gamma\gamma$ final state, we treat in this way the 68% CL contours given by ATLAS in [@ATLAS-CONF-2013-012; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-014; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-034], by CMS in [@CMS-PAS-HIG-13-001; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-005; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-015][^2] and the Tevatron in [@Aaltonen:2013kxa]. (In the case of the Tevatron, for all final states only a strip in the plane of the (VBF+VH) and (ggF+ttH) production modes is defined.) For the combination of the $ZZ$ and $WW$ final states, we use the 68% CL contours given by ATLAS for $ZZ$ in [@ATLAS-CONF-2013-013; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-014; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-034], by CMS for $ZZ$ in [@CMS-PAS-HIG-13-002; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-005], by ATLAS for $WW$ in [@ATLAS-CONF-2013-030; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-034], by CMS for $WW$ in [@CMS-PAS-HIG-13-005; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-003; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-009] and by the Tevatron for $WW$ in [@Aaltonen:2013kxa]. For the combination of the $b\bar{b}$ and $\tau\tau$ final states, we use the “strip” defined by the ATLAS result for $b\bar{b}$ in associated VH production from [@ATLAS-CONF-2012-161], the 68% CL contour given by CMS for $b\bar{b}$ in [@CMS-PAS-HIG-13-012], the Tevatron result for $b\bar{b}$ from [@Aaltonen:2013kxa] and combine them with the ATLAS 68% CL contour for $\tau\tau$ from [@ATLAS-CONF-2012-160; @ATLAS-CONF-2013-034] and the CMS 68% CL contours for $\tau\tau$ from [@CMS-PAS-HIG-13-005; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-004]. We also use the ATLAS search for $ZH\to \ell^+\ell^-\!+{\rm invisible}$, extracting the likelihood from Fig. 10b of [@ATLAS-CONF-2013-011]. All the above 68% CL likelihood contours are parametrized by ellipses (or strips) in $\chi^2$ as in Eq. (\[eq:1\]), which can subsequently be combined. (In Appendix A we clarify how these combinations are performed.)
The resulting parameters $\hat{\mu}^{\rm{ggF}}$, $\hat{\mu}^{\rm{VBF}}$, $a$, $b$ and $c$ for Eq. (\[eq:1\]) (and, for completeness, the correlation coefficient $\rho$) for the different final states are listed in Table \[tab:1\]. The corresponding 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL ellipses are represented graphically in Fig. \[fig:ellipses1\].
$\hat{\mu}^{\rm{ggF}}$ $\hat{\mu}^{\rm{VBF}}$ $\rho$ $a$ $b$ $c$
--------------------- ---------------------------- ------------------------ --------- ------- ------ -------
$\gamma\gamma$ $\phantom{-}0.98 \pm 0.28$ $1.72 \pm 0.59$ $-0.38$ 14.94 2.69 3.34
$VV$ $\phantom{-}0.91 \pm 0.16$ $1.01 \pm 0.49$ $-0.30$ 44.59 4.24 4.58
$b\bar{b}/\tau\tau$ $\phantom{-}0.98 \pm 0.63$ $0.97 \pm 0.32$ $-0.25$ 2.67 1.31 10.12
$b\bar{b}$ $-0.23 \pm 2.86$ $0.97 \pm 0.38$ $0$ 0.12 0 7.06
$\tau\tau$ $\phantom{-}1.07 \pm 0.71$ $0.94 \pm 0.65$ $-0.47$ 2.55 1.31 3.07
: Combined best-fit signal strengths $\hat{\mu}^{\rm{ggF}}$, $\hat{\mu}^{\rm{VBF}}$ and correlation coefficient $\rho$ for various final states, as well as the coefficients $a$, $b$ and $c$ for the $\chi^2$ in Eq. (\[eq:1\]).[]{data-label="tab:1"}
![Combined signal strength ellipses for the $\gamma\gamma$, $VV=ZZ,WW$ and $b\bar b=\tau\tau$ channels. The filled red, orange and yellow ellipses show the 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL regions, respectively, derived by combining the ATLAS, CMS and Tevatron results. The red, orange and yellow line contours in the right-most plot show how these ellipses change when neglecting the Tevatron results. The white stars mark the best-fit points. \[fig:ellipses1\] ](ellipses/LHCP_ellipse_gamgam.eps "fig:") ![Combined signal strength ellipses for the $\gamma\gamma$, $VV=ZZ,WW$ and $b\bar b=\tau\tau$ channels. The filled red, orange and yellow ellipses show the 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL regions, respectively, derived by combining the ATLAS, CMS and Tevatron results. The red, orange and yellow line contours in the right-most plot show how these ellipses change when neglecting the Tevatron results. The white stars mark the best-fit points. \[fig:ellipses1\] ](ellipses/LHCP_ellipse_VV.eps "fig:") ![Combined signal strength ellipses for the $\gamma\gamma$, $VV=ZZ,WW$ and $b\bar b=\tau\tau$ channels. The filled red, orange and yellow ellipses show the 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL regions, respectively, derived by combining the ATLAS, CMS and Tevatron results. The red, orange and yellow line contours in the right-most plot show how these ellipses change when neglecting the Tevatron results. The white stars mark the best-fit points. \[fig:ellipses1\] ](ellipses/LHCP_ellipse_dd_combined.eps "fig:")
We see that, after combining different experiments, the best fit signal strengths are astonishingly close to their SM values, the only exception being the $\gamma\gamma$ final state produced via (VBF+VH) for which the SM is, nonetheless, still within the 68% CL contour. Therefore, these results serve mainly to constrain BSM contributions to the properties of the Higgs boson.
The combination of the $b\bar{b}$ and $\tau\tau$ final states is justified, in principle, in models where one specific Higgs doublet has the same reduced couplings (with respect to the SM) to down-type quarks and leptons. However, even in this case QCD corrections and so-called $\Delta_b$ corrections (from radiative corrections, notably at large $\tan\beta$, inducing couplings of another Higgs doublet to $b$ quarks, see [*e.g.*]{} [@Carena:1999py; @Eberl:1999he]) can lead to deviations of the reduced $Hbb$ and $H\tau\tau$ couplings from a common value. Therefore, for completeness we show the result for the $b\bar{b}$ final state only (combining ATLAS, CMS and Tevatron results as given in the previous paragraph) in the fourth line of Table \[tab:1\], and the resulting 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL contours in the left plot in Fig. \[fig:ellipses2\]. The result for the $\tau\tau$ final state only (combining ATLAS and CMS results as given in the previous paragraph) is shown in the fifth line of Table \[tab:1\], and the resulting 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL contours in the right plot in Fig. \[fig:ellipses2\].
![Combined signal strength ellipses as in Fig. \[fig:ellipses1\] but treating the couplings to $b\bar b$ and $\tau\tau$ separately. \[fig:ellipses2\] ](ellipses/LHCP_ellipse_bb_combined.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}![Combined signal strength ellipses as in Fig. \[fig:ellipses1\] but treating the couplings to $b\bar b$ and $\tau\tau$ separately. \[fig:ellipses2\] ](ellipses/LHCP_ellipse_tautau.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}
Before proceeding, a comment is in order regarding the impact of the Tevatron results. While for the $\gamma\gamma$ and $VV$ final states, our combined likelihoods are completely dominated by the LHC measurements, to the extent that they are the same with or without including the Tevatron results, this is not the case for the $b\bar{b}$ final state. For illustration, in the plots for the $b\bar{b}$ final state in Figs. \[fig:ellipses1\] and \[fig:ellipses2\] we also show what would be the result neglecting the Tevatron measurements.
Fits to reduced Higgs couplings
===============================
Using the results of the previous section, it is straightforward to determine constraints on the couplings of the observed Higgs boson to various particle pairs, assuming only a SM-like Lagrangian structure. As in [@Belanger:2012gc], we define $\cu$, $\cd$ and $\cv$ to be ratios of the $H$ coupling to up-type quarks, down-type quarks and leptons, and vector boson pairs, respectively, relative to that predicted in the case of the SM Higgs boson (with $\CV>0$ by convention). In addition to these tree-level couplings there are also the one-loop induced couplings of the $H$ to $gg$ and $\gam\gam$. Given values for $\cu$, $\cd$ and $\cv$ the contributions of SM particles to the $gg$ and $\gam\gam$ couplings, denoted $\anti\cg$ and $\anti \cp$ respectively, can be computed. We take into account NLO corrections to $\anti\cg$ and $\anti \cp$ as recommended by the LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group [@LHCHiggsCrossSectionWorkingGroup:2012nn]. In particular we include all the available QCD corrections for $C_g$ using `HIGLU` [@Spira:1995mt; @Spira:1996if] and for $C_\gamma$ using `HDECAY` [@Spira:1996if; @Djouadi:1997yw], and we switch off the electroweak corrections. In some of the fits below, we will also allow for additional New Physics contributions to $\cg$ and $\cp$ by writing $\cg=\anti\cg+\dcg$ and $\cp=\anti\cp+\dcp$.
We note that in presenting one- (1D) and two-dimensional (2D) distributions of $\dchisq$, those quantities among $\cu$, $\cd$, $\cv$, $\dcg$ and $\dcp$ not plotted, but that are treated as variables, are being profiled over. The fits presented below will be performed with and without allowing for invisible decays of the Higgs boson. In the latter case, only SM decay modes are present. In the former case, the new decay modes are assumed to produce invisible or undetected particles that would be detected as missing transverse energy at the LHC. A direct search for invisible decays of the Higgs boson have been performed by ATLAS in the $ZH \to \ell^+\ell^- + E_T^{\rm miss}$ channel [@ATLAS-CONF-2013-011] and is implemented in the analysis. Thus, the total width is fully calculable from the set of $C_i$ and ${\cal B}(H \to {\rm invisible})$ in all the cases we consider. (We will come back to this at the end of this section.)
We begin by taking SM values for the tree-level couplings to fermions and vector bosons, $\cu=\cd=\cv=1$, but allow for New Physics contributions to the couplings to $gg$ and $\gam\gam$. The fit results with and without allowing for invisible/unseen Higgs decays are shown in Fig. \[fig:CPadd-CGadd\]. We observe that the SM point of $\dcg=\dcp=0$ is well within the 68% contour with the best fit points favoring a slightly positive (negative) value for $\dcp$ ($\dcg$). Allowing for invisible/unseen decays expands the 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL regions by only a modest amount. This is in contrast to the situation at the end of 2012 [@Belanger:2012gc; @Belanger:2013kya], where some New Physics contribution to both $\dcg$ and $\dcp$ was preferred, and allowing for invisible decays had a large effect; with the higher statistics and with the reduced $\gamma\gamma$ signal strength from CMS [@CMS-PAS-HIG-13-001], $\dcg$ and $\dcp$ are now much more constrained. The best fit is obtained for $\dcg=-0.06$, $\dcp=0.13$, $\brinv\equiv \br({H\to\rm invisible})=0$ and has $\chimin=17.71$ for 21 d.o.f. (degrees of freedom)[^3], as compared to $\chisq=18.95$ with 23 d.o.f. for the SM, so allowing for additional loop contributions does not improve the fit.
![$\Delta \chi^2$ distributions in 1D and 2D for the fit of $\dcg$ and $\dcp$ for $\CU=\CD=\CV=1$. In the 1D plots, the solid (dashed) lines are for the case that invisible/unseen decays are absent (allowed). In the 2D plot, the red, orange and yellow areas are the 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL regions, respectively, assuming invisible decays are absent. The white star marks the best-fit point. The black and grey lines show the 68% and 95% CL contours when allowing for invisible decays. \[fig:CPadd-CGadd\] ](figs/LHCP_CPadd-CGadd/5S.eps "fig:"){width="4.75cm"}![$\Delta \chi^2$ distributions in 1D and 2D for the fit of $\dcg$ and $\dcp$ for $\CU=\CD=\CV=1$. In the 1D plots, the solid (dashed) lines are for the case that invisible/unseen decays are absent (allowed). In the 2D plot, the red, orange and yellow areas are the 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL regions, respectively, assuming invisible decays are absent. The white star marks the best-fit point. The black and grey lines show the 68% and 95% CL contours when allowing for invisible decays. \[fig:CPadd-CGadd\] ](figs/LHCP_CPadd-CGadd/4_5S.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}![$\Delta \chi^2$ distributions in 1D and 2D for the fit of $\dcg$ and $\dcp$ for $\CU=\CD=\CV=1$. In the 1D plots, the solid (dashed) lines are for the case that invisible/unseen decays are absent (allowed). In the 2D plot, the red, orange and yellow areas are the 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL regions, respectively, assuming invisible decays are absent. The white star marks the best-fit point. The black and grey lines show the 68% and 95% CL contours when allowing for invisible decays. \[fig:CPadd-CGadd\] ](figs/LHCP_CPadd-CGadd/4S.eps "fig:"){width="4.75cm"}
Next, we allow $\cu$, $\cd$ and $\cv$ to vary but assume that there is no New Physics in the $gg$ and $\gam\gam$ loops, we take $\dcg=\dcp=0$. Results for this case are shown in Fig. \[fig:CU-CD-CV\]. We observe that, contrary to the situation at the end of 2012 [@Belanger:2012gc], the latest data prefer a positive value of $\cu$ close to 1. This is good news, as a negative sign of $\cu$—in the convention where $m_t$ is positive—is quite problematic in the context of most theoretical models.[^4] (We do not show the distribution for $\cd$ here but just remark that $|\CD|\simeq 1\pm0.2$ with a sign ambiguity following from the weak dependence of the $gg$ and $\gam\gam$ loops on the bottom-quark coupling.) For $\CV$, we find a best-fit value slightly above 1, at $\CV=1.07$, but with the SM-like value of $\cv=1$ lying well within one standard deviation.
![Fit of $\CU$, $\CD$, $\CV$ for $\dcg=\dcp=0$. The plots show the 1D $\dchisq$ distribution as a function of $\cu$ (left) and $\cv$ (right). The solid (dashed) lines are for the case that invisible/unseen decays are absent (allowed). \[fig:CU-CD-CV\] ](figs/LHCP_CU-CD-CV/1S.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}![Fit of $\CU$, $\CD$, $\CV$ for $\dcg=\dcp=0$. The plots show the 1D $\dchisq$ distribution as a function of $\cu$ (left) and $\cv$ (right). The solid (dashed) lines are for the case that invisible/unseen decays are absent (allowed). \[fig:CU-CD-CV\] ](figs/LHCP_CU-CD-CV/3S.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}
Since $\cu<0$ is now disfavored and the sign of $\CD$ is irrelevant, we confine ourselves subsequently to $\cu,\cd>0$. In Fig. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CV\] we show $\dchisq$ distributions in 2D planes confined to this range, still assuming $\dcg=\dcp=0$.
The mild correlation between $\CU$ and $\CD$ in the leftmost plot of Fig. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CV\] follows from the very SM-like signal rates in the $VV$ and $\gamma\gamma$ final states in ggF: varying $\CD$ implies a variation of the partial width $\Gamma(H\to bb)$ which dominates the total width. Hence, the branching fractions $\br(H\to VV)$ and $\br(H\to\gamma\gamma)$ change in the opposite direction, decreasing with increasing total width ( with increasing $\CD$) and vice versa. In order to keep the signal rates close to 1, the ggF production cross section, which is roughly proportional to $ \CU^2$, has to vary in the same direction as $\CD$.
The best fit is obtained for $\CU=0.88$, $\CD=0.94$, $\CV=1.04$, $\cp=1.09$, $\cg=0.88$ (and, in fact, $\brinv=0$). Note that if $\cv>1$ were confirmed, this would imply that the observed Higgs boson must have a significant triplet (or higher representation) component [@Logan:2010en; @Falkowski:2012vh]. Currently the coupling fits are, however, perfectly consistent with SM values. Again, with a $\chimin=17.79$ (for 20 d.o.f.) as compared to $\chisq=18.95$ for the SM, allowing for deviations from the SM does not significantly improve the fit.
![Fit of $\CU>0$, $\CD>0$ and $\CV$ for $\dcg=\dcp=0$. The red, orange and yellow areas are the 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL regions, respectively, assuming invisible decays are absent. The white star marks the best-fit point. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CV\] ](figs/LHCP_CUpos-CDpos-CV/2_1.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}![Fit of $\CU>0$, $\CD>0$ and $\CV$ for $\dcg=\dcp=0$. The red, orange and yellow areas are the 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL regions, respectively, assuming invisible decays are absent. The white star marks the best-fit point. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CV\] ](figs/LHCP_CUpos-CDpos-CV/3_1.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}![Fit of $\CU>0$, $\CD>0$ and $\CV$ for $\dcg=\dcp=0$. The red, orange and yellow areas are the 68%, 95% and 99.7% CL regions, respectively, assuming invisible decays are absent. The white star marks the best-fit point. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CV\] ](figs/LHCP_CUpos-CDpos-CV/6_7.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}
In models where the Higgs sector consists of doublets+singlets only one always obtains $\cv\le1$. Results for this case are shown in Fig. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CVle1\]. Given the slight preference for $\cv>1$ in the previous free-$\cv$ plots, it is no surprise the $\cv=1$ provides the best fit along with $\CU=\cg=0.87$, $\CD=0.88$ and $\cp=1.03$. Of course, the SM is again well within the $68\%$ CL zone.
![As in Fig. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CV\] but for $\CV\leq 1$. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CVle1\] ](figs/LHCP_CUpos-CDpos-CVle1/2_1.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}![As in Fig. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CV\] but for $\CV\leq 1$. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CVle1\] ](figs/LHCP_CUpos-CDpos-CVle1/3_1.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}![As in Fig. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CV\] but for $\CV\leq 1$. \[fig:CUpos-CDpos-CVle1\] ](figs/LHCP_CUpos-CDpos-CVle1/6_7.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}
The general case of free parameters $\cu$, $\cd$, $\cv$, $\dcg$ and $\dcp$ is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:5param\], where we show the 1D $\dchisq$ distributions for these five parameters (each time profiling over the other four parameters). As before, the solid (dashed) lines indicate results not allowing for (allowing for) invisible/unseen decay modes of the Higgs. Allowing for invisible/unseen decay modes again relaxes the $\dchisq$ behavior only modestly. The best fit point always corresponds to $\brinv=0$.
![Five (six) parameter fit of $\CU$, $\CD$, $\CV$, $\dcg$ and $\dcp$; the solid (dashed) curves are those obtained when invisible/unseen decay modes are not allowed (allowed) for. \[fig:5param\] ](figs/LHCP_CUpos-CDpos-CV-CPadd-CGadd/1S "fig:"){width="5cm"}![Five (six) parameter fit of $\CU$, $\CD$, $\CV$, $\dcg$ and $\dcp$; the solid (dashed) curves are those obtained when invisible/unseen decay modes are not allowed (allowed) for. \[fig:5param\] ](figs/LHCP_CUpos-CDpos-CV-CPadd-CGadd/2S "fig:"){width="5cm"}![Five (six) parameter fit of $\CU$, $\CD$, $\CV$, $\dcg$ and $\dcp$; the solid (dashed) curves are those obtained when invisible/unseen decay modes are not allowed (allowed) for. \[fig:5param\] ](figs/LHCP_CUpos-CDpos-CV-CPadd-CGadd/3S "fig:"){width="5cm"}![Five (six) parameter fit of $\CU$, $\CD$, $\CV$, $\dcg$ and $\dcp$; the solid (dashed) curves are those obtained when invisible/unseen decay modes are not allowed (allowed) for. \[fig:5param\] ](figs/LHCP_CUpos-CDpos-CV-CPadd-CGadd/4S "fig:"){width="5cm"}![Five (six) parameter fit of $\CU$, $\CD$, $\CV$, $\dcg$ and $\dcp$; the solid (dashed) curves are those obtained when invisible/unseen decay modes are not allowed (allowed) for. \[fig:5param\] ](figs/LHCP_CUpos-CDpos-CV-CPadd-CGadd/5S "fig:"){width="5cm"}\
An overview of the current status of invisible decays is given in Fig. \[fig:BRinv\], which shows the behavior of $\dchisq$ as a function of $\brinv$ for various different cases of interest:\
a) SM Higgs with allowance for invisible decays — one finds $\brinv<0.09$ (0.19);\
b) $\cu=\cd=\cv=1$ but $\dcp,\dcg$ allowed for — $\brinv< 0.11$ (0.29);\
c) $\cu,\cd,\cv$ free, $\dcp=\dcg=0$, — $\brinv<0.15$ (0.36);\
d) $\cu,\cd$ free, $\cv\leq 1$, $\dcp=\dcg=0$ — $\brinv<0.09$ (0.24);\
e) $\cu,\cd,\cv,\dcg,\dcp$ free — $\brinv<0.16$ (0.38).\
(All $\brinv$ limits are given at 68% (95%) CL.) Thus, while $\brinv$ is certainly significantly limited by the current data set, there remains ample room for invisible/unseen decays. At 95% CL, $\brinv$ as large as $\sim 0.38$ is possible. Here, we remind the reader that the above results are obtained after fitting the $125.5\gev$ data [*and*]{} inputting the experimental results for the $(Z \to \ell^+\ell^-) \;+$ invisible direct searches. When $C_V \leq 1$, $H\to\,$invisible is much more constrained by the global fits to the $H$ properties than by the direct searches for invisible decays, [*cf.*]{} the solid, dashed and dash-dotted lines in Fig. \[fig:BRinv\]. For unconstrained $C_U$, $C_D$ and $C_V$, on the other hand, [*cf.*]{} dotted line and crosses in Fig. \[fig:BRinv\], the limit comes from the direct search for invisible decays in the $ZH$ channel.
![$\Delta\chi^2$ distributions for the branching ratio of invisible Higgs decays for various cases. Solid: SM+invisible. Dashed: varying $\dcg$ and $\dcp$ for $\CU=\CD=\CV=1$. Dotted: varying $\CU$, $\CD$ and $\CV$ for $\dcg=\dcp=0$. Dot-dashed: varying $\CU$, $\CD$ and $\CV\leq 1$ for $\dcg=\dcp=0$. Crosses: varying $\CU$, $\CD$, $\CV$, $\dcg$ and $\dcp$. \[fig:BRinv\] ](figs/LHCP_1d_BRinv_combined.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}\
A comment is in order here. In principle there is a flat direction in the unconstrained LHC Higgs coupling fit when unobserved decay modes are present: setting $\cu = \cd = \cv \equiv C$, so that ratios of rates remain fixed, all the Higgs production$\times$decay rates can be kept fixed to the SM ones by scaling up $C$ while adding a new, unseen decay mode with branching ratio ${\cal B}_{\rm new}$ according to $C^2 = 1/(1 - {\cal B}_{\rm new}$) [@Zeppenfeld:2000td; @Djouadi:2000gu], see also [@Duhrssen:2004cv].[^5] In [@Belanger:2013kya] we found that it is mainly $\cv$ which is critical here, because of the rather well measured ${\rm VBF}\to H\to VV$ channel. Therefore limiting $\cv\le 1$ gives a strong constraint on ${\cal B}_{\rm new}$, similar to the case of truly invisible decays. Concretely we find at 95% CL: [*i)*]{} ${\cal B}_{\rm new}<0.21$ for a SM Higgs with allowance for unseen decays; [*ii)*]{} ${\cal B}_{\rm new}<0.39$ for $\cu=\cd=\cv=1$ but $\dcp,\dcg$ allowed for; and [*iii)*]{} ${\cal B}_{\rm new}<0.31$ for $\cu,\cd$ free, $\cv\leq 1$ and $\dcp=\dcg=0$. For unconstrained $C_U$, $C_D$ and $C_V$, however, there is no limit on ${\cal B}_{\rm new}$.
With this in mind, the global fit we perform here also makes it possible to constrain the Higgs boson’s total decay width, $\Gamma_{\rm tot}$, a quantity which is not directly measurable at the LHC. For SM + invisible decays, we find $\Gamma_{\rm tot}/\Gamma_{\rm tot}^{\rm SM}<1.11$ (1.25) at 68% (95%) CL. Figure \[fig:Rwidth\] shows the $\Delta\chi^2$ as function of $\Gamma_{\rm tot}/\Gamma_{\rm tot}^{\rm SM}$ for the fits of: $\CU$, $\CD$, and $\CV\le1$; $\CU$, $\CD$, and $\CV$ free; and $\CU$, $\CD$, $\CV$, $\dcg$, $\dcp$. The case of $\dcg$, $\dcp$ with $\cu=\cd=\cv=1$ is not shown; without invisible decays we find $\Gamma_{\rm tot}/\Gamma_{\rm tot}^{\rm SM}=[0.98,1.0]$ ($[0.97,1.02]$) at 68% (95%) CL in this case. Allowing for invisible decays this changes to $\Gamma_{\rm tot}/\Gamma_{\rm tot}^{\rm SM}=[0.97,1.14]$, ($[0.96,1.46]$), it is very close to the line for $\CU$, $\CD$, $\CV\le1$ in the right plot of Fig. \[fig:Rwidth\].
![$\Delta\chi^2$ distributions for the total Higgs decay width relative to SM, $\Gamma_{\rm tot}/\Gamma_{\rm tot}^{\rm SM}$, on the left without invisible decays, on the right including $\brinv$ as a free parameter in the fit. The lines are for: $\CU$, $\CD$ and $\CV\le1$ (dotted); $\CU$, $\CD$ and free $\CV$ (dashed); and $\CU$, $\CD$, free $\CV$, $\dcg$, $\dcp$ (solid). \[fig:Rwidth\] ](figs/LHCP_1d_width-woutinv_combined.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}![$\Delta\chi^2$ distributions for the total Higgs decay width relative to SM, $\Gamma_{\rm tot}/\Gamma_{\rm tot}^{\rm SM}$, on the left without invisible decays, on the right including $\brinv$ as a free parameter in the fit. The lines are for: $\CU$, $\CD$ and $\CV\le1$ (dotted); $\CU$, $\CD$ and free $\CV$ (dashed); and $\CU$, $\CD$, free $\CV$, $\dcg$, $\dcp$ (solid). \[fig:Rwidth\] ](figs/LHCP_1d_width-winv_combined.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}
Application to specific models
==============================
So far our fits have been largely model-independent, relying only on assuming the Lagrangian structure of the SM. Let us now apply our fits to some concrete examples of specific models in which there are relations between some of the coupling factors $C_I$.
Two-Higgs-Doublet Models
------------------------
[|c|c|c|c|c|c|]{} & Type I and II & & Higgs & VV & up quarks & down quarks & & up quarks & down quarks & & & & leptons & & leptons $h$ & $\sin(\beta-\alpha)$ & $\cosa/ \sinb$ & $\cosa/ \sinb$ & $\cosa/\sinb$ & $-{\sina/\cosb}$ $H$ & $\cos(\beta-\alpha)$ & $\sina/ \sinb$ & $\sina/ \sinb$ & $\sina/ \sinb$ & $\cosa/\cosb$ $A$ & 0 & $\cotb$ & $-\cotb$ & $\cotb$ & $\tanb$
As a first example, we consider Two-Higgs-Doublet Models (2HDMs) of Type I and Type II (see also [@Altmannshofer:2012ar; @Chang:2012ve; @Chen:2013kt; @Celis:2013rcs; @Grinstein:2013npa; @Coleppa:2013dya; @Chen:2013rba; @Eberhardt:2013uba; @Craig:2013hca; @Maiani:2013nga] for other 2HDM analyses in the light of recent LHC data). In both cases, the basic parameters describing the coupling of either the light $h$ or heavy $H$ CP-even Higgs boson are only two: $\alpha$ (the CP-even Higgs mixing angle) and $\tanb=v_u/v_d$, where $v_u$ and $v_d$ are the vacuum expectation values of the Higgs field that couples to up-type quarks and down-type quarks, respectively. The Type I and Type II models are distinguished by the pattern of their fermionic couplings as given in Table \[tab:2hdm-couplings\]. The SM limit for the $h$ ($H$) in the case of both Type I and Type II models corresponds to $\alpha=\beta-\pi/2$ ($\alpha=\beta$). We implicitly assume that there are no contributions from non-SM particles to the loop diagrams for $\cp$ and $\cg$. In particular, this means our results correspond to the case where the charged Higgs boson, whose loop might contribute to $\cp$, is heavy.
The results of the 2HDM fits are shown in Fig. \[fig:2hdm\] for the case that the state near 125 GeV is the lighter CP-even $h$. To be precise, the top row shows $\Delta\chi^2$ contours in the $\beta$ versus $\cos(\beta-\alpha)$ plane while the bottom row shows the 1D projection of $\Delta\chi^2$ onto $\cos(\beta-\alpha)$ with $\beta$ profiled over. For identifying the heavier $H$ with the state near 125 GeV, replace $\cos(\beta-\alpha)$ by $\sin(\beta-\alpha)$ in the 1D plots. (Since the $\sim 125\gev$ state clearly couples to $WW,ZZ$ we do not consider the case where the $A$ is the only state at $\sim 125\gev$.)
![Fits for the 2HDM Type I (left) and type II (right) models for $m_h=125.5$ GeV. See text for details. \[fig:2hdm\] ](figs/LHCP_2HDM_I/cosba_b.eps "fig:"){width="6.1cm"}![Fits for the 2HDM Type I (left) and type II (right) models for $m_h=125.5$ GeV. See text for details. \[fig:2hdm\] ](figs/LHCP_2HDM_II/cosba_b.eps "fig:"){width="6.1cm"}\
![Fits for the 2HDM Type I (left) and type II (right) models for $m_h=125.5$ GeV. See text for details. \[fig:2hdm\] ](figs/LHCP_2HDM_I/cos_c.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}![Fits for the 2HDM Type I (left) and type II (right) models for $m_h=125.5$ GeV. See text for details. \[fig:2hdm\] ](figs/LHCP_2HDM_II/cos_c.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}
In the case of the Type I model, we note a rather broad valley along the SM limit of $\cos(\beta-\alpha)=0$, which is rather flat in $\tan\beta$; the 68% (95%) CL region extends to $\cos(\beta-\alpha) = [-0.31,\, 0.19]$ ($[-0.45,\,0.44]$). The best fit point lies at $\beta\simeq0.02\pi$ and $\alpha\simeq 1.52\pi$ with $\chimin=18.01$ for 21 d.o.f. (to be compared to the SM $\chimin=18.95$). Requiring $\tan\beta>1$, this moves to $\beta\simeq0.25\pi$, $\tan\beta$ just above 1, with $\alpha\simeq 1.71\pi$ and $\chimin=18.08$. At 99.7% CL, there is also a small island at $\cos(\beta-\alpha)\approx -0.5$ and $\tan\beta<1$, which corresponds to the $\CU<0$ solution. (This is responsible for the splitting of the two lines at $\cos(\beta-\alpha)\lesssim-0.5$ in the 1D plot.)
In contrast, for the Type II model, we observe two narrow 68% CL valleys in the $\beta$ versus $\cos(\beta-\alpha)$ plane, one along the SM solution with the minimum again very close to $\beta\approx 0$ and a second banana-shaped one with $\tan\beta\gtrsim 5$ (3) and $\cos(\beta-\alpha)\lesssim 0.4$ (0.6) at 68% (95%) CL. This second valley is the degenerate solution with $\CD\approx-1$; it does not appear in Fig. 3 of [@Craig:2013hca] because there $\CU,\CD>0$ was implicitly assumed. The best fit point is very similar to that for Type I: $\beta\simeq0.01\pi$ ($0.25\pi$) and $\alpha\simeq 1.5\pi$ ($1.75\pi$) with $\chimin=18.68$ ($18.86$) for 21 d.o.f. for arbitrary $\tan\beta$ ($\tan\beta>1$). Again, there is an additional valley very close to $\beta\sim 0$, extending into the negative $\cos(\beta-\alpha)$ direction, which however does not have a 68% CL region. In 1D, we find $\cos(\beta-\alpha) = [-0.11,\,0.50]$ at 95% CL.
Let us end the 2HDM discussion with some comments regarding the “other” scalar and/or the pseudoscalar $A$. To simplify the discussion, we will focus on the $m_h=125.5\gev$ case. First, we note that if the $H$ and $A$ are heavy enough (having masses greater than roughly $600\gev$) then their properties are unconstrained by LHC data and the global fits for the $h$ will be unaffected. If they are lighter then it becomes interesting to consider constraints that might arise from not having observed them. Such constraints will, of course, depend upon their postulated masses, both of which are independent parameters in the general 2HDM. For purposes of discussion, let us neglect the possibly very important $H,A\to hh$ decays. The most relevant final states are then $H\to VV$ and $H,A\to \tau\tau$.
With regard to observing the heavy Higgs in the $H \to VV$ channels, we note that for the $H$ our fits predict the $VV$ coupling to be very much suppressed in a large part (but not all) of the 95% CL allowed region. While this implies suppression of the VBF production mode for the $H$ it does not affect the ggF production mode and except for very small $VV$ coupling the branching ratio of the $H$ to $VV$ final states declines only modestly. As a result, the limits in the $ZZ\to4\ell$ channel [@ATLAS-CONF-2013-013], which already extend down to about $0.1\times$SM in the mass range $m_H\approx 180-400$ GeV, and to about $0.8\times$SM at $m_H\approx 600$ GeV, can be quite relevant. For instance, for a heavy scalar $H$ of mass $m_H=300$ GeV, in the 95% CL region of our fits the signal strength in the $gg\to H\to ZZ$ channel ranges from 0 to 5.4 in Type I and from 0 to 33 in Type II. For $m_H=600$ GeV, we find $\mu(gg\to H\to ZZ)\lesssim 1.1$ (0.6) in Type I (II). Further, at the best-fit point for $\tanb>1$, $\mu(gg\to H\to ZZ)=1.10~(0.08)$ at $m_H=300~(600)\gev$ in Type I and $\mu(gg\to H\to ZZ)=0.12~(0.001)$ at $m_H=300~(600)\gev$ in Type II, which violate the nominal limits at $m_H=300\gev$ in both models. Note, however, that it is possible to completely evade the $4\ell$ bounds if $H\rightarrow hh$ decays are dominant. Moreover, both the $H$ and the $A$, which has no tree-level couplings to $VV$, may show up in the $\tau\tau$ final state through ggF. Limits from ATLAS [@Aad:2012yfa] range (roughly) from $\mu(gg\to H,A \to \tau\tau)$ $< 2500$ at $m_{H,A}=300\gev$ to $<21000$ at $m_{H,A}=500\gev$. These may seem rather weak limits, but in fact the signal strengths for $H\to\tau\tau$ and $A\to\tau\tau$ (relative to $H_{\rm SM}$) can be extremely large. In the case of the $A$, this is because the $A\to\tau\tau$ branching ratio is generically much larger than the $H_{\rm SM}\to\tau\tau$ branching ratio, the latter being dominated by $VV$ final states at high mass. In the case of the $H$, the same statement applies whenever its $VV$ coupling is greatly suppressed. We find that only the Type I model with $\tan\beta>1$ completely evades the $\tau\tau$ bounds throughout the 95% CL region of the $h$ fit since both the fermionic couplings of $H$ and $A$ are suppressed by large $\tan\beta$. In the Type II model, $gg\to A\to\tau\tau$ satisfies the $\tau\tau$ bounds at 95% CL, but $gg\to H\to\tau\tau$ can give a very large signal. However, the best fit $h$ point for $\tanb>1$ in Type II predicts $\mu(gg\to H\to\tau\tau)$ values of $674$ and $6.4$ at $300$ and $500\gev$, both of which satisfy the earlier-stated bounds. We also stress that no bounds are available in the $\tau\tau$ channel above 500 GeV.
Clearly, a full study is needed to ascertain the extent to which limits in the $H\to ZZ$ and $H,A\to \tau\tau$ channels will impact the portion of the $\alpha$ — $\beta$ plane allowed at 95% CL after taking into account Higgs-to-Higgs decays, which are typically substantial. This is beyond the scope of this paper and will be presented elsewhere [@2hdmyun].
Inert Doublet Model
-------------------
In the Inert Doublet Model (IDM) [@Deshpande:1977rw], a Higgs doublet $\tilde H_2$ which is odd under a $Z_2$ symmetry is added to the SM leading to four new particles: a scalar $\tilde{H}$, a pseudoscalar $\tilde{A}$, and two charged states $\tilde{H}^\pm$ in addition to the SM-like Higgs $h$.[^6] All other fields being even, this discrete symmetry not only guarantees that the lightest inert Higgs particle is stable, and thus a suitable dark matter candidate [@Ma:2006km; @Barbieri:2006dq; @LopezHonorez:2006gr; @Krawczyk:2013jta], but also prevents the coupling of any of the inert doublet particles to pairs of SM particles. Therefore, the only modification to the SM-like Higgs couplings is through the charged Higgs contribution to $\Delta C_\gamma$. The scalar potential of the IDM is given by $$\begin{aligned}
V&=&\mu_1^2 |H_1|^2 + \mu_2^2 |\tilde{H}_2|^2 +\lambda_1 |H_1|^4+\lambda_2|\tilde{H}_2|^4+\lambda_3|H_1|^2 |\tilde{H}_2|^2\nonumber\\
& & +\, \lambda_4 |H_1^\dagger \tilde{H}_2|^2
+\frac{\lambda_5}{2} \left[ \left( H_1^\dagger \tilde{H}_2 \right)^2 + {\rm h.c.}\right] \,,\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu_2^2>-v^2$ is required in order that $\tilde H_2^0$ not acquire a non-zero vev (which would violate the symmetry needed for $\tilde H$ to be a dark matter particle). The crucial interactions implied by this potential are those coupling the light Higgs $h$ associated with the $H_1$ field to pairs of Higgs bosons coming from the $\tilde H_2$ field. These are given by: $-(2 m_W/g) \lambda_3 h \tilde{H}^+ \tilde{H}^-$, $-(2 m_W/g) \lambda_L h \tilde{H} \tilde{H}$ and $-(2 m_W/g) \lambda_S h \tilde{A} \tilde{A}$ for the charged, scalar and pseudo scalar, respectively, where $$\lambda_{L,S}= \frac{1}{2}(\lambda_3+\lambda_4\pm\lambda_5)\,.$$ With these abbreviations, the Higgs masses at tree-level can be written as m\^2\_h = \_1\^2 + 3\_1v\^2, m\^2\_[H,(A)]{} = \_2\^2 + \_[L(S)]{}v\^2, m\^2\_[H\^]{} = \_2\^2 + \_3v\^2. \[eq:idm-mh\] Moreover, the couplings to the inert charged and neutral Higgses are related by $$\frac{\lambda_3}{2}=\frac{1}{v^2}\left( m_{\tilde{H}^+}^2-m_{\tilde{H}}^2 \right) + \lambda_L \,.
\label{eq:lambda3}$$ It is important to note that a priori $m^2_{\tilde H,\tilde A,\tilde H^+}$ are each free parameters and could be small enough that $h$ decays to a pair of the dark sector states would be present and possibly very important. The $h\to \tilde H\tilde H$ and $h\to \tilde A\tilde A$ decays would be invisible and contribute to $\brinv$ for the $h$; $h\to \tilde H^+\tilde H^-$ decays would generally be visible so long as the $\tilde H^+$ was not closely degenerate with the $\tilde H$.
Theoretical constraints impose some conditions on the couplings. Concretely, we assume a generic perturbativity upper bound $|\lambda_i|<4\pi$, which, when coupled with the vacuum stability and perturbative unitarity conditions on the potential, leads to $\lambda_3>-1.5$ and $\mu_2^2\gtrsim-4.5\times 10^4$ GeV$^2$ [@Krawczyk:2013jta; @Swiezewska:2012ej]. We also adopt a lower bound of $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}>70$ GeV, as derived from chargino limits at LEP [@Pierce:2007ut; @Lundstrom:2008ai]. Note however that LHC exclusions for the SM Higgs do not apply to members of the inert doublet because [*i)*]{} they do not couple to fermions and [*ii)*]{} trilinear and quartic couplings to gauge bosons involve two inert Higgses.
Let us now turn to the fit results.[^7] First, we consider the case where $m_{\tilde{H}},m_{\tilde{A}}>m_h/2$—the only deviation from the SM then arises from the charged Higgs contribution to $\Delta C_\gamma$ parametrized by $\lambda_3$ and $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}$. The general one-parameter fit to the Higgs couplings leads to the bounds $-0.02~(-0.13) <\Delta C_\gamma < 0.17~(0.26)$ at $1\sigma$ $(2\sigma)$. The corresponding contours in the $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}$ versus $\lambda_3$ plane are shown in Fig. \[fig:idm1\]. Note that the 3rd equality of Eq. (\[eq:idm-mh\]) and the lower bound of $\mu_2^2\gtrsim-4.5\times 10^4$ GeV$^2 $ imply an upper bound on $\lam_3$ for any given $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}$. This excludes the large-$\lam_3$ region when $m_{\tilde H^+}\gsim 130\gev$. The impact of the global fit is confined to the region $m_{\tilde H^+}\lsim 130\gev$ and $|\lam_3|\lsim 2$ (at 95% CL). The best fit point lies at $m_{\tilde H^+}=170$ GeV and $\lam_3=-1.47$.
![Contours of 68%, 95%, 99.7% CL in the $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}$ versus $\lambda_3$ plane for the IDM assuming that there are no invisible decays of the SM-like Higgs $h$. \[fig:idm1\] ](figs/LHCP_IDM/66_67_zoom.eps){width="6cm"}
Second, we consider the case where the inert scalar is light and examine how invisible $h\to \tilde H\tilde H$ decays further constrain the parameters. The bounds on the invisible width actually lead to a strong constraint on the coupling $\lambda_L$. The $1\sigma$ ($2\sigma$) allowed range is roughly $\lambda_L \times 10^3=\pm 4$ ($\pm 7$) for $m_{\tilde{H}}=10~{\rm GeV}$. This bound weakens only when the invisible decay is suppressed by kinematics; for $m_{\tilde{H}}=60~{\rm GeV}$, we find $\lambda_L\times 10^{3}=[-9,7]$ ($[-13,12]$) at $1\sigma$ ($2\sigma$). The $\Delta\chi^2$ distributions of $\lambda_L$ for $m_{\tilde{H}}=10$ and 60 GeV are shown in the left panel in Fig. \[fig:idm2\], with $m_{\tilde H^\pm}$ profiled over from 70 GeV to about 650 GeV (the concrete upper limit being determined by the perturbativity constraint). This strong constraint on $\lambda_L$ implies that it can be neglected in Eq. (\[eq:lambda3\]) and that the charged Higgs coupling $\lambda_3$ is directly related to $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}$ for a given $m_{\tilde H}$, as illustrated in the middle panel of Fig. \[fig:idm2\] (here, the mass of the inert scalar is profiled over in the range $m_{\tilde H} \in [1,\,60]$ GeV). As a result the value of $C_\gamma$ is also strongly constrained from the upper bound on the invisible width. For example for $m_{\tilde{H}}=10$ GeV, we find that $C_\gamma =[0.940,0.945]$ at 68% CL. Note that because $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}> m_{\tilde{H}}$ is needed in order to have a neutral dark matter candidate, $\lambda_3$ is always positive and therefore $C_\gamma<1$. To approach $C_\gamma\simeq 1$, the inert Higgs mass has to be close to the kinematic threshold, $m_{\tilde H}\to m_h/2$ so that the constraint on $\lambda_L$ is relaxed. For illustration, see the right panel in Fig. \[fig:idm2\]. These results imply that with an improved accuracy on the measurements of the Higgs coupling, for example showing that $C_\gamma> 0.95$, it would be possible to exclude light dark matter ($m_{\tilde H}<10$ GeV) in the IDM. Another consequence is that for a given $m_{\tilde H}$ the perturbativity limit $\lambda_3<4\pi$ implies an upper bound on the charged Higgs mass. For $m_{\tilde H} \in [1,\,60]$ GeV we obtain $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}<620$ GeV.
![Left panel: $\Delta\chi^2$ distribution of $\lambda_L$ for $m_{\tilde H}=10$ GeV (full line) and 60 GeV (dashed line) with $m_{\tilde{H^+}}$ profiled over its whole allowed range. Middle panel: relation between $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}$ and $\lambda_3$ with $m_{\tilde H}$ profiled over from 1 to 60 GeV. Right panel: $\Delta\chi^2$ as function of $C_\gamma$ for $m_{\tilde H}=10$ GeV (full line) and 60 GeV (dashed line) with $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}$ profiled over. \[fig:idm2\] ](figs/LHCP_IDM_inv/laL_10_60.eps "fig:"){width="5.2cm"} ![Left panel: $\Delta\chi^2$ distribution of $\lambda_L$ for $m_{\tilde H}=10$ GeV (full line) and 60 GeV (dashed line) with $m_{\tilde{H^+}}$ profiled over its whole allowed range. Middle panel: relation between $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}$ and $\lambda_3$ with $m_{\tilde H}$ profiled over from 1 to 60 GeV. Right panel: $\Delta\chi^2$ as function of $C_\gamma$ for $m_{\tilde H}=10$ GeV (full line) and 60 GeV (dashed line) with $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}$ profiled over. \[fig:idm2\] ](figs/LHCP_IDM_inv/la3_MCH_1-60p.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"} ![Left panel: $\Delta\chi^2$ distribution of $\lambda_L$ for $m_{\tilde H}=10$ GeV (full line) and 60 GeV (dashed line) with $m_{\tilde{H^+}}$ profiled over its whole allowed range. Middle panel: relation between $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}$ and $\lambda_3$ with $m_{\tilde H}$ profiled over from 1 to 60 GeV. Right panel: $\Delta\chi^2$ as function of $C_\gamma$ for $m_{\tilde H}=10$ GeV (full line) and 60 GeV (dashed line) with $m_{\tilde{H}^\pm}$ profiled over. \[fig:idm2\] ](figs/LHCP_IDM_inv/CP_10_60.eps "fig:"){width="5cm"}
Finally note that the case where $\tilde{A}$ is the lightest neutral state and $m_{\tilde{A}}< m_h/2$ is analogous to the $\tilde H$ case just discussed, with $m_{\tilde{H}}\rightarrow
m_{\tilde{A}}$ and $\lambda_L \rightarrow \lambda_S$ and leads to analogous conclusions. Analyses of the Higgs sector of the Inert Doublet Model were also performed recently in [@Krawczyk:2013jta; @Goudelis:2013uca; @Arhrib:2012ia; @Gustafsson:2012aj; @Swiezewska:2012eh].
Triplet Higgs model
-------------------
In this section we consider the model of [@Georgi:1985nv] which combines a single Higgs doublet field with $Y=0$ and $Y=\pm 1$ triplet fields in such a way that custodial symmetry is preserved at tree level. The phenomenology of this model was developed in detail in [@Gunion:1989ci; @Englert:2013zpa]. In this model, the neutral doublet and triplet fields acquire vacuum expectation values given by $\vev{\phi^0}=a/\sqrt 2$ and $\vev{\chi^0}=\vev{\xi^0}=b$, respectively. It is the presence of the two triplet fields and their neutral members having the same vev, $b$, that guarantees $\rho=1$ at tree level. The value of $v^2\equiv a^2+8b^2=(246\gev)^2$ is determined by the $W,Z$ masses. However, the relative magnitude of $a$ and $b$ is a parameter of the model. The relative mixture is defined by the doublet-triplet mixing angle $\theta_H$ with cosine and sine given by $ c_H ={a\over\sqrt{a^2+8b^2}}$ and $s_H= \sqrt{{8b^2\over a^2+8b^2}}$. The angle $\theta_H$ is reminiscent of the $\beta$ angle of a 2HDM. Just like $\beta$, $\theta_H$ can be taken to lie in the 1st quadrant so that both $c_H$ and $s_H$ are positive.
In this model, it is most natural to choose a Higgs sector potential that preserves the custodial symmetry. ln this case, the Higgs eigenstates comprise a five-plet, a triplet and two singlets, $\hone$ and $\honepr$. The Higgs bosons of the five-plet couple only to vector boson pairs and those of the triplet couple only to fermion pairs. Further, the neutral members of the five-plet and the triplet cannot mix (without violating the custodial symmetry). As a result, they cannot describe the Higgs-boson like state seen at the LHC. In contrast, the $\hone$ and $\honepr$ can mix. Further, their reduced couplings are given by C\_F()=[1c\_H]{},C\_V()=c\_H,C\_F()=0,C\_V()=[223]{}s\_H, where all fermionic couplings scale with the common factor $C_F$. We see that in the limit $c_H\to 1$ the $\hone$ looks exactly like the SM Higgs boson and the $\honepr$ has no tree-level couplings. More generally, from these expressions, it is clear that only a Higgs state that is primarily $\hone$ can provide the SM-like signal rates that typify the $\sim 125.5\gev$ state observed at the LHC.
The mixing of the $\hone$ and $\honepr$ is determined by the mass-squared matrix: \^2\_[,]{}= (
[cc]{} c\_H\^2|\_[13]{} & s\_Hc\_H|\_3 s\_Hc\_H|\_3 & s\_H\^2|\_[23]{}
)v\^2 , \[monematrix\] where we have defined |\_[13]{}8(\_1+\_3),|\_[23]{}3(\_2+\_3),|\_[3]{}26 \_3, \[lambardefs\] where $\lam_{1,2,3}$ are couplings appearing in the full Higgs sector potential (see [@Gunion:1989ci]), with $\lam_1+\lam_3>0$ and $\lam_2+\lam_3>0$ required for stability in the asymptotic $\phi$ and $\chi$ directions, respectively, and $\lam_1\lam_2+\lam_1\lam_3+\lam_2\lam_3>0$ required for positive mass-squared for the mass eigenstates coming from the $\hone$–$\honepr$ sector. Clearly, the mixing between $\hone$ and $\honepr$ vanishes in the limit of $\lam_3\rta 0$. More generally, the above mass-squared matrix will be diagonalized by a rotation matrix specified by an angle for which we use the 2HDM-like notation, $\alpha$. We define $\alpha$ using the convention in which the Higgs boson mass eigenstates are given by H=+, H’=-+. We can solve for the $\bar\lam$’s in terms of $m_H^2$ and $m_{H'}^2$ and the mixing angle $\alpha$: |\_[13]{}=[m\_H\^2\^2+m\_[H’]{}\^2\^2\^2v\^2]{},|\_[23]{}=[m\_H\^2\^2+m\_[H’]{}\^2\^2\^2v\^2]{}, |\_3 = [(m\_H\^2-m\_[H’]{}\^2)v\^2]{}, valid regardless of the relative size of $m_H^2$ and $\mhpr^2$.
As regards the masses of the triplet members and of the five-plet members, we have degeneracy at tree-level within the two representations with m\_[H\_5]{}\^2=3(\_5 \^2+\_4 \^2)v\^2,m\_[H\_3]{}\^2=\_4 v\^2, \[mhfivethree\] implying that these masses can be chosen independently of the $\hone$–$\honepr$ sector.
The couplings of the $H$ relative to the SM are: C\_F=,C\_V=+[223]{}. \[tripcoup\] Note that if $\sh$ is sizable, then $C_V$ will be enhanced relative the SM value of $1$ and the fermonic couplings will also be enhanced. As noted earlier, the angle $\theta_H$ can be chosen to be in the first quadrant: $0\leq \theta_H\leq \pi/2$. For a full range of possible phenomenology, we must explore $0\leq \alpha\leq 2\pi$. In passing, we note that if we require $C_F=1$ then $\cosa=\ch$, and plugging into the expression for $\cv$ we find that $\ch^2=1$ is required if we demand also that $C_V=1$.
The interesting question we want to answer is what does the LHC data allow for $\theta_H$ and $\alpha$. The result is shown in Fig. \[fig:tripletH\], on the left in the $\theta_H$ versus $\alpha$ plane and on the right in the $\CV$ versus $\cf$ plane. As expected, the preferred region lies at small $\alpha$ and small $\theta_H$, roughly $\alpha \in [0,\,\pi/4]$ and $\theta_H \in [0,\,0.1\pi]$, leading to a very SM-like picture in the $\CV$ versus $\cf$ plane.
![Fit for the Georgi–Machacek triplet model [@Georgi:1985nv] assuming that $H=\cosa \hone+\sina\honepr$ is the observed state at $125.5$ GeV. (The right plot is also valid for 2HDMs of Type I.) See text for details. \[fig:tripletH\] ](figs/LHCP_triplet/1_2_newrange.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}![Fit for the Georgi–Machacek triplet model [@Georgi:1985nv] assuming that $H=\cosa \hone+\sina\honepr$ is the observed state at $125.5$ GeV. (The right plot is also valid for 2HDMs of Type I.) See text for details. \[fig:tripletH\] ](figs/LHCP_triplet/1_3.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}
At the best-fit point, $\alpha\sim 0.2\pi$, $\theta_H\sim 0.07\pi$, and taking $m_{H'}=m_H/2$ (so as to avoid $H\to \hpr\hpr$ decays, see below), we find: |\_[13]{}\~0.21,|\_[23]{}\~2.93,|\_3 \~0.42, perfectly consistent with the vacuum stability conditions given earlier and with perturbativity for the couplings themselves. As $m_{H'}$ increases, $\bar\lam_{23}$ increases (when holding $\alpha$ and $\theta_H$ at their best-fit values). For example, at $\mhpr=400\gev$, we have $\bar\lam_{13}=1.14$, $\bar\lam_{23}=38.25$ and $\bar\lam_3=-5.32$. From we see that this is still within the perturbative limits defined as $|\lam_i|<4\pi$.
We have seen that the SM-like nature of the observed $125.5\gev$ state requires small $\theta_H$ and $\alpha$, implying that the $H$ state will be mostly $\hone$ and that the $H'$ state will be mostly $\honepr$. Further, from and the above results for the $\bar\lam_i$ we see that it is most natural for the mass of the $H'$ to be smaller than the mass of the $H$ for moderate values of the $\lam_i$. This brings up the possibility that $H\to H'H'$ decays could be possible. If present, they would significantly deplete the SM decay modes of the $H$ and the fit to the data would be bad. The $HH'H' $ coupling is given by (using Eq. (2.21) of [@Gunion:1989ci] and the notation $\ca\equiv\cos\alpha$, $\sa\equiv \sin\alpha$) -2 H H’\^2 v . At the best fit point, the coefficient of $HH'^2$ is $\sim -0.57v$ for $\mhpr=m_H/2$, falling slowly as $\mhpr$ decreases. Since this is a large coupling, $\br(H\to H'H')$ would be large at the best-fit point if this decay is allowed. Thus, our fitting results must be taken to apply only to the situation where $\mhpr>m_H/2$. As discussed above, this presents no particular problem in the context of the model.
There are also couplings of the $H$ to pairs of five-plet or triplet members (Eq. (2.22) of [@Gunion:1989ci]). Thus, to avoid the associated decays of the $H$ we need to require $\mhfive>m_H/2$ and $\mhthree>m_H/2$, as shows is easily arranged for appropriate choices of (the independent parameters) $\lam_4$ and $\lam_5$. In fact, experimental limits on the charged Higgs members of the five-plet and triplet from LEP [@Abbiendi:2013hk] are of order $80\gev$ and from LHC of order $120\gev$ [@Chatrchyan:2012vca] assuming decay to $\tau^+\nu$. Limits on the doubly-charged Higgs of the 5-plet from the LHC [@CMS:double] are of order $300\gev$ (for decays to two charged leptons). Thus it seems certain that the (degenerate) masses of all the five-plet and all the triplet Higgses are necessarily $>m_H/2$. Note that this automatically means that the $H\to \hthree Z$ and $H\to \hthreepm\wmp$ decays which could be significant (see Eq. (2.15) of [@Gunion:1989ci]) will also be forbidden.
Of course, it is certainly interesting to consider the $H'$ itself. Its couplings relative to the SM are C\_F\^=-,C\_V\^=[223]{}-. \[tripcoupHprime\] For small $\alpha$ and $\theta_H$, both will be small — the $H'$ will be weakly coupled to both fermions and vector bosons. This is illustrated by plotting the preferred regions in the $C_V^{\,\prime}$ versus $C_F^{\,\prime}$ plane, displayed in Fig. \[fig:triplet-alt\] (where we are assuming, as above, that $H\to H'H'$ decays are forbidden).
![Fit of $C_V^{\,\prime}$ versus $C_F^{\,\prime}$ of the $H'$ in the Georgi–Machacek triplet Higgs model with $m_H=125.5$ GeV. The regions above and below the dashed lines are excluded by LEP constraints for $m_{H'}=100$ GeV. \[fig:triplet-alt\] ](figs/LHCP_triplet/CF2_CV2.eps){width="6cm"}
In the mass region $\mhpr \in[m_H/2,m_H]$ only LEP2 data could potentially yield direct constraints on the $\hpr$. For the lower portion of this mass range, $\epem\to Z^*\to ZH'$ limits are significant and would eliminate some portion of the larger $|\cv'|$ region of Fig. \[fig:triplet-alt\]. Using Table 14 of [@Schael:2006cr] and noting that $\br(H' \to b\anti b)$ will be approximately the same as for a SM Higgs boson, we see that $\cv'^2$ is limited to $\lsim 0.028$ at $\mhpr \sim 63\gev$ rising to $\lsim 0.044$ at $\mhpr=80\gev$ and $\lsim 0.24$ at $\mhpr=100\gev$. Thus, for the plot of Fig. \[fig:triplet-alt\] to not conflict with LEP2 95% CL limits over the full $68\%$ ($95\%$) CL regions of the plot would require $\mhpr>100\gev$ ($>112\gev$). For the best fit point, the LEP constraints are obeyed so long as $\mhpr>85\gev$.
The fact that the $\hpr \hthree Z$ coupling is large (in fact, enhanced) for small $\theta_H$ will imply constraints coming from $\epem\to Z^* \to \hpr \hthree$ on the lower $\hpr$ masses should $\mhthree$ be small enough. For the $\mhpr=85\gev$ lower bound associated with the best-fit point (see above), Table 18 of [@Schael:2006cr] shows that $\mhthree>110\gev$ is required, whereas for $\mhpr$ close to $m_H$, there are no constraints for any $\mhthree>m_H/2$. In any case, all such constraints are avoided if $\mhthree$ is above $m_H$, as easily arranged given , and almost guaranteed given the strong limits on its degenerate charged Higgs partner discussed above.
Of course, to avoid LEP2 limits on the $\hpr$ the easiest choice is to take $\mhpr>m_H$. In this region, LHC constraints derived from the $ZZ\to 4\ell$ channel must be examined. To do so, we need to first recall that $\mu(X\to H \to 4\ell)$ scales as $C_X^2\br(H\to ZZ)/ \br (H_{\rm SM} \to ZZ)$, where $X=$ ggF or VBF. Even though $\cv'^2$ is typically suppressed, $\cv'^2\sim 0.06$ at the best fit point for the $H$, since both the partial width and total width are typically dominated by the $VV$ final state $\br(H\to ZZ)/ \br (H_{\rm SM} \to ZZ)$ is typically of order 1. In this approximation $\mu({\rm VBF}\to H'\to ZZ)$ will be suppressed because of the suppressed $\cv'^2$ and $\mu({\rm ggF}\to H'\to ZZ)$ will be suppressed by the small $C_F'^2$ values. Thus, except for the large $\cv'$ region of Fig. \[fig:triplet-alt\], we expect that the LHC bounds are satisfied for any $\mhpr>m_H$. Further, $\hpr\to 4\ell$ estimates should also take into account $\hpr\to HH$ decays, present when $\mhpr>2m_H$. These decays would deplete the $4\ell$ channel, making it easier to satisfy the $4\ell$ constraints. LHC constraints on the $HH$ type final state are not currently available from ATLAS and CMS. Finally, the $H'\to\tau\tau$ partial width will not be enhanced in this model since $|C_F'|<1$ (see Fig. \[fig:triplet-alt\]). Coupled with the reduced ggF rate, this will mean (unlike the 2HDM models) that the constraints from this channel will not impact the 95% CL region of the $H$ fit even before allowing for $\hpr\to HH$ decays.
Conclusions
===========
Using all publicly available results from the LHC and Tevatron experiments, we determined combined likelihood ellipses for the Higgs signal around $125.5$ GeV in the (ggF+ttH) versus (VBF+VH) production plane for various independent final states: $\gam\gam$, $ZZ$, $WW$, $\tau\tau$ and $b\anti b$. We presented parameterizations of these ellipses that should be of general utility for exploring different types of models.
Any model in which the Lagrangian structure has a SM-like form can be parameterized via scaling factors, $\cu$, $\cd$ and $\cv$, for the up-quark, down-quark, lepton and vector boson couplings (relative to SM values), respectively. Additional New Physics contributions to the one-loop gluon and photon couplings can be allowed for by writing scaling factors for the $gg$ and $\gam\gam$ couplings in the form $C_g=\overline \cg+\dcg$ and $C_\gam=\overline C_\gam+\dcp$ where the $\overline C_{g,\gam}$ values are those predicted for given $\cu$, $\cd$ and $\cv$ using SM particle loops only. We can also allow for invisible/unseen decay modes of the Higgs by adding an invisible component to Higgs decays parameterized by $\brinv$. In terms of these input parameters, the $\chisq$ associated with each ellipse can be calculated. In this way, we were able to explore the behavior of the total $\chisq$ as a function of any one parameter (profiling over the other parameters that were allowed to vary freely in a given case) and also to determine the 68%, 95% and 99.7% contours in various 2-D planes of any two of the freely varying parameters.
The most general fits considered were those in which $\cu,\cd,\cv,\dcg,\dcp$ were all allowed to vary freely. If there are no unseen (as opposed to truly invisible) decay modes of the Higgs, one finds that the observed $125.5\gev$ state prefers to have quite SM-like couplings whether or not $\brinv=0$ is imposed — more constrained fits, for example taking $\dcg=\dcp=0$ while allowing $\cu,\cd,\cv$ to vary, inevitably imply that the other parameters must lie even closer to their SM values.
Allowing for invisible decays of the $125.5\gev$ state through $\brinv>0$ does not change the best-fit parameter values but does widen the $\dchisq$ distributions somewhat leading to important implications, , for decays into dark matter particles. In particular, we found that at 95% CL there is still considerable room for such Higgs decays, up to $\brinv\sim 0.38$ when $\cu,\cd,\cv,\dcg,\dcp$ are all allowed to vary independently of one another. In comparison, a fit for which $\cu,\cd$ are allowed to vary freely, but $\cv\leq 1$ is required (as appropriate for any doublets+singlets model) and $\dcg=\dcp=0$ is imposed, yields $\brinv\lsim 0.24$ at 95% CL. Even requiring completely SM couplings for the Higgs ($\cu=\cd=\cv=1$, $\dcg=\dcp=0$) still allows $\brinv\leq 0.19$ at 95% CL. It is worthwhile noting that for $\cv \leq 1$, the limits on $\brinv$ from global coupling fits are currently more constraining than those from direct searches for invisible decays, , in the $ZH\to\ell^+\ell^- + E_T^{\rm miss}$ mode; thus for $\cv \leq 1$ the limits on merely unseen ( not strictly invisible) decays are similar to the ones on $\brinv$.
As part of the fitting procedure, the total width of the Higgs relative to the SM prediction is computed as a function of the parameters and a $\dchisq$ distribution for $\Gamma_{\rm tot}/ \Gamma_{\rm tot}^{\rm SM}$ is obtained. Assuming no unseen, but potentially visible, decays, we found $\Gamma_{\rm tot}/ \Gamma_{\rm tot}^{\rm SM}\in[0.5,2]$ at 95% CL for the case where $\cu,\cd,\cv,\dcg,\dcp$ and $\brinv$ are all allowed to vary freely, while $\Gamma_{\rm tot}/ \Gamma_{\rm tot}^{\rm SM}\in[1,1.25]$ at 95% CL if $\cu=\cd=\cv=1$, $\dcg=\dcp=0$ are imposed and only $\brinv\geq 0$ is allowed for. These are useful limits given the inability to directly measure $\Gamma_{\rm tot}$ at the LHC. Of course, if there are unseen (but not invisible) decays, there is a flat direction that would prevent setting limits on the total width.
In the second part of the paper, we then examined implications of these results in the context of some simple concrete models with an extended Higgs sector: the Type I and Type II Two-Higgs-doublet models; the Inert Doublet Model; and the custodially symmetric triplet Higgs model. Concretely, we used the combined likelihood ellipses to constrain the parameter spaces with corresponding implications for the properties of the other Higgs boson(s) of the model. In particular, the ability to discover a 2nd neutral Higgs boson with mass above $125.5\gev$ in, , the $4\ell$ mode can be quantified.
In the 2HDM, enhancement of the signal strength for a 2nd neutral (scalar or pseudoscalar) Higgs boson with mass above $125.5\gev$ can occur in both the $4\ell$ and $\tau\tau$ channels. Therefore additional constraints on $\alpha$ and $\beta$ can be set unless the decay of the heavier Higgs to a pair of the $125.5\gev$ states dominates. Generally the signals in both channels can be at a level of interest for future LHC runs. In the triplet model, when the second Higgs, $H'$, is heavy the LHC bounds in both the $H'\to 4\ell$ and $H'\to \tau\tau$ channel are generally satisfied even without taking into account the heavy Higgs decays into pairs of $125.5$ GeV Higgses. Only the region of parameter space with large $C'_V$ requires a large branching fraction into Higgs pairs to deplete the $4\ell$ signal. We stress that in both these models the heavy Higgs to Higgs pair decays are generically important when allowed, implying that ways must be found to be sensitive to the $4b$, $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$ and $4\tau$ final states resulting therefrom.
In the Inert Doublet Model, the inert Higgs states can only be pair-produced and therefore are not currently constrained. However, we showed that the bound on the invisible decay of the $125.5$ GeV SM-like Higgs, relevant when one inert Higgs is lighter than $\approx 60$ GeV, constrains the allowed range for the two-photon width. Thus, a precise determination of $C_\gamma$ could rule out light inert Higgs dark matter.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
This work originated from the workshops “Implications of the 125 GeV Higgs boson”, which was held 18–22 March at LPSC Grenoble, and “The LHC Higgs Signal: Characterization, Interpretation and BSM Model Implications”, held 22–26 April 2013 at UC Davis. Partial support by US DOE grant DE-FG03-91ER40674 and by IN2P3 under contract PICS FR–USA No. 5872 is gratefully acknowledged. GB, BD, SK acknowledge partial support from the French ANR DMAstroLHC. UE acknowledges partial support from the French ANR LFV-CPV-LHC, ANR STR-COSMO and the European Union FP7 ITN INVISIBLES (Marie Curie Actions, PITN-GA-2011-289442).
Combining likelihoods of different experiments in the Gaussian approximation
============================================================================
As function of the model-dependent signal rates $\mu_i$ (where $i$ stands for $\gam\gam$, $VV^{(*)}$, $b\bar{b}$ and $\tau\tau$ (or $b\bar{b}=\tau\tau$)), the likelihoods in the Gaussian approximation in the $\mu({\rm ggF + ttH})$ versus $\mu({\rm VBF + VH})$ plane obtained by the experiment $j$ (where $j$ stands for ATLAS, CMS or the Tevatron) can be expressed as $\chi^2_{i,j}$ with \[eq:a1\] \_[i,j]{}\^2 &=& a\_[i,j]{}(\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{}-\_[i,j]{}\^[[ggF]{}]{})\^2 +2b\_[i,j]{}(\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{}-\_[i,j]{}\^[[ggF]{}]{}) (\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{}-\_[i,j]{}\^[[VBF]{}]{}) +c\_[i,j]{}(\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{}-\_[i,j]{}\^[[VBF]{}]{})\^2\
&& a\_[i,j]{}(\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{})\^2+c\_[i,j]{}(\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{})\^2 +2b\_[i,j]{}\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{}\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{} +d\_[i,j]{}\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{}+e\_[i,j]{}\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{}+… , where $\hat{\mu}_{i,j}^{\rm{ggF}}$ and $\hat{\mu}_{i,j}^{\rm{VBF}}$ denote the best-fit points of the experiment $j$.[^8] The dots denote terms independent of $\mu_i$, which are irrelevant for $\chi_{i}^2$ relative to the best-fit points as defined in Eq. . $d_{i,j}$ and $e_{i,j}$ are given by \[eq:a2\] d\_[i,j]{} = -2a\_[i,j]{}\_[i,j]{}\^[[ggF]{}]{} -2b\_[i,j]{}\_[i,j]{}\^[[VBF]{}]{}, e\_[i,j]{} = -2c\_[i,j]{}\_[i,j]{}\^[[VBF]{}]{} -2b\_[i,j]{}\_[i,j]{}\^[[ggF]{}]{} . Combining experiments leads to \[eq:a3\] \_[i]{}\^2=a\_[i]{}(\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{})\^2+c\_[i]{}(\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{})\^2 +2b\_[i]{}\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{}\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{} +d\_[i]{}\_i\^[[ggF]{}]{}+e\_[i]{}\_i\^[[VBF]{}]{} , with \[eq:a4\] a\_i = \_[j]{}a\_[i,j]{}, b\_i = \_[j]{}b\_[i,j]{},c\_i = \_[j]{}c\_[i,j]{}, d\_i = \_[j]{}d\_[i,j]{},e\_i = \_[j]{}e\_[i,j]{} . From one obtains Eq. with \[eq:a5\] \_[i]{}\^[[ggF]{}]{}= , \_[i]{}\^[[VBF]{}]{}= .
Comparison with ATLAS and CMS couplings fits
============================================
Coupling fits using all available results up to the Moriond 2013 conference have been performed individually by ATLAS and CMS [@ATLAS-CONF-2013-034; @CMS-PAS-HIG-13-005]. While the present paper aims at presenting combined results from ATLAS, CMS and Tevatron using parameterizations motivated by various models of New Physics, the coupling fits made by ATLAS and CMS that combine the information from different channels can be used to check the robustness of the implementation of the experimental searches as presented in Section \[ssellipse\]. In particular, deviations of our results from those obtained by the ATLAS and/or CMS give a measure for the importance of the missing correlations mentioned at the end of Section \[sintro\].
For the aim of comparison, we have performed fits to the $(C_F,\,C_V)$ and $(C_g,\,C_\gamma)$ couplings, using separately only ATLAS or CMS data up to the Moriond 2013 conference. Figure \[fig:lhc-check\] compares our results to those published by ATLAS [@ATLAS-CONF-2013-034] and CMS [@CMS-PAS-HIG-13-005]. We obtain good agreement in all four cases. The ATLAS (CMS) best fit points are at distances of $\sqrt{(\Delta C_V)^2 + (\Delta C_F)^2} = 0.03$ (0.07) and $\sqrt{(\Delta C_\gamma)^2 + (\Delta C_g)^2} = 0.04$ (0.05) from the reconstructed best fit points, and good coverage of the 68% and 95% CL regions is observed.
For completeness, we note that our fit for $(C_F,\,C_V)$ combining ATLAS and CMS results up to the LHCP 2013 conference can be seen in the right plot of Fig. \[fig:tripletH\], and the one for $(C_g,\,C_\gamma)$ in the middle plot in Fig. \[fig:CPadd-CGadd\], taking $C_{g,\gamma}=1+\Delta C_{g,\gamma}$.
![Fit to the couplings $(C_F,C_V)$ (left) and $(C_g,C_\gamma)$ (right) using separately results from ATLAS and CMS up to the Moriond 2013 conference. The black and grey (dark blue and light blue) contours show the 68% and 95% CL regions for ATLAS (CMS), respectively. The solid contours correspond to the results published by the experimental collaborations, while dashed contours have been obtained using the fitted signal strength ellipses as determined using the separate data for ATLAS (CMS) in the manner described in Section \[ssellipse\].\[fig:lhc-check\] ](figs/CVCF_check.eps "fig:"){width="6cm"}![Fit to the couplings $(C_F,C_V)$ (left) and $(C_g,C_\gamma)$ (right) using separately results from ATLAS and CMS up to the Moriond 2013 conference. The black and grey (dark blue and light blue) contours show the 68% and 95% CL regions for ATLAS (CMS), respectively. The solid contours correspond to the results published by the experimental collaborations, while dashed contours have been obtained using the fitted signal strength ellipses as determined using the separate data for ATLAS (CMS) in the manner described in Section \[ssellipse\].\[fig:lhc-check\] ](figs/CPCG_check.eps "fig:"){width="5.85cm"}
[99]{} G. Aad [*et al.*]{} \[ATLAS Collaboration\], “Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC,” Phys. Lett. B [**716**]{} (2012) 1 \[arXiv:1207.7214 \[hep-ex\]\].
S. Chatrchyan [*et al.*]{} \[CMS Collaboration\], “Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC,” Phys. Lett. B [**716**]{} (2012) 30 \[arXiv:1207.7235 \[hep-ex\]\].
CMS-PAS-HIG-13-005, “Combination of standard model Higgs boson searches and measurements of the properties of the new boson with a mass near 125 GeV”.
ATLAS-CONF-2013-034, “Combined coupling measurements of the Higgs-like boson with the ATLAS detector using up to 25$\fbi$ of proton-proton collision data”.
ATLAS-CONF-2013-011, “Search for invisible decays of a Higgs boson produced in association with a Z boson in ATLAS”.
ATLAS-CONF-2013-012, “Measurements of the properties of the Higgs-like boson in the two photon decay channel with the ATLAS detector using 25$\fbi$ of proton-proton collision data”.
ATLAS-CONF-2013-013, “Measurements of the properties of the Higgs-like boson in the four lepton decay channel with the ATLAS detector using 25$\fbi$ of proton-proton collision data”.
ATLAS-CONF-2013-014, “Combined measurements of the mass and signal strength of the Higgs-like boson with the ATLAS detector using up to 25$\fbi$ of proton-proton collision data”.
ATLAS-CONF-2013-030, “Measurements of the properties of the Higgs-like boson in the $WW^{(*)} \rightarrow \ell\nu\ell\nu$ decay channel with the ATLAS detector using 25$\fbi$ of proton-proton collision data”.
CMS-PAS-HIG-12-053, “Search for the standard model Higgs boson decaying to tau pairs produced in association with a W or Z boson with the CMS experiment in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 and 8 TeV”.
CMS-PAS-HIG-13-001, “Updated measurements of the Higgs boson at 125 GeV in the two photon decay channel”.
CMS-PAS-HIG-13-002, “Properties of the Higgs-like boson in the decay $H \rightarrow ZZ \rightarrow 4\ell$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ and 8 TeV”.
CMS-PAS-HIG-13-003, “Evidence for a particle decaying to $W^+W^-$ in the fully leptonic final state in a standard model Higgs boson search in pp collisions at the LHC”.
CMS-PAS-HIG-13-004, “Search for the Standard-Model Higgs boson decaying to tau pairs in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ and 8 TeV”.
CMS-PAS-HIG-13-009, “Search for the Standard Model Higgs Boson in $WH \to WWW \to 3\ell3\nu$ Decays”.
S. Chatrchyan [*et al.*]{} \[CMS Collaboration\], “Search for the standard model Higgs boson produced in association with a top-quark pair in pp collisions at the LHC,” arXiv:1303.0763 \[hep-ex\].
S. Chatrchyan [*et al.*]{} \[CMS Collaboration\], “Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ and 8 TeV,” arXiv:1303.4571 \[hep-ex\].
T. Aaltonen [*et al.*]{} \[CDF and D0 Collaborations\], “Higgs Boson Studies at the Tevatron,” arXiv:1303.6346 \[hep-ex\].
CMS-PAS-HIG-13-012, “Search for the standard model Higgs boson produced in association with W or Z bosons, and decaying to bottom quarks (LHCP 2013)”.
CMS-PAS-HIG-13-015, “Search for $t\bar{t}H$ production in events with $H \to \gamma\gamma$ at $\sqrt{s}= 8$ TeV collisions”.
D. Carmi, A. Falkowski, E. Kuflik and T. Volansky, “Interpreting LHC Higgs Results from Natural New Physics Perspective,” JHEP [**1207**]{} (2012) 136 \[arXiv:1202.3144 \[hep-ph\]\].
A. Azatov, R. Contino and J. Galloway, “Model-Independent Bounds on a Light Higgs,” JHEP [**1204**]{} (2012) 127 \[arXiv:1202.3415 \[hep-ph\]\].
J. R. Espinosa, C. Grojean, M. Muhlleitner and M. Trott, “Fingerprinting Higgs Suspects at the LHC,” JHEP [**1205**]{} (2012) 097 \[arXiv:1202.3697 \[hep-ph\]\].
M. Klute, R. Lafaye, T. Plehn, M. Rauch and D. Zerwas, “Measuring Higgs Couplings from LHC Data,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**109**]{} (2012) 101801 \[arXiv:1205.2699 \[hep-ph\]\].
A. Azatov, S. Chang, N. Craig and J. Galloway, “Higgs fits preference for suppressed down-type couplings: Implications for supersymmetry,” Phys. Rev. D [**86**]{} (2012) 075033 \[arXiv:1206.1058 \[hep-ph\]\].
I. Low, J. Lykken and G. Shaughnessy, “Have We Observed the Higgs (Imposter)?,” Phys. Rev. D [**86**]{} (2012) 093012 \[arXiv:1207.1093 \[hep-ph\]\].
T. Corbett, O. J. P. Eboli, J. Gonzalez-Fraile and M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, “Constraining anomalous Higgs interactions,” Phys. Rev. D [**86**]{} (2012) 075013 \[arXiv:1207.1344 \[hep-ph\]\].
P. P. Giardino, K. Kannike, M. Raidal and A. Strumia, “Is the resonance at 125 GeV the Higgs boson?,” Phys. Lett. B [**718**]{} (2012) 469 \[arXiv:1207.1347 \[hep-ph\]\].
J. Ellis and T. You, “Global Analysis of the Higgs Candidate with Mass 125 GeV,” JHEP [**1209**]{} (2012) 123 \[arXiv:1207.1693 \[hep-ph\]\].
M. Montull and F. Riva, “Higgs discovery: the beginning or the end of natural EWSB?,” JHEP [**1211**]{} (2012) 018 \[arXiv:1207.1716 \[hep-ph\]\].
J. R. Espinosa, C. Grojean, M. Muhlleitner and M. Trott, “First Glimpses at Higgs’ face,” JHEP [**1212**]{} (2012) 045 \[arXiv:1207.1717 \[hep-ph\]\].
D. Carmi, A. Falkowski, E. Kuflik, T. Volansky and J. Zupan, “Higgs After the Discovery: A Status Report,” JHEP [**1210**]{} (2012) 196 \[arXiv:1207.1718 \[hep-ph\]\].
S. Banerjee, S. Mukhopadhyay and B. Mukhopadhyaya, “New Higgs interactions and recent data from the LHC and the Tevatron,” JHEP [**1210**]{} (2012) 062 \[arXiv:1207.3588 \[hep-ph\]\].
D. Bertolini and M. McCullough, “The Social Higgs,” JHEP [**1212**]{} (2012) 118 \[arXiv:1207.4209 \[hep-ph\]\].
F. Bonnet, T. Ota, M. Rauch and W. Winter, “Interpretation of precision tests in the Higgs sector in terms of physics beyond the Standard Model,” Phys. Rev. D [**86**]{} (2012) 093014 \[arXiv:1207.4599 \[hep-ph\]\].
T. Plehn and M. Rauch, “Higgs Couplings after the Discovery,” Europhys. Lett. [**100**]{} (2012) 11002 \[arXiv:1207.6108 \[hep-ph\]\].
D. Elander and M. Piai, “The decay constant of the holographic techni-dilaton and the 125 GeV boson,” arXiv:1208.0546 \[hep-ph\].
A. Djouadi, “Precision Higgs coupling measurements at the LHC through ratios of production cross sections,” arXiv:1208.3436 \[hep-ph\].
B. A. Dobrescu and J. D. Lykken, “Coupling spans of the Higgs-like boson,” JHEP [**1302**]{} (2013) 073 \[arXiv:1210.3342 \[hep-ph\]\].
G. Moreau, “Constraining extra-fermion(s) from the Higgs boson data,” Phys. Rev. D [**87**]{} (2013) 015027 \[arXiv:1210.3977 \[hep-ph\]\].
G. Cacciapaglia, A. Deandrea, G. D. La Rochelle and J. -B. Flament, “Higgs couplings beyond the Standard Model,” JHEP [**1303**]{} (2013) 029 \[arXiv:1210.8120 \[hep-ph\]\].
T. Corbett, O. J. P. Eboli, J. Gonzalez-Fraile and M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, “Robust Determination of the Higgs Couplings: Power to the Data,” Phys. Rev. D [**87**]{} (2013) 015022 \[arXiv:1211.4580 \[hep-ph\]\].
E. Masso and V. Sanz, “Limits on Anomalous Couplings of the Higgs to Electroweak Gauge Bosons from LEP and LHC,” Phys. Rev. D [**87**]{} (2013) 033001 \[arXiv:1211.1320 \[hep-ph\]\].
A. Azatov and J. Galloway, “Electroweak Symmetry Breaking and the Higgs Boson: Confronting Theories at Colliders,” arXiv:1212.1380 \[hep-ph\].
G. Belanger, B. Dumont, U. Ellwanger, J. F. Gunion and S. Kraml, “Higgs Couplings at the End of 2012,” JHEP [**1302**]{} (2013) 053 \[arXiv:1212.5244 \[hep-ph\]\].
K. Cheung, J. S. Lee and P. -Y. Tseng, “Higgs Precision (Higgcision) Era begins,” arXiv:1302.3794 \[hep-ph\].
A. Celis, V. Ilisie and A. Pich, “LHC constraints on two-Higgs doublet models,” arXiv:1302.4022 \[hep-ph\].
G. Belanger, B. Dumont, U. Ellwanger, J. F. Gunion and S. Kraml, “Status of invisible Higgs decays,” arXiv:1302.5694 \[hep-ph\].
A. Falkowski, F. Riva and A. Urbano, “Higgs At Last,” arXiv:1303.1812 \[hep-ph\].
J. Cao, P. Wan, J. M. Yang and J. Zhu, “The SM extension with color-octet scalars: diphoton enhancement and global fit of LHC Higgs data,” arXiv:1303.2426 \[hep-ph\].
P. P. Giardino, K. Kannike, I. Masina, M. Raidal and A. Strumia, “The universal Higgs fit,” arXiv:1303.3570 \[hep-ph\].
T. Alanne, S. Di Chiara and K. Tuominen, “LHC Data and Aspects of New Physics,” arXiv:1303.3615 \[hep-ph\].
J. Ellis and T. You, “Updated Global Analysis of Higgs Couplings,” arXiv:1303.3879 \[hep-ph\].
A. Djouadi and G. Moreau, “The couplings of the Higgs boson and its CP properties from fits of the signal strengths and their ratios at the 7+8 TeV LHC,” arXiv:1303.6591 \[hep-ph\].
W. -F. Chang, W. -P. Pan and F. Xu, “An effective gauge-Higgs operators analysis of New Physics associated with the Higgs,” arXiv:1303.7035 \[hep-ph\].
B. Dumont, S. Fichet and G. von Gersdorff, “A Bayesian view of the Higgs sector with higher dimensional operators,” arXiv:1304.3369 \[hep-ph\].
P. Bechtle, S. Heinemeyer, O. Stål, T. Stefaniak and G. Weiglein, “HiggsSignals: Confronting arbitrary Higgs sectors with measurements at the Tevatron and the LHC,” arXiv:1305.1933 \[hep-ph\].
F. Boudjema [*et al.*]{}, “On the presentation of the LHC Higgs Results,” arXiv:1307.5865 \[hep-ph\].
M. E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, “A New constraint on a strongly interacting Higgs sector,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [**65**]{} (1990) 964. M. E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, “Estimation of oblique electroweak corrections,” Phys. Rev. D [**46**]{} (1992) 381. M. Baak, M. Goebel, J. Haller, A. Hoecker, D. Kennedy, R. Kogler, K. Moenig and M. Schott [*et al.*]{}, “The Electroweak Fit of the Standard Model after the Discovery of a New Boson at the LHC,” Eur. Phys. J. C [**72**]{} (2012) 2205 \[arXiv:1209.2716 \[hep-ph\]\]. ATLAS-CONF-2012-161, “Search for the Standard Model Higgs boson produced in association with a vector boson and decaying to bottom quarks with the ATLAS detector”.
ATLAS-CONF-2012-160, “Search for the Standard Model Higgs boson in $H \to \tau^+\tau^-$ decays in proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS detector”.
M. S. Carena, D. Garcia, U. Nierste and C. E. M. Wagner, “Effective Lagrangian for the $\bar{t} b H^{+}$ interaction in the MSSM and charged Higgs phenomenology,” Nucl. Phys. B [**577**]{} (2000) 88 \[hep-ph/9912516\]. H. Eberl, K. Hidaka, S. Kraml, W. Majerotto and Y. Yamada, “Improved SUSY QCD corrections to Higgs boson decays into quarks and squarks,” Phys. Rev. D [**62**]{} (2000) 055006 \[hep-ph/9912463\]. LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, A. David, A. Denner, M. Duehrssen, M. Grazzini, C. Grojean, [*et al.*]{}, “LHC HXSWG interim recommendations to explore the coupling structure of a Higgs-like particle,” arXiv:1209.0040 \[hep-ph\].
M. Spira, “HIGLU: A program for the calculation of the total Higgs production cross-section at hadron colliders via gluon fusion including QCD corrections,” hep-ph/9510347.
M. Spira, “HIGLU and HDECAY: Programs for Higgs boson production at the LHC and Higgs boson decay widths,” Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A [**389**]{}, 357 (1997) \[hep-ph/9610350\].
A. Djouadi, J. Kalinowski and M. Spira, “HDECAY: A Program for Higgs boson decays in the standard model and its supersymmetric extension,” Comput. Phys. Commun. [**108**]{}, 56 (1998) \[hep-ph/9704448\].
D. Choudhury, R. Islam, A. Kundu and B. Mukhopadhyaya, “[Anomalous Higgs Couplings as a Window to New Physics]{},” arXiv:1212.4652 \[hep-ph\]. H. E. Logan and M. -A. Roy, “[Higgs couplings in a model with triplets]{},” Phys. Rev. D [**82**]{} (2010) 115011 \[arXiv:1008.4869 \[hep-ph\]\]. A. Falkowski, S. Rychkov and A. Urbano, “What if the Higgs couplings to W and Z bosons are larger than in the Standard Model?,” JHEP [**1204**]{} (2012) 073 \[arXiv:1202.1532 \[hep-ph\]\]. D. Zeppenfeld, R. Kinnunen, A. Nikitenko and E. Richter-Was, “Measuring Higgs boson couplings at the CERN LHC,” Phys. Rev. D [**62**]{}, 013009 (2000) \[hep-ph/0002036\]. A. Djouadi, R. Kinnunen, E. Richter-Was, H. U. Martyn, K. A. Assamagan, C. Balazs, G. Belanger and E. Boos [*et al.*]{}, “The Higgs working group: Summary report,” hep-ph/0002258. M. Duhrssen, S. Heinemeyer, H. Logan, D. Rainwater, G. Weiglein and D. Zeppenfeld, “Extracting Higgs boson couplings from CERN LHC data,” Phys. Rev. D [**70**]{}, 113009 (2004) \[hep-ph/0406323\].
W. Altmannshofer, S. Gori and G. D. Kribs, “A Minimal Flavor Violating 2HDM at the LHC,” Phys. Rev. D [**86**]{} (2012) 115009 \[arXiv:1210.2465 \[hep-ph\]\].
S. Chang, S. K. Kang, J. -P. Lee, K. Y. Lee, S. C. Park and J. Song, “Comprehensive study of two Higgs doublet model in light of the new boson with mass around 125 GeV,” JHEP [**1305**]{} (2013) 075 \[arXiv:1210.3439 \[hep-ph\]\].
C. -Y. Chen and S. Dawson, “Exploring Two Higgs Doublet Models Through Higgs Production,” arXiv:1301.0309 \[hep-ph\].
B. Grinstein and P. Uttayarat, “Carving Out Parameter Space in Type-II Two Higgs Doublets Model,” arXiv:1304.0028 \[hep-ph\].
B. Coleppa, F. Kling and S. Su, “Constraining Type II 2HDM in Light of LHC Higgs Searches,” arXiv:1305.0002 \[hep-ph\]. C. -Y. Chen, S. Dawson and M. Sher, “Heavy Higgs Searches and Constraints on Two Higgs Doublet Models,” arXiv:1305.1624 \[hep-ph\]. O. Eberhardt, U. Nierste and M. Wiebusch, “Status of the two-Higgs-doublet model of type II,” arXiv:1305.1649 \[hep-ph\]. N. Craig, J. Galloway and S. Thomas, “Searching for Signs of the Second Higgs Doublet,” arXiv:1305.2424 \[hep-ph\]. L. Maiani, A. Polosa, and V. Riquer, “Bounds to the Higgs Sector Masses in Minimal Supersymmetry from LHC Data,” arXiv:1305.2172 \[hep-ph\]. G. Aad [*et al.*]{} \[ATLAS Collaboration\], “Search for the neutral Higgs bosons of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV with the ATLAS detector,” arXiv:1211.6956 \[hep-ex\]. B. Dumont, J. F. Gunion, Y. Jiang and S. Kraml, in preparation.
N. G. Deshpande and E. Ma, “Pattern of Symmetry Breaking with Two Higgs Doublets,” Phys. Rev. D [**18**]{} (1978) 2574.
E. Ma, “Verifiable radiative seesaw mechanism of neutrino mass and dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D [**73**]{} (2006) 077301 \[hep-ph/0601225\]. R. Barbieri, L. J. Hall and V. S. Rychkov, “Improved naturalness with a heavy Higgs: An Alternative road to LHC physics,” Phys. Rev. D [**74**]{} (2006) 015007 \[hep-ph/0603188\].
L. Lopez Honorez, E. Nezri, J. F. Oliver and M. H. G. Tytgat, “The Inert Doublet Model: An Archetype for Dark Matter,” JCAP [**0702**]{} (2007) 028 \[hep-ph/0612275\].
M. Krawczyk, D. Sokolowska, P. Swaczyna and B. Swiezewska, “Constraining Inert Dark Matter by $R_{\gamma\gamma}$ and WMAP data,” arXiv:1305.6266 \[hep-ph\].
B. Swiezewska, “Yukawa independent constraints for 2HDMs with a 125 GeV Higgs boson,” arXiv:1209.5725 \[hep-ph\].
A. Pierce and J. Thaler, “Natural Dark Matter from an Unnatural Higgs Boson and New Colored Particles at the TeV Scale,” JHEP [**0708**]{} (2007) 026
E. Lundstrom, M. Gustafsson and J. Edsjo, “The Inert Doublet Model and LEP II Limits,” Phys. Rev. D [**79**]{}, 035013 (2009) \[arXiv:0810.3924 \[hep-ph\]\].
A. Arhrib, R. Benbrik and N. Gaur, “$H\to \gamma \gamma$ in Inert Higgs Doublet Model,” Phys. Rev. D [**85**]{} (2012) 095021 \[arXiv:1201.2644 \[hep-ph\]\].
M. Gustafsson, S. Rydbeck, L. Lopez-Honorez and E. Lundstrom, “Status of the Inert Doublet Model and the Role of multileptons at the LHC,” Phys. Rev. D [**86**]{}, 075019 (2012) \[arXiv:1206.6316 \[hep-ph\]\].
B. Swiezewska and M. Krawczyk, “Diphoton rate in the Inert Doublet Model with a 125 GeV Higgs boson,” arXiv:1212.4100 \[hep-ph\].
A. Goudelis, B. Herrmann and O. StŒl, “Dark matter in the Inert Doublet Model after the discovery of a Higgs-like boson at the LHC,” arXiv:1303.3010 \[hep-ph\].
G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov, “micrOMEGAs3.1 : a program for calculating dark matter observables,” arXiv:1305.0237 \[hep-ph\].
H. Georgi and M. Machacek, “Doubly Charged Higgs Bosons,” Nucl. Phys. B [**262**]{}, 463 (1985). J. F. Gunion, R. Vega and J. Wudka, “Higgs triplets in the standard model,” Phys. Rev. D [**42**]{}, 1673 (1990). C. Englert, E. Re and M. Spannowsky, “Triplet Higgs boson collider phenomenology after the LHC,” Phys. Rev. D [**87**]{} (2013) 095014 \[arXiv:1302.6505 \[hep-ph\]\].
S. Schael [*et al.*]{} \[ALEPH and DELPHI and L3 and OPAL and LEP Working Group for Higgs Boson Searches Collaborations\], “Search for neutral MSSM Higgs bosons at LEP,” Eur. Phys. J. C [**47**]{}, 547 (2006) \[hep-ex/0602042\]. G. Abbiendi [*et al.*]{} \[ALEPH and DELPHI and L3 and OPAL and The LEP working group for Higgs boson searches Collaborations\], “Search for Charged Higgs bosons: Combined Results Using LEP Data,” \[arXiv:1301.6065 \[hep-ex\]\]. S. Chatrchyan [*et al.*]{} \[CMS Collaboration\], “Search for a light charged Higgs boson in top quark decays in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV,” JHEP [**1207**]{}, 143 (2012) \[arXiv:1205.5736 \[hep-ex\]\]. CMS-PAS-HIG-12-005, “Search for doubly-charged Higgs".
[^1]: This corresponds to fitting a bivariate normal distribution to the 68% CL contours. We have verified that this reproduces sufficiently well the best fit points as well as the 95% CL contours; see Section 2 of Ref. [@Boudjema:2013qla] for more detail.
[^2]: Note that we are using the MVA analysis for CMS $H \to \gamma\gamma$. The cut-based analysis (CiC) also presented by CMS \[10\]—that leads to higher but compatible signal strengths—is unfortunately not available in the form of contours in the plane of the (VBF+VH) and (ggF+ttH) production modes. Moreover, no information is given on the sub-channel decomposition, so in fact the CMS CiC analysis cannot be used for our purpose.
[^3]: There are in total 23 measurements entering our fit, and we adopt the simple definition of the number of d.o.f. as number of measurements minus number of parameters.
[^4]: If the top quark and Higgs bosons are considered as fundamental fields, it would require that the top quark mass is induced dominantly by the vev of at least one additional Higgs boson which is not the Higgs boson considered here, and typically leads to various consistency problems as discussed, , in [@Choudhury:2012tk].
[^5]: We thank Heather Logan for pointing this out.
[^6]: For distinction with the 2HDM, we denote all IDM particles odd under $Z_2$ with a tilde.
[^7]: In our IDM fits, the $h\gamma\gamma$ coupling is computed with [micrOMEGAs3]{} [@Belanger:2013oya].
[^8]: Of course $\chi_{i,j}^2$ defined in this way is not an absolute $\chi^2$, but rather a $\Delta\chi^2$ relative to the best fit value of the experiment in a given channel.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We study the magnetic field generation in a neutron star within the model based on the magnetic field instability in the nuclear matter owing to the electron-nucleon parity violating interaction. We suggest that the growing magnetic field takes the energy from thermal background fermions in the neutron star matter. The system of kinetic equations for the spectra of the magnetic helicity density and magnetic energy density as well as the chiral imbalance are solved numerically accounting for this energy source. We obtain that, for the initial conditions corresponding to a typical neutron star, the large scale magnetic field $\sim 10^{15}\thinspace\text{G}$ is generated during $(10^4-10^5)\thinspace\text{yr}$. We suggest that the proposed model describes strong magnetic fields observed in magnetars.'
author:
- 'Maxim Dvornikov$^{a,b}$'
- 'Victor B. Semikoz$^{a}$'
title: 'Energy source for the magnetic field growth in magnetars driven by the electron-nucleon interaction'
---
The most plausible explanation of radiation of soft gamma repeaters [@Maz79] and anomalous X-ray pulsars [@FahGre81] is the presence of strong magnetic fields $B\gtrsim 10^{15}\thinspace\text{G}$ in a neutron star (NS). Such highly magnetized NSs are called magnetars. Various models, explaining the origin of such strong astrophysical magnetic fields, were reviewed in Ref. [@Fer15]. Nevertheless, the issue of the magnetic fields generation in magnetars still remains open.
Recently in Refs. [@DvoSem15a; @DvoSem15b] we proposed the new model for the generation of strong magnetic fields in magnetars based on the instability of magnetic fields in dense degenerate matter composed of nonrelativistic neutrons and ultrarelativistic electrons interacting by parity violating electroweak forces. The idea that electroweak interaction can induce the magnetic field instability was put forward first in Ref. [@BoyRucSha12]. Within our model, basing on quite natural assumptions about the neutron star structure, we could describe the generation of large scale magnetic fields, with magnitudes predicted in magnetars, during time intervals comparable with magnetars ages.
Despite the plausibility of the model developed in Refs. [@DvoSem15a; @DvoSem15b], it has a significant disadvantage. The instability of a magnetic field, proposed in Refs. [@DvoSem15a; @DvoSem15b], is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for the magnetic field growth. To describe the magnetic field generation in magnetars one should indicate the source which feeds the magnetic field growth. This issue is addressed in the present work.
In this paper we further develop the model in Refs. [@DvoSem15a; @DvoSem15b]. We start with a brief description of the basic features of our model. Then we propose that magnetic fields can take the energy from the thermal motion of particles in the NS matter. We modify the kinetic equations, derived in Refs. [@DvoSem15a; @DvoSem15b], to account for the magnetic field saturation, and numerically solve them. Finally, we discuss our results. In our work we use natural units in which $\hbar = c = k_\mathrm{B} = 1$.
Our model is based on the parity violating electroweak electron-nucleon interaction (the $eN$ interaction). We shall take that the background nuclear matter consists of neutrons and protons. This matter is supposed to be unpolarized and nonmoving macroscopically. In Ref. [@DvoSem15a] we derived the averaged effective Lagrangian of the $eN$ interaction in the Fermi approximation as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Hew}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{int}} = &
- \bar{\psi}_{e}
\gamma^0
\left(
V_\mathrm{L}P_\mathrm{L} + V_\mathrm{R}P_\mathrm{R}
\right)
\psi_{e},
\notag
\\
V_\mathrm{L} = & \frac{G_{\mathrm{F}}}{\sqrt{2}}
\left[
n_{n} - n_{p}
(1 - 4 \xi)
\right] (1 - 2\xi),
\notag
\\
V_\mathrm{R} = &
- \frac{G_{\mathrm{F}}}{\sqrt{2}}
\left[
n_{n} - n_{p}
(1 - 4 \xi)
\right] 2\xi,\end{aligned}$$ where $G_{\mathrm{F}}\approx1.17\times10^{-5}{\rm GeV}^{-2}$ is the Fermi constant, $n_{n,p}$ are the constant and uniform densities of neutrons and protons, $\psi_{e}$ is the bispinor electron wave function, $\xi = \sin^2\theta_\mathrm{W}\approx0.23$ is the Weinberg parameter, $P_\mathrm{L,R} = (1 \mp \gamma^5)/2$ are the chiral projectors, $\gamma^{5} = \mathrm{i} \gamma^{0}\gamma^{1}\gamma^{2}\gamma^{3}$, and $\gamma^{\mu} = (\gamma^{0},\bm{\gamma})$ are the Dirac matrices.
Now let us consider the interaction of ultrarelativistic electrons with background matter, described by Eq. (\[eq:Hew\]), and an external magnetic field $\mathbf{B}=(0,0,B)$. The total Lagrangian has the form, $\mathcal{L} = \mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{em}} + \mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{int}}$, where $\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{em}} = \bar{\psi}_{e} \gamma^{\mu} \left( \mathrm{i}\partial_{\mu}+eA_{\mu} \right) \psi_{e}$ is the Lagrangian for the interaction of an ultrarelativistic electron with the electromagnetic field $A^{\mu}=\left(0,0,Bx,0\right)$, and $e>0$ is the absolute value of the electron charge.
The Dirac equation generated by $\mathcal{L}$ was solved in Refs. [@DvoSem15a; @DvoSem15b]. Using this solution, exactly accounting for both the matter interaction and the magnetic field, one can compute the induced electric current along the magneic field $J_z = - e \langle \bar{\psi}_{e} \gamma^3 \psi_e \rangle + \text{positron contribution}$, averaged using the Fermi-Dirac distribution. This current, which is additive to the ohmic current $\mathbf{J}_\mathrm{ohm}=\sigma_\mathrm{cond}\mathbf{E}$, where $\sigma_\mathrm{cond}$ is the matter conductivity and $\mathbf{E}$ is the electric field, turns out to be nonzero. If we restore the vector notations, one gets for the induced electric current $\mathbf{J}=\Pi\mathbf{B}$. The parameter $\Pi$ reads $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:CSparam}
\Pi = & \frac{2\alpha_{\mathrm{em}}}{\pi}
\left(
\mu_{5}+V_{5}
\right),
\notag
\\
\mu_{5} = & \frac{1}{2}
\left(
\mu_{\mathrm{R}}-\mu_{\mathrm{L}}
\right),
\notag
\\
V_{5} = & \frac{1}{2}
\left(
V_{\mathrm{L}}-V_{\mathrm{R}}
\right) \approx
\frac{G_{\mathrm{F}}}{2\sqrt{2}}n_{n},\end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha_{\mathrm{em}} = e^2/4\pi \approx7.3\times10^{-3}$ is the fine structure constant. Note that, since we consider ultrarelativistic electrons, we can assume that right and left chiral projections of the electron-positron field behave independently and possess different chemical potentials: $\mu_{\mathrm{R}}$ and $\mu_{\mathrm{L}}$. To obtain Eq. (\[eq:CSparam\]) we assume that $n_{n}\gg n_{p}$ inside NS.
Using Eq. , in Ref. [@DvoSem15b] we derived the system of kinetic equations for the spectra of the magnetic helicity densiy $h(k,t)$ and magnetic energy density $\rho_\mathrm{B}(k,t)$ as well as the chiral imbalance $\mu_5(t)$ in the form, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{general}
\frac{\partial h(k,t)}{\partial t} = &
-\frac{2k^2}{\sigma_\mathrm{cond}}h(k,t) +
\left(
\frac{4\Pi}{\sigma_\mathrm{cond}}
\right)
\rho_\mathrm{B}(k, t),
\nonumber
\\
\frac{\partial \rho_\mathrm{B}(k,t)}{\partial t} = &
-\frac{2k^2}{\sigma_\mathrm{cond}}\rho_\mathrm{B}(k,t) +
\left(
\frac{\Pi}{\sigma_\mathrm{cond}}
\right)
k^2 h(k, t),
\notag
\\
\frac{\mathrm{d}\mu_5(t)}{\mathrm{d}t} = &
\frac{\pi\alpha_\mathrm{em}}{\mu^2 \sigma_\mathrm{cond}}
\int \mathrm{d} k
\left[
k^2h(k,t) - 2 \Pi \rho_\mathrm{B}(k,t)
\right]
\notag
\\
& -
\Gamma_f\mu_5,\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu$ is the chemical potential of electrons in NS, $\Gamma_f = 4 \alpha_\mathrm{em} m_e^2 /3\pi\sigma_\mathrm{cond}$ is the chirality flip rate in the electron-proton ($ep$) collisions, and $m_e$ is the electron mass. Note that the chirality flipping term in Eq. should contain $\mu_5$ since the equilibrium in the system of right and left electrons is achieved when $\mu_\mathrm{R}=\mu_\mathrm{L}$.
The total magnetic helicity $H$ and the magnetic field strength $B$ can be found on the basis of $h(k,t)$ and $\rho_\mathrm{B}(k,t)$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{hdef}
H(t) = & \int \mathrm{d}^3 x (\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{B}) =
V \int h(k,t) \mathrm{d}k,
\notag
\\
\frac{1}{2}B^2(t) = & \int \mathrm{d}k \rho_\mathrm{B}(k,t),\end{aligned}$$ where $V$ is the normalization volume and the integration is over all the range of the wave number $k$ variation. It should be mentioned that in Eqs. and we assume the isotropic spectra.
In Ref. [@DvoSem15b] we found that the model described by Eq. reveals the potential growth of the seed magnetic field $B_0 = 10^{12}\thinspace\text{G}$ up to $B \gtrsim 10^{17}\thinspace\text{G}$, i.e. the strengths predicted in magnetars. However, the energy source feeding the magnetic field growth was not specified in Ref. [@DvoSem15b]. We demonstrate below that the magnetic field can take the energy from thermal motion of nucleons and electrons, which NS is composed of. For this purpose we shall calculate the temperature corrections to the energy density of degenerate fermions in NS as a possible source for the growth of the magnetic field.
We shall start with the electron component of NS matter. Using the expansion of the integral in Ref. [@LanLif80], $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:intexp}
\int_0^{\infty} \mathrm{d} \varepsilon
\frac{f(\varepsilon)}{\exp[(\varepsilon - \mu)/T] + 1}
\\
=
\int_0^{\mu}f(\varepsilon)\mathrm{d}\varepsilon +
\frac{\pi^2}{6}T^2
\left.
\frac{\mathrm{d}f(\varepsilon)}{\mathrm{d}\varepsilon}
\right|_{\varepsilon=\mu} +
\mathcal{O}(T^4),\end{gathered}$$ one gets for the energy density $$\begin{aligned}
\label{endensel}
\rho_e = &
2 \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^3 p}{(2\pi)^3}
\frac{p}{\exp[(p - \mu)/T] + 1} =
\rho_{e0} + \delta \rho_{e},
\notag
\\
\rho_{e0} = & \frac{\mu^4}{4\pi^2},
\quad
\delta \rho_{e} = \frac{\mu^2T^2}{2}, \end{aligned}$$ and the number density $$\begin{aligned}
\label{numdensel}
n_e = &
2 \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^3 p}{(2\pi)^3}
\frac{1}{\exp[(p - \mu)/T] + 1} =
n_{e0} + \delta n_{e},
\notag
\\
n_{e0} = & \frac{\mu^3}{3\pi^2},
\quad
\delta n_{e} = \frac{T^2\mu}{3},\end{aligned}$$ of degenerate ultrarelativistic electrons including temperature corrections. In Eqs. and we keep only the leading terms in the temperature $T$. To derive Eqs. and we neglect the magnetic fields correction to $\rho_e$ and $n_e$, studied in Ref. [@Nun97], since $eB \ll \mu^2$ for $B = (10^{12} - 10^{17})\thinspace\text{G}$ we consider here. One can see in Eqs. and that the mean energy of a thermal electron $\langle \varepsilon_e \rangle_T=\delta \rho_e/\delta n_e=3\mu/2$ exceeds the Fermi level $\mu$. The cooling of such electrons proceeds independently of the main contribution in degenerate electron gas with $0\leq \varepsilon_e\leq \mu$ since both the energy density of electrons and their number density are proportional to $T^2$. This cooling does not violate the Pauli principle for them either. That is why the decreasing of the temperature of such thermal electrons can feed the magnetic field growth.
Now let us consider degenerate nonrelativistic nucleons $N$, i.e. neutrons $N=n$ and protons $N=p$, as the energy source for the magnetic field growth. These particles have the Fermi energy $\mu_N=p_{F_N}^2/2M_N \gg T$, where $p_{F_N}$ is the nucleons Fermi momentum and $M_N$ is the nucleon mass. Analogously to Eqs. and , as well as using Eq. , we get the energy and number densities for degenerate nucleons, including thermal corrections, as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{endensN}
\rho_N = &
2 \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^3 p}{(2\pi)^3}
\frac{\varepsilon}{\exp[(\varepsilon - \mu_N)/T] + 1} =
\rho_{N0} + \delta \rho_N,
\notag
\\
\rho_{N0} = & \frac{p_{F_N}^5}{10\pi^2 M_N},
\quad
\delta \rho_N = \frac{T^2 M_N p_{F_N}}{4}, \end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\label{numdensN}
n_N = &
2 \int \frac{\mathrm{d}^3 p}{(2\pi)^3}
\frac{1}{\exp[(\varepsilon - \mu_N)/T] + 1} =
n_{N0} + \delta n_N,
\notag
\\
n_{N0} = &\frac{p_{F_N}^3}{3\pi^2},
\quad
\delta n_N = \frac{T^2 M_N^2}{6p_{F_N}}, \end{aligned}$$ where we account for the energy-momentum relation for a nonrelarivistic nucleon $\varepsilon = p^2 / 2 M_N$ and again keep only the leading terms in $T$.
Basing on Eqs. and , one obtains the mean energy of thermal nucleons $\langle \varepsilon_N\rangle_T=\delta\rho_N/\delta n_N=3p_{F_N}^2/2M_N$, which is above the Fermi surface: $\langle \varepsilon_N\rangle_T > \mu_{N}$. Hence, like electrons, these nucleons can transfer their thermal energy to the magnetic field in their cooling without violation of the Pauli principle.
Summing up the thermal energy density corrections of electrons, protons, and nucleons, we can define the equipartition magnetic field strength $B_\mathrm{eq}$ as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{thermal}
\frac{B_\mathrm{eq}^2}{2} = &
\delta \rho_e + \delta \rho_p + \delta \rho_n
\notag
\\
& =
\left[
\frac{M_n p_{F_n} + M_p p_{F_p}}{2} +\mu^2
\right]
\frac{T^2}{2}.\end{aligned}$$ Accounting for $M_N \approx 940\thinspace\text{MeV}$, $p_{F_n} = (3 \pi^2 n_n)^{1/3} \approx 339\thinspace\text{MeV}$ for the NS density $n_n = 0.18\thinspace\text{fm}^{-3}$, and $p_{F_p} \approx \mu = 125\thinspace\text{MeV}$ for the electron density $n_e = 9 \times 10^{36}\thinspace\text{cm}^{-3}$, one gets that the neutron contribution to $B_\mathrm{eq}$ is the greatest one. We can consider the quantity $\rho_\mathrm{T} = B_\mathrm{eq}^2/2$ in Eq. as the inexhaustible energy source requiring that $B_\mathrm{eq}^2\gg B^2$. Thus we do not violate the total energy conservation for the extended system which includes the background matter and the magnetic field. Since the values of $n_{n,e}$ are typical for NS we shall later use them in the numerical simulations.
In Refs. [@DvoSem15a; @DvoSem15b] we simulated magnetic fields in magnetars solving Eq. and using $B_0 = 10^{12}\thinspace\text{G}$ as the initial magnetic field. Assuming $T=10^8\thinspace\text{K}$ and the above parameters of the NS matter, we get that $B_0^2 \ll B_\mathrm{eq}^2$. However, if $B = 10^{17}\thinspace\text{G}$, one obtains that $B^2 \gg B_\mathrm{eq}^2$. Thus strong magnetic fields, predicted in Refs. [@DvoSem15a; @DvoSem15b], will influence the background matter in NS.
To avoid a back reaction on matter from such a strong magnetic field we should modify Eq. . As known from the solar dynamo theory [@Cha14], one can avoid the infinite growth of the magnetic field by quenching of the dynamo $\alpha$-parameter. Thus we can introduce the quenching of the parameter $\Pi$, given in Eq. , as $$\label{newPi}
\Pi \to \frac{\Pi}{1+B^2/B_\mathrm{eq}^2},$$ where $B^2$ and $B_\mathrm{eq}^2$ can be found in Eqs. and . Again referring to the solar dynamo theory, $B_\mathrm{eq}$ is equivalent to $B_{\odot} \sim 1\thinspace\text{kG}$, which is the magnetic field strength in a solar spot. Now the excessive growth of the magnetic field is eliminated from our model since it is the parameter $\Pi$ which is responsible for the magnetic field instability.
To analyze the magnetic field generation in a magnetar on the basis of Eq. we should adopt an appropriate initial condition. The detailed discussion of the initial condition is provided in Ref. [@DvoSem15b]. Here we just make a few comments on it.
We shall consider the evolution of a thermally relaxed NS at $t>t_0$, where $t_0 = 10^2\thinspace\text{yr}$. As obtained in Ref. [@Yak11], at $t_0<t\lesssim 10^6\thinspace\text{yr}$, NS cools down by the neutrino emission in modified Urca processes. The time dependence of the NS temperature obeys the differential equation [@Pet92], $$\label{eq:law}
\frac{\mathrm{d}T(t)}{\mathrm{d}t}= -\frac{T(t)}{(n_\mathrm{T}-2)t},$$ where the index $n_\mathrm{T} = 8$ for modified Urca processes. Using Eq. and the results of Ref. [@DvoSem15b], one gets that the NS temperature and the NS conductivity will depend on time as $T^2 = T_0^2 F$ and $\sigma_\mathrm{cond} = \sigma_0/F$, where $F = (t/t_0)^{-1/3}$, $T_0 = 10^8\thinspace\text{K}$, and $\sigma_0 = 2.7\times10^8\thinspace\text{MeV}$ is given by the electron (or proton) density $n_e=n_p=9\times 10^{36}\thinspace{\rm cm}^{-3}$.
We shall study the generation of the magnetic field without specifying its direction, which can be random. Moreover we suggest that a seed magnetic field appears due to a turbulence which can be of a hydrodynamic origin. In this case one can choose the initial Kolmogorov spectrum for the magnetic energy density $\rho_\mathrm{B}(k,t_0) = \mathcal{C} k^{-5/3}$ [@Dav04]. Here we correct the initial spectrum chosen in Ref. [@DvoSem15b]. The constant $\mathcal{C}$ can be found from Eq. setting $B(t_0)=B_0 = 10^{12}\thinspace\text{G}$, which is a seed field typical for a young pulsar. The wave number runs in the interval $k_\mathrm{min} < k < k_\mathrm{max}$, where $k_\mathrm{min} = R_\mathrm{NS}^{-1} = 2\times10^{-11}\thinspace\text{eV}$, $R_\mathrm{NS} = 10\thinspace\text{km}$ is the NS radius, $k_\mathrm{max} = \Lambda_\mathrm{B}^{-1}$, and $\Lambda_\mathrm{B}$ is the free parameter specifying the scale of the magnetic field generated.
The initial spectrum of the helicity density can be chosen as $h(k,t_0)=2q\rho_\mathrm{B}(k,t_0)/k$, where the parameter $0 \leq q \leq 1$ defines the initial helicity. The case $q=0$ corresponds to the initially non-helical field and $q=1$ to the magnetic field with a maximal helicity. Therefore, besides magnetic fields we can also study the generation of the magnetic helicity in our model.
The initial value of the chiral imbalance can be taken as $\mu_5(t_0) = 1\thinspace\text{MeV}$. Note that $\mu_5(t_0)\neq 0$ is generated in direct Urca processes at the early stages of the NS evolution at $t<t_0$. The energy scale of these processes is governed by the mass difference between a neutron and a proton: $M_n - M_p \sim 1\thinspace\text{MeV}$. This fact substantiates our choice of $\mu_5(t_0)$. At the first glance one can imagine that, for the chosen parameters, the contribution of the electroweak interactions $\sim V_5$ to Eq. is negligible compared to the electrodynamic contribution $\sim \mu_5$. As shown in Refs. [@DvoSem15a; @GraKapRed15], almost any initial $\mu_5(t_0)\neq 0$ tends to zero very rapidly because of the high rate of $ep$ collisions, whereas $V_5$ is a steady source for the growth of the magnetic helicity and the magnetic energy density. Moreover, the electroweak term is not affected by $ep$ collisions since $V_5$ depends on the difference of the interaction potentials of left and right electrons with background matter, which are constant parameters of the model \[see Eqs. and \], unlike $\mu_5$, which is a dynamic variable.
We also mention the recent Ref. [@SigLei15], where another steady source for the magnetic field instability, different from $V_5$, was used to explain strong magnetic fields in magnetars. It is based on the generation of the chiral imbalance in direct and modified Urca processes, $e_\mathrm{L}^- + p \to n + \nu_{e\mathrm{L}}$ and $e_\mathrm{L}^- + p +N \to n + \nu_{e\mathrm{L}} + N$, which are not in the equilibrium with inverse reactions. This situation can happen during $\sim 10\thinspace\text{s}$ after the onset of the supernova collapse outside the neutrinosphere.
Short scale, $\Lambda_\mathrm{B} \lesssim 1 \thinspace \text{cm}$, magnetic fields with the strength $B \lesssim 10^{14}\thinspace\text{G}$ were demonstrated in Ref. [@SigLei15] to be generated in this situation. However, as shown in Ref. [@MoiBis08], short scale chaotic magnetic fields in a supernova explosion are subject to the reconnection with the typical time of several seconds. This time scale is comparable with the time interval for magnetic field generation in Ref. [@SigLei15]. Thus, magnetic fields predicted in Ref. [@SigLei15] will transform effectively into heat because of the magnetic reconnection.
Below we present the results of numerical solution of Eq. accounting for Eq. and the chosen initial conditions. In Fig. \[fig:B\] one can see the growth of magnetic fields of different length scales and initial helicities. We study the two main minimal scales: $\Lambda_\mathrm{B}^{(\mathrm{min})} = 1\thinspace\text{km}$ in Figs. \[1a\] and \[1b\] as well as $\Lambda_\mathrm{B}^{(\mathrm{min})} = 100\thinspace\text{m}$ in Figs. \[1c\] and \[1d\]. Thus we predict the generation of strong large scale magnetic fields.
-.7cm\
-.7cm
To compare the behavior of magnetic fields in the present work with that in Ref. [@DvoSem15b], in Figs. \[1a\] and \[1c\] we also show the results of the numerical solution of Eq. without quenching in Eq. . One can see that unquenched magnetic fields, shown by blue lines, slow down the growth rate after $\sim 10^5\thinspace\text{yr}$ in Fig. \[1a\] and $\sim 10^4\thinspace\text{yr}$ in Fig. \[1c\], but continue growing [@DvoSem15b]. On the contrary, the quenched magnetic fields, shown by red lines, are saturated. For both $\Lambda_\mathrm{B}^{(\mathrm{min})}$ we start with $B_0 = 10^{12}\thinspace\text{G}$ and magnetic fields reach the saturated value $B_\mathrm{sat} \sim 10^{15}\thinspace\text{G}$. For example, in Fig. \[1b\], $B_\mathrm{sat} \approx 1.1\times 10^{15}\thinspace\text{G}$. This $B_\mathrm{sat}$ is close to magnetic fields observed in magnetars [@Mer15].
Magnetic fields in Fig. \[1a\] grow up to $B_\mathrm{sat}$ for $t\gtrsim 10^5\thinspace\text{yr}$ and in Fig. \[1c\] for $t\gtrsim 10^4\thinspace\text{yr}$. These time intervals are comparable with the ages of young magnetars [@Mer15]. Note that the smaller the scale of the magnetic field is, the faster this magnetic field grows and the stronger $B_\mathrm{sat}$ is. One gets from Eq. that $\rho_\mathrm{B} \sim k^2 A^2$, where $A$ is the typical vector potential. Hence, a bigger $k_\mathrm{max}$ corresponds to stronger $B_\mathrm{sat}$.
We also analyze the evolution of magnetic fields with different initial helicities. One can see in Figs. \[1b\] and \[1d\] that there is a difference in the behavior of magnetic fields for initially non-helical (solid lines) and maximally helical (dashed lines) fields for relatively small evolution times. At later times this difference is washed out; cf. Figs. \[1a\] and \[1c\]. It means that, in frames of our model, we can generate both strong magnetic fields and the magnetic helicity.
Note that the behavior of quenched and unquenched magnetic fields is almost indistinguishable at small evolution times. Indeed, if $t \ll t_\mathrm{sat}$, where $t_\mathrm{sat} = (10^4 - 10^5)\thinspace\text{yr}$ is the saturation time depending on the scale of the magnetic field, then $B \ll B_\mathrm{eq}$ in Eq. . Thus in this time interval it is sufficient to consider the evolution of quenched magnetic fields, which is shown in Figs. \[1b\] and \[1d\].
Comparing the results of Ref. [@DvoSem15b] with the evolution of magnetic fields in Figs \[1b\] and \[1d\], one can notice that in the present work magnetic fields grow several times slower. This discrepancy can be attributed to the fact that now we use the correct initial Kolmogorov’s spectrum $\rho_\mathrm{B}(k,t_0) = \mathcal{C} k^{\nu_\mathrm{B}}$ with $\nu_\mathrm{B} = -5/3$ vs. $\nu_\mathrm{B} = 1/3$ in Ref. [@DvoSem15b]. Indeed, since $\mathcal{C} \sim \nu_\mathrm{B}+1$, the greater $\nu_\mathrm{B}$ is, the faster $\rho_\mathrm{B}(k,t)$ will grow.
Along with growing magnetic fields, shown in Fig. \[fig:B\], it is important to consider the evolution of the magnetic helicity density $h(t)=H(t)/V$ to illustrate its generation in a magnetar. In Fig. \[fig:h\] we demonstrate how the magnetic helicity grows in our model. We consider the cases of initially helical and nonhelical magnetic fields as well as quenched and unquenched parameter $\Pi$ in Eq. to compare our results with those in Ref. [@DvoSem15b]. One can see in Figs. \[2b\] and \[2d\] that the difference in the evolution of initially helical and nonhelical magnetic fields is important only at early evolution times. Later this difference is washed out; cf. Figs. \[2a\] and \[2b\]. Therefore we extend the result of Ref. [@DvoSem15b], that the magnetic helicity can be generated in our model, to the case of the quenched parameter $\Pi$ in Eq. .
-.7cm\
-.7cm
In conclusion we mention that we have further developed the model, recently proposed in Refs. [@DvoSem15a; @DvoSem15b], for the magnetic fields generation in magnetars. We have improved our approach pointing out that the magnetic field, growing owing to the instability caused by the parity violating $eN$ interaction, can take the energy mostly from thermal neutrons, as well as electrons and protons, which are present in the NS matter.
We have started with the evaluation of thermal corrections to the number densities and the energy densities of background fermions in NS. We have shown that, by cooling, these particles can pass their thermal energy to the magnetic field without violating the Pauli principle. Then, in the analogy with the solar dynamo, we have generalized the kinetic equations, derived in Ref. [@DvoSem15b], by quenching of the parameter $\Pi$; cf. Eq. . This procedure allowed us to treat background fermions as the large energy reservoir feeding the magnetic field. Moreover we have avoided the infinite growth of the magnetic field.
We have numerically solved the system of kinetic Eqs. with the modified parameter $\Pi$. For the initial conditions corresponding to a typical NS ($n_{n,e}$ and $B_0$), we have obtained the growth of the seed magnetic field by three orders of magnitude to $B_\mathrm{sat} \approx 10^{15}\thinspace\text{G}$. Although this value of $B_\mathrm{sat}$ is smaller than that obtained in Refs. [@DvoSem15a; @DvoSem15b], this $B_\mathrm{sat}$ is close to the magnetic field predicted in magnetars [@Mer15].
The time of the magnetic field growth to $B_\mathrm{sat}$ is $t_\mathrm{sat} = (10^4 - 10^5)\thinspace\text{yr}$ depending on the scale of the magnetic field. We have analyzed the two scales of the magnetic field in the range $\Lambda_\mathrm{B} = (10^2 - 10^3)\thinspace\text{m}$, i.e. we predict the generation of large scale magnetic fields. Comparing the obtained results for $t_\mathrm{sat}$ with the ages of magnetars [@Mer15], one concludes that our model is a quite plausible explanation of magnetic fields in magnetars.
We are thankful L.B. Leinson and D.D. Sokoloff for useful discussions. V.B.S. acknowledges G. Sigl for comments on the subject. M.D. is grateful to the Competitiveness Improvement Program at the Tomsk State University and to RFBR (research project No. 15-02-00293) for partial support.
[99]{}
E. P. Mazets, S. V. Golenetskij, and Y. A. Guryan, Soft gamma-ray bursts from the source B1900+14, Sov. Astr. Lett. **5**, 343 (1979).
G. G. Fahlman and P. C. Gregory, An X-ray pulsar in SNR G109.1-1.0, Nature **293**, 202 (1981).
L. Ferrario, A. Melatos, and J. Zrake, Magnetic field generation in stars, Space Sci. Rev. (2015), doi:10.1007/s11214-015-0138-y; arXiv:1504.08074.
M. Dvornikov and V. B. Semikoz, Magnetic field instability in a neutron star driven by the electroweak electron-nucleon interaction versus the chiral magnetic effect, Phys. Rev. D **91**, 061301 (2015); arXiv:1410.6676.
M. Dvornikov and V. B. Semikoz, Generation of the magnetic helicity in a neutron star driven by the electroweak electron-nucleon interaction, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2015) 032; arXiv:1503.04162.
A. Boyarsky, O. Ruchayskiy, and M. Shaposhnikov, Long-Range Magnetic Fields in the Ground State of the Standard Model Plasma, Phys. Rev. Lett. **109**, 111602 (2012); arXiv:1204.3604.
L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, *Statistical Physics: Part I* (Pergamon, Oxford, 1980), 3rd ed., pp. 168–171.
H. Nunokawa *et al.*, Neutrino conversions in a polarized medium, Nucl. Phys. B **501**, 17 (1997); hep-ph/9701420.
P. Charbonneau, Solar dynamo theory, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. **52**, 251 (2014).
D. G. Yakovlev *et al.*, Cooling rates of neutron stars and the young neutron star in the Cassiopeia A supernova remnant, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. **411**, 1977 (2011); arXiv:1010.1154.
C. J. Pethick, Cooling of neutron stars, Rev. Mod. Phys. **64**, (1992) 1133.
P. A. Davidson, *Turbulence: An Introduction for Scientists and Engineers* (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004).
D. Grabowska, D. Kaplan, and S. Reddy, The role of the electron mass in damping chiral magnetic instability in supernova and neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D **91**, 085035 (2015); arXiv:1409.3602.
G. Sigl and N. Leite, Chiral magnetic effect in protoneutron stars and magnetic field spectral evolution, submitted to J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.; arXiv:1507.04983.
S. G. Moiseenko and G. S. Bisnovatyi-Kogan, Outflows from magnetorotational supernovae, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D **17**, 1411 (2008); arXiv:0801.2471.
S. Mereghetti, J. A. Pons, and A. Melatos, Magnetars: Properties, origin and evolution, Space Sci. Rev. (2015), doi:10.1007/s11214-015-0146-y; arXiv:1503.06313.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The secrecy degrees of freedom (SDoF) of the Gaussian multiple-input and single-output (MISO) wiretap channel is studied under the assumption that delayed channel state information (CSI) is available at the transmitter and each receiver knows its own instantaneous channel. We first show that a strictly positive SDoF can be guaranteed whenever the transmitter has delayed CSI (either on the legitimate channel or/and the eavesdropper channel). In particular, in the case with delayed CSI on both channels, it is shown that the optimal SDoF is $2/3$. We then generalize the result to the two-user Gaussian MISO broadcast channel with confidential messages and characterize the SDoF region when the transmitter has delayed CSI of both receivers. Interestingly, the artificial noise schemes exploiting several time instances are shown to provide the optimal SDoF region by masking the confidential message to the unintended receiver while aligning the interference at each receiver.'
author:
-
-
title: |
On the Secrecy Degrees of Freedom of Multi-\
Antenna Wiretap Channels with Delayed CSIT
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
Although perfect channel state information at transmitter (CSIT) may not be available in most practical scenarios due to time-varying nature of wireless channels, many wireless applications must still guarantee secure and reliable communication. In fast fading scenarios, the channel estimation/feedback process is often slower than the coherence time and CSIT may be further outdated. In [@maddah2010degrees], the authors considered such a scenario in the context of multi-input single-output (MISO) broadcast channels (BCs). By assuming delayed CSIT from each receiver and perfect CSI at the receivers, they established the optimal sum-degrees of freedom (DoF). These results show that, by a careful design of linear precoding schemes, completely outdated CSIT, i.e. independent of the current channel state, can still significantly increase the DoF. Recently, [@vaze2010degrees] extended the work for two-user multi-input multi-output (MIMO) BCs and characterized the DoF region. The same feedback model has also been studied in [@maleki2010retrospective] where the so-called retrospective interference alignment has been proposed for networks with distributed encoders (e.g. interference channels and X-channels). Finally, [@vaze2011degrees] established the DoF region of the two-user MIMO interference channel.
The secrecy capacity of MISO Gaussian wiretap channel is not fully understood yet for the cases of partial (or imperfect) CSIT. Due to the difficulty of its complete characterization, a number of contributions have focused on secrecy degrees of freedom (SDoF) capturing the behavior in high signal-to-noise (SNR) regime (see e.g. [@yingbin2009compound; @khisti2010compound; @kobayashi2009compound; @kobayashi2010secrecy]). References [@yingbin2009compound; @khisti2010compound; @kobayashi2009compound] investigated compound models where the channel uncertainty is modeled as a set of finite states, while [@kobayashi2010secrecy] considered the case when the transmitter knows some special structure of the block-fading channels of receivers. In this paper, inspired by recent exciting results, we study the impact of delayed CSIT on the MISO Gaussian wiretap and the MISO Gaussian BC with confidential messages (BCC). We assume that delayed CSI is available both at the transmitter and at the receivers (or eavesdroppers), where each receiver knows its own instantaneous channel. We consider two different cases for the wiretap channel: (i) the “asymmetric scenario” where the transmitter has delayed CSI of either the legitimate channel or the eavesdropper channel, and (ii) the “symmetric scenario” where the transmitter has delayed CSI of both channels. It is shown that, similarly to the conclusion drawn in [@maddah2010degrees; @maleki2010retrospective], delayed CSIT can increase the SDoF. More precisely, by means of simple artificial noise schemes, a SDoF of $1/2$ can be guaranteed in the asymmetric scenario while a SDoF of $2/3$ is ensured in the symmetric case. It turns out that $2/3$ is the fundamental SDoF for symmetric scenario. Then, we consider the MISO BCC where the transmitter wishes to send two messages respectively to two receivers while keeping each of them secret to the unintended receiver. We characterize the SDoF region and show that the artificial noise to convey two messages enables to achieve the sum rate SDoF point $(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})$.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section II presents the system model while Section III provides an upper bound and artificial noise schemes for the wiretap channel. The SDoF region of MISO-BCC are derived in Section IV. Finally Section V concludes the paper. We should emphasize that all the results of this work apply for $M\geq 2$, although the achievability results are provided for $M=2$ for the sake of simplicity.
[**Notations:**]{} Upper case letters, lower case bold letters are used to denote random variables, vectors, respectively. $X^n$ denotes the sequence $(X_1,\ldots,X_n)$. ${{\bf A}}^{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}$ and ${{\hbox{tr}}}( {{\bf A}})$ denote the transpose and the trace of matrix ${{\bf A}}$, respectively. $h(X)$ denotes the differential entropy of random variable $X$. ${\mathcal{O}_P}$ denotes any real-valued function $f(P)$ such that ${\displaystyle \lim_{P\to \infty}} \frac{f(P)}{\log_2 P}=0$.
System Model
============
Consider the fading Gaussian MISO wiretap channel, where the transmitter with $M$ antennas sends a confidential message to the legitimate receiver in the presence of an eavesdropper. The corresponding channel models are given by $$\begin{aligned}
y_{t} = {\pmb{h}}_{t}^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}} {\pmb{x}}_{t} + e_{t}, \\
z_{t} = {\pmb{g}}_{t}^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}} {\pmb{x}}_{t} + b_{t},\end{aligned}$$ for $t=1,\ldots,n$, where $(y_{t}, z_{t})$ denotes the observations at the legitimate receiver and the eavesdropper at channel use $t$, associated to $M$-input single-output channel vector ${\pmb{h}}_{t},{\pmb{g}}_{t}\in{\mbox{\bb C}}^{M\times 1}$, respectively, and $(e_{t},b_{t})$ are assumed to be independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) additive white Gaussian noises $\sim{{\cal N}}_{{{\cal C}}}(0,1)$, the input vector ${\pmb{x}}_{t}\in{\mbox{\bb C}}^{M\times 1}$ is subject to the power constraint $
\frac{1}{n}\sum\limits_{t=1}^n {{\hbox{tr}}}( {\pmb{x}}_{t} {\pmb{x}}_{t}^H ) \leq P.
$ We assume any arbitrary stationary fading process where $\{{\pmb{h}}_{t}, {\pmb{g}}_{t}\}_{t=1}^\infty$ are mutually independent and change from a letter to another one in an independent manner.
A code for the Gaussian MISO wiretap channel with delayed CSI consists of:
- A sequence of stochastic encoders[^2] $F_t:\{1,\dots,M_n\}\times \{{\pmb{h}}_{1},\dots,{\pmb{h}}_{t-1}\} \times \{{\pmb{g}}_{1},\dots,{\pmb{g}}_{t-1}\} \longmapsto {\mbox{\bb C}}^{M}$ where the message $W$ is uniformly distributed over $\{1,\dots,M_n\}$,
- A legitimate decoder given by the mapping $\hat{W}:\{y_{1},\dots,y_{n}\}\times \{{\pmb{h}}_{1},\dots,{\pmb{h}}_{n}\} \longmapsto \{1,\dots,M_n\}$,
- The error probability is then defined by $$P_e^{(n)}=\Pr\left\{ \mathbf{W}\neq \mathbf{\hat{W}}\right\}.$$
An SDoF $d\geq 0$ is said [*achievable*]{} if there exists a code that simultaneously satisfies $$\begin{aligned}
\lim_{P\rightarrow \infty} \liminf_{n\rightarrow \infty} \frac{n^{-1} \log_2 M_n(P)}{\log_2 P}\geq d,\end{aligned}$$ with $$\begin{aligned}
\lim\limits_{n\rightarrow \infty} P_{e}^{(n)} = 0,\end{aligned}$$ and the equivocation $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:SecurityConstraints}
\lim_{P\rightarrow \infty} \limsup_{n\rightarrow \infty} \frac{n^{-1} I(W;Z^n,H^n,G^n)}{\log_2 P}=0.
\end{aligned}$$ The supremum of all achievable SDoF is then called the fundamental SDoF of the wiretap channel.
MISO Wiretap Channel with Delayed CSIT
======================================
The SDoF of the Gaussian MISO wiretap channel is upper-bounded by $1$, which is the DoF of a MISO channel. It is achievable when instantaneous CSI on either the legitimate or the eavesdropper channel is available at the transmitter. In this section, we first provide a new upper bound on the SDoF when no instantaneous CSI is available at the transmitter. It will then be shown that this upper-bound is achievable for the symmetric scenario where delayed CSIT from both the legitimate and eavesdropper channel is available.
Upper Bound on the SDoF
-----------------------
\[thm:ub\] Without instantaneous CSIT, the SDoF of the Gaussian MISO wiretap channel is upper-bounded by $d=\frac{2}{3}$.
For sake of clarity, we remove the channel state from the expressions since these can be considered as additional channel outputs. Before proving the Theorem, let us start by setting the following constraints: $$\begin{aligned}
h({Y}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1}, {Z}^{t-1}) &= h({Z}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1}, {Z}^{t-1}),
\label{eq:tmp01}\\
h({Y}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1}, {Z}^{t-1}, W) &= h({Z}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1}, {Z}^{t-1}, W),
\label{eq:tmp02}\end{aligned}$$for $t=1,\dots,n$. Note that these are direct consequences of our assumptions: (i) the legitimate and the eavesdropper channel have the same statistics, (ii) the channel input cannot depend on either of the instantaneous channels, and (iii) the marginal distributions of both outputs are equal given the same previous observations and/or the source message.
The following inequalities hold true under the constraints and : $$\begin{aligned}
h({Z}^n) &\ge h({Y}^n {\,\vert\,}{Z}^n), \label{eq:tmp1}\\
h({Y}^n) &\ge h({Z}^n {\,\vert\,}{Y}^n),\\
h({Z}^n{\,\vert\,}W) &\ge h({Y}^n {\,\vert\,}{Z}^n, W), \\
h({Y}^n{\,\vert\,}W) &\ge h({Z}^n {\,\vert\,}{Y}^n, W).
\end{aligned}$$
By symmetry of the problem, it is enough to prove the first inequality as follows $$\begin{aligned}
2h({Z}^n)&= 2\sum_{t=1}^n h({Z}_t {\,\vert\,}{Z}^{t-1}) \label{eq:cr1}\\
&\ge 2\sum_{t=1}^n h({Z}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1},
{Z}^{t-1})\label{eq:cond} \\
&= \sum_{t=1}^n h({Y}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1}, {Z}^{t-1}) +
h({Z}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1}, {Z}^{t-1}) \label{eq:tmp343}\\
&\ge \sum_{t=1}^n h({Y}_t, {Z}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1},
{Z}^{t-1}) \label{eq:tmp874} \\
&= h({Y}^{n}, {Z}^{n}) \label{eq:tmp291}\\
&= h({Z}^{n}) + h({Y}^{n} {\,\vert\,}{Z}^{n})
\label{eq:tmp754}
\end{aligned}$$ where and are from the chain rule; holds because conditioning reduces entropy; is from . From , is immediate.
We are now ready to provide the following lemma that is essential to our main results.
Under constraints and , we have: $$\begin{aligned}
h({Y}^n) &\le 2 h({Z}^n), \label{eq:tmp822}\\
h({Z}^n) &\le 2 h({Y}^n), \label{eq:tmp823}\\
h({Y}^n{\,\vert\,}W) &\le 2 h({Z}^n {\,\vert\,}W), \label{eq:tmp824}\\
h({Z}^n{\,\vert\,}W) &\le 2 h({Y}^n {\,\vert\,}W),\label{eq:tmp876} \\
I(W;{Y}^n) - I(W;{Z}^n) &\le h({Z}^n).\label{eq:tmp825}
\end{aligned}$$
To prove , from , we have $$\begin{aligned}
2 h({Z}^n) &\ge h({Y}^n, {Z}^n) \\
&= h({Y}^n) + h({Z}^n {\,\vert\,}{Y}^n) \\
&\ge h({Y}^n)
\end{aligned}$$ where the last inequality[^3] comes from the fact that $h({Z}^n {\,\vert\,}{Y}^n)\geq {\mathcal{O}_P}$. Same steps can be applied to obtain -. To show , we start from $$\begin{aligned}
h({Z}^n) &\ge h({Y}^n {\,\vert\,}{Z}^n) \\
&\ge I(W;{Y}^n {\,\vert\,}{Z}^n) \\
&\ge I(W;{Y}^n {\,\vert\,}{Z}^n) - I(W;{Z}^n {\,\vert\,}{Y}^n) \\
&= I(W;{Y}^n) - I(W;{Z}^n). $$
The inequality (\[eq:tmp876\]) implies that $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{I(W;{Y}^n) - I(W;{Z}^n)} \nonumber\qquad \\ &= h({Y}^n) -
h({Y}^n{\,\vert\,}W) - h({Z}^n) + h({Z}^n{\,\vert\,}W) \nonumber \\
&\le h({Y}^n) + \frac{1}{2} h({Z}^n{\,\vert\,}W) - h({Z}^n) \nonumber \\
&\le h({Y}^n) - \frac{1}{2} h({Z}^n)\label{eq:tmplast}\end{aligned}$$ By combining two bounds (\[eq:tmp876\]) and (\[eq:tmplast\]), we have $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{I(W;{Y}^n) - I(W;{Z}^n)} \nonumber\qquad \\ &\le \min\left\{ h({Z}^n),\ h({Y}^n) - \frac{1}{2}
h({Z}^n) \right\} \nonumber\\
&\le\max_{h({Y}^n)} \max_{h(Z^n)} \min\left\{ h({Z}^n),\ h({Y}^n) - \frac{1}{2}
h({Z}^n)
\right\} \\
&\le \frac{2}{3} n \log_2(P) + {\mathcal{O}_P}. \end{aligned}$$We now verify that and still hold given ${H}^n$ and ${G}^n$ $$\begin{aligned}
\lefteqn{h({Y}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1}, {Z}^{t-1}, {H}^n, {G}^n)}\qquad\\ &= h({Y}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1},
{Z}^{t-1}, {H}^{t-1}, {G}^{t-1}, {H}_t) \\
&= h({Z}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1}, {Z}^{t-1}, {H}^{t-1}, {G}^{t-1}, {G}_t) \\
&= h({Z}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1}, {Z}^{t-1}, {H}^n, {G}^n) \end{aligned}$$from the fact that current channel outputs do not depend on the future channel realizations. Similarly, $$\begin{gathered}
h({Y}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1}, {Z}^{t-1}, {H}^n, {G}^n, W) \\= h({Z}_t {\,\vert\,}{Y}^{t-1}, {Z}^{t-1}, {H}^n, {G}^n, W). \end{gathered}$$
We are ready to prove Theorem \[thm:ub\] as follows. From Fano’s inequality and the secrecy constraint we have that $$\begin{aligned}
n(R&-{\mathcal{O}_P}) \\
&\le I(W;{Y}^n {\,\vert\,}{H}^n, {G}^n) - I(W;{Z}^n {\,\vert\,}{H}^n, {G}^n) \\
&\le \min\left\{ h({Z}^n {\,\vert\,}{G}^n ),\ h({Y}^n {\,\vert\,}{H}^n ) - \frac{1}{2}
h({Z}^n {\,\vert\,}{G}^n ) \right\} \\
&\le \frac{2}{3} n \log_2 P,\end{aligned}$$which concludes the proof of the theorem.
Achievability: Symmetric Case
-----------------------------
With delayed CSIT on both the legitimate and eavesdropper channels, the upper bound is indeed achievable.
The fundamental SDoF of a two-user MISO wiretap channel with delayed CSIT from both the legitimate and the eavesdropper channel is $d=\frac{2}{3}$.
The converse follows from Theorem \[thm:ub\]. Inspired by the artificial noise (AN) scheme [@goel2008guaranteeing], we propose a three-slot scheme sending four independent Gaussian-distributed symbols ${\pmb{u}}{\triangleq}[u_1\ u_2]^{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}$, ${\pmb{v}}{\triangleq}[v_1\ v_2]^{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}$, whose powers scale equally with $P$. In the first slot, the AN ${{\bf u}}$ is sent. In the second slot, the transmitter sends the useful symbols ${\pmb{v}}$ together with the AN seen by the legitimate receiver in the first slot. Finally, we repeat the observation of the eavesdropper in the second slot (without thermal noise). By ignoring scaling terms in the transmit vectors, the channel inputs/outputs are given in -.
[[**x**]{}]{}\_1 &= & [[**x**]{}]{}\_2 &= + \[ [[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}0\]\^ & [[**x**]{}]{}\_3 &=\[[[**g**]{}]{}\_2 \^+ g\_[21]{}[[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}0\]\^ \[eq:tmp201\]\
y\_1 &= [[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^[[**u**]{}]{}+ e\_1 & y\_2 &= [[**h**]{}]{}\_2\^+ h\_[21]{}[[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}+ e\_2 & y\_3 &= h\_[31]{} [[**g**]{}]{}\_2 \^+ h\_[31]{}g\_[21]{}[[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}+ e\_3\
z\_1 &= [[**g**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}+ b\_1 & z\_2 &= [[**g**]{}]{}\_2 \^+ g\_[21]{}[[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}+ b\_2 & z\_3 &= g\_[31]{} [[**g**]{}]{}\_2 \^+g\_[31]{} g\_[21]{}[[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}+ b\_3 \[eq:tmp203\]
The received signals can be rewritten as $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{bmatrix} y_1 \\ y_2 \\ y_3\end{bmatrix} &=
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & {{\bf 0}}\\
h_{21} & {{\bf h}}_2^{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}\\
h_{31}g_{21} & h_{31}{{\bf g}}_2^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}}
\end{bmatrix}_{3\times3} \begin{bmatrix} {{\bf h}}_1^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}}{{\bf u}}\\
{\pmb{v}}\end{bmatrix}_{3\times1} +
\begin{bmatrix} e_1 \\ e_2\\ e_3\end{bmatrix}, \\
\begin{bmatrix} z_1 \\ z_2\\ z_3 \end{bmatrix} &= \begin{bmatrix}
{{\bf g}}_1^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}} & 0 \\
g_{21}{{\bf h}}_1^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}} & 1 \\
g_{31}g_{21}{{\bf h}}_1^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}} & g_{31}
\end{bmatrix}_{3\times3} \begin{bmatrix} {{\bf u}}\\
{{\bf g}}_2^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}}{\pmb{v}}\end{bmatrix}_{3\times1} + \begin{bmatrix} b_1 \\ b_2\\ b_3\end{bmatrix}.\end{aligned}$$The following remarks are in order; (i) since the equivalent channel matrix is full-rank, the useful signal ${\pmb{v}}$ can be recovered from ${{\bf y}}$, (ii) the eavesdropper’s observation is completely drowned in the artificial noise ${\pmb{u}}$. More precisely, we have $$\begin{aligned}
I({V};{Y}^3) &= 2 \log_2(P) + {\mathcal{O}_P}, \\
I({V};{Z}^3) &= {\mathcal{O}_P},\end{aligned}$$which implies a SDoF $d=2/3$.
Achievability: Asymmetric Case
------------------------------
(asymmetric case) With delayed CSIT only on the legitimate channel, an SDoF $d=1/2$ is achievable.
The achievability is based on the following two-slot scheme sending three independent Gaussian-distributed symbols ${\pmb{u}}{\triangleq}[u_1\ u_2]^{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}$ and $v$:
\_1 &= & \_2 &= \[\_1\^v\]\^\
y\_1 &= \_1\^+ e\_1 & y\_2 &= h\_[21]{} (\_1\^) + h\_[22]{} v + e\_2\
z\_1 &= \_1\^+ b\_1 & z\_2 &= g\_[21]{} (\_1\^) + g\_[22]{} v + b\_2
The received signal can be rewritten as $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{bmatrix} y_1 \\ y_2 \end{bmatrix} &=
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 \\ h_{21} & h_{22} \end{bmatrix}_{2\times2} \begin{bmatrix}
{\pmb{h}}_1^{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}{\pmb{u}}\\ v \end{bmatrix}_{2\times1} +
\begin{bmatrix} e_1 \\ e_2\end{bmatrix} \\
\begin{bmatrix} z_1 \\ z_2 \end{bmatrix} &= \begin{bmatrix}
{\pmb{g}}_1^{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}& 0 \\ g_{21} {\pmb{h}}_1^{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}& g_{22}
\end{bmatrix}_{2\times3}\begin{bmatrix} {\pmb{u}}\\ v
\end{bmatrix}_{3\times1} + \begin{bmatrix} b_1 \\ b_2\end{bmatrix} \end{aligned}$$from which we remark that: (i) the useful signal $v$ can be recovered from ${{\bf y}}$, and (ii) it is completely drowned in the artificial noise ${\pmb{u}}$ at the eavesdropper side, i.e., $$\begin{aligned}
I({V};{Y}^2) &= \log_2(P) + {\mathcal{O}_P}, \\
I({V};{Z}^2) &= {\mathcal{O}_P},\end{aligned}$$which implies an SDoF $d=1/2$.
It is still unknown if $1/2$ is the best possible SDoF with only delayed CSIT on the legitimate channel. Nevertheless, it can be shown that it is indeed optimal within the class of Gaussian inputs. As a matter of fact, we can show that $$\begin{aligned}
h({Z}^n {\,\vert\,}{H}^n, {G}^n) \ge h({Y}^n {\,\vert\,}{H}^n, {G}^n) + {\mathcal{O}_P}\end{aligned}$$the proof of which is omit due to page limit. Therefore, it is straightforward to get $$\begin{aligned}
n(R-{\mathcal{O}_P})
&\le I(W;{Y}^n {\,\vert\,}{H}^n, {G}^n) - I(W;{Z}^n {\,\vert\,}{H}^n, {G}^n) \\
&\le h({Z}^n {\,\vert\,}W, {H}^n, {G}^n) - h({Y}^n {\,\vert\,}W, {H}^n, {G}^n) \\
&\le \frac{1}{2} h({Z}^n {\,\vert\,}W, {H}^n, {G}^n) \\
&\le \frac{1}{2} n \log_2 P. \end{aligned}$$
Broadcast Channel with Confidential Messages (BCC)
==================================================
We now characterize the fundamental SDoF region of the two-user MISO-BCC with delayed CSIT on both channels. In this setting, the transmitter wishes to send two messages $(W_1,W_2)$ to receivers 1 and 2, respectively, while keeping each of them secret to the unintended receiver, i.e. $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Constraint1-bcc}
& \lim_{P\rightarrow \infty} \limsup_{n\rightarrow \infty} \frac{n^{-1} I(W_1;Z^n,H^n,G^n)}{\log_2 P}=0,\\ \label{eq:Constraint2-bcc}
& \lim_{P\rightarrow \infty} \limsup_{n\rightarrow \infty} \frac{n^{-1} I(W_2;Y^n,H^n,G^n)}{\log_2 P}=0. \end{aligned}$$ The channel models, the definition of a code and achievability remain similar to those of Section II. Let us begin with the proof of the outer bound on the SDoF region. Then, we show the achievability of the corner (sum SDoF) point involved in the region and by a simple time-sharing argument we will prove that our outer bound is tight.
Outer Bound on the SDoF Region of BCC
-------------------------------------
\[thm:ubBCC\] The SDoF region of the two-user MISO-BCC with delayed CSIT from both receivers is outer-bounded by $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{R}_{\textrm{BCC}} = \Big\{(d_1,d_2)\in\mathbb{R}_2^+:\quad
3d_1+d_2 \leq 2,\ d_1+3d_2 \leq 2 \Big\}.\end{aligned}$$ The region is illustrated in Fig. 1.
\[fig:Region\]
Obviously, the above region is included in that of the MISO-BC with delayed CSIT [@maddah2010degrees] as well as the rectangle region of the MISO-BCC with perfect CSIT. In Table \[table:comparison\], we summarize the achievable SDoF with no, delayed, and perfect CSIT and compare them the achievable DoF of the two-user MISO-BC. We remark that the degradation due to the imperfect CSIT is more significant in the secrecy communications.
no CSIT delayed CSIT perfect CSIT
---------- --------- --------------- --------------
MISO-BCC 0 1 2
MISO-BC 1 $\frac{4}{3}$ 2
: Sum SDoF of the MISO-BCC.
\[table:comparison\]
[[**x**]{}]{}\_1 &= & [[**x**]{}]{}\_2 &= \_1+ \[ [[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}0\]\^& [[**x**]{}]{}\_3 &= \_2+ \[[[**g**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}0\]\^& [[**x**]{}]{}\_4 &= \[ [[**g**]{}]{}\_2 \^\_1 + [[**h**]{}]{}\_3 \_2 + (h\_[31]{} [[**g**]{}]{}\_1\^ + g\_[21]{}[[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^ )[[**u**]{}]{}0\]\^\[eq:tmp401\]\
\_1 &= [[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^[[**u**]{}]{}& \_2 &= [[**h**]{}]{}\_2\^\_1 + h\_[21]{}[[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}& \_3 &= [[**h**]{}]{}\_3\^\_2 + h\_[31]{} [[**g**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}& \_4 &= h\_[41]{}([[**g**]{}]{}\_2 \^\_1 + [[**h**]{}]{}\_3 \^\_2 + (h\_[31]{} [[**g**]{}]{}\_1 + g\_[21]{}[[**h**]{}]{}\_1 )\^[[**u**]{}]{}) \[eq:tmp402\]\
\_1 &= [[**g**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}& \_2 &= [[**g**]{}]{}\_2 \^\_1 + g\_[21]{}[[**h**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}& \_3 &= [[**g**]{}]{}\_3 \^\_2 + g\_[31]{}[[**g**]{}]{}\_1\^ [[**u**]{}]{}& \_4 &=g\_[41]{}([[**g**]{}]{}\_2 \^\_1 + [[**h**]{}]{}\_3\^\_2 + (h\_[31]{} [[**g**]{}]{}\_1+ g\_[21]{}[[**h**]{}]{}\_1)\^[[**u**]{}]{}) \[eq:tmp403\]
First, the secrecy constraint (\[eq:Constraint1-bcc\]) and the Fano inequality for $W_2$ yield $$I(W_1;{Z}^n|W_2)\leq n {\mathcal{O}_P}\label{eq:ubBCC6}.$$ Combining with the Fano inequality on $W_1$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
n(R_1- {\mathcal{O}_P}) &\leq I(W_1;Y^n|W_2) - I(W_1;Z^n|W_2)\nonumber\\
&\leq I(W_1;Y^n|Z^n,W_2)\nonumber \\
&\leq h(Y^n|Z^n,W_2) \label{apply-lemma}\\
&\leq h(Z^n|W_2)\end{aligned}$$ where (\[apply-lemma\]) follows from inequality in Lemma 1 and the last inequality follows since removing the conditioning increases the entropy. We notice that the upper bound (\[eq:tmplast\]) holds true by replacing $W$ with $W_1$. Finally, we obtain the following upper bound for $R_1$: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:ubBCC7}
n(R_1- {\mathcal{O}_P}) \leq \min\{ h(Z^n|W_2), h(Y^n)-\frac{1}{2}h(Z^n)\}. \end{gathered}$$
On the other hand, the Fano inequality for $W_2$ leads to $$n(R_2- {\mathcal{O}_P}) \leq h({Z}^n) - h({Z}^n|W_2), \label{eq:ubBCC8}$$ By weight-summing the two inequalities (\[eq:ubBCC7\]) and (\[eq:ubBCC8\]), we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
n(3R_1+R_2- {\mathcal{O}_P})&\leq \max_{h(Y^n)}\max_{\alpha}\min\left\{ \alpha,\
3h(Y^n)-\frac{\alpha}{2} \right\}\\
&\leq \max_{h(Y^n)} 2h(Y^n)\\
& \leq 2n\log_2 P
$$ where we let $\alpha= h(Z^n)+2h(Z^n|W_2)$ in the first inequality and the last inequality follows because $h(Y^n)\leq n\log_2 P+{\mathcal{O}_P}$. By dividing both sides by $\log_2 P$ and letting $P$ grow, we obtain the first desired inequality. By swapping the roles of $R_1$ and $R_2$, we obtain the second inequality. This completes the proof.
It turns out that the outer bound given by Theorem \[thm:ubBCC\] is the fundamental SDoF region of the two-user MISO-BCC with delayed CSIT on both channels. We next prove that the cross point between two half-spaces is indeed achievable and hence by the simple time-sharing argument all pairs $(d_1,d_2)\in \mathcal{R}_{\textrm{BCC}}$ are achievable.
Achieving $(d_1, d_2) = (\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})$
--------------------------------------------------
As an extension of the three-slot scheme for the MISO wiretap channel, we propose a four-slot scheme sending six independent Gaussian-distributed symbols ${\pmb{u}}{\triangleq}[u_1\ u_2]^{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}$, ${\pmb{v}}_1 {\triangleq}[v_{11} \ v_{12}]^{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}$, ${\pmb{v}}_2 {\triangleq}[v_{21} \ v_{22}]^{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}$ whose powers scale equally with $P$. The channel inputs and outputs are given in -, where we let $\tilde{y}_t, \tilde{z}_t$ denote the received signal without thermal noise at receiver 1, 2, respectively. Compared to the three-slot scheme for the MISO wiretap channel,an additional time slot (third slot) is added to convey the message $W_2$ and the last slot is dedicated to send two signals overheard at the unintended receiver simultaneously. The observations at two receivers can be rewritten as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{obs-delayed2}
\left[\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{y}_1\\
\tilde{y}_2\\
\tilde{y}_3\\
\tilde{y}_4
\end{array}\right] = &\left[\begin{array}{ccc}
{{\bf 0}}& 1 & 0\\
{{\bf h}}_2^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}} & h_{21} & 0 \\
{{\bf 0}}& 0 & 1 \\
h_{41}{{\bf g}}_2^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}}& h_{41}g_{21} & h_{42}
\end{array}\right]
\left[\begin{array}{c}
{\pmb{v}}_1\\
{{\bf h}}_1^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}}{{\bf u}}\\
h_{31}{{\bf g}}_1^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}}{{\bf u}}+ {{\bf h}}_3^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}} {\pmb{v}}_2
\end{array}\right], \\
\left[\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{z}_1\\
\tilde{z}_2\\
\tilde{z}_3\\
\tilde{z}_4
\end{array}\right] = &\left[\begin{array}{ccc}
{{\bf 0}}& 1 & 0\\
{{\bf 0}}& 0 & 1 \\
{{\bf g}}_3^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}} & g_{31} &0 \\
g_{42}{{\bf h}}_3^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}}& g_{42}h_{31} & g_{41}
\end{array}\right]
\left[\begin{array}{c}
{\pmb{v}}_2\\
{{\bf g}}_1^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}}{{\bf u}}\\
{{\bf g}}_2^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}}{\pmb{v}}_1 + g_{21}{{\bf h}}_1^{{{\scriptscriptstyle\mathsf{T}}}}{{\bf u}}\end{array}\right]. \end{aligned}$$ We remark that 1) ${\pmb{v}}_2$ (resp. ${\pmb{v}}_1$) and the artificial noise ${\pmb{u}}$ are aligned in a two-dimensional subspace at receiver $1$ (resp. receiver $2$), while the useful signal ${\pmb{v}}_1$ (resp. ${\pmb{v}}_2$) also lies within a two-dimensional subspace, 2) ${\pmb{v}}_2$ (resp. ${\pmb{v}}_1$) is completely drowned in the artificial noise ${\pmb{u}}$ at receiver $1$ (resp. receiver $1$). It is readily shown that $$\begin{aligned}
I({V}_1;{Y}^4) &= 2 \log_2(P) + {\mathcal{O}_P}\\
I({V}_1;{Z}^4{\,\vert\,}{V}_2) &= {\mathcal{O}_P}\end{aligned}$$which implies degrees of freedom $d_1 = 1/2$. By symmetry, we have $d_2 =
1/2$.
Conclusions
===========
We studied the impact of delayed CSIT on secrecy degrees of freedom (SDoF) in the Gaussian MISO wiretap channel and the two-user Gaussian MISO broadcast channel with confidential messages (BCC). We fully characterized the corresponding SDoF region when the transmitter has delayed CSI on both channels and proved that simple artificial noise schemes are optimal. The comparison with the achievable DoF of the MISO-BC demonstrated the sensitivity of the secrecy rate to the quality of CSIT. On one hand, delayed CSIT substantially increases the SDoF (w.r.t. the case of no CSIT where the SDoF is zero). On the other hand, the lack of perfect CSIT yields a more severe loss in the secrecy communications.
Acknowledgment {#acknowledgment .unnumbered}
==============
This work was partially supported by the framework of the FP7 Network of Excellence in Wireless Communications NEWCOM++.
[1]{} \[1\][\#1]{} url@samestyle \[2\][\#2]{} \[2\][[l@\#1=l@\#1\#2]{}]{}
M. Maddah-Ali and D. Tse, “[On the degrees of freedom of MISO broadcast channels with delayed feedback]{},” *EECS Department, University of California, Berkeley, Tech. Rep. UCB/EECS-2010-122, Sep*, pp. 2010–122, 2010.
C. Vaze and M. Varanasi, “[The degrees of freedom region of the two-user MIMO broadcast channel with delayed CSI]{},” *Arxiv preprint arXiv:1101.0306*, 2010.
H. Maleki, S. Jafar, and S. Shamai (Shitz), “[Retrospective interference alignment]{},” *Arxiv preprint arXiv:1009.3593*, 2010.
C. Vaze and M. Varanasi, “The degrees of freedom region and interference alignment for the MIMO interference channel with delayed CSI,” *Arxiv preprint arXiv:1101.5809*, 2011.
, “[Compound wiretap channels]{},” *EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking*, vol. 2009, 2009.
A. Khisti, “[Interference alignment for the multi-antenna compound wiretap channel]{},” *Arxiv preprint arXiv:1002.4548*, 2010.
M. Kobayashi, Y. Liang, S. Shamai (Shitz), and M. Debbah, “[On the compound MIMO broadcast channels with confidential messages]{},” in *Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT’09), Seoul, Korea.*, 2009, pp. 1283–1287.
M. Kobayashi, P. Piantanida, S. Yang, and S. Shamai (Shitz), “[On the secrecy degrees of freedom of the multi-antenna block fading wiretap channels]{},” in *Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT’10), Austin, Texas, USA*, 2010, pp. 2563–2567.
S. Goel and R. Negi, “[Guaranteeing secrecy using artificial noise]{},” *IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications*, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 2180–2189, 2008.
[^1]: This work was partially supported by the framework of the FP7 Network of Excellence in Wireless Communications NEWCOM++.
[^2]: If delayed CSI from one terminal is available, the encoder depends only on $\{{\pmb{g}}_{1},\dots,{\pmb{g}}_{t-1}\}$ or $\{{\pmb{h}}_{1},\dots,{\pmb{h}}_{t-1}\}$.
[^3]: It is true since ${Z}^n$ contains AWGN that is independent from ${Y}^n$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- 'V. Doroshenko, A. Santangelo, V. Suleimanov, I. Kreykenbohm, R. Staubert, C. Ferrigno, D. Klochkov'
bibliography:
- '12951.bib'
title: 'Is there a highly magnetized neutron star in ?'
---
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
GX 301$-$2 (also known as 4U 1223$-$62) is a high-mass binary system, consisting of a neutron star orbiting the early optical companion Wray 977. The neutron star is a $\sim$680s X-ray pulsar [@White:1976p993], accreting from the dense wind of the optical companion. The wind’s mass-loss rate of the optical component is one of the highest known in the galaxy: [@Kaper:2006p1357]. Because the terminal velocity of the wind is very low ,@Kaper:20 [@06p1357]), the accretion rate is high enough to explain the observed luminosity of $L_{\mathrm{X}}\sim10^{37} \mathrm{erg}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$. The distance to the source is estimated to be between [@Parkes:1980p1360] and 5.3kpc , depending on the spectral classification of Wray 977. The latest estimate is 3kpc [@Kaper:2006p1357]. The orbit is highly eccentric with an eccentricity of $\sim$0.5 and an orbital period of $\sim41.5\,d$ [@Koh:1997p138]. The absence of X-ray eclipses despite the large radius ($R\sim43$R$_{\odot}$) of Wray 977 [@Parkes:1980p1360] constrains the inclination angle in the range $44-78^\circ$ with a best-fit value of $i\sim66^\circ$ [@Kaper:2006p1357; @Leahy:2008p358]. The source exhibits regular X-ray flares about 1–2d before the periastron passage (orbital phase $\sim0.95$). There is also an indication of a second flare at orbital phase $\sim0.5$ [@Koh:1997p138]. Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain the observed orbital lightcurve, including a circumstellar disk [@Koh:1997p138] and a quasi-stable accretion stream [@Leahy:2008p358]. Similar to other wind accreting systems, the pulse period behavior of on short time scales is described well by a random walk model [@deKool:1993p147]. exhibits a long-term pulse period evolution as well. The observed pulse period remained $\sim$700s until 1984 when it began to decrease during a rapid spin-up episode observed by *BATSE* [@Koh:1997p138; @Bildsten:1997p2328]. The spin-up trend reversed in 1993 [@Pravdo:2001p360] and ever since the pulse period has been increasing [@LaBarbera:2005p156; @Kreykenbohm:2004p155].
The X-ray spectrum of the is rich in features. The lower energy range is subject to heavy and variable photoelectric absorption [@White:1976p993]. As shown by [@Kreykenbohm:2004p155] and [@LaBarbera:2005p156], a partial covering model with two absorption columns is required to describe the spectrum. There is a complex of iron lines at $\sim$6.4 to 7.1keV [@Watanabe:2003p357]. A high-energy cutoff at , together with a deep and broad cyclotron resonance scattering feature (CRSF) at $\sim$30–45keV, is present at higher energies [@Makishima:1992p3220; @Orlandini:2000p153; @Kreykenbohm:2004p155; @LaBarbera:2005p156]. The CRSF is highly variable with pulse phase, and it exhibits interesting correlations with the continuum parameters [@Kreykenbohm:2004p155].
The nature of accreting pulsars with long pulse periods is still poorly understood. Because of the low moment of inertia of the neutron star, the accelerating torque of the accreted matter can spin up a neutron star very efficiently. Braking torques are then required to explain the observed long pulse periods. It is commonly assumed that the observed pulse period is determined by the equality of torques affecting the neutron star or relaxes to the value determined by this equality. Braking torques are generally associated with the coupling of the neutron star’s magnetic field with the surrounding plasma. The drag force depends on the relative linear speed of field lines at certain effective radius, which in turn depends on the magnetic field strength. The efficiency of braking decreases for slowly rotating and weakly magnetized neutron stars so a strong field (up to $10^{15}$G, @Shakura:1975p2764) is required to spin down a slowly rotating accreting X-ray pulsar even further. This results in an apparent contradiction with field estimates obtained from the CRSF centroid energy, which is $B\sim(E_\mathrm{cyc}\mathrm{keV}/11.57)\times10^{12}\mathrm{G}\sim4\times10^{12}\mathrm{G}$ in the case of and in the same order of magnitude as for other sources.
We suggest that this contradiction may be resolved if the line-forming region resides in an accretion column of significant height [@Basko:1976p1538], comparable to the neutron star radius. We investigate this hypothesis using *INTEGRAL* and *BATSE* observations to study the spectral and timing properties of .
Observations and data selection
===============================
The International Gamma-Ray Astronomy Laboratory (*INTEGRAL*) launched in October 2002 by the European Space Agency (ESA) is equipped with 3 co-aligned coded mask instruments: *IBIS* (Imager onboard the *INTEGRAL* Satellite, @Ubertini:2003p1120), *JEM-X* (Joint European X-ray Monitor, @Lund:2003p1129), and *SPI* (Spectrometer on *INTEGRAL*, @Vedrenne:2003p1138). Because of limited *SPI* sensitivity for variable sources, we rely on data from *IBIS* (the *ISGRI* layer) and *JEM-X* in this paper. Among the *INTEGRAL* instruments, *IBIS* has the largest field of view and, therefore, the highest probability of observing the source. We used a total of 554 available public pointings with within the *IBIS* half-coded field of view for the pulse period determination (i.e. for Table \[tab:perhist\]). These data include a long observation that covers $\sim60$% of the orbital cycle and is long enough to allow binary ephemeris estimation (283 pointings in *INTEGRAL* revolutions 322-330). Three dedicated observations (see Table \[tab:obs\]) were also performed during the pre-periastron flare and were used to study the spectrum of the source.
We also used results provided by the *ASM/RXTE* teams at *MIT* and at the *RXTE SOF* and *GOF* at *NASA*’s *GSFC* and *CGRO BATSE* pulsar *DISCLA* histories data by [@Bildsten:1997p2328] to study the long-term evolution of the spin period.
Observational results {#sec:data_analysis}
=====================
Timing analysis {#sub:timing_analysis}
---------------
To derive the intrinsic pulse period of the source, the lightcurve must be corrected for Doppler delays due to the orbital motion of the source and the satellite. Phase connection or pulse time arrival analysis is a precise timing technique, based on measuring arrival times of individual pulses or groups of pulses [@staubert2009]. It allows to determine the Doppler delays and therefore the orbital parameters of the system. A fixed phase of the pulsating flux from a pulsar is observed at times [@Nagase:1982p2720]: $$\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle T_n=T_0+P_0n+\frac{1}{2}\dot{P}P_0n^2 +\frac{1}{6}\ddot{P}{P_0}^2n^3 +...\\
\displaystyle \qquad {} ...+ a\sin(i)F_n(e,\omega,T_\mathrm{PA},\theta)
\end{array}
\label{eq:tn}$$ referred to as Time Of Arrival (TOA), where ${P}_{0}$, $\dot{P}$, and $\ddot{P}$ are the intrinsic pulse period and its time derivatives at the initial epoch $ {T}_{0}$. The last term represents the Doppler delays due to the orbital motion as a function of the Kepler parameters for an eccentric orbit: the projected semi-major axis $ a\sin{i}$ in light seconds ($ i$ is the orbit inclination), the eccentricity $e$, the longitude of the periastron $ \omega $, time of periastron passage $ T_\mathrm{PA} $, and the mean anomaly $\theta =2\pi{(T-T_\mathrm{PA})}/{P_\mathrm{orb}}$. To obtain a solution for the unknown pulse and orbital parameters, a number of measurements of $ {T}_{n}$ (for known $n$) must be obtained. Usually only $
{T}_{n,obs}$ is measured, while $ n$ must be found during the fitting procedure to obtain a self-consistent solution. The orbital period may be estimated either directly as one of the free parameters or by comparing periastron passage times of subsequent cycles (i.e. similarly to the pulse period). The latter method is more precise (see e.g. @staubert2009).
Using archival *ISGRI* observations and the standard *OSA* 6.1 software provided by *ISDC*[^1], we constructed lightcurves with 20s time bins in the energy range 20–40keV and determined the pulse arrival times (each pulse profile obtained by folding $\sim20$ individual pulses) for data from revolutions 322-330 using a technique similar to the one by [@Koh:1997p138]. This is the only *INTEGRAL* observation to cover a significant fraction of the orbital cycle, and it allows estimation of binary parameters. We then used Eq. \[eq:tn\] to determine $P$,$\dot{P}$ and $T_\mathrm{PA}$. The other orbital parameters were fixed to values reported by [@Koh:1997p138]. Our best-fit values are $P_\mathrm{pulse}=684.1618(3)\,\mathrm{s}$, $\dot{P}_\mathrm{pulse}=4.25(22)\times10^{-8}\,\mathrm{s}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ at the epoch $53523.8$, and $T_\mathrm{PA}=53531.63(1)$MJD. All uncertainties are at $1\sigma$ confidence level unless otherwise stated. Pulse delays from the orbital motion and residuals of the best-fit are plotted in Fig. \[fig:toa\].
![Time delays of pulse arrival times induced by the orbital motion. Changes due to the intrinsic variation of the spin period are subtracted. best-fit residuals are also shown. The best-fit periastron passage time is marked with a vertical line. The folded *RXTE ASM* orbital profile with the pre-periastron flare is plotted in gray.[]{data-label="fig:toa"}](12951fg0.eps)
Comparing our $T_\mathrm{PA}$ value with the historical values reported by [@ws84], [@Sato:1986p130] and [@Koh:1997p138] allows estimation of the orbital period.
![Residuals to fit over periastron passage times for orbital period with (circles) and without (triangles) inclusion of the orbital period derivative.[]{data-label="fig:orbper"}](12951fg1.eps)
Inclusion of our measurement requires introducing of a secular change to the orbital period. The quality of the fit improves significantly[^2]. The residuals to fit both with and without inclusion of a secular change are plotted in Fig. \[fig:orbper\]. Our best fit values are $P_\mathrm{orb}=41.506\pm0.003$d and $\dot{P}_\mathrm{orb}=(-3.7\pm0.5)\times10^{-6}\,\mathrm{s}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1
}$ at the reference time reported by [@Sato:1986p130]: $T_\mathrm{PA,0}=43906.06\pm0.11$. This estimate is consistent with the direct measurements of the orbital period both by [@Sato:1986p130] and by [@Koh:1997p138].
It should be emphasized that the commonly used value of P$_\mathrm{orb}$=41.498d by [@Koh:1997p138] was obtained by comparison of the $T_\mathrm{PA}$ values as well (the authors compared their value to that by [@Sato:1986p130] under the assumption of a constant orbital period). On the other hand, all published measurements including ours are consistently described when an orbital period derivative is included. For the time of the *INTEGRAL* observation, the predicted orbital period The periastron passage time measured with the orbital period value fixed to this prediction does not change significantly: $T_\mathrm{PA}=53531.65\pm0.01$MJD.
Because the pre-periastron flare in the orbital lightcurve of the source is associated with the periastron passage time, an additional check can be made using the long-term lightcurve of the source. We split a 10-year long *RXTE ASM* barycentered daily lightcurve of (all bands combined) into parts of $\sim5$ orbital cycles in length and folded each part with the orbital period $P_\mathrm{orb}$=41.498d to obtain a series of orbital profiles. The relative phase shifts and the associated orbital periods were then determined in the same way as for the pulse period. The best-fit value for a constant period is $P_\mathrm{orb}=41.482\pm0.001$d. The mean value of the orbital period, calculated using $P_\mathrm{orb}$ and $\dot{P}_\mathrm{orb}$ obtained above, is consistent with the observed value at the time of the *ASM* observations, although an orbital period derivative is not formally required by the *ASM* data alone.
A set of pulse period measurements with epoch folding was performed with the updated ephemeris. We grouped all available *INTEGRAL* data by the observation time by the “k-means” clustering algorithm [@MacQueen:1966p2718]. The number of groups was chosen such that the mean number of X-ray pulses within one group was $\sim50$. We searched for pulsations in each of the groups with epoch folding [@Larsson:1996p368]. A few groups where no pulsations were found because of insufficient statistics were rejected afterwards. The results are listed in Table \[tab:perhist\] and plotted in Fig. \[fig:perhist\] together with historical values for clarity. On average, continues to spindown after the first *INTEGRAL* observation of the source.
[MJD$_{\text{obs}}$]{} [Period,s.]{} [MJD$_{\text{obs}}$]{} [Period,s.]{}
------------------------ ----------------- ------------------------ -----------------
52833.5 $681.33\pm0.04$ 53538.0 $684.59\pm0.12$
53088.0 $683.42\pm0.07$ 53541.6 $684.4\pm0.04$
53525.9 $683.9\pm0.1$ 53545.6 $684.27\pm0.04$
53528.5 $684.19\pm0.16$ 53549.4 $684.15\pm0.05$
53529.7 $684.15\pm0.44$ 54111.9 $684.62\pm0.06$
53535.0 $684.73\pm0.05$ 54277.6 $685.15\pm0.07$
: Pulse period values obtained with archival *INTEGRAL* data.[]{data-label="tab:perhist"}
Spectral analysis {#sub:spectral_analysis}
-----------------
The observations listed in Table \[tab:obs\] were used to obtain the broadband spectrum of the source. Since all three observations were made at almost the same orbital phase, we combined all data to have better statistics. We used the standard OSA 6.1 pipeline for spectral extraction. A systematic error of 1% for all *ISGRI* and of 2% for all *JEM-X* spectra was assigned as suggested in the OSA documentation.
---------------- -------------- ----------- ----------- -------------
*INTEGRAL* MJD of Orbital Exposure, Rate,
science window observation phase ksec ctss$^{-1}$
05180027–66 54110.5–12.2 0.96–1.02 91.66 98
05730048–60 54276.3–76.9 0.95–0.97 31.98 163
05740012–40 54277.6–78.9 0.99–1.02 69.38 76
---------------- -------------- ----------- ----------- -------------
: Pointed observations of by *INTEGRAL*, with an updated ephemeris to calculate the orbital phase. \[tab:obs\]
Spectra of X-ray pulsars are usually described with phenomenological multi-component models. The continuum of was been modeled with a cut-off power law modified at low energy by photoelectric absorption. An iron emission K$_\alpha$ line was been also observed. In fact, there is a complex of iron lines at $\sim6.4\sim7.1$keV [@Watanabe:2003p357; @LaBarbera:2005p156] in the spectrum of . These are not resolved with *JEM-X*. We therefore used a simple Gaussian-shaped profile with larger width to formally describe this feature.
The photoelectric absorption of the source’s spectrum is strongly variable, and at least two absorption columns are identified. Part of the X-ray emission is thought to be strongly absorbed close to the neutron star, while all emission from this region is also subject to absorption in the overall stellar wind of the optical companion. A model describing this physical situation is the absorbed partial covering model [@Kreykenbohm:2004p155; @LaBarbera:2005p156].
From a more physical point of view, the spectrum of an accreting pulsar is believed to be mainly the result of a Comptonization processes of thermal photons in the accretion column and in the neutron star atmosphere. The emerging spectrum depends on the optical depth and generally has a power-law shape, with a cut-off at an energy corresponding to the temperature of the Comptonizing medium [$\sim3kT_e$, @Sunyaev:1980p2243]. Phenomenological models aim at describing this shape regardless of the optical depth. For two models have been used in literature. @LaBarbera:2005p156 adopted a modified “high energy” cut-off, while @Kreykenbohm:2004p155 used a so-called Fermi-Dirac cut-off. As discussed in [@pos], both models describe the *INTEGRAL* data well with parameters close to the published ones. It is somewhat difficult, however, to interpret these results from a physical point of view. We therefore focus here on a different description.
One of the first physical models to describe Comptonization spectra was proposed by [@Sunyaev:1980p2243]. Compton scattering in strong magnetic field is a more complicated problem [@Lyubarskii:1986p3028; @Meszaros1985], but for the saturated case ($\tau_e\gg1$) a blackbody-like spectrum is formed in both cases [@Lyubarskii:1986p3028]. The model is included in the standard *XSPEC* distribution as *COMPST*. Free parameters include the electron temperature of the medium $T_e$, optical depth $\tau_{e}$, and normalization $A_{st}$. We used this model because it contains the least number of free parameters and produces identical results to more complex models for . The pulse-phase averaged spectrum was extracted and fitted with the partially absorbed *COMPST* model. The fit results are listed in Table \[tab:spepars\]. Since the optical depth of the Comptonizing medium is very high, we verified that a simple black body model provides an equally good description of the data. The unabsorbed source flux in the same energy range is in both models.
A CRSF was necessary in the fit. This was included assuming a Gaussian-shaped profile. With the inclusion of the line the $\chi^2_{red}$ dropped from $\sim3.8$ (depending on the model) to values around 1.2 (see Table \[tab:spepars\]).
----------------------------------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- -- -- -- -- --
Parameter Absorbed Absorbed
blackbody *COMPST*
$N_{H,1}[10^{22} \rm{atoms}/\rm{cm}^2]$ $\le4$ $\le4$
$N_{H,2}[10^{22} \rm{atoms}/\rm{cm}^2]$ $178.3_{-6.7}^{+6.9}$ $175.6_{-9.9}^{+10.4}$
$c_{\rm F}$ $0.798_{-0.008}^{+0.008}$ $0.78_{-0.01}^{+0.01}$
$E_\mathrm{gabs}[\rm{keV}]$ $45.8_{-1.6}^{+1.7}$ $45.9_{-1.6}^{+1.8}$
$\sigma_\mathrm{gabs}[\rm{keV}]$ $15.0_{-1.7}^{+1.8}$ $15.1_{-1.8}^{+2.0}$
$d_\mathrm{gabs}$ $57.45_{-17.89}^{+23.66}$ $57.93_{-18.19}^{+25.93}$
$A_{bb/st}$ $0.31_{-0.04}^{+0.06}$ $0.35_{-0.05}^{+0.09}$
$T_e$\[[keV]{}\] $5.1_{-0.2}^{+0.2}$ $5.1_{-0.2}^{+0.3}$
$\tau_{e}$ – $42.3_{-3.9}^{+4.8}$
$E_\mathrm{Fe}[\rm{keV}]$ $6.32_{-0.02}^{+0.02}$ $6.32_{-0.02}^{+0.02}$
$\sigma_\mathrm{Fe}[\rm{keV}]$ $0.36_{-0.05}^{+0.04}$ $0.38_{-0.04}^{+0.04}$
$\chi^2$/dof 1.18/149 1.17/148
----------------------------------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- -- -- -- -- --
: Fit results for phase averaged spectra. Uncertainties are expressed at 90% confidence level.[]{data-label="tab:spepars"}
Discussion
==========
Orbital period evolution
------------------------
Our estimate of the rate of orbital period decay $\dot{P}_\mathrm{orb}/P_\mathrm{orb}\simeq-3.25\times10^{-5}\,\mathrm{yr}^{
-1}$ exceeds that of other known sources at least by one order of magnitude. Previous detections include Cen X$-$3 ($\dot{P}_\mathrm{orb}/P_\mathrm{orb}=-1.738\times10^{-6}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}
$ [@bagot and references therein], SMC X$-$1 ($\dot{P}_\mathrm{orb}/P_\mathrm{orb}=-3.36\times10^{-6}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$) and Her X$-$1 with $\dot{P}_\mathrm{orb}/P_\mathrm{orb}=-1.0\times10^{-8}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ [@staubert2009]. GX 301$-$2 is very different from all these systems. It is younger and has a highly eccentric orbit, while other systems have almost circular orbits. Both real and apparent changes in the orbital period are expected to be greater for an eccentric orbit.
We measured the rate of decay of the orbit by comparing the times of several periastron-passages. Those are determined by fitting the observed pulse delays as a function of orbital phase, and they may in principle be correlated with other model parameters, particularly with the longitude of periastron due to apsidal motion. The span of our data used for the pulse time arrival analysis does not allow both $T_{PA}$ and $\omega$ to be reliably constrained simultaneously. All published estimates of $\omega$ are also consistent with each other within uncertainties, but still we cannot rule out that apsidal motion contributes to the observed apparent change in the orbital period.
The eccentric orbit and very strong mass transfer in the system (the mass loss by the optical component is , [@Kaper:2006p1357]) suggest that some intrinsic changes in the orbital period are also expected.
The optical companion is much heavier than the neutron star and contributes almost nothing to the orbital angular momentum of the system. Direct mass loss via the stellar wind by the optical companion therefore does not lead to significant loss of the angular momentum. The optical star becomes less massive, leading to a longer orbital period [@Hilditch], which is the opposite of what is observed, although the rate of such change is very low.
To explain the decrease in the orbital period, one has to assume that the material carrying the angular momentum away must come from the vicinity of the neutron star, since it is the neutron star’s orbital motion that represents the bulk of the angular momentum in the system. We can see two mechanisms that could be responsible for the loss of angular momentum. First, material of the stellar wind that is streaming by the neutron star feels the gravitational pull of the moving neutron star. Only a fraction of this material is eventually accreted onto the neutron star, and the larger part is leaving the binary system and carrying some angular momentum away, since the interaction with the neutron star changed its trajectory. Second, before the matter is accreted onto the neutron star, it interacts with the neutron star’s magnetosphere (leading to spin-up and spin-down of the neutron star, as will be discussed below). However, the interaction with the magnetosphere may also lead to a magnetically driven outflow of material [@Illarionov:1990p1675; @Lovelace:1999p1780; @klochkov2009], again carrying angular momentum away. In addition, tidal coupling of the rotational frequency of the optical star with the orbital frequency could play some role, although estimates by @Leahy:2008p358 and @Hilditch suggest that, despite the high eccentricity, this is probably not very efficient. The details of the mass transfer and angular momentum loss in this system are not understood well, and more observations are required to secure the rate of change in the orbital period.
Torque balance and magnetic moment of the neutron star
------------------------------------------------------
The evolution of the spin frequency of the neutron star gives insight into the interaction of the accretion flow with the neutron star. The rotational dynamics is determined by the equation $$I\frac{d\omega}{dt}=K_++K_-$$ where $K_+$ and $K_-$ are the acceleration and deceleration torques, where $\omega$ is the pulse frequency, and $I$ the momentum of inertia of the neutron star.
Two rapid spin-up episodes observed by [@Koh:1997p138] indicate that a long lived accretion disk may sometimes form in GX 301$-$2. Both episodes are characterized by an increased source flux, which implies an increased accretion rate. The infrequent occurrence of such episodes argues against the hypothesis that they are triggered by tidal overflows at periastron (see [@Layton]) and suggests that mass loss episodes of Wray 977 may be responsible for them [@Koh:1997p138]. As concluded by [@Koh:1997p138], the pulse period decrease in 1984-1992 can be attributed entirely to similar spin-up episodes, while most of the time the neutron star accretes from the wind, and no net change of the pulse period is observed. It is therefore important to understand the torque balance in this case. This is why we focus on wind-accretion models.
In the case of quasi-spherical accretion from a stellar wind the accelerating torque can be expressed as [@Davies:1979p2881] $$K_+=\dot{M}k_w{R_{A}}^2\Omega_\mathrm{orb}
\label{eq:kw}$$ where $\Omega_\mathrm{orb}$ is the orbital frequency, $\dot{M}$ the accretion rate, $k_w$ dimensionless coefficient reflecting the efficiency of the angular momentum transfer, and $R_A$ the accretion radius given by $$R_{A}=\frac{2GM}{v_{rel}^2}\,,$$ where $B$ is the field strength, $R,M$ are the neutron star radius and mass, and $v_{rel}$ is the relative speed of the wind and the neutron star. Hydrodynamical simulations [@taam; @Fryxell; @ruffert:1992; @ruffert:1997] show that, due to the asymmetry of the accretion flow caused by the orbital motion of the neutron star and due to fluctuations in the speed and density of the local wind, short lived accretion disks may form. The disk direction alternates between prograde and retrograde depending on the local physical conditions. This causes the neutron star to alternate between short spin-up (prograde disk) and spin-down (retrograde disk) episodes, so a significant fraction of the angular momentum carried by the wind is cancelled out. To account for this decrease in the efficiency of angular momentum transfer, $k_w$ is introduced in Eq. \[eq:kw\]. Its value is a controversial topic, but simulations predict that it is rather small (absolute value less than $\sim1.2$ according to @Ho:1989p3226).
There are several models for the deceleration torque. According to @Davies:1979p2881 and @BisnovatyiKogan:1991p2029, an asymmetric magnetosphere of the accreting pulsar produces turbulent viscosity in the nearby wind, which brakes the neutron star: $$K_-=-\dot{M}\frac{\omega^2{R_m}^{7/2}}{4\sqrt{2GM}}
\label{eq:dav}$$ where $R_m$ is the magnetospheric radius given by $$R_m={\left(\frac{B^2{R}^6}{2\dot{M}\sqrt{2GM}}\right)}^{2/7}$$
Instead, [@Illarionov:1990p1675] explain the spin down as a result of the efficient angular momentum transfer from the rotating magnetosphere of the accreting star to an outflowing stream of magnetized matter. This outflow is said to be a result of the heating of the accreting matter by hard X-ray emission from the pulsar through Compton scattering. The outflow is focused within a certain solid angle owing the anisotropy of the pulsar emission. It has a lower density than the surrounding accreting matter due to the higher temperature, thus it is driven out by the buoyancy force. Angular momentum gain from the accreting gas is balanced by angular momentum loss via the outflow, enabling a spin-down of the neutron star under certain circumstances. In this model, $$K_-=-\dot{M}k\frac{\xi}{2\pi}{R_m}^2\omega\,,
\label{eq:k-}$$ where $\xi\sim1$ is the solid angle of the stream outflow. The dimensionless coefficient $k\sim2/3$ accounts for the orientation of the outflow with respect to the magnetic field. It is worth noting, that the equilibrium period obtained from the comparison of this torque with the accelerating torque has the same value (aside from the numerical coefficients) as second estimate by [@BisnovatyiKogan:1991p2029]. The braking torque there arises from the turbulent viscosity in the same way as in Eq. \[eq:dav\], but it is assumed, that the magnetosphere and accreting matter corotate, and the velocity for the velocity dependent viscosity coefficient is taken as the sound speed for the corresponding temperature at the magnetosphere boundary (and not as relative velocity of the wind and the magnetosphere). The angular momentum is then carried away with the turbulent motions. As noted by [@BisnovatyiKogan:1991p2029], the situation for real pulsars is probably somewhere in between these two estimates. The braking torques in both models may also include undetermined coefficients $\sim1$, which, can however, be incorporated into the accelerating torque term.
The torque balance, hence the rotational frequency derivative, depends on $\dot{M}$, so one has to investigate this dependence to study the rotational dynamics. Since the longest continuous pulse frequency monitoring campaign (for this source was carried out with BATSE [@Bildsten:1997p2328], we used the data products available at the [CGRO ](ftp://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/compton/data/batse/pulsar/histories/DISCLA_histories/gx301m2_psr_hist.fits)mission[^3]. The pulse frequency and pulse frequency derivative histories are provided for the entire *BATSE* lifetime. Both were determined for a set of $\sim4$d intervals using the phase connection technique assuming the ephemeris by [@Koh:1997p138] for binary-motion corrections (see [@Bildsten:1997p2328; @Koh:1997p138] for details). The corresponding *BATSE* pulsed flux in the 20–50keV energy range, averaged over the interval is also provided.
Contrary to the report by [@Inam:2000p144], a correlation between the angular frequency derivative ($\dot{\omega}=2\pi\dot{\nu}$) and the flux (see Fig. \[fig:flux\_fdot\]) was found (Pearson correlation coefficient 0.96, null hypotheses probability 8$\times10^{-6}$).
The discrepancy between our findings and the ones reported in [@Inam:2000p144] lie in their method of estimating frequency derivatives. With the *BATSE* data set that we used, [@Inam:2000p144] estimate pulse frequency derivatives by grouping the provided frequency values in intervals of $\sim30$d and averaging between the left and right frequency derivatives calculated using these values for each interval. This approach is incorrect because it assumes that the frequency values provided by [@Koh:1997p138] alone characterize the average pulse frequency during the corresponding observation time, while the average pulse frequency also depends on the frequency derivative included in the fit and on the observation length. For this approach to work it is required to remove the frequency derivative in the fit for the pulse arrival times in the raw *BATSE* data, which was not done by [@Inam:2000p144]. There is also a second point to question in their analysis. To obtain values of the first derivative, [@Inam:2000p144] use frequency values on intervals of $\sim$30d, comparable to the orbital period of the system. Both the pulse frequency and the flux are known to change on much shorter time scales in GX 301$-$2. Averaging on such a long interval smoothes out most of the flux and pulse frequency variations, making it difficult to find the correlation between the two quantities.
On the other hand, we used $\dot{\omega}$ and flux values directly measured for each observation with phase connection. The points in Fig. \[fig:flux\_fdot\] were obtained by averaging provided frequency derivative values of points with flux in a given range. The standard error was used as an uncertainty estimate. We excluded both spin-up episodes observed by [@Koh:1997p138] (i.e. MJD 48440–48463 and MJD 49230$-$49245) and intervals where pulsations were not detected reliably (see @Koh:1997p138) from the further analysis.
To investigate the accretion models and compare them to the data, we need to express the accretion rate as a function of the count rate, not a trivial task. The conversion depends on the distance, radiative efficiency of accretion, and beaming factor. We assumed that the mean source flux derived from the spectra obtained with the *INTEGRAL* pointed observations corresponds to the mean *BATSE* count-rate at the same orbital phase. Then we assumed a conversion factor of $10^{37}$ergs$^{-1}\simeq10^{17}$gs$^{-1}$ which corresponds to the radiative efficiency of accretion $\sim10$%, $L_\mathrm{x}\sim0.1\dot{M}\rm{c}^2$) to estimate the accretion rate. The distance to the source is uncertain so the derived value should account for the spread of the estimates (1.4-5.3kpc). Apparently, $K_+$, hence the torque balance, depends significantly on the efficiency of angular momentum transfer $k_w$ and on the relative velocity of the neutron star and the wind.
The orbit of GX 301$-$2 is eccentric, so the orbital speed of the neutron star changes significantly along the orbit. The wind, on the other hand, is also accelerated from the sound speed at the surface of Wray 977 ($\sim10$kms$^{-1}$) to a terminal velocity of 300–400kms$^{-1}$ at infinity [@castor]: $$v_w(r)=v_0+(v_\infty-v_0)(1-R_*/r)^\beta$$ where $v_0$ is the velocity at the surface of the star close to the sound speed, $v_\infty$ the terminal wind speed, and $\beta\sim1$ for O-type stars. Radial and tangential components of the neutron star as function of orbital phase $\theta$ are $$v_r=\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{p}}e\sin{\theta},\,\,\,\,v_t=\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{p}}(1+e\cos{\theta})\\$$ where $\mu=G(\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{opt}}+\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{NS}})$, $p=a(1-e^2)$, $e$ is the eccentricity, and $a\sim1.2\times10^{13}$cm is the semi-major axis for $i=66^\circ$. It turns out that, while both the orbital speed of the neutron star and the wind speed are strong functions of the orbital phase, the relative velocity varies only by a factor of 2 (see Fig. \[fig:diagram\]).
![Sketch of the GX 301$-$2 system. The relative speed of the neutron star and wind, the orbital velocity of the neutron star, and the intrinsic velocity of the wind close to the neutron star are plotted as a function of the orbital phase. Velocities are normalized to maximal relative velocity $\sim380$kms$^{-1}$, and distances to the periastron distance $\sim1.75\times10^{13}$cm.[]{data-label="fig:diagram"}](12951fg5.eps)
Each flux bin in Fig. \[fig:flux\_fdot\] contains measurements performed at different orbital phases. We then calculated an average relative speed for each flux bin to properly estimate $R_A$. It turns out, however, that the relative speed varies only within 5% and consequently $R_A$ does not changes significantly (see Fig. \[fig:flux\_fdot\]).
The absolute value of $k_w$ cannot be arbitrarily small, otherwise the source will not be able to spin up, while this is clearly the case when the flux exceeds a certain value. The value of $k_w$ can, therefore, be estimated using the observed frequency derivative over accretion rate dependence. We only measure flux, so the accretion rate and $k_w$ are parametrized by the assumed distance. For each distance in the range of published estimates from 1.4 to 5.3kpc, we calculated the accretion rate and estimated $k_w$ and $B$ as free parameters of models defined by Eqs. \[eq:kw\]–\[eq:k-\] where we assumed M=1.4$M_\odot$, R=$10^6$cm, I=1.4$\times10^{45}$gcm$^2$, $v_\infty$=300kms$^{-1}$, k=2/3, and $\xi$=0.87. The estimated values are presented in Fig. \[fig:kwb\]. The $k_w$ range is in line with estimates obtained by [@Ho:1989p3226] and with later claims that the average amount of angular momentum transferred from the wind to the neutron star is relatively small [@ruffert:1992; @ruffert:1997]. It is likely that the mechanisms to generate the braking torques assumed in the models may act simultaneously, so we attempted to find the magnetic field required in this case by including both torques. The required field strength, however, is not significantly reduced and still exceeds $10^{14}$G (see Fig. \[fig:kwb\]).
It is important to emphasize that the frequency derivative and therefore torque affecting the neutron star are consistent with zero for the average source flux. This means that, for the average conditions during the observations, the period is close to a so-called equilibrium period (i.e. when the torques are balanced). This is also in line with the long-term pulse period evolution (see Fig. \[fig:perhist\]). The knowledge of the equilibrium period allows estimation of the magnetic field for the average luminosity even without knowing the exact dependency of torque with luminosity. For example, for the [@Davidson:1973p2909], [@Davies:1979p2881], [@BisnovatyiKogan:1991p2029] model in the case of torque equivalence, the field strength may be expressed as $$\begin{aligned}
B \approx 3\times10^{14}\,\mathrm{G}\left(\frac{k_w}{0.25}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{\dot{M}_\mathrm{eq}}{10^{17}\,\mathrm{g/s}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{v_{rel}}{400\,\mathrm{km/s}}\right)^{-2} \\ \nonumber
\times \left(\frac{P}{680\,\mathrm{s}}\right)\left(\frac{P_\mathrm{orb}}{41.5\,\mathrm{d}}\right)^{-1/2}\left(\frac{M}{1.4M_\odot}\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{R}{10^6\,\mathrm{cm}}\right)^{-3}\nonumber.\end{aligned}$$ The equivalent equation for the [@Illarionov:1990p1675] model is $$\begin{aligned}
B \approx 2\times10^{14}\,\mathrm{G}\left(\frac{k_w}{0.25}\right)^{7/8}\left(\frac{k}{2/3}\right)^{-7/8}\left(\frac{\xi}{0.87}\right)^{-7/8}\left(\frac{\dot{M}_\mathrm{eq}}{10^{17}\,\mathrm{g/s}}\right)^{1/2}\\ \nonumber
\left(\frac{v_{rel}}{400\,\mathrm{km/s}}\right)^{-7/2} \left(\frac{P}{680\,\mathrm{s}}\right)^{7/8}\left(\frac{P_\mathrm{orb}}{41.5\,\mathrm{d}}\right)^{-7/8}\left(\frac{M}{1.4M_\odot}\right)^{2}\left(\frac{R}{10^6\,\mathrm{cm}}\right)^{-3}\nonumber.\end{aligned}$$ The strength of the magnetic field calculated under the assumption of an equilibrium period using the models for systems accreting from the persistent disk [@Lovelace:1999p1780; @Ghosh:1979p1676] is even
Implications of the strong magnetic field.
------------------------------------------
As shown above, a very strong magnetic field is required to explain the long pulse period of the GX 301$-$2. Other authors [@Li:1999p3188] argue that a long-period pulsating source might be a relic of magnetar evolutionary phase, when the field is strong enough to sufficiently spin the neutron star down, and demonstrate the feasibility of this scenario for . However, this does not apply to GX 301$-$2, since the source is in torque equilibrium and therefore the field has to be very strong presently, unless there are some unidentified braking torques. The observed CRSF energy, on the other hand, corresponds to a field of $B\sim4\times10^{12}$G, which contradicts our previous conclusion.
We suggest that it may be resolved if the line-forming region is situated far above the neutron star’s surface (i.e. in the accretion column). To reconcile a surface field of $\sim10^{14}$G with the one derived from the observed CRSF energy, one must assume that the CRSF is formed at height $H\sim R_\mathrm{NS}(({B_\mathrm{surf}/B_\mathrm{CRSF}})^{1/3}-1)\sim2-3\,R_\mathrm{NS}$ (see Fig. \[fig:sketch\]).
The accretion column rises owing to the radiation pressure when the flux from the hotspot on the neutron star surface becomes comparable to a critical flux (local Eddington luminosity). The column height increases with the accretion rate to allow the excess energy to radiate away from the side surface. The observed color temperature 4–5keV of the spectrum suggests that the accretion column is likely to form in this source. Indeed, the effective critical temperature, which corresponds to the critical flux, is $T_{\rm Edd} \sim$2keV for standard neutron star parameters ($M=1.4\,M_\odot$, $R$=10$^6$cm) and solar composition of the accreting matter. The observed spectrum is expected to be close to the diluted Plank spectrum $B_E$: $F_E \approx B_E(T_c)/f_c^4$, with a color temperature $T_c = f_c T_{\rm{eff}}$ and a hardness factor because of the Compton scattering [@pavlov1991]. This qualitative picture is similar in the case of Compton scattering in the strong magnetic field [@Lyubarskii:1986p3028], so the measured color temperature probably corresponds to a critical effective temperature at the neutron star surface (or at a certain height above the surface, but in this case the temperature at the surface is expected to be even higher, so the accretion column forms anyway).
It is possible to estimate the height of the accretion column, and it turns out to be compatible with the requirement mentioned above: $H\sim2-3\,R_\mathrm{NS}$. Indeed, the accretion column base radius can be estimated from the neutron star magnetic moment $r \approx R_\mathrm{NS}
(R_\mathrm{NS}/R_{\rm H})^{1/2}$ [@Lipunov:1992p2320]. The magnetospheric radius is $\approx(3-30)\times10^8$cm for a magnetic field in the range $10^{12}-10^{14}$G. The corresponding radius of the column base is . The accretion column height may then be estimated using cylindrical geometry, and the critical effective temperature from the observed luminosity $\displaystyle L \approx 10^{37}$ erg s$^{-1}$ $\approx 2~ \sigma_{\rm SB} T_{\rm Edd}^4~ 2\pi r$. This simple estimate gives $H \approx$ 8–20km (for B=$10^{12}-10^{14}$G and $\dot{M}=1.2\times10^{17}$gs$^{-1}$). More elaborate calculations by [@Basko:1976p1538], and [@Lyubarsky1988] give similar results (depending on the assumed accretion column geometry).
As shown by @Basko:1976p1538 [see Fig. 4 and accompanying discussion], the amount of energy released by a unit of height of the accretion column is almost constant, so a significant part of emission comes from the outer parts of it. The contribution of the outer parts is especially important because the inner parts of the column are more easily obscured by the neutron star. It is natural to assume that X-ray emission and cyclotron line formation regions coincide, so the whole column contributes to the formation of the CRSF. The magnetic field strength and the other physical properties depend on height, so a mix of cyclotron lines coming from regions with different physical properties are observed [@Nishimura:2008p2969]. The contribution of the outer parts of the column to the cyclotron line formation is especially important because the field there is weaker, so the line is observed at lower energies, which makes it easier to detect.
The formation of the pulse profile and the spectrum of a tall accretion column has not yet been understood and is beyond the scope of this work, although some characteristic features may be reckoned. The color temperature in the column increases towards the neutron star surface. The inner and hotter parts of the column are more likely to be obscured by the neutron star, so the pulse fraction increases with temperature (hence energy). For certain pulse phases, the inner parts of the column are obscured by the neutron star, and we can see only the outer, relatively cool parts, while a larger part of the column is seen at other phases. The pulse fraction is also expected to decrease with the increase in the column height and therefore with the source luminosity, which is indeed the case for GX 301$-$2 [@lutovinov].
The magnetic field strength increases towards the neutron star, so one can expect the centroid energy of the CRSF to be anti-correlated with total column height (hence luminosity) and correlated with the effective color temperature (or the cutoff energy, which is believed to be proportional to temperature). The latter is indeed the case for , as reported by @Kreykenbohm:2004p155 [see Table 3], while the correlation of the line energy with the luminosity is not confirmed because the cyclotron line was never detected outside of the pre-periastron flare.
When the vertical span of the observed part of the column is short, the line width is also expected to be smaller. In contrast, the line becomes wider when a larger part of the column is observed as the magnetic field increases by an order of magnitude from the column top to the bottom. This could explain the “line width - line energy” correlation reported by @Kreykenbohm:2004p155 for GX 301$-2$ and also by @Coburn:2002p158 for several other sources. As was concluded by @Coburn:2002p158, the observed correlation is independent of the spectral model used and is not affected by selection effects. It can therefore be considered as an intrinsic correlation between CRSF parameters. The proposed scenario with a tall accretion column explains it and complements the explanation of this correlation by @Coburn:2002p158, who attribute it to a change in the viewing angle with respect to the magnetic field (see also @1992herm.book.....M).
The cyclotron line formation in a tall column with temperature gradient was investigated in detail by [@Nishimura:2008p2969] with similar conclusions. He considered a surface field of $\sim10^{12}$G and about an order of magnitude less at the top of the accretion column. Both the height of the column and the range of the physical parameters within it are expected to be greater for a stronger surface field, but the results should be similar. Detailed modeling of the accretion column which accounts for light-bending and beaming is, however, required to clarify the expected shape, and pulse-phase dependence of the spectrum. The pulse profile shape and phase dependence of the spectrum in GX 301$-$2 [@Kreykenbohm:2004p155] is similar to other luminous slow-pulsating sources like [@vela] and [@4u1538]. Common spectral features include a correlation of CRSF energy with the width and with the cutoff energy (which characterizes the continuum temperature) in phase-resolved spectra, so the discussion above may also be relevant for these objects.
It is worth noting that the mass of the optical counterpart is very high, so one can expect that the second supernova explosion in the system may take place before the magnetic field decays significantly. Such an explosion will most likely disrupt the system and leave an isolated neutron star with a magnetar-like magnetic field and the long pulse period. The observational appearance of such an object is unclear. The strong magnetic field might power a magnetar-like emission, however, known magnetars (i.e. soft gamma-repeaters and anomalous X-ray pulsars) have much shorter pulse periods.
![Results of fitting frequency derivative – flux correlation (see Fig. \[fig:flux\_fdot\]) with [@Illarionov:1990p1675] (solid), [@Davidson:1973p2909], [@Davies:1979p2881], [@BisnovatyiKogan:1991p2029] (dashed) and a model with both braking torques in place (dotted) depending on assumed distance, hence mean accretion rate. The required magnetic field strength B (bottom pane) depends on the efficiency of angular momentum transfer $k_w$ (top pane), which is constrained by the fit.[]{data-label="fig:kwb"}](12951fg6.eps)
![Sketch of a radiation-dominated accretion column. Temperature and magnetic field strength increase towards the neutron star surface.[]{data-label="fig:sketch"}](12951fg7.eps)
Summary and conclusions
=======================
In this work we studied the timing and spectral properties of using the archival data of *INTEGRAL* and data products of *CGRO BATSE* and *RXTE ASM*. An orbital-period’s secular change was detected and the pulse period history since May 2005 determined. This shows a steady spin-down trend. The apparent rate of decay of the orbital period is about an order of magnitude higher than for other known sources. We argue that this is probably caused by angular momentum loss by material expelled from the vicinity of the neutron star to the outside world. However, we cannot at this time exclude some contribution from a possible apsidal motion to the observational appearance.
Results of our spectral analysis are consistent with previous works, although we find that the spectrum is described well not only with phenomenological models, but also with a saturated comptonization model.
We discussed a possible scenario to explain the long pulse period and long spin-down trends observed despite steady accretion of matter and angular momentum onto the neutron star. We studied the balance of the torques affecting the neutron star using *BATSE/DISCLA* data by [@Bildsten:1997p2328] and find that the rotational frequency derivative is correlated with the flux. We also find that the frequency derivative is zero for the average count rate, which is a signature that the observed pulse period reflects torque equilibrium during the observations’ time span. The scenario invoked by [@Li:1999p3188] to explain the long period of cannot therefore be applied to since the observed pulse period is close to equilibrium. We investigated several published torque models to constrain the magnetic field strength and found that all of them require the field to be $\ga10^{14}$G. The magnetic field strength derived from the observed CRSF energy turns out to be $\sim4\times10^{12}$G, i.e. at least an order of magnitude less than from the timing. We argue that this can be explained if the line-forming region resides high up in the accretion column. We show that the accretion column as high as $\sim$ 10 – 20km is expected to form in in the framework of the [@Basko:1976p1538] model and that it is sufficient to reconcile the very strong field at the surface with the observed cyclotron line energy. Following the scenario proposed by [@Nishimura:2008p2969], we conclude that these correlations may be explained qualitatively by a simultaneous change of height and vertical span of the observed region with pulse phase if the line-forming region resides in a tall accretion column with a temperature gradient. The quantitive description of the spectrum with a model such as the one developed by [@Nishimura:2008p2969] and detailed pulse profile formation modeling is, however, required to confirm this scenario.
An alternative scenario is that the long pulse period is explained by the presence of some unidentified braking torque, which is less dependent on magnetic field strength, and the CRSF pulse phase variability is attributed, as concluded by [@Kreykenbohm:2004p155], to multipole field components.
We sincerely wish to thank N. Shakura, K. Postnov, and the anonymous referee for the useful comments and discussions, which helped to improve the paper. V.D., D.K., and C.F thank the DFG for financial support (grants DLR 50 OR 0702 and DLR 50 OG 0601). VS thanks the DFG for financial support (grant SFB/Transregio 7 “Gravitational Wave Astronomy”), and for partial support the RBRF(grant ). We also acknowledge the support of the International Space Science Institute (Bern). This research is based on observations with INTEGRAL, an ESA project with the instruments and science data center funded by ESA member states (especially the PI countries: Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Spain), the Czech Republic, and Poland, with the participation of Russia and the USA.
[^1]: http://isdc.unige.ch
[^2]: The $\chi^2$ drops from 52 to 0.52 with an F-test significance of $\sim98\%$
[^3]:
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We calculate the branching ratio for the production of the meson $Y(4260)$ in the decay $B^- \to Y(4260)K^-$. We use QCD sum rules approach and we consider the $Y(4260)$ to be a mixture between charmonium and exotic tetraquark, $[\bar{c}\bar{q}][qc]$, states with $J^{PC}=1^{--}$. Using the value of the mixing angle determined previously as: $\theta=(53.0\pm0.5)^\circ$, we get the branching ratio $\mathcal{B}(B\to Y(4260)K)=(1.34\pm0.47)\times10^{-6}$, which allows us to estimate an interval on the branching fraction $3.0 \times 10^{-8} < {\mathcal B}_{_Y} < 1.8 \times 10^{-6}$ in agreement with the experimental upper limit reported by Babar Collaboration.'
author:
- 'R.M. Albuquerque'
- 'M. Nielsen'
- 'C.M. Zanetti'
title: 'Production of the $Y(4260)$ state in B meson decay'
---
The $Y(4260)$ state was first observed by BaBar collaboration in the $e^+e^-$ annihilation through initial state radiation [@babar1], and it was confirmed by CLEO and Belle collaborations [@yexp]. The $Y(4260)$ was also observed in the $B^-\to Y(4260)K^-\to J/\Psi\pi^+\pi^-K^-$ decay [@babary2], and CLEO reported two additional decay channels: $J/\Psi\pi^0\pi^0$ and $J/\Psi K^+K^-$ [@yexp]. The $Y(4260)$ is one of the many charmonium-like state, called $X,~Y$ and $Z$ states, recently observed in $e^+e^-$ collisions by BaBar and Belle collaborations that do not fit the quarkonia interpretation. The production mechanism, masses, decay widths, spin-parity assignments and decay modes of these states have been discussed in some reviews [@Zhu:2007wz; @Nielsen:2009uh; @Brambilla:2010cs; @Nielsen:2014mva]. The $Y(4260)$ is particularly interesting because some new states have been identified in the decay channels of the $Y(4260)$, like the $Z_c^+(3900)$. The $Z_c^+(3900)$ was first observed by the BESIII collaboration in the $(\pi^\pm J/\psi)$ mass spectrum of the $Y(4260)\to J/\psi\pi^+\pi^-$ decay channel [@Ablikim:2013mio]. This structure, was also observed at the same time by the Belle collaboration [@Liu:2013dau] and was confirmed by the authors of Ref. [@Xiao:2013iha] using CLEO-c data.
The decay modes of the $Y(4260)$ into $J/\psi$ and other charmonium states indicate the existence of a $\bar{c}c$ in its content. However, the attempts to classify this state in the charmonium spectrum have failed since the $\Psi(3S),~\Psi(2D)$ and $\Psi(4S)$ $c\bar{c}$ states have been assigned to the well established $\Psi(4040),~\Psi(4160),~$ and $\Psi(4415)$ mesons respectively, and the prediction from quark models for the $\Psi(3D)$ state is 4.52 GeV. Therefore, the mass of the $Y(4260)$ is not consistent with any of the $1^{--}$ $c\bar{c}$ states [@Zhu:2007wz; @Nielsen:2009uh].
Some theoretical interpretations for the $Y(4260)$ are: tetraquark state [@tetraquark], hadronic $D_{1} D$, $D_{0} D^*$ molecule [@Ding], $\chi_{c1} \omega$ molecule [@Yuan], $\chi_{c1} \rho$ molecule [@liu], $J/\psi f_0(980)$ molecule [@oset], a hybrid charmonium [@zhu], a charm-baryonium [@Qiao], a cusp [@eef1; @eef2; @eef3], etc. Within the available experimental information, none of these suggestions can be completely ruled out. However, there are some calculations, within the QCD sum rules (QCDSR) approach [@Nielsen:2009uh; @svz; @rry; @SNB], that can not explain the mass of the $Y(4260)$ supposing it to be a tetraquark state [@rapha], or a $D_{1} D$, $D_{0} D^*$ hadronic molecule [@rapha], or a $J/\psi f_0(980)$ molecular state [@Albuquerque:2011ix].
In the framework of the QCDSR the mass and the decay width, in the channel $J/\psi\pi\pi$, of the $Y(4260)$ were computed with good agreement with data, considering it as a mixing between two and four-quark states [@Dias:2012ek]. The mixing is done at the level of the hadronic currents and, physically, this corresponds to a fluctuation of the $c \overline{c}$ state where a gluon is emitted and subsequently splits into a light quark-antiquark pair, which lives for some time and behaves like a tetraquark-like state. The same approach was applied to the $X(3872)$ state and good agreement with the data were obtained for its mass and the decay width into $J/\psi\pi\pi$ [@x3872mix], its radiative decay [@x3872rad], and also in the $X(3872)$ production rate in $B$ decay [@x3872prod].
In this work we will focus on the production of the $Y(4260)$, using the mixed two-quark and four-quark prescription of Ref. [@Dias:2012ek] to perform a QCDSR analysis of the process $B^-\to Y(4260)K^-$. The experimental upper limit on the branching fraction for such a production in $B$ meson decay has been reported by BaBar Collaboration [@babary2], with $95\%$ C.L., $$\label{branching}
{\mathcal B}_{_Y} <\! 2.9\times10^{-5}$$ where ${\mathcal B}_{_Y} \equiv {\mathcal B}
(B^- \!\!\to\! K^- Y(4260),Y(4260) \!\to\! J/\psi\pi^+\pi^-)$.
![The process for production of the $Y(4260)$ state in B meson decay, mediated by an effective vertex operator ${\mathcal O}_2$.[]{data-label="weakdecay"}](byk_eff.eps){width="35.00000%"}
The process $B\to Y(4260)K$ occurs via weak decay of the $b$ quark, while the $u$ quark is a spectator. The $Y$ meson as a mixed state of tetraquark and charmonium interacts via $\bar{c}c$ component of the weak current. In effective theory, at the scale $\mu\sim m_b\ll m_W$, the weak decay is treated as a four-quark local interaction described by the effective Hamiltonian (see Fig. \[weakdecay\]): $$\lb{ham}
{\mathcal{H}}_W=\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}V_{cb}V_{cs}^*\left[\left(C_2(\mu)+
\frac{C_1(\mu)}{3}\right)
{\mathcal{O}}_2+\cdots\right]\,,$$ where $V_{ik}$ are CKM matrix elements, $C_1(\mu)$ and $C_2(\mu)$ are short distance Wilson coefficients computed at the renormalization scale $\mu\sim{\mathcal O}(m_b)$. The four-quark effective operator is ${\mathcal{O}}_2=J_{\mu}^{(\bar{c}c)}J_{\mu}^W$, with $$\lb{wcurrents} J_{\mu}^W=\bar{s}\Gamma_\mu b\,,\quad
J_{\mu}^{(\bar{c}c)}=\bar{c}\Gamma_\mu c\,,$$ and $\Gamma_\mu=\gamma_\mu(1-\gamma_5)$.
Using factorization, the decay amplitude of the process is calculated from the Hamiltonian (\[ham\]), by splitting the matrix element in two pieces: $$\begin{aligned}
\lb{amp}
{\mathcal M}
&=&i\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}V_{cb}V_{cs}^*\left(C_2+\frac{C_1}{3}\right)\nn\\&
\times&\langle B(p)\vert J_{\mu}^W\vert K(p^\prime)\rangle\langle Y(q)
\vert J^{\mu(\bar{c}c)}\vert0\rangle, \end{aligned}$$ where $p=p^\prime+q$. Following Ref. [@x3872prod], the matrix elements in Eq. ([\[amp\]]{}) are parametrized as: $$\lb{2pmatrix}
\langle Y(q)\vert J_{\mu}^{(\bar{c}c)}\vert0\rangle=\lambda_W
\epsilon^\ast_\mu(q)\,,$$ and $$\lb{3pmatrix}
\langle B(p)\vert J_{\mu}^W\vert K(p^\prime)\rangle=f_+(q^2)(p_\mu+
p_\mu^\prime)+f_-(q^2)(p_\mu-p_\mu^\prime)\,.$$ The parameter $\lambda_W$ in (\[2pmatrix\]) gives the coupling between the current $J_\mu^{(\bar{c}c)}$ and the $Y$ state. The form factors $f_\pm(q^2)$ describe the weak transition $B\to K$. Hence we can see that the factorization of the matrix element describes the decay as two separated sub-processes.
The decay width for the process $B^-\to Y(4260)K^-$ is given by $$\lb{eqwidth}
\Gamma(B\to YK)=\frac{\vert{\mathcal{M}}\vert^2}{16\pi m_B^3}\sqrt{\lambda(m_B^2,m_K^2,m_Y^2)},$$ with $\lambda(x,y,z)=x^2+y^2+z^2-2xy-2xz-2yz$. The invariant amplitude squared can be obtained from (\[amp\]), using (\[2pmatrix\]) and (\[3pmatrix\]): $$\begin{aligned}
\vert\mathcal{M}\vert^2&=&\frac{G_F^2}{2 m_Y^2}\vert V_{cb}V_{cs}\vert^2\left(C_2
+\frac{C_1}{3}\right)^2\nn\\\nn\\
&\times& \lambda(m_B^2,m_K^2,m_Y^2)\lambda_W^2f_+^2
\,. \end{aligned}$$
The coupling constant $f_ +$ was determined in Ref.[@x3872prod] through extrapolation of the form factor $f_+(Q^2)$ to the meson pole $Q^2 = - m_Y^2$, using the QCDSR approach for the three-point correlator [@bcnn]: \_(p,p\^)&=&d\^4x d\^4y e\^[i(p\^x-p y)]{}0T{J\_\^W(0)\
&&J\_K(x)J\^\_B(y)}0, where the weak current, $J^W_\mu$, is defined in (\[wcurrents\]) and the interpolating currents of the $B$ and $K$ pseudoscalar mesons are: $$J_K = i\,\bar{u}_a \gamma_5 s_a \,,\quad J_B=i\,\bar{u}_a
\gamma_u b_a\,.$$
The obtained result for the form factor was [@x3872prod]: $$\lb{fplus}
f_+(Q^2)=\frac{(17.55\pm0.04) \GeV^2}{(105.0\pm1.8)\GeV^2+Q^2}\,.$$ For the decay width calculation, we need the value of the form factor at $Q^2=-m_Y^2$, where $m_Y$ is the mass of the $Y(4260)$ meson. Using $m_Y=(4251\pm9)\MeV$ [@pdg] we get: $$\lb{fpluspolo}
f_+(Q^2)\vert_{Q^2=-m_Y^2}=0.206\pm0.004\,.$$ The parameter $\lambda_W$ can also be determined using the QCDSR approach for the two-point correlator: $$\Pi_{\mu\nu}(q)=i\int d^4y~e^{iq\cdot y}\langle0\vert T\{J_\mu^Y(y)
J_\nu^{(\bar{c}c)}(0)\}\vert0\rangle\,,
\label{2point}$$ where the current $J_\nu^{(\bar{c}c)}$ is defined in (\[wcurrents\]). For the $Y$ meson we will follow [@Dias:2012ek] and consider a mixed charmonium-tetraquark current: J\_\^Y = J\_\^[(4)]{} + J\_\^[(2)]{}, \[jmix\] where J\_\^[(4)]{} &=& , \[j4q\] J\_\^[(2)]{}=( |[c]{}\_a\_c\_a ) J\_\^[’(2)]{} . In Eq. (\[jmix\]), $\theta$ is the mixing angle that was determined in [@Dias:2012ek] to be: $\theta=(53.0\pm0.5)^0$.
Inserting the currents (\[wcurrents\]) and (\[jmix\]) in the correlator we have in the OPE side of the sum rule $$\begin{aligned}
\Pi^{\mathrm{OPE}}_{\mu\nu}(q)&=&\sin\theta\,
\Pi^{4,2}_{\mu\nu}(q)
+\frac{\qq}{\sqrt{2}}\cos\theta\,
\Pi^{2,2}_{\mu\nu}(q)\,, \end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\Pi^{4,2}_{\mu\nu}(q)&=&i\int d^4y ~e^{iq\cdot y}\langle0\vert T\{
J_\mu^{(4)}(y)J_{\nu(\bar{c}c)}(0)\}\vert0\rangle\nn\\
\Pi^{2,2}_{\mu\nu}(q)&=&i\int d^4y ~e^{iq\cdot y}\langle0\vert T\{
J_\mu^{'(2)}(y)J_{\nu(\bar{c}c)}(0)\}\vert0\rangle\,.
\label{pi24}\end{aligned}$$ Only the vector part of the current $J_\nu^{(\bar{c}c)}$ contributes to the correlators in Eq. (\[pi24\]). Therefore, these correlators are the same as the ones calculated in Ref. [@Dias:2012ek] for the mass of the $Y(4260)$.
------------------------- ---------------------------------------------
Parameters Values
$\overline{m}_c$ $(1.23 - 1.47) \GeV$
$\qq$ $ \hspace{-0.25cm}-(0.23 \pm 0.03)^3\GeV^3$
$\gGG$ $(0.88 \pm 0.25)~\GeV^4$
$m_0^2 \equiv \qGq/\qq$ $(0.8 \pm 0.1) ~\GeV^2$
------------------------- ---------------------------------------------
: QCD input parameters.
\[Param\]
To evaluate the phenomenological side we insert intermediate states of the $Y$: $$\begin{aligned}
\Pi_{\mu\nu}^{phen}(q)&=&\frac{i}{q^2-m_Y^2}\langle0\vert J^Y_\mu\vert
Y(q)\rangle\langle Y(q)\vert J^{(\bar{c}c)}_\nu\vert0\rangle\,,\nn\\
&=&\frac{i\lambda_Y\lambda_W}{Q^2+m_Y^2}\left(g_{\mu\nu}-\frac{q_\mu q_\nu}
{m_Y^2}\right) \end{aligned}$$ where $q^2=-Q^2$, and we have used the definition (\[2pmatrix\]) and $$\langle0\vert J^Y_\mu\vert Y(q)\rangle=\lambda_Y\epsilon_\mu(q)\,.$$ The parameter $\lambda_Y$, that defines the coupling between the current $J^Y_\mu$ and the $Y$ meson, was determined in Ref. [@Dias:2012ek] to be: $\lambda_Y = (2.00 \pm 0.23) \times 10^{-2} ~ \GeV^5$. As usual in the QCDSR approach, we perform a Borel transform to $Q^2\to M_B^2$ to improve the matching between both sides of the sum rules. After performing the Borel transform in both sides of the sum rule we get in the $g_{\mu\nu}$ structure: $$\begin{aligned}
\lb{2psumrule}
\lambda_W\lambda_Ye^{-\frac{m_Y^2}{M_B^2}}=
\frac{\sin \theta}{\sqrt{2}}\,\Pi^{4,2}(M_B^2)
+\frac{\qq}{\sqrt{2}} \cos \theta\,
\Pi^{2,2}(M_B^2) ~~~~~~\end{aligned}$$ where the invariant functions $\Pi^{2,2}(M_B^2)$ and $\Pi^{4,2}(M_B^2)$ are written in terms of a dispersion relation, $$\begin{aligned}
\Pi(M_B^2) = \int\limits_{4m_c^2}^{\infty} \!ds ~e^{-s/M_B^2} \:\rho(s) ~~,\end{aligned}$$ with their respective spectral densities $\rho^{2,2}(s)$ and $\rho^{4,2}(s)$ given in Appendix.
We perform the calculation of the coupling parameter $\lambda_W$ using the same values for the masses and QCD condensates as in Ref. [@Dias:2012ek] which are listed in Table \[Param\]. To be consistent with the calculation of $\lambda_Y$ we also use the same region in the threshold parameter $s_0$ as in Ref. [@Dias:2012ek]: $\sqrt{s_{0}} = (4.70 \pm 0.10)$ GeV. As one can see in Fig. \[figLW\], the region where we get $M_B^2$-stability is given by: $(8.0 \leq M_B^2 \leq 25.0) \GeV^2$.
Taking into account the variation in the Borel mass parameter, in the continuum threshold, in the quark condensate, in the coupling constant $\lambda_Y$ and in the mixing angle $\theta$, the result for the $\lambda_W$ parameter is: $$\lb{lambdaW}
\lambda_W=(0.90\pm0.32)\GeV^2\,.$$ Thus we can calculate the decay width in Eq. (\[eqwidth\]) by using the values of $f_+(-M_Y^2)$ and $\lambda_W$, determined in Eqs. (\[fpluspolo\]) and (\[lambdaW\]). The branching ratio is evaluated dividing the result by the total width of the $B$ meson $\Gamma_{\mathrm{tot}}=4.280 \times 10^{-4} \:\mbox{eV}$: $$\lb{result}
\mathcal{B}(B\to Y(4260)K)=(1.34\pm0.47)\times10^{-6}\,,$$ where we have used the CKM parameters $V_{cs}=1.023$, $V_{cb}=40.6\times10^{-3}$ [@pdg], and the Wilson coefficients $C_1(\mu)=1.082$, $C_2(\mu)=-0.185$, computed at $\mu=m_b$ and $\bar{\Lambda}_{\mathrm{MS}}=225\MeV$ [@buras].
![The coupling parameter $\lambda_W$ as a function of $M_B^2$, for different values of the continuum threshold.[]{data-label="figLW"}](LW.eps){width="45.00000%"}
In order to compare the branching ratio in Eq. (\[result\]) with the branching fraction obtained experimentally in Eq. (\[branching\]), we might use the results found in Ref. [@Dias:2012ek]: $$\mathcal{B}(Y(4260) \to J/\psi \:\pi^+\pi^-) = (4.3 \pm 0.9)\times10^{-2}\,,
\label{brY}$$ and then, considering the uncertainties, we can estimate ${\mathcal B}_{_Y} >\! 3.0 \times 10^{-8}$. However, it is important to notice that the authors in Ref. [@Dias:2012ek] have considered two pions in the final state coming only from intermediate states, e.g. $\sigma$ and $f_0(980)$ mesons, which could indicate that the result in Eq. (\[brY\]) can be underestimated. In this sense, considering that the main decay channel observed for the $Y(4260)$ state is into $J/\psi \:\pi^+\pi^-$, we would naively expect that the branching ratio into this channel could also be $\mathcal{B}(Y(4260) \to J/\psi \:\pi^+\pi^-) \sim 1.0$, which would lead to the following result, ${\mathcal B}_{_Y} <\! 1.8 \times 10^{-6}$. Therefore, we obtain an interval on the branching fraction $$3.0 \times 10^{-8} < {\mathcal B}_{_Y} < 1.8 \times 10^{-6}$$ which is in agreement with the experimental upper limit reported by Babar Collaboration given in Eq. (\[branching\]). In general the experimental evaluation of the branching fraction takes into account additional factors related to the numbers of reconstructed events for the final state ($J/\psi \:\pi^+\pi^- \:K$), for the reference process ($B \to Y(4260) \:K$), and for the respective reconstruction efficiencies. However, since such information has not been provided in Ref. [@babary2], we have neglected these factors in the calculation of the branching fraction ${\mathcal B}_Y$. Therefore, the comparison of our result with the experimental result could be affected by these differences.
In conclusion, we have used the QCDSR approach to evaluate the production of the $Y(4260)$ state, considered as a mixed charmonium-tetraquark state, in the decay $B\to YK$. Using the factorization hypothesis, we find that the sum rules result in Eq. (\[result\]), is compatible with the experimental upper limit. Our result can be interpreted as a lower limit for the branching ratio, since we did not considered the non-factorizable contributions.
Our result was obtained by considering the mixing angle in Eq. (\[jmix\]) in the range $\theta=(53.0\pm0.5)^0$. This angle was determined in Ref. [@Dias:2012ek] where the mass and the decay width of the $Y(4260)$ in the channel $J/\psi\pi^+\pi^-$ were determined in agreement with experimental values. Therefore, since there is no new free parameter in the present analysis, the result presented here strengthens the conclusion reached in [@Dias:2012ek] that the $Y(4260)$ is probably a mixture between a $c\bar{c}$ state and a tetraquark state.
As discussed in [@x3872prod], it is not simple to determine the charmonium and the tetraquark contribution to the state described by the current in Eq. (\[jmix\]). From Eq. (\[jmix\]) one can see that, besides the $\sin\theta$, the $c\bar{c}$ component of the current is multiplied by a dimensional parameter, the quark condensate, in order to have the same dimension of the tetraquark part of the current. Therefore, it is not clear that only the angle in Eq. (\[jmix\]) determines the percentage of each component. One possible way to evaluate the importance of each part of the current it is to analyze what one would get for the production rate with each component, [*i.e.*]{}, using $\theta=0$ and $90^\circ$ in Eq. (\[jmix\]). Doing this we get respectively for the pure tetraquark and pure charmonium: $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathcal{B}}(B\to Y_{\mathrm{tetra}}K) &=& (1.25\pm0.23)\times10^{-6}\,, \\
{\mathcal{B}}(B\to Y_{\bar{c}c}K) &=&(1.14\pm0.20)\times10^{-5}\,. \end{aligned}$$ Comparing the results for the pure states with the one for the mixed state (\[result\]), we can see that the branching ratio for the pure tetraquark is one order smaller, while the pure charmonium is larger. From these results we see that the $c\bar{c}$ part of the state plays a very important role in the determination of the branching ratio. On the other hand, in the decay $Y\to J/\psi\pi^+\pi^-$, the width obtained in our approach for a pure $c\bar{c}$ state is [@Dias:2012ek]: $$\lb{xppcc}
\Gamma(Y_{\bar{c}c}\to J/\psi\pi\pi)=0\,,$$ and, therefore, the tetraquark part of the state is the only one that contributes to this decay, playing an essential role in the determination of this decay width.
Therefore, although we can not determine the percentages of the $c\bar{c}$ and the tetraquark components in the $Y(4260)$, we may say that both components are extremely important, and that, in our approach, it is not possible to explain all the experimental data about the $Y(4260)$ with only one component.
Acknowledgment {#acknowledgment .unnumbered}
==============
This work has been partially supported by São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), grant n.2012/22815-3, and National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq-Brazil).
Spectral Densities for the Two-point Correlation Function
=========================================================
We list the spectral densities for the invariant functions related to the coupling between the current $J^{(\bar{c}c)}_\mu$ and the $Y(4260)$ state. We consider the OPE contributions up to dimension-five condensates and keep terms at leading order in $\alpha_s$. In order to retain the heavy quark mass finite, we use the momentum-space expression for the heavy quark propagator. We calculate the light quark part of the correlation function in the coordinate-space and use the Schwinger parametrization to evaluate the heavy quark part of the correlator. For the $d^4y$ integration in Eq. (\[2point\]), we use again the Schwinger parametrization, after a Wick rotation. Finally, the result of these integrals are given in terms of logarithmic functions through which we extract the spectral densities. The same technique can be used for evaluating the condensate contributions.
Then, in the $g_{\mu\nu}$ structure, we evaluate the spectral densities for the $\Pi^{2,2}(M_B^2)$ function, $$\begin{aligned}
\rho^{2,2}(s) \!&=&\! \frac{m_c^2}{4\pi^2} ~v\Big( 2+ \frac{1}{x} \Big) +
\frac{\gGG}{48\pi^2} ~\frac{v}{M_B^2}\bigg[ 4\Big( 1-\frac{1}{x} \Big) \hspace{1cm} \nn\\
&& ~- \frac{m_c^2}{M_B^2 \:x} \Big( 11 - \frac{5}{x} \Big)
+ \Big( \frac{m_c^2}{M_B^2 \:x} \Big)^2 \Big( 3 - \frac{1}{x} \Big) \bigg],\end{aligned}$$ and for the $\Pi^{2,4}(M_B^2)$ function, $$\begin{aligned}
\rho^{2,4}(s) \!&=&\! -\frac{m_c^2 \:\qq}{12\pi^2} ~v\Big( 2 \!+\! \frac{1}{x} \Big) +
\frac{\qGq}{24\pi^2} ~v \Big( 1 \!-\! \frac{m_c^2}{M_B^2 \:x} \Big) \hspace{0.7cm}\end{aligned}$$ where we have used the definitions $$\begin{aligned}
x &=& m_c^2 /s \\
v &=& \sqrt{1-4x} ~~.\end{aligned}$$
[999]{}
B. Aubert [*et al.*]{} \[BaBar Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**95**]{}, 142001 (2005).
Q. He [*et al.*]{} \[CLEO Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. D [**74**]{}, 091104(R) (2006); C.Z. Yuan [*et al.*]{} \[Belle Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**99**]{}, 182004 (2007).
B. Aubert [*et al.*]{} \[BaBar Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. D [**73**]{}, 011101 (2006).
S. L. Zhu, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E [**17**]{}, 283 (2008) \[hep-ph/0703225\].
M. Nielsen, F. S. Navarra and S. H. Lee, Phys. Rept. [**497**]{}, 41 (2010) \[arXiv:0911.1958\].
N. Brambilla, [*et al.*]{}, Eur. Phys. J. [**C71**]{}, 1534 (2011) \[arXiv:1010.5827\].
M. Nielsen and F. S. Navarra, Mod. Phys. Lett. A [**29**]{}, 1430005 (2014) \[arXiv:1401.2913\].
M. Ablikim [*et al.*]{} \[BESIII Collaboration\], [Phys. Rev. Lett. ]{} [**110**]{}, 252001 (2013).
Z.Q. Liu [*et al.*]{} \[BELLE Collaboration\], [Phys. Rev. Lett. ]{} [**110**]{}, 252002 (2013).
T. Xiao, S. Dobbs, A. Tomaradze and K.K. Seth, [Phys. Lett. B ]{} [**727**]{}, 366 (2013).
L. Maiani, V. Riquer, F. Piccinini and A. D. Polosa, Phys. Rev. [**D72**]{}, 031502 (2005).
G. J. Ding, Phys. Rev. [**D79**]{}, 014001 (2009).
C. Z. Yuan, P. Wang and X. H. Mo, Phys. Lett. [**B634**]{}, 399 (2006).
X. Liu, X. Q. Zeng and X. Q. Li, Phys. Rev. [**D72**]{}, 054023 (2005).
A. Martinez Torres, K. P. Khemchandani, D. Gamermann, E. Oset, Phys. Rev. [**D80**]{}, 094012 (2009) \[arXiv:0906.5333\].
S. L. Zhu, Phys. Lett. [**B625**]{}, 212 (2005).
C. F. Qiao, Phys. Lett. [**B639**]{}, 263 (2006).
E. van Beveren and G. Rupp, arXiv:hep-ph/0605317.
E. van Beveren and G. Rupp, arXiv:0904.4351.
E. van Beveren and G. Rupp, Phys. Rev. [**D79**]{}, 111501 (2009).
M.A. Shifman, A.I. and Vainshtein and V.I. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. B [**147**]{}, 385 (1979).
L.J. Reinders, H. Rubinstein and S. Yazaki, Phys. Rept. [**127**]{}, 1 (1985).
For a review and references to original works, see e.g., S. Narison, [*QCD as a theory of hadrons, Cambridge Monogr. Part. Phys. Nucl. Phys. Cosmol.*]{} [**17**]{}, 1 (2002) \[hep-h/0205006\]; [*QCD spectral sum rules , World Sci. Lect. Notes Phys.*]{} [**26**]{}, 1 (1989); [ Acta Phys. Pol.]{} B [**26**]{}, 687 (1995); [ Riv. Nuov. Cim.]{} [**10N2**]{}, 1 (1987); [ Phys. Rept.]{} [**84**]{}, 263 (1982).
R.M. Albuquerque and M. Nielsen, Nucl. Phys. [**A815**]{}, 53 (2009); Erratum-ibid. A857 (2011) 48.
R. M. Albuquerque, M. Nielsen and R. R. da Silva, Phys. Rev. D [**84**]{}, 116004 (2011) \[arXiv:1110.2113 \[hep-ph\]\].
J. M. Dias, R. M. Albuquerque, M. Nielsen and C. M. Zanetti, Phys. Rev. D [**86**]{}, 116012 (2012) \[arXiv:1209.6592\].
R. D. Matheus, F. S. Navarra, M. Nielsen and C. M. Zanetti, Phys. Rev. D [**80**]{}, 056002 (2009) \[arXiv:0907.2683\].
M. Nielsen and C. M. Zanetti, Phys. Rev. D [**82**]{}, 116002 (2010) \[arXiv:1006.0467 \[hep-ph\]\].
C. M. Zanetti, M. Nielsen and R. D. Matheus, Phys. Lett. B [**702**]{}, 359 (2011) \[arXiv:1105.1343 \[hep-ph\]\].
M. E. Bracco, M. Chiapparini, F. S. Navarra and M. Nielsen, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. [**67**]{}, 1019 (2012) \[arXiv:1104.2864\].
K.A. Olive [*et al.*]{} (Particle Data Group), Chin. Phys. C [**38**]{}, 090001 (2014).
G. Buchalla, A. J. Buras and M. E. Lautenbacher, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**68**]{}, 1125 (1996) \[arXiv:hep-ph/9512380\].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'One studies plane Cremona maps by focusing on the ideal theoretic and homological properties of its homogeneous base ideal (“indeterminacy locus”). The [*leitmotiv*]{} driving a good deal of the work is the relation between the base ideal and its saturation. As a preliminary one deals with the homological features of arbitrary codimension $2$ homogeneous ideals in a polynomial ring in three variables over a field which are generated by three forms of the same degree. The results become sharp when the saturation is not generated in low degrees, a condition to be given a precise meaning. An implicit goal, illustrated in low degrees, is a homological classification of plane Cremona maps according to the respective homaloidal types. An additional piece of this work relates the base ideal of a rational map to a few additional homogeneous “companion” ideals, such as the integral closure, the $\boldsymbol\mu$-fat ideal and a seemingly novel ideal defined in terms of valuations.'
---
\
[^1] [^2] [^3]
Introduction {#introduction .unnumbered}
============
Let $k$ be an algebraically closed field and let $R=k[\XX]=k[X_0,\ldots,X_n]$ denote a polynomial ring over $k$, endowed with the ordinary standard grading. A rational map $F\colon\pp^n\dasharrow \pp^n$ is defined by $n+1$ forms in $R$ of the same degree. If $F$ is birational then it is called a Cremona map. Cremona maps are a classical subject that can do away with any general introduction. Yet, perhaps less known is a fairly recent body of results on the nature and structure of an individual such map – rather than on the structure of the Cremona group – that draws on modern geometric and algebraic tools (see, e.g., [@CRS],[@Pan], [@PanRusso], [@bir2003], [@SiVi], [@SimisVilla], ).
In many aspects the properties of the base locus of $F$ play a fundamental role, where the base locus is the scheme defined by the [*base ideal*]{} $I\subset R$ generated by the $n+1$ forms defining $F$. There is a neat difference between the base ideal and its ideal theoretic saturation $I^{\rm sat}$. Of course both define the same scheme, but while $I^{\rm sat}$ serves well the geometric purpose, it is $I$ that gives the nature of the linear system defining the map. For plane Cremona maps of degree at least $2$, asking when the base ideal $I\subset R$ is saturated is tantamount to asking when $R/I$ is a Cohen–Macaulay ring, i.e., when $I$ is generated by the maximal minors of a $3\times 2$ homogeneous matrix with entries in $R$. While there are many rational maps on $\pp^2$, in any degree, defined by such ideals, the question for Cremona maps becomes much tighter.
In this work we deal only with the plane case ($n=2$), largely focusing on a comparison of these two ideal theoretic versions of the base scheme. Furthermore, we exploit a nice interplay between the algebraic properties of the base ideal and the geometry related to the underlying linear system spanned by the coordinate forms defining the rational map. Classically, the role of the underlying linear system comes through the [*weighted cluster*]{} associated to it. Exploiting the ideal theoretic side of this linear system we introduce into the picture other ideals squeezed between the base ideal and the so-called fat ideal associated to the proper points of the underlying cluster.
Our main results are Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\], Theorem \[Rees\_of\_Jonq\], Theorem \[tcharactrization\] and Theorem \[proper\_types\_degree5\].
We now proceed to a more detailed description of the sections.
Section \[first\] gives a few homological particulars of a codimension $2$ homogeneous ideal $I\subset R$ generated by three forms of the same degree $d\geq 2$ in a polynomial ring $R=k[x,y,z]$ over a field $k$. The use of local cohomology and spectral sequences at this early stage is justified by a quick derivation of bounds on the regularity of $R/I$ in terms of $d$ and some sharp prediction for the Betti numbers of the corresponding minimal free resolution. Furthermore, the true impact of these preliminaries is toward the relation between $I$ and $I^{\rm sat}$. Here a crucial assumption is that the initial degree of the $R$-module $I^{\rm sat}/I$ is at least $d+1$. Coupled with the homological preliminaries this hypothesis triggers further lower bounds for $d$ if $I$ is non-saturated, gives a sharp upper bound for the saturation exponent in terms of the regularity, and allows to establish the Betti numbers of the resolution of $R/I$ for $d\leq 7$ (see Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\] and Proposition \[P567\]).
We introduce a couple of ideals naturally related to the base ideal $I$ of a plane rational map. One of these is a version of the usual fat ideal for the case when the rational map has infinitely near base points. Of course, infinitely near points have a large history, both classical under the Zariski school, and modern, with blowing-up and sheaf theoretic tools. However, the objective here is to introduce a seemingly bona fide homogeneous ideal [*on the nose*]{} in the polynomial ring $k[x,y,z]$ – as is the case of the ordinary fat ideal – that contains and is closely related to the base ideal. Besides, it comes along with another homogeneous ideal defined in terms of divisorial valuations; as it turns out, the latter is a nice carrier to questions about the integral closure $\bar{I}$ of the base ideal $I$. Including the usual fat ideal (associated to the proper base points of the map), one finds the base ideal as a successive subideal of three more ideals. It is possible moreover to bring into the picture both the saturation of $I$ and its integral closure $\bar{I}$. In the case of a Cremona map, we end up with a sequence of inclusions with $I$ and the fat ideal as extremes and yields equalities throughout of the corresponding linear systems spanned in the degree of the rational map. We intend to explore better the inclusions between these ideals in a future work.
An additional aspect of interest, as a consequence of the present ideal theoretic and homological steps, is a short proof that a Cremona map of degree $\leq 4$ is saturated (Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\] (i)), a result that does not seem to have been explicitly given before.
The second section studies the specifics of Cremona maps. First is the case of de Jonquières maps, whose crucial role is well-known. De Jonquières maps generate a subgroup of the entire group of Cremona transformations with well-known group structure. Recently, there has been some intensive activity around the dynamic of these maps. The latter catches the asymptotic character of the iterates of a Cremona map. Our purpose here is to convey the ideal theoretic properties of a given map – a [*static*]{} view instead.
We introduce basic ideal theoretic properties of de Jonquières map (Corollary \[jonquieres\]), including a neat description of the syzygies and the Rees ideal (defining the blowup) of the base ideal, in addition to an analysis of the behavior of the powers of the latter (Theorem \[Rees\_of\_Jonq\]). Such a complete picture of the ideal theoretic side of these maps does not seem to be found in the previous literature. In any case, it is a first step toward a classification of homaloidal types. A main result of this part is Theorem \[tcharactrization\] which explains the homological details of non-saturated base ideals in degrees $5,6,7$. The method can in principle be used to classify higher degrees as well, but the results become more involved to describe.
Since $5$ is the first degree where the base ideal of a plane Cremona map is not necessarily saturated, we carry a homological characterization of the three known proper homaloidal types in this degree. The result is given in Theorem \[proper\_types\_degree5\].
At the end of the section we state a homological criterion for a restricted class of rational maps in degree $4$ to be Cremona (Proposition \[ideal\_squared\_replaces\_telescopic\]). This trades the Cohen–Macaulayness hocus-pocus for the geometric background. This is just an example of such theorems and we believe that there are more of the kind. A couple of questions is stated that may suggest further work on the subject along the present lines.
For convenience we next give a short recap of the terminology used in classical plane Cremona map theory (see [@alberich] for most of the notions to follow).
Let $F\colon
\pp^2\dasharrow \pp^2$ be a rational map. Knowingly, $F$ is defined by three forms of the same degree $d\geq 1$. Its [*base ideal*]{} is the ideal $I\subset R=k[x,y,z]$ generated by these forms. As is of wide acceptance, the $k$-vector subspace of $R_d$ spanned by these forms is often called a [*linear system*]{} on $\pp^2$ (whereas it is in fact a space of global sections of a suitably defined linear system or locally free sheaf of rank one on $\pp^2$). Clearly, $I$ is generated by the elements of this linear system which allows us to abuse going back and forth between the two, often in an imprecise style.
If these forms have no nontrivial common factor – i.e., if the linear system has no fixed part – then $F$ is said to have [*degree*]{} $d$. In this case, $I$ has codimension $\geq 2$ and hence, the radical of $I$ defines a reduced finite set $V(I)$ of points. Clearly, the codimension of $I$ is in this case exactly $2$ if and only if $I$ is not $R_+$-primary (equivalently, the set of base points is nonempty). The points of $V(I)\subset \pp^2$ are called [*proper base points*]{} of $F$ – this terminology is suggestive of the existence of other “improper” base points. Thus, if $I$ has codimension $2$ then it has a primary decomposition whose minimal primary components are associated to the minimal primes of $R/I$ defining the proper base points $V(I)=\{p_1,\ldots,p_r\}$. Since $k$ is algebraically closed, every one of these primes is generated by two independent linear forms.
We next recall the notion of (effective) multiplicity. Namely, given a variety $X$, a smooth point $p\in X$ and a hypersurface (divisor) $D$ then the [*multiplicity*]{} $e_p(D)$ of $D$ at $p$ is the order of vanishing of a local equation of $D$ at $p\,$; algebraically, if $f$ is a local equation of $D$ at $p$, then $e_p(D)=\min\{r\geq 0\,|\, f^r\in \mathfrak{m}\}$, where $ \mathfrak{m}$ is the maximal ideal of the local ring of $X$ at $p$. For our purpose, $X$ will always be a smooth projective surface; more particularly, $X$ is either $\pp^2$ or the resulting surface of repeatedly blowing up a reduced finite set of points on the latter.
Going back to our rational map $F\colon
\pp^2\dasharrow \pp^2$, for each proper base point $p_j$, $j=1,\ldots,r$, one introduces into the picture a [*virtual multiplicity*]{} $\mu_{p_j}=\mu_{p_j}(F):=\min\{ e_{p_j}(f)\,|\,f\in I_d\}$. Note that the subset of the linear system whose elements have at $p_j$ effective multiplicity equal to $\mu_{p_j}$ forms an open set $U_{p_j}$ (in the set of parameters).
The complication in the theory is that, besides proper base points, $F$ has built in other base points, called infinitely near base points. To define these points, fix a proper base point $p$ of $F$ and let $\mathcal{B}_p$ denote the surface obtained by blowing-up $p$ on $\pp^2$. Let $E_p\subset \mathcal{B}_p$ stand for the corresponding exceptional divisor. A point $q\in E_p$ is a [*base point infinitely near*]{} to $p$ if it belongs to the proper transform of every divisor in the open set $U_p$ as introduced above. We then define the [*virtual multiplicity*]{} of $F$ at $q$ to be the integer $\mu_q=\mu_q(F):=\{e_q(\tilde{D})\,|\, D\in U_p\}$, where $\, \tilde\,$ denotes proper transform. This procedure is to be repeated successively (see [@alberich Definition 1.1.49] for the details).
The total set $K$ of points, proper and infinitely near ones, is called the (the set of) [*base points*]{} of $F$. The complete set $\boldsymbol{\mu}=\{\mu_1,\ldots,\mu_r\}$ of multiplicities corresponding to the base points, preceded by the degree $d$ of $F$, is the [*characteristic*]{} ([@alberich]) of $F$ – usually denoted $(d\,; \mu_1,\ldots,\mu_r)$ or $(d\,; \mu_1^{m_1},\ldots,\mu_n^{m_n})$ to account for the repetitions. The resulting [*cluster*]{} $\mathcal{K}=(K, \boldsymbol{\mu})$ is the (weighted) [*cluster of base points*]{} of $F$ or of the corresponding linear system – a notion that plays an important role in the classical Cremona theory; we refer to [@Casas] which contains a detailed study of this notion and its role in plane curve theory. Thus, any rational map $F:\pp^2\dasharrow \pp^2$ with codimension $2$ base ideal, and in particular, a Cremona map with codimension $2$ base ideal, carries a weighted cluster $\mathcal{K}=(K,\boldmath{\mu})$, consisting of the set of its base points suitably ordered, along with the set of their corresponding virtual multiplicities (weights) as explained above.
We also recall the classical [*equations of condition*]{} for a plane Cremona map of degree $d$ (see [@alberich 2.5]): $$\label{eqs_condition}
\sum_{p}\mu_p=3d-3,\; \sum_{p}\mu_p^2=d^2-1,$$ where $p$ runs through the set of (proper and infinitely near) base points of the corresponding linear system with respective multiplicities $\mu_p$. An abstract configuration $(d\,;\mu_1,\ldots,\mu_r)$ satisfying the equations of condition is called a [*homaloidal type*]{}, and is denoted in the same fashion as the characteristic of a Cremona map.
A Cremona map whose base points are proper is called [*simple*]{}.
A homaloidal type is called [*proper*]{} if there exists a plane Cremona map whose characteristic coincides with it. There is an important practical tool to test whether a given homaloidal type is proper - it is called [*Hudson test*]{} ([@alberich Corollary 5.3.2]).
[**Acknowledgements.**]{} The first author is grateful to M. Alberich-Caramiñana, C. Araújo, M. Chardin and I. Pan for helpful discussions. The second author thanks C. Ciliberto and F. Russo for an illuminating conversation at the early stages of the work.
Related ideal theory {#first}
====================
Homological results
-------------------
In this part we develop some generalities on resolutions of ideals generated by three forms.
The following basic statement about graded minimal resolutions does not seem to have been noted before in this particular form. Its only use will be in the standard graded case, but because of its possible independent interest it may be convenient to state it in the larger realm of positively graded Noetherian $^*$local rings (see [@BHbook Definition 1.5.13]).
\[lgeneral\]Let $(R,\fm)$ be a positively graded Noetherian $^*$local ring and let $I\subset \fm$ be a $3$-generated homogeneous ideal with graded minimal free resolution $$\label{eqresolution}
0\rightarrow\bigoplus_{m=1}^{r-2}R(-D_m)\xrightarrow{\phi_3}\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(-d_i)
\xrightarrow{\phi_2}\bigoplus_{l=1}^{3}R(-a_l)\xrightarrow{\phi_1}R\rightarrow R/I \rightarrow 0.$$ Assume $D_1\geq\cdots\geq D_{r-2}$ and $d_1\geq\cdots\geq d_{r}$. Then $D_m\geq d_m +1$ for all $1\leq m \leq r-2$.
By the Buchsbaum–Eisenbud criterion [@E Theorem 20.9], $\operatorname{rank}(\phi_3)=r-2$ and $\operatorname{grade}(I_{r-2}(\phi_3))\geq 3$. Since the resolution is graded minimal, $\operatorname{grade}(I_{r-2}(\phi_3))= 3$. Therefore, the Eagon–Northcott is a graded minimal resolution of $I_{r-2}(\phi_3)$, which implies in particular that the maximal minors of $\phi_3$ form a minimal set of generators of the ideal generated by these minors. In particular, every maximal minor is nonzero.
Now set $\phi_3=(m_{ij})$, with $m_{ij}\in\fm,\,\forall i,j$. We claim that $\deg(m_{ii})\geq 0$ for all $1\leq i \leq r-2$. Indeed, if $D_i\leq d_i$ for some $i$ then for all $p \leq i$ and $q \geq i$ we would have $\operatorname{deg}(m_{pq})=D_q-d_p\leq D_i-d_i\leq 0$ and since $m_{pq}\in\fm$, necessarily $m_{pq}=0$ for all $p \leq i$ and $q \geq i$. It then follows that the upper $(r-2)\times(r-2)$ submatrix of $\phi_3$ is of the following shape: $$\left(
\begin{array}{cccccl}
*&&..&0 &\cdots&0\\
&*&..&0&\cdots&\vdots\\
&& & 0&\cdots&0\\
&&&&*&\\
&& & &\cdots&*
\end{array}
\right)$$ This determinant is obviously null, thus contradicting the above assertion. Therefore $\operatorname{deg}(D_i)-\operatorname{deg}(d_i)=\operatorname{deg}(m_{ii})>0$ for all $1\leq i \leq r-2$.
Our focus in this work is on the case where $(R,\fm)=(k[x_0,x_1,x_2], (x_0,x_1,x_2))$ in which $k$ is a field and $R$ is assigned the standard grading. We set $M\,\Check {}$ for the graded Matlis dual of an $R$-module into $k=R/\fm$.
For a graded $R$-module $M$, we will denote $$\operatorname{indeg}(M):=\inf \{ \mu \ \vert \ M_\mu \not= 0\},$$ with the convention that $\operatorname{indeg}(0)=+\infty$, and $$\operatorname{end}(M):= \sup \{ \mu \ \vert \ M_\mu \not= 0 \},$$ with the convention that $\operatorname{end}(0)=-\infty$.
As a matter of further notation, we set $I^{\rm sat}:=I:\fm^{\infty}$ and denote by $I^{\rm un}$ the unmixed part of the primary decomposition of the ideal $I$. Finally, $\omega_{R/I}$ will denote the graded canonical module of $R/I$.
The duality piece in the next result is a special case of [@Ch Lemma 5.8], but we will give a proof for the reader’s convenience and later reference.
\[ldual\] Let $R=k[x_0,x_1,x_2]$ and let $I\subset R$ be an ideal of height $2$ generated by $3$ linearly independent forms of degree $d\geq 1$. Then
- $(I^{\rm sat}/I)\Check {}\simeq (I^{\rm sat}/I) (3d-3)\,$[;]{} in particular, if $I$ is not saturated then $$\operatorname{end}(I^{\rm sat}/I)+\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)=3d-3.$$
- $\operatorname{end}(H^1_{\fm}(R/I))+1=-\operatorname{indeg}(\omega_{R/I})+1\leq 2d-3$.
Note at the outset that $I$ is a strict almost complete intersection generated in degree $d\geq 2$.
Consider the graded Koszul complex $K_{\bullet}$ generated by a minimal generating set of $I$ and set $H_i:=H_i(K_{\bullet})$ for its $i$th homology. Consider the complexes tensor product $K_{\bullet}\otimes C^{\bullet}_{\fm}$, where $C^{\bullet}_{\fm}$ is the Čech complex on $\fm$. Consider the spectral sequence $\operatorname{\rm E}$ associated to the total complex of the double complex $K_{\bullet}\otimes C^{\bullet}_{\fm}$. (For details on this terminology, we refer to [@E Sections A3.13.4 and A3.13.5].) Note that $H_{q-p}($Tot$(E^{\bullet,\bullet}))=\sideset{^{\infty}}{_{\text\footnotesize{hor}}^{-p,-q}}{\operatorname{\rm E}}$. Putting this complex in the third quadrant, the terms of the second spectral sequence are $$\sideset{^2}{_{\text\footnotesize{\rm ver}}^{-p,-q}}{\operatorname{\rm E}}= \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{c l}
H^q_{\fm}(R/I) & \text{if $p=0$ and $q=0,1$},\\
H^1_{\fm}(H_1) & \text{if $p=1$ and $q=1$},\\
0 & \text{otherwise};
\end{array}
\right.$$ $$\sideset{^2}{_{\text\footnotesize{\rm hor}}^{-p,-q}}{\operatorname{\rm E}}= \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{c l}
(H_0(3d-3))\Check {} & \text{if $p=3$ and $q=3$},\\
(H_1(3d-3))\Check {} & \text{if $p=2$ and $q=3$},\\
0 & \text{otherwise}.
\end{array}
\right.$$
Therefore, by the convergence of the spectral sequence, the homology of the total complex is filtered by elements on the diagonal of $\sideset{^{\infty}}{_{\text\footnotesize{\rm ver}}^{\bullet,\bullet}}{\operatorname{\rm E}}$ which contains $\sideset{^{\infty}}{_{\text\footnotesize{\rm ver}}^{-p,-q}}{\operatorname{\rm E}}$. The only non-trivial filtration thus obtained is for $H_0($Tot$(E^{\bullet,\bullet}))=(H_0(3d-3))\Check {}\,$, which is the following short exact sequence: $$\label{homology_sequence}
0 \rightarrow H^1_{\fm}(H_1){\longrightarrow}(H_0(3d-3))\Check {} {\longrightarrow}H^0_{\fm}(R/I) {\longrightarrow}0.$$
Since $I$ is an almost complete intersection, one has $H_1\simeq \omega_{R/I}\simeq \operatorname{Ext}^2(R/I,R)(-3d)$. Moreover, quite generally, $\omega_{R/I}=\omega_{R/I^{\rm un}}$. Therefore, by graded duality ([@BHbook])
$H^1_{\fm}(H_1) \simeq (\operatorname{Ext}^2(\operatorname{Ext}^2(R/I^{\rm un},R)(-3d),R(-3)))\Check {}\simeq (R/I^{\rm un}(3d-3))\Check {}$,
where the rightmost isomorphism is due to the Cohen-Macaulayness of $R/I^{\rm un}$.
Then the exact sequence (\[homology\_sequence\]) becomes $$\label{duality_sequence}
0 \rightarrow (R/I^{\rm un}(3d-3))\Check {}{\longrightarrow}(R/I(3d-3))\Check {} {\longrightarrow}H^0_{\fm}(R/I) {\longrightarrow}0.$$
Thus $H^0_{\fm}(R/I)\simeq (I^{\rm un}/I)\Check {}\,(3-3d)$. Since $H^0_{\fm}(R/I)= I^{\rm sat}/I$ and $I^{\rm sat}=I^{\rm un}$ in the present context, we are done for (i).
To prove (ii), note that $R/I^{\rm sat}$ is a CM ring of dimension $1$ and that $I^{\rm sat}/I$ is a module of finite length; thus $H^1_{\fm}(R/I)=H^1_{\fm}(R/I^{\rm sat})$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
\operatorname{end}(H^1_{\fm}(R/I))+1&=&-\operatorname{indeg}(\omega_{R/I^{\rm un}})+1 = -\operatorname{indeg}(\omega_{R/I})+1\\
&=& -\operatorname{indeg}(\operatorname{Ext}^2(R/I,R)(3d-3))+1.\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, we may assume that $k$ is infinite, hence $$\operatorname{Ext}^2(R/I,R)(3d-3)=(\alpha:I/\alpha)(2d-3),$$ where $\alpha$ is a maximal regular sequence of $d$-forms in $I$ . Since $I$ is not complete intersection, $\operatorname{indeg}((\alpha:I/\alpha))\geq 1$. Collecting the information, we arrive at the statement.
\[gen\_degs\_of\_H0\] Let $R=k[x_0,x_1,x_2]$ and let $I\subset R$ be an ideal of codimension $2$ generated by $3$ linearly independent forms of degree $d\geq 1$ with minimal graded free resolution $$\label{eqdresolution}
0\rightarrow\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r-2}R(-D_i)\longrightarrow \bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(-d_i)\longrightarrow
R^{3}(-d)\rightarrow R\rightarrow R/I \rightarrow 0 \quad (r\geq 3).$$ Then:
- The minimal free resolution of $I^{\rm sat}/I$ as an $R$-module has the form [$$\label{eqdresolutionIsatI}
0{\rightarrow}\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r-2}R(-D_i){\rightarrow}\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(-d_i){\rightarrow}\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(d_i-3d){\rightarrow}\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r-2}R(D_i-3d)
\rightarrow I^{\rm sat}/I \rightarrow 0$$ ]{} where the leftmost map is the same as that of [(\[eqdresolution\])]{}.
- If in addition $I^{\rm sat}_d=I_d$ and $I^{\rm sat}_i=0$ for $i< d$, then the resolution of $I^{\rm sat}$ is $$\label{eqdresolutionIsat}
0\longrightarrow \bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(-(3d-d_i))\longrightarrow R^{3}(-d)\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r-2}R(-(3d-D_i))
\rightarrow I^{\rm sat} \rightarrow 0.$$
\(i) Applying $\operatorname{Hom}_R(-,R(-3))$ to (\[eqdresolution\]) yields a minimal free presentation $$\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(d_i-3)\longrightarrow \bigoplus_{i=1}^{r-2}R(D_i-3)\longrightarrow \operatorname{Ext}^3(R/I,R(-3)) \rightarrow 0.$$ On the other hand, by graded duality and by the exact sequence (\[duality\_sequence\]) one has $$\operatorname{Ext}^3(R/I,R(-3))\simeq H^0_{\fm}(R/I)\Check {}=(I^{\rm sat}/I)(3d-3).$$ Therefore, we have a free presentation $$\label{presentation_of_quotient}
\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(d_i-3)\longrightarrow \bigoplus_{i=1}^{r-2}R(D_i-3)\longrightarrow (I^{\rm sat}/I)(3d-3) \rightarrow 0.$$ Shifting by $-3d+3$ yields a free resolution of the form $$\label{eqdresolutionMef}
0\rightarrow\bigoplus_{i=1}^{l-2}R(-a_i)\longrightarrow\bigoplus_{i=1}^{l}R(-b_i)\longrightarrow
\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(d_i-3d)\longrightarrow \bigoplus_{i=1}^{r-2}R(D_i-3d)\rightarrow I^{\rm sat}/I \rightarrow 0,$$ with suitable integers $l, a_i, b_i$. Applying $\operatorname{Hom}_R(-,R(-3))$ to the latter yields a free complex resolving the third homology $\operatorname{Ext}^3(I^{\rm sat}/I, R(-3))$. But, again by graded duality plus the fact that $H^0_{\fm}(I^{\rm sat}/I)=I^{\rm sat}/I$ by definition of $I^{\rm sat}$, and using Theorem \[ldual\] (i), we get $$\operatorname{Ext}^3(I^{\rm sat}/I, R(-3))\simeq (I^{\rm sat}/I)(3d-3).$$ Shifting by $-3d+3$ once more yields a free resolution of the form $$\label{eqdresolutionM}
0\rightarrow\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r-2}R(-D_i)\longrightarrow\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(-d_i)\longrightarrow
\bigoplus_{i=l}^{l}R(b_i-3d)\longrightarrow \bigoplus_{i=1}^{l-2}R(a_i-3d)\rightarrow I^{\rm sat}/I \rightarrow 0.$$ Comparing (\[eqdresolutionMef\]) and (\[eqdresolutionM\]), the uniqueness of the minimal free resolution yields the assertion.
\(ii) Since $R/I^{\rm sat}$ is Cohen–Macaulay, the hypothesis of the item implies a graded minimal resolution of the form $$0\longrightarrow \bigoplus_{i=1}^{s+2}R(\alpha_i)\longrightarrow \left(\bigoplus_{i=1}^{s}R(-\beta_i)\right)\oplus R^{3}(-d)
\rightarrow I^{\rm sat} \rightarrow 0.$$ In order to determine the shifts $\alpha_i, \beta_i$, we consider a map of complexes lifting the inclusion $I\subset I^{\rm sat}$ [ $$\begin{array}{cccccccclccc}
0&\rightarrow &0 &\rightarrow &\bigoplus_{i=1}^{s+2}R(\alpha_i)&\rightarrow &
\left(\bigoplus_{i=1}^{s}R(-\beta_i)\right)\oplus R^{3}(-d))&\rightarrow & I^{\rm sat}&\rightarrow&0& \\[5pt]
& & \uparrow & & \uparrow & &\stackrel{\iota}{}\;\uparrow & &\uparrow & & &\\[5pt]
0&\rightarrow &\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r-2}R(-D_i)&\rightarrow &\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(-d_i) &\rightarrow & R^{3}(-d) &\rightarrow &I &\rightarrow&0&
\end{array}$$ ]{} with $\iota$ the inclusion in the “second” coordinate. Now, the mapping cone of this map [$$0 {\rightarrow}\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r-2}R(-D_i){\longrightarrow}\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(-d_i){\longrightarrow}\bigoplus_{i=1}^{s+2}R(\alpha_i)\bigoplus R^{3}(-d)
{\longrightarrow}(\bigoplus_{i=1}^{s}R(-\beta_i))\oplus R^{3}(-d)$$ ]{} is a free resolution of $I^{\rm sat}/I$. Canceling the non-minimal part coming from the summand $R^{3}(-d)$, yields a minimal free complex. Comparing with (\[eqdresolutionIsatI\]) yields $s=r, \alpha_i=d_i-3d, \beta_i=3d-D_i$.
A critical lower bound for $I^{\rm sat}/I$
------------------------------------------
If $I$ is a homogeneous ideal minimally generated in some degree $d\geq 1$, but non-saturated, typically $I^{\rm sat}/I$ will have minimal generators in degrees $\leq d$. In this part, we derive substantial consequences by requiring that the initial degree of $I^{\rm sat}/I$ be $d+1$. For later use, we remark that this critical bound holds true when $I$ is the base ideal of a Cremona map ([@PanRusso Proposition 1.2]).
First is an upper bound for the regularity in terms of $d$.
\[strong\_bound\] Let $R=k[x_0,x_1,x_2]$ and let $I\subset R$ be an ideal of codimension $2$ generated by $3$ linearly independent forms of degree $d\geq 1$. If $\,\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)\geq d+1$ then $\operatorname{reg}(R/I)\leq 2d-3$.
By definition, one has $$\operatorname{reg}(R/I)=\operatorname{max}\{\operatorname{end}(H^0_{\fm}(R/I)), \operatorname{end}(H^1_{\fm}(R/I))+1\}.$$ By Theorem \[ldual\](ii), $\operatorname{end}(H^1_{\fm}(R/I))+1\leq 2d-3$. Thus, we are done if $I$ is saturated because $\operatorname{end}(H^0_{\fm}(R/I))=-\infty$.
If $I$ is not saturated, then $$\operatorname{end}(H^0_{\fm}(R/I))=3d-3-\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)\leq 3d-3-(d+1)=2d-4,$$ by Theorem \[ldual\](i) and the hypothesis. Hence we are done in this case too.
\[from\_lower\_bound\] Let $R=k[x_0,x_1,x_2]$ and let $I\subset R$ be an ideal of codimension $2$ generated by $3$ linearly independent forms of degree $d\geq 1$ with minimal graded free resolution $$\label{eqdresolution2}
0\rightarrow\bigoplus_{m=1}^{r-2}R(-D_m)\longrightarrow \bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}R(-d_i)
\longrightarrow R^{3}(-d)\rightarrow R\rightarrow R/I \rightarrow 0 \quad (r\geq 3).$$ If $\,\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)\geq d+1$ then:
- [$d\geq 5$]{}
- [$\operatorname{reg}(R/I)=3d-3-\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)=D_1-3\leq 2d-4$]{}
- [$r \leq d-2$.]{}
(i)$\,$ This follows from the equation $\operatorname{end}(I^{\rm sat}/I)+\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)=3d-3$ in Theorem \[ldual\](i) and from the assumption $\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)\geq d+1$. Indeed, one has $$2d+2\leq 2\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)\leq \operatorname{end}(I^{\rm sat}/I)+\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)=3d-3,$$ hence $d\geq 5$.
(ii)$\,$ Since $\operatorname{reg}(R/I)=\operatorname{max}\{d-1,d_1-2,D_1-3\}$, Lemma \[lgeneral\] gives $\operatorname{reg}(R/I)=D_1-3$. By Proposition \[gen\_degs\_of\_H0\] and the hypothesis, $3d-D_1=\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)\geq d+1$. Assembling yields $\operatorname{reg}(R/I)=D_1-3=3d-3-\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)\leq 2d-4$.
(iii)$\,$ From the resolution of $R/I$ its Hilbert series is $$\label{hseries}
\frac{1-3t^d+\sum_{i=1}^r t^{d_i}- \sum_{m=1}^{r-2} t^{D_m}}{(1-t)^3},$$ with a pole of order $2$ at $t=1$ since $\dim R/I=1$. Taking $t$-derivatives of the numerator of (\[hseries\]) evaluated at $t=1$ (see [@BHbook 4.1.14]), one obtains the following relation $$\label{firstderivative}
d_r+d_{r-1}=\sum_{m=1}^{r-2}( D_m -d_m)+3d.$$ Now, Lemma \[lgeneral\] implies that $\sum_{m=1}^{r-2}( D_m -d_m)+3d\geq r-2+3d$. On the other hand, part (ii) yields $\operatorname{reg}(R/I)\leq 2d-4$ which implies $d_1\leq 2d-2$. Therefore $d_r+d_{r-1}\leq 4d-4$. Assembling the inequalities, we get $r-2+3d\leq 4d-4$, hence $r\leq d-2$ as required.
As a consequence of the above results, one can classify the virtual resolutions along with the corresponding twists in case of low values of $d$. In the subsequent sections we will deal with the question whether such virtual resolutions are in fact realized by the base ideal of a plane Cremona map – note that realisability is a question only when the resolution has length at least $3$. We emphasize that in the case where $I$ is saturated the virtual resolutions are easily computed by means of (\[firstderivative\]) and Corollary \[strong\_bound\].
\[P567\] With the same notation and hypotheses as in [Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\]]{}, one has:
- [If $d=5$, the minimal free resolution of $R/I$ is\
$0\rightarrow R(-9)\rightarrow R^3(-8)\rightarrow R^3(-5)\rightarrow R$]{}
- [If $d=6$, the minimal free resolution of $R/I$ is one of the following:\
$0\rightarrow R^2(-11)\rightarrow R^4(-10)\rightarrow R^3(-6)\rightarrow R$, or\
$0\rightarrow R(-11)\rightarrow R^2(-10)\bigoplus R(-9) \rightarrow R^3(-6)\rightarrow R$.]{}
- [If $d=7$, the minimal free resolution of $R/I$ is one of the following:\
$0\rightarrow R^3(-13)\rightarrow R^5(-12)\rightarrow R^3(-7)\rightarrow R$,\
$0\rightarrow R^2(-13)\rightarrow R^3(-12)\bigoplus R(-11) \rightarrow R^3(-7)\rightarrow R$,\
$0\rightarrow R(-13)\rightarrow R(-12)\bigoplus R^2(-11) \rightarrow R^3(-7)\rightarrow R$,\
$0\rightarrow R(-12)\rightarrow R^3(-11) \rightarrow R^3(-7)\rightarrow R$, or\
$0\rightarrow R(-13)\rightarrow R^2(-12)\bigoplus R(-10) \rightarrow R^3(-7)\rightarrow R$ .]{}
First recall the following strand of inequalities from the proof of Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\], (iii): $$\label{ineq}
4d-4\geq d_r+d_{r-1}=\sum_{m=1}^{r-2}( D_m -d_m)+3d\geq r-2+3d\geq 1+3d.$$
\(i) $\,$ If $d=5$, then $r=3$ by Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\], (iii) and the inequalities in (\[ineq\]) are all equalities, whence $d_3=d_2=d_1=2d-2=8$ and $D_1-d_1=1$.
\(ii) $\,$ If $d=6$ then $r=3$ or $r=4$ by Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\] (iii). In the case where $r=4$, the inequalities in (\[ineq\]) are all equalities except the rightmost one and there is one single solution. The shifts turn out to be as stated. If $r=3$ then (\[ineq\]) yields two virtual solutions, with $D_1=11$ or $D_1=12$. However, by Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\] (ii), only $D_1=11$ is possible and the shifts are as stated.
\(ii) $\,$ If $d=7$ then $3\leq r\leq 5$ by Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\] (iii). The case $r=5$ yields again equalities throughout (\[ineq\]) except for the rightmost inequality and there is one single solution, as stated.
For $r=4$, from (\[ineq\]) we deduce that $d_3\geq r+d+1=12=2d-2$, hence $d_3=d_2=d_1=2d-2=12$ as this is the highest possible value. As a consequence, both $D_1$ and $D_2$ attain the upper bound $2d-1=13$. Thence the equality $d_4+d_3=\sum_{m=1}^{r-2}( D_m -d_m)+3d=23$ gives $d_4=11$, as stated.
For $r=3$ the argument is slightly more involved, but again (\[ineq\]) yields the result: the third and fourth possibilities on the list stem from the equality $d_2=d+r+1=11$ which gives $d_3=11$ and $d_1=12$ or $d_1=11$ and accordingly $D_1=d_1+1=13, 12$. The last case listed is when $d_2=12$, the largest possible value. Accordingly, from (\[ineq\]) comes $d_2=d_1=D_1-1=12$, hence $d_3=10$.
For an ideal $I$ in a standard graded or local ring $(R,\fm)$ over a field one defines the [*saturation exponent*]{} of $I$ as ${\rm st}(I):=\operatorname{min}\{s\in \mathbb{N}\,|\, I^{\rm sat}=I:\fm^s\}$. This number has been variously called [*saturation index*]{} or [*satiety*]{}.
\[psat\] With the same notation and hypotheses as in [Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\]]{}, one has:
- [st]{}$(I)\leq 2\operatorname{reg}(R/I)-3d+4\leq d-4$
- If the module $I^{\rm sat}/I$ is minimally generated by elements of a fixed degree then [st]{}$(I)= 2\operatorname{reg}(R/I)-3d+4$. In particular, this equality holds for $d\leq 7$.
(i)$\,$ Let $i_0=\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)$ and $e=\operatorname{end}(I^{\rm sat}/I)$. Then $$\fm^{e-i_0+1}(I^{\rm sat}/I)_j\subset (I^{\rm sat}/I)_{e+j-i_0+1}=\{0\},$$ for all $j\geq 0$, because $j\geq i_0$ as soon as $(I^{\rm sat}/I)_j\neq \{0\}$. Therefore st$(I)\leq e-i_0+1$. On the other hand Theorem \[ldual\] (iii) and Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\] (ii) yield $e-i_0+1=2\operatorname{reg}(R/I)-3d+4\leq d-4$.
(ii)$\,$ By Proposition \[gen\_degs\_of\_H0\], $I^{\rm sat}/I$ is generated by elements in $(I^{\rm sat}/I)_{i_0}$. Therefore it obtains $0\neq (I^{\rm sat}/I)_e\subseteq \fm^{e-i_0}(I^{\rm sat}/I)_{i_0}$ thus yielding the required equality.
Finally, for $d\leq 7$, Proposition \[P567\] together with Proposition \[gen\_degs\_of\_H0\](i) shows that $I^{\rm sat}/I$ is generated in fixed degree.
Analogues of the fat ideal {#analogues}
--------------------------
In this portion we wish to get hold of other homogeneous ideals closely related to the base ideal of a rational map $F:\pp^2\dasharrow\pp^2$ without fixed part. For the sake of clarity, we briefly go back to some of the notions given in the Introduction.
Letting $\mathcal{K}=(K,\boldsymbol\mu)$ denote the weighted cluster of the linear system defining $F$, one can consider the [*$\boldsymbol\mu$-fat ideal*]{} $$\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}:=I(p_1)^{\mu_1}\cap\cdots\cap I(p_r)^{\mu_r},$$ corresponding to the proper points of $K$, where $I(p_j)$ stands for the defining prime ideal of the proper point $p_j$. Thus, for a plane rational map $F$ whose base points are all proper, the $\boldsymbol\mu$-fat ideal is a rough ideal theoretic saturated approximation to the base ideal of $F$.
One advantage of the fat ideal is that the degree of the corresponding scheme is automatic: $$\label{multplicity_of_fat}
e(R/\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}})=\sum_{j=1}^r\, \frac{\mu_j(\mu_j+1)}{2}.$$ Now, if $k$ is algebraically closed (or if we consider only rational points) then $I\subset \mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$. This is because saying that a form $f\in R$ has multiplicity at least $\mu_j$ locally at the prime $I(p_j)\subset R$ is equivalent to asserting that $f\in I(p_j)^{(\mu_j)}=I(p_j)^{\mu_j}$ (the equality holding because $I(p_j)$ is a complete intersection). This allows for a comparison of the two ideals and shows that $e(R/I)\geq \sum_{j=1}^r\,
\frac{\mu_j(\mu_j+1)}{2}$.
On the other hand, since the saturation $I^{\rm sat}=I:(R_+)^{\infty}$ of $I$ coincides with the unmixed part of $I$, it is the smallest unmixed ideal (by inclusion) containing $I$. Since $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$ is unmixed by definition and has same radical as $I$, one has the valuable setup $I\subset I^{\rm sat}\subset \mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$, with all three ideals sharing the same radical.
Alas, if the map has infinitely near points among its base points, then the $\boldsymbol\mu$-fat ideal is no longer the “tightest” ideal to look at. A “correction” is available by introducing two new ideals, one of which is based on the classical theory of (weighted) clusters and the corresponding blowup gadgets. We now proceed to establish these definitions.
\[passing\_virtually\]Let $\mathcal{K}=(K,\boldsymbol\mu)$ denote a weighted cluster.
- A plane curve $C\subset \pp^2$ [*passes virtually through*]{} $\mathcal{K}$ if the divisor on $\mathcal{B}_K$ $$\label{passing_total}
\bar{C}^K-\sum_{p\in K}\, \mu_p\, \bar{E}_p^K$$ is effective, where $\mathcal{B}_K$ is the blowup of the set $K$ on $\pp^2$, $\bar{C}^K$ and $\bar{E}_p^K$ are the total transform of $C$ and the total $p$-component of the exceptional divisor $E^K$, respectively (see [@alberich Definition 1.1.38].
- Given $m\geq 1$, let $\ell_{\mathcal{K}}(m)\subset R_m$ consist of all forms $f$ of degree $m$ such the curve $C=V(f)$ passes virtually through $\mathcal{K}$.
Set $I_{\mathcal{K}}:=\oplus_{m\geq 0} \ell_{\mathcal{K}}(m)\subset R$. Then $I_{\mathcal{K}}$ is an ideal (not just a vector subspace) of $R$ - we call it the [*full ideal of curves through*]{} $\mathcal{K}$.
The difficulty in handling the algebraic properties of the full ideal of curves is due to the nature of the notion in (\[passing\_total\]). One can modify it to requiring, equivalently, that $$\label{passing_proper}
\tilde{C}^K-\sum_{p\in K}\, (e_p(C)-\mu_p)\, \bar{E}_p^K$$ be effective, where $\tilde{C}^K$ now denotes the proper transform of $C$ in $\mathcal{B}_K$ (use [@alberich lemma 1.1.8]). Since $\tilde{C}^K$ is an effective divisor, the condition that $C$ passes through the cluster $\mathcal{K}$ means that the divisor $\sum_{p\in K}\, (e_p(C)-\mu_p)\, \bar{E}_p^K$ is effective.
If we had $\tilde{E}_p^K$ instead of $\bar{E}_p^K$ in this divisor, then the condition would simply require the inequalities $e_p(C)\geq \mu_p$ for every $p\in K$. To still express the actual condition in terms of inequalities, one resorts to the notion of the [*proximity matrix*]{} $\mathbf{P}_{\mathcal{K}}$ of the cluster $\mathcal{K}$, whose entries are exactly the coefficients of each $\tilde{E}_p^K$ in terms of all $\bar{E}_q^K$, with $q\in K$ (see [@alberich Corollary 1.1.27 and Definition 1.1.28]).
For reference convenience, we state the final expression in a separate result:
\[passing\_lemma\] A plane curve $C\subset \pp^2$ passes virtually through $\mathcal{K}$ if and only if $$\label{passing_as_proximity}
\mathbf{P}_{\mathcal{K}}^{-1}\cdot (\mathbf{e}_K(C)-{\boldsymbol\mu}_K)^t\geq 0,$$ where $\mathbf{e}_K(C)$ [(]{}respectively, ${\boldsymbol\mu}_K$[)]{} denotes the vector of effective multiplicities at the points of $K$ [(]{}respectively, the vector of virtual multiplicities of $\mathcal{K}$[)]{}, and $^{-1}$, $^t$ denote matrix inverse and matrix transpose, respectively.
To make sense, the above inequality relies on the fact that $\det(\mathbf{P}_{\mathcal{K}})\neq 0$ – actually this matrix is unimodular, so its inverse is an integer matrix; moreover, it can be shown that the inverse has only nonnegative entries ([@alberich Lemma 1.1.32]).
As a preliminary to the subsequent results we can now prove without difficulty:
\[first\_inclusions\] Let $F:\pp^2\dasharrow\pp^2$ be a rational map without fixed part, with cluster of base points $\mathcal{K}=(K, \boldsymbol\mu)$ and base ideal $I\subset R$. Then:
- $I\subset I_{\mathcal{K}}$.
- $I_{\mathcal{K}}\subset \mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}:=\bigcap_j \wp_j^{\mu_j}$ [(]{}“fat” ideal[)]{}, where $\wp_j\subset R$ is the homogeneous prime ideal of the proper point $p_j\in K$. If, moreover, $K$ consists of proper points then $I_{\mathcal{K}}=\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$.
\(a) Let $d$ be the degree of $F$. By the very nature of the definition of the associated weighted cluster $\mathcal{K}$ of $F$, any curve of the linear system in degree $d$ defining $F$ passes virtually through $\mathcal{K}$ – note that the condition in (\[passing\_as\_proximity\]) is here verified “on the nose" through the inequalities $e_p(C)\geq \mu_p$ for every $p\in K$. Therefore $I_d\subset {(I_{\mathcal{K}})}_d$. It follows that $I_m\subset {(I_{\mathcal{K}})}_m$ for every degree $m\geq d$. If $m <d$ then $I_m=\{0\}$, hence $I_m\subset {(I_{\mathcal{K}})}_m$ holds trivially. Thus, $I\subset I_{\mathcal{K}}$.
\(b) $\mathbf{P}_{\mathcal{K}}$ is a block-diagonal matrix and it can be arranged so that the submatrix corresponding to the proper points is the identity matrix; then the inverse $\mathbf{P}_{\mathcal{K}}^{-1}$ will also contain an identity block that multiplies the proper part of the vector $(\mathbf{e}_K(C)-{\boldsymbol\mu}_K)^t$. On the other hand, it follows from the definitions that $$\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}=\{f\in R: e_p(f)\geq \mu_p,\; \forall \; {\rm proper}\, p\in K\}.$$ Therefore, the inclusion $I_{\mathcal{K}}\subset \mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$ follows immediately.
The second statement of this item is a direct consequence of the part just proved.
To proceed, we need the following order of ideas.
Recall that given a Noetherian domain $R$ with field of fractions $Q$, a valuation ring $(V,\fm_V)$ of $Q$ containing $R$ is called a [*divisorial valuation ring*]{} on $R$ if the transcendence degree of $V/\fm_V$ over $R_{\fm_V\cap R}/(\fm_V\cap R)_{\fm_V\cap R}$ is $\hht (\fm_V\cap R)-1$. The corresponding valuation of $V$ will be called a divisorial valuation relative to $R$. Let D$(R)$ denote the set of the divisorial valuations on $R$.
Given $v\in {\rm D}(R)$ and an ideal $I\subset R$, one denotes $v(I):=\min\{v(f)\,|\, f\in I\}$ – this is well-defined since $I$ is finitely generated and a divisorial valuation ring is a rank one discrete valuation ring (see [@SHbook Definition 6.8.9 and Theorem 9.3.2]).
Assume now that $R=\oplus_{_{\kern-2pt m\geq 0}} R_m$ is a standard graded domain over a field $k$.
Given a homogeneous ideal $I\subset R$ and an integer $m\geq 0$, set $$\tilde{I}(m)=\bigcap_{v \in {\rm D}(R)}\{f\in R_m\,|\, v(f)\geq v(I)\}$$ -15pt and $\tilde{I}=\oplus_{_{\kern-2pt m\geq 0}}\tilde{I}(m)$.
Since $v$ is a valuation, it is clear that $\tilde{I}(m)$ is a vector subspace of $R_m$ and $\tilde{I}$ is a homogeneous ideal such that $\tilde{I}_m=\tilde{I}(m)$ for every $m\geq 0$. We will call $\tilde{I}$ the [*divisorial cover ideal*]{} of $I$. We next give a more ideal theoretic formulation of this ideal:
\[compact\_divisorial\] Notation being as above, let in addition $R_v$ denote the valuation ring on $R$ corresponding to a given $v\in {\rm D}(R)$. Then $$\tilde{I}=\bigoplus_{m\geq 0}\,\left(\bigcap_{v\in {\rm D}(R)}(IR_v\cap R_m)\right).$$
Note that both sides of the sought equality are homogeneous ideals of $R$, hence it suffices to show the equality of the homogeneous parts of the same degree. Thus, fix $m\geq 0$ and $v\in {\rm D}(R)$. Let $g\in R$ be such that $v(g)=v(I)$. Then $f\in R_m$ belongs to $\tilde{I}_m$ if and only if $v(f/g)\geq 0$, i.e, if and only if $f/g\in R_v$. This shows that $\tilde{I}_m=gR_v\cap R_m\subset IR_v\cap R_m$. Conversely, if $f=gu\in IR_v\cap R_m$, with $g\in I$ and $u\in R_v$, then $v(f)=v(g)+v(u)\geq v(g)\geq v(I)$, hence $f\in \tilde{I}_m$. Since $f$ is arbitrarily taken in $IR_v\cap R_m$, it follows that $IR_v\cap R_m\subset \tilde{I}_m$.
Given an ideal $I\subset R$, let $\bar{I}\subset R$ denote its integral closure.
\[inclusion\_closure\_cover\] Let $R$ be a standard graded domain over a field and let $I\subset R$ denote a homogeneous ideal. Then $\bar{I}\subset \tilde{I}$.
First note that the integral closure $\bar{I}$ of $I$ is still homogenous. On the other hand, one has $\bar I=\bigcap_{v} (IR_v\cap R)$, where this time around $v$ varies over all rank one discrete valuations of $Q$ positive on $R$ [@SHbook Proposition 6.8.2]. Clearly, $\bar I=\bigcap_{v} (IR_v\cap R)=(\bigcap_{v} IR_v)\cap R$, hence $\bar{I}_m=(\bigcap_{v} IR_v)\cap R_m=
\bigcap_{v} (IR_v\cap R_m)$ for $v$ varying over the rank one discrete valuations positive on $R$. Since the divisorial valuations on $R$ are among the latter, we can apply Lemma \[compact\_divisorial\] to conclude.
For the next result we need the following basic result, part of which holds more generally in any dimension. For the sake of both simplicity and objectiveness we stick to the $2$-dimensional case.
\[order\_is\_valuation\] Let $X$ stand for a smooth surface over $k$ and let $p\in X$. Denote by $(\mathcal{O}_p,\,\fm_p)$ the local ring of $p$ on $\pp^2$ and its unique maximal ideal. Let $\mathfrak{o}_p$ stand for the order function relative to $\fm_p$. Then:
- $\mathfrak{o}_p$ extends to divisorial valuation $v_p$ centered on $\mathcal{O}_p$.
- Let $F:\pp^2\dasharrow\pp^2$ be a rational map with base ideal $I$ and weighted cluster $\mathcal{K}=
(K, \boldsymbol\mu)\,;$ then $v_p(I)=\mu_p$ for every $p\in K$.
\(a) This is a well-known fact going back to Zariski [*et. al*]{} – a good reference is [@SHbook Theorem 6.7.9].
\(b) This part follows from the fact that any proper or infinitely near point of $K$ is a point on some (smooth) surface obtained as a successive blowup of a point on $\pp^2$ – so one can apply part (a) – and the definition of $\mu_p$. Indeed, tracing through this notion one sees that $\mu_p$ is obtained by evaluating the order function at that step on the corresponding extension of the ideal $I$. To see the latter, observe that, at each infinitely near point $p$, $\mu_p$ takes value on a nonempty open subset of the parameters.
\[from\_divisorial\_to\_full\] Let $I\subset R$ be the base ideal of a rational map $F:\pp^2\dasharrow\pp^2$ with weighted cluster $\mathcal{K}=
(K, \boldsymbol\mu)$. Then $\tilde{I}\subset I_{\mathcal{K}}$.
For every $p\in K$ let $v_p$ as in Lemma \[order\_is\_valuation\](a) denote the divisorial valuation ring induced by the order function defined on the local ring $(\mathcal{O}_p,\,\fm_p)$. Then, by Lemma \[order\_is\_valuation\],(a) and(b), one has $$\tilde{I}_m= \kern-8pt\bigcap_{v \in {\rm D}(R)}\{f\in R_m\,|\, v(f)\geq v(I)\} \kern-3pt\subset
\bigcap_{p \in \mathcal{K}}\{f\in R_m\,|\, v_p(f)\geq v_p(I)\}=\kern-3pt\bigcap_{p \in \mathcal{K}}\{f\in R_m\,|\, v_p(f)\geq \mu_p\},$$ for every $m\geq 0$.
On the other hand, $(I_{\mathcal{K}})_m=\{f\in R_m\,|\, \mathbf{P}_{\mathcal{K}}^{-1}\cdot
(\mathbf{e}_K(f)-{\boldsymbol\mu}_K)^t\geq 0\}$. Now, for $p\in K$, the effective multiplicity $e_p$ is also given by the order function, hence $e_p(f)=v_p(f)$ for every $p\in K$. As already observed and used, $\mathbf{P}_{\mathcal{K}}^{-1}$ has only nonnegative entries. Therefore, $\mathbf{e}_K(f) - {\boldsymbol\mu}_K=\mathbf{v}_K(f)-{\boldsymbol\mu}_K\geq 0$ certainly implies that $\mathbf{P}_{\mathcal{K}}^{-1}\cdot (\mathbf{e}_K(f)-{\boldsymbol\mu}_K)^t\geq 0$.
This concludes the proof of the statement.
We collect the various results in the following
\[almost\_all\_inclusions\] Let $I\subset R$ be the base ideal of a rational map $F:\pp^2\dasharrow\pp^2$ with weighted cluster $\mathcal{K}$. Then $$I\subset \bar{I}\subset \tilde{I}\subset I_{\mathcal{K}}\subset \mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}.$$
Complements
-----------
We state a basic fact of standard graded rings, reminiscent of an argument in the proof of [@Har Theorem 5.19]. It gives an Artin–Rees type of equality “on the nose” (see [@SHbook Chapter 13] for the known aspects relating Artin–Rees and integral closure in more generality).
\[linear\_multiple\] Let $(R,R_+)$ denote a standard graded ring over a field $k$ and its maximal irrelevant ideal. Write $n:=\edim(R)=\dim_kR_1$. Let $I\subset R_+$ stand for a homogeneous ideal of codimension $\geq 2$ generated by $n$ $k$-linearly independent forms of degree $d$, for some $d\geq 1$. Given a homogeneous ideal $J\subset R_+$ such that $I_d=J_d$, one has:
1. For any integer $j\geq 0$, $$\label{linear_multiple_subset}
R_+^jJ\cap I=R_+^jI.$$
2. If, moreover, $J\subset I:R_+^{\infty}$ then $J$ is integral over $I$.
Clearly, $I\subset J$. Moreover, $J_{\ell}=\{0\}$ for $\ell<d$. Indeed, if $0\neq g\in J_{d-1}$ then $R_1g\subset J_d=I_d$. Since $R_1g$ is spanned by $k$-linearly independent elements and $I_d$ has $k$-vector dimension $n$, it follows that $I=(R_1g)$, hence $I$ would have codimension $\leq 1$.
To prove (a), it clearly suffices to show the inclusion $R_+^jJ\cap I\subset R_+^jI$. Now, since $R_+$ is the maximal irrelevant ideal of $R$, then $R_j=(R_+^j)_j$ for any $j\geq 0$. Therefore, since $I_{\ell}=\{0\}$ for $\ell<d$, one can write $I_{d+j}= R_jI_d=(R_+^j)_jI_d$, for any $j\geq 0$ (any linear form that multiplies the generators of $I$ into $I_{d+1}$ can be absorbed by $R_+$).
Since $R_+^jJ\cap I\subset I$, it follows that $$(R_+^jJ\cap I)_{d+j}\subset I_{d+j}=(R_+^j)_jI_d\subset (R_+^jI)_{d+j},$$ for any $j\geq 0$. On the other hand, we have $J_{\ell}=\{0\}$ for $\ell<d$ as shown above. Therefore $(R_+^jJ)_{\ell+j}=\{0\}$ for $\ell<d$ and any $j\geq 0$. Thus, finally one has $R_+^jJ\cap I\subset R_+^jI$ for any $j\geq 0$, as required.
To prove (b), one notes that the hypothesis implies the inclusion $R_+^sJ\subset I$ for some $s\geq 0$. Then clearly $R_+^sJ=R_+^sJ\cap I\subset R_+^sI$. Therefore the result follows from the so-called [*determinantal trick*]{} (see [@SHbook Corollary 1.1.8]).
As an immediate consequence of this criterion and the results of the previous subsection, we file the following result.
\[plane\_pan\_russo\] Let $I$ be the base ideal of a Cremona map of degree $d\geq 1$ of $\pp^2$ with weighted cluster $\mathcal{K}$. Then $$I\subset I^{\rm sat}\subset\bar{I}\subset \tilde{I}\subset I_{\mathcal{K}}\subset \mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}.$$ [Supplement.]{} $I_d = I^{\rm sat}_d = \bar{I}_d = \tilde{I}_d = (I_{\mathcal{K}})_d$.
By [@PanRusso Proposition 1.2], $I_d=I^{\rm sat}_d$. Thus, we can apply Proposition \[linear\_multiple\](b) to conclude that $I^{\rm sat}\subset\bar{I}$. The other inclusions were proved in Theorem \[almost\_all\_inclusions\].
The statement in the supplement follows from [@alberich Proposition 2.5.2] in which it is shown that $I_d=(I_{\mathcal{K}})_d$.
Note that [@PanRusso Proposition 1.2] translates into the basic assumption of the previous section, namely, that $\operatorname{indeg}(I^{\rm sat}/I)\geq d+1$. Thus, Theorem \[ldual\] and all of its consequences are immediately applicable and will subsequently be drawn upon. For example, one has:
\[cupperbound\] Let $I=(I_d)\subset R=k[x_0,x_1,x_2]\,(d\geq 2)$ stand for the base ideal of a plane Cremona map without fixed part. If $I$ is non-saturated then $d\geq 5$ and:
- $(d{\,}^2+3d-4)/2\leq e(R/I)\leq (5d\,^2-21d)/2$, where lower bound is for the case where the base points are proper, while the upper bound is valid for $d\geq 6$
- $2d-4-\lfloor(d-5)/2\rfloor\leq \operatorname{reg}(R/I)\leq 2d-4$.
The bounds for the regularity follows from Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\] (ii) and the inequalities $2(\operatorname{reg}(R/I)+2)\geq d_r+d_{r-1}\geq 1+3d$ in (\[ineq\]). As to the upper bound for the multiplicity, it comes out of the following equality derived from (\[hseries\]) $$\label{multiplicity}
e(R/I)=\sum_{i=1}^r {{d_i}\choose {2}}- \sum_{m=1}^{r-2} {{D_m}\choose {2}} -3{{d}\choose {2}}.$$ The lower bound $e(R/I)\geq e(R/\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}})=(d^2+3d-4)/2$ has been previously explained, where $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$ is the fat ideal as above and after using the equations of condition (\[eqs\_condition\]).
It would be interesting to obtain an estimate of $e(R/I_{\mathcal{K}})$ in order to get tighter lower bounds for $e(R/I)$.
Observe that, in contrast to the intangible ideal theoretic properties of the full ideal of curves $I_{\mathcal{K}}$, the fat ideal based on the proper part of $\mathcal{K}$ is unmixed and integrally closed. An immediate consequence of this facet is the following.
\[sat\_is\_closure\] Let $F$ be a plane rational map without fixed part and base ideal $I$, and let $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$ denote the fat ideal associated to the proper part of the corresponding weighted cluster of $F$. If $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}=I^{\rm sat}$ then $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$ is the integral closure of $I$.
Since $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$ is integrally closed and $I\subset \mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$ then the integral closure $\bar{I}$ of $I$ is contained in $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$. By Proposition \[linear\_multiple\] (b), $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}\subset \bar{I}$. Therefore, $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}=\bar{I}$.
An instance of the above is a simple Cremona map of homaloidal type $(5\,; 2^6)$ (see the proof of Theorem \[proper\_types\_degree5\]).
Finally, using Proposition \[plane\_pan\_russo\] and Theorem \[from\_lower\_bound\] one gets:
\[degree\_at\_most\_4\] Let $I=(I_d)\subset R=k[x_0,x_1,x_2]\,(d\geq 2)$ stand for the base ideal of a plane Cremona map without fixed part. If $d\leq 4$ then $I$ is saturated.
Steps in the classification of plane Cremona maps
=================================================
de Jonquières maps
------------------
Among plane Cremona maps, the so-called [*de Jonquières map*]{} plays a fundamental role going back at least to Castelnuovo’s celebrated proof of Noether theorem ([@alberich Proposition 8.3.4]. Following [@alberich 2.6.10], we define it as a plane Cremona map of degree $d\geq 2$ whose homaloidal type is $(d\,; d-1,1^{2d-2})$.
A basic geometric datum is its close association with the so-called [*monoids*]{}. Besides, this class of maps enjoys many interesting properties from the algebraic and homological viewpoints. It may be convenient to give an overview of some of these properties and describe some relevant families of such maps.
### Monomial de Jonquières maps {#monomial-de-jonquières-maps .unnumbered}
An important class of Cremona maps is that of monomial Cremona maps.
A [*monomial Cremona map*]{} is a Cremona map in $\pp^n$ whose base ideal is generated by monomials in $k[x_0,\ldots, x_n]$.
There is as of now a reasonably extensive literature on these maps (see, e.g., [@Barbara], [@CoSi], [@Andre], [@SiVi], [@SimisVilla], [@CremonaMexico]). It is on itself a guiding case study. The following proposition covers some basic properties of plane such maps and gives a characterization of plane monomial de Jonquières maps; parts (c) and (d) below seem to be new.
\[monomial\_jonquieres\] Let $F:\pp^2\dasharrow \pp^2$ denote a plane monomial Cremona map and let $I\subset R$ stand for its base ideal. Then:
1. Up to permutation of the variables [(]{}source[)]{} and the defining monomials [(]{}target[)]{}, the base ideal $I$ is one of the following:
- $(xy,xz,yz)$
- $(x^d,x^{d-1}y,y^{d-1}z)$, with $d\geq 1$
- $(x^d, x^{d-(a+b)}y^az^b, y^{d-c}z^c)$, with $abc\neq 0$, $d\geq a+b$ and $ac-b(d-c)=\pm 1$.
2. $I$ is saturated.
3. $F$ is a de Jonquières map exactly in the following cases:
- $(xy,xz,yz)$
- $(x^d,x^{d-1}y,y^{d-1}z)$, with $d\geq 2$
- $(x^d, xyz^{d-2}, yz^{d-1})$, with $d\geq 3$.
4. If $F$ is a de Jonquières map then $I$ is an integrally closed ideal exactly in the following cases:
- $(xy,xz,yz)$
- $(x^2,xy,yz)$
- $(x^3,x^2y,y^2z)$
- $(x^3,xyz,yz^2)$.
\(a) This part is proved in [@CremonaMexico Lemma 3.3 and Proposition 3.5].
\(b) This is a result of [@Andre Proposition 2.11] drawing upon part (a).
\(c) We first argue that the three alternatives give in fact de Jonquières maps according to the above definition. We skip the discussion of the first case as being sufficiently known.
It suffices to show that there is a proper base point where the defining $d$-forms have minimum multiplicity (i.e., order) $d-1$, for then the equations of condition yield the existence of $2d-2$ additional proper or infinitely near base points.
Consider the case $I=(x^d,x^{d-1}y,y^{d-1}z)$, $d\geq 2$. The map has only two proper base points: $p=(0:0:1)$ and $q=(0:1:0)$. By passing to the respective local rings, one readily finds that the minimum multiplicity at $p$ is $d-1$, while at $q$ it is $1$.
In the case $I=(x^d, xyz^{d-2}, yz^{d-1})$, we have again the same two proper base points. Again, an immediate check gives multiplicity $d-1$ at the point $q$ (and $1$ at $p$).
Conversely, let $F$ be a de Jonquières map. By (a), we may assume that its base ideal has the third form. Because of the restrictions on the integers $a,b,c$ in this case, we again find that the map has only the two proper base points $p,q$ as before. Therefore, one (and only) one of these points has minimum multiplicity $d-1$ for the curves of the system.
Now, locally at $q$ and $p$ the minimum multiplicity of the curves of the system is $$\min\{d-a,c\}\quad {\rm and}\quad \min\{d-(a+b)+a=d-b,d-c\},$$ respectively. But since permuting $y$ and $z$ will not change the form of the map, we may assume that this point is $q=(0:1:0)$. Suppose first that $d-1=d-a$, hence $a=1$. Then, on the other point the minimum multiplicity must be $1$, hence either $b=d-1$ or $c=d-1$. If $b=d-1$ then $a+b=d$, contradicting one of the restrictions in the third case of part (a). Therefore, it must be the case that $c=d-1$. But then $ac-b(d-c)=\pm 1$ now reads $b=d-1\pm 1$. Since $b<d$, we must have $b=d-2$, as required.
The discussion of the alternative $c=d-1$ at the outset is similar: $ac-b(d-c)=\pm 1$ now gives $a\leq (a+b)a-b\leq (d-1)a-b=\pm 1$. Since $a>0$, we get $a=1$. Then as before, $b=d-2$.
\(d) It is well-known that $(xy,xz,yz)$ is even a normal ideal (see, e.g., [@bowtie Theorem 1.1 and Corollary 2.8], also [@HiOh]) and so is $(x^2,xy,yz)$ by a similar token: the defining ideal of the Rees algebra in either case is a codimension $2$ complete intersection whose Jacobian ideal has codimension $2$.
The cases of $(x^3,x^2y,y^2z)$ and $(x^3,xyz,yz^2)$ can be dealt with by readily verifying that the ideal on the local pieces $z=1$ and $y=1$ is integrally closed; from this, an easy checking shows that the original ideal is integrally closed.
On the other hand, neither $I=(x^d,x^{d-1}y, y^{d-1}z)$ nor $J=(x^d, xyz^{d-2}, yz^{d-1})$ is integrally closed for $d\geq 4$. Indeed, for example: $$\left\{
\begin{array}{lll}
x^{d/2}y^{d/2}z\notin I, & \mbox{but $(x^{d/2}y^{d/2}z)^2\in I^2,$} & \mbox{if $d\geq 4$ is even}\\[5pt]
x^{(d-1)/2}y^{(d+1)/2}z\notin I, & \mbox{but $(x^{(d-1)/2}y^{(d+1)/2}z)^2\in I^2,$} & \mbox{if $d\geq 5$ is odd}
\end{array}
\right.$$ and, similarly $$\left\{
\begin{array}{lll}
x^{d-1}y^2z^{(d-2)/2}\notin J, & \mbox{but $(x^{d-1}y^2z^{(d-2)/2})^2\in J^2,$} & \mbox{if $d\geq 4$ is even}\\[5pt]
x^{d-1}y^{2}z^{(d-1)/2}\notin J, & \mbox{but $(x^{d-1}y^{2}z^{(d-1)/2})^2\in J^2,$} & \mbox{if $d\geq 5$ is odd}.
\end{array}
\right.$$
### Arbitrary de Jonquières maps {#arbitrary-de-jonquières-maps .unnumbered}
The next proposition states the equivalence between two notions of a de Jonquières map. Although this equivalence is used liberally (see, e.g., [@PanBoletim Lemme 2], [@Pan Exemple 1.3]) we could not trace through the literature a fully rigorous algebraic proof. Since the definition we employ here is based on properties of the weighted cluster of the map, while the second notion essentially deals with the format of the base ideal, it would seem desirable to have such a precise proof.
In addition, there is a very good reason to be able to navigate between the two notions as, at one end, the first is computable in terms of any set of generators of the base ideal, while the second one is impossible to verify as its formulation depends upon a projective coordinate change both in the source and the target of the map. At the other end, the second gives a good handling of the algebraic properties of the ideal, whereas the first notion falls behind in this regard.
A $z$-[*monoid*]{} is a $d$-form $f_{d-1}z+f_d\in R$, where $f_{d-1},f_d$ are forms in $k[x,y]$ of respective degrees $d-1,d$. It is noteworthy that such a form is irreducible if (and only if) $\gcd\{f_{d-1},f_d\}=1$.
\[characterization\_of\_jonquieres\] Let $F:\pp^2\dasharrow \pp^2$ be a rational map of degree $d$ with no fixed part and let $I\subset R$ denote its base ideal. The following conditions are equivalent:
1. $F$ is a de Jonquières map
2. Up to permutation of the variables [(]{}source[)]{} and the defining forms [(]{}target[)]{}, the base ideal $I$ is generated by $d$-forms $\{f, xq, yq\}$ such that $f$ and $q$ are both $z$-monoids and $f$ is irreducible.
\(i) $\Rightarrow$ (ii) Since there must be at least one proper base point, we may assume that $p=(0:0:1)\in \pp^2$ is the base point with the (unique) prescribed multiplicity $d-1$. On the other hand, by the genus formula, any irreducible $d$-form having multiplicity $d-1$ at $p$ has no other (proper or infinitely near) singularities. But among these forms, there is a $z$-monoid, namely, $f=zf_{d-1}(x,y)+f_d(x,y)$, with $f_{d-1}$ and $f_d$ forms of degrees $d-1$ and $d$, respectively, with $\gcd(f_{d-1},f_d)=1$. Now, since $f_{d-1}$ and $f_d$ can be chosen generically, we may assume that they have been chosen so that, moreover, $f$ goes through the remaining (proper or infinitely near) base points of $F$. It follows from [@alberich Proposition 2.5.2] that $f\in I_d$. Such a form being irreducible, the corresponding homogeneous coordinate ring $k[x,y,z]/(f)$ is an integral domain. Also, $V(f)$ is the image of the rational map $$(s_0f_{d-1}(s_0,s_1): s_1f_{d-1}(s_0,s_1):-f_d(s_0,s_1)) :\pp^1_{s_0,s_1}\dasharrow \pp^2_{x,y,z},$$ which is birational onto $V(f)$. Therefore, the natural inclusion $$k[s_0f_{d-1}(s_0,s_1), s_1f_{d-1}(s_0,s_1), -f_d(s_0,s_1]\subset k[s_0,s_1]^{(d)}$$ into the $d$th Veronese is an equality at the level of the respective fraction fields, which in turn induces an injective $k$-homomorphism $$k[x,y,z]/(f)\stackrel{\alpha}{\simeq} k[s_0f_{d-1}(s_0,s_1), s_1f_{d-1}(s_0,s_1), -f_d(s_0,s_1]\subset k(s_0,s_1).$$
Extending $f$ to a $k$-vector base $\{g,h,f\}$ of $I_d$ corresponds to a coordinate change on the target, hence we may assume that the map $F:\pp^2\dasharrow \pp^2$ is defined by $(g:h:f)$. On the other hand, for general choices of $f_{d-1}$ and $f_d$, the restriction of $F$ to $V(f)\subset \pp^2$ is birational onto the image. This gives, again and over, that the injection $$\sigma: k[g,h,f]/k[g,h,f]\cap (f){\hookrightarrow}(k[x,y,z]/(f))^{(d)}$$ extends to an equality of the respective fields of fractions. But the natural map $$k[g,h]\stackrel{\gamma}{{\hookrightarrow}} k[g,h,f]/k[g,h,f]\cap (f)$$ is injective (which is the translation of the fact that the restriction of $F$ maps $V(f)$ onto a line). Altogether, one has an injective $k$-homomorphism $\beta: k[g,h]{\hookrightarrow}k(s_0,s_1)$, $\beta=\alpha\sigma\gamma$, which is an isomorphism at the level of $d$th Veronese fields of fractions. Thus, $(\beta(g):\beta(h))$ defines a Cremona map of $\pp^1$, hence must be equivalent to the identity map of $\pp^1$. In other words, $\beta(g)$ and $\beta(h)$ are multiples of $s_0,s_1$, respectively, with same common factor in $k[s_0,s_1]$. Extending $\alpha$ to the level of fractions modulo $(f)$ yields $$\alpha(y/x)=s_1f_{d-1}(s_0,s_1)/s_0f_{d-1}(s_0,s_1)=s_1/s_0=\alpha(h/g),$$ thus implying $yg\equiv xh \pmod {f} $. Therefore, we obtain a relation $yg-xh+\ell f=0$, for some linear form $\ell\in R$. On the other hand, we can write $f=xp_1+yp_2$ for suitable $(d-1)$-forms $p_1,p_2\in k[x,y,z]$. Substituting in the linear relation for $\ell f$, and using that $\{x,y\}$ is a regular sequence, yields $g=xq-\ell p_2, h=yq+\ell p_1$, for some $(d-1)$-form $q$. Then, as one readily checks, $f,g,h$ are (up to a sign) the $2$-minors of the matrix $$\phi=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
x& p_2\\
-y& p_1\\
\ell & q
\end{array}
\right).$$ Assume first that $d\geq 3$. We claim that $x,y,\ell$ are linearly dependent.
Indeed, otherwise the ideal $I_1(\phi)$ would have codimension $3$, thus implying that $I$ is generically a complete intersection. But, since $I$ is an almost complete intersection, it would be an ideal of linear type (see, e.g., [@SV Proposition 3.7]). However, since $F$ is a Cremona map and , this would contradict the main birationality criterion of [@AHA].
This means that $\ell$ is a $1$-form in $k[x,y]$, hence up to a change of coordinates we may assume that $\ell=0$. It follows that $I$ is now generated by $\{f, xq, yq\}$. Here $f$ is an irreducible $z$-monoid by construction, while $q$ is again a $z$-monoid because $xq$ and $yq$ have multiplicity $\geq d-1$ at $(0:0:1)$.
In the case where $d=2$, up to a coordinate change on the source and the target the respective base ideal has one of the following set of generators:
1. $F$ is given by $\{xy, xz, yz\}$ (Three distinct proper base points $p_1,p_2,p_3$)
2. $F$ is given by $\{x^2, xy, yz\}$ (Two distinct proper base points $p_1,p_2$ and one infinitely near point to $p_1$)
3. $F$ is given by $\{x^2, xy, y^2-xz\}$ (A unique proper base point $p$ and two infinitely near points to $p$).
We deal with the first of these alternatives as the other two are treated similarly. Namely, we take the following modified set of generators: $f=xz+yz+xy=(x+y)z+xy= x(y+z)+yz, g=xz,h=yz$. Then $f$ is an irreducible $z$-monoid, while $q=z$. The corresponding syzygy matrix is $$\phi=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
x&z\\[3pt]
-y& y+z\\[3pt]
0 & z
\end{array}
\right).$$
\(ii) $\Rightarrow$ (i) According to [@PanBoletim Lemme 2], the rational map with these properties is birational. In particular, the equations of condition are satisfied. Thus it suffices to show that the minimum multiplicity at the base point $(0:0:1)$ is $d-1$. But this follows immediately from the monoidal structure of $f$ and $q$.
A self-contained argument for proving that the map as given in (ii) is birational comes from the details in the proof of Theorem \[Rees\_of\_Jonq\](i). Indeed, in \[loc. cit.\] it is shown in particular that there exists a relation of $\{f,xq,yq\}$ which is a form of bidegree $(1,d-2)$. Such a form, along with the form of bidegree $(1,1)$ coming from the trivial relation of $\{xq,yq\}$, implies that the pertinent matrix in [@AHA Theorem 1.18] has rank $2$, thus forcing birationality.
Recall that an ideal $I$ of a ring $R$ is [*of linear type*]{} if the natural surjective homomorphism from the symmetric algebra of $I$ to its Rees algebra is injective.
The following ideal theoretic properties follow suit.
\[jonquieres\] Let $F$ denote a plane de Jonquières map of degree $d\geq 2$ with base ideal $I\subset R=k[x,y,z]$. Then:
- $R/I$ is Cohen–Macaulay, hence $I=I^{\rm sat}$.
- The degree [(]{}algebraic multiplicity[)]{} of the scheme $R/I$ is $d(d-1)+1$.
- $I$ is an ideal of linear type if and only if $d=2$.
\(a) Then a set of generators of $I$ are the $2\times 2$ minors of the matrix $$\phi=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
x&p_2\\
-y& p_1\\
0 & q
\end{array}
\right).$$ Since $I$ has codimension $\geq 2$, this shows that $R/I$ is a Cohen–Macaulay ring, hence $I$ is an unmixed ideal. Thus, a de Jonquières map has a saturated base ideal.
\(b) It follows from (a) that $R/I$ has a minimal graded resolution of the form $$\label{res_of_jonquieres}
0{\rightarrow}R(-(2d-1))\oplus R(-(d+1)){\longrightarrow}R(-d)^3{\longrightarrow}R.$$ Therefore, its Hilbert series is $(1-3t^d+t^{d+1}+t^{2d-1})/(1-t)^3$. From this, by taking the second $t$-derivative of the numerator and evaluating at $t=1$, one obtains the degree $$e(R/I):=\frac{-3d(d-1)+(d+1)d+ (2d-1)(2d-2)}{2}=d(d-1)+1.$$
\(c) As mentioned in the proof of Proposition \[characterization\_of\_jonquieres\], since $I$ is an almost complete intersection one knows that $I$ is of linear type if and only it is generically a complete intersection, i.e., if and only if the ideal of $1$-minors of its structural Hilbert–Burch matrix $\phi$ as above is $(x,y,z)$-primary. By the monoidal form of $q$, $q$ has a pure power term in $z$ only if $\deg(q)=1$; else, it is either $p_1$ or $p_2$ that has a nonzero term in $z^r$ alone, for some $r\geq 1$. Again, from the monoidal form of $f$ above this happens if and only if $\deg (p_1)=1$.
\(1) The interest of a calculation such as the one in item (b) above is that, even if the points are proper and in general position, the corresponding $\boldsymbol\mu$-fat ideal $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$ may not coincide with $I^{\rm sat}$, where $I$ denotes the base ideal of the linear system in degree $d$. An example is obtained with $d=4$, where $I$ is saturated by Corollary \[jonquieres\](a). One has $e(R/I)=13$ by the above corollary, while $e(R/\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}})=12$ by (\[multplicity\_of\_fat\]).
\(2) As embodied in the proof of Proposition \[characterization\_of\_jonquieres\], the statement of (c) in the above proposition is also a consequence of the birationality criterion of [@AHA].
One can even go one step further to give the structure of the Rees algebra of the base ideal of a de Jonquières map, in fact, of any rational map $\pp^2\dasharrow \pp^2$ whose base ideal has a similar structure. More precisely, we prove:
\[Rees\_of\_Jonq\] Let $I\subset R$ denote the base ideal of a rational map $\pp^2\dasharrow \pp^2$ of degree $d\geq 2$ with no fixed part, whose syzygy matrix has the form $$\phi=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
x&p_2\\
-y& p_1\\
0 & q
\end{array}
\right),$$ where $q$ has a nonzero term which is a pure power of $z$ if and only if $d=2$. Let $\mathcal{R}(I)$ denote the Rees algebra of $I$. One has:
1. If $\mathcal{R}(I)\simeq R[t,u,v]/\mathcal{J}$ stands for a minimal presentation then $\mathcal{J}$ is minimally generated by $d$ polynomials of bidegrees $(1,1), (d-1,1), (d-2,2),...,(1,d-1)$
2. $I^j$ is saturated for $1\leq j\leq d-1$, while $I^d$ is not saturated
3. $\mathcal{R}(I)$ is Cohen–Macaulay if and only if $d\leq 3$.
\(i) For $d=2$ we are assuming that $q=z+q'$, where $q'\in k[x,y]$. Therefore, the ideal $I_1(\phi)=(x,y,z)$. This forces $I$ to be generically a complete intersection, hence is of linear type – an argument we have repeatedly used in the text. Thus, the result is immediate in this degree.
Suppose that $d\geq 3$. The hypothesis on the form of $\phi$ implies at the outset that $I_1(\phi)=(x,y)$. This is suited to applying the method of the [*Sylvester forms*]{} as indicated in [@syl1] and based on the standard bigrading of the polynomial ring $S=R[t,u,v]$, where $x,y,z$ have bidegree $(1,0)$ and $t,u,v$ have bidegree $(0,1)$.
The Sylvester form associated to a set of polynomials is computed with respect to a given ideal that serves as a kind of “frame” for these polynomials. The advantage of this procedure is that the forms obtained are among the defining Rees equations of $I$.
Starting with the Rees equations $F=xt-yu, G=p_2t+p_1u+qv\in \mathcal{J}$, coming from the syzygies of $I$, we can then write
$$\left[\begin{array}{c} F \\ G \end{array}\right]=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
t & -u \\
G_x & G_y\\
\end{array}
\right)
\left[\begin{array}{c} x
\\ y \end{array} \right],$$ for suitable forms $G_x,G_y\in R[t,u,v]$ of bidegree $(d-2,1)$. By Cramer’s rule, $H_1:=\det(C)\in \mathcal{J}$, where $$C=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
t & -u \\
G_x & G_y\\
\end{array}
\right).$$ This is our first Sylvester form. We have $H_1\neq 0\,$; indeed, otherwise $[P \;Q ]\cdot C=0$, for some nonzero row vector with $P,Q\in R[t,u,v]$. But then the transpose $[P \; Q]^t$ would be a syzygy of $\{F,G\}$. Since the latter is a regular sequence, it would give that the columns of $C$ are syzygies of $\{-G,F\}$, which is absurd.
Note that $H_1$ is of bidegree $(d-2,2)$. By the same procedure, we obtain the next Sylvester form:
$$\left[\begin{array}{c} F \\ H_1 \end{array}\right]=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
t & -u \\
(H_1)_x & (H_1)_y\\
\end{array}
\right)
\left[\begin{array}{c} x
\\ y \end{array} \right],$$ for suitable forms $(H_1)_x, (H_1)_y\in R[t,u,v]$ of bidegree $(d-3,2)$. By the same argument, the determinant $H_2$ of the above $2\times 2$ “content” matrix is a nonzero Sylvester form of bidegree $(d-3, 3)$ belonging to $\mathcal{J}$. Continuing this way, always using $F$ and the updated $H_{i-1}$, we obtain a subideal $(F,G,H_1, \ldots, H_{d-2})\subset \mathcal{J}$, where $H_i$ is a form of bidegree $(d-(i+1), i+1)$, for $i=1,\ldots, d-2$.
Now, $H_{d-2}\notin (x,y)R[t,u,v]$ because otherwise we could construct a nonvanishing Sylvester form of bidegree $(0,d)$. This would give a nonzero form in $\mathcal{J}\cap k[t,u,v]$, contradicting birationality. But then the $R$-content ideal of the forms $\{F,G,H_1, \ldots, H_{d-2}\}$ has codimension $3$. By [@syl3], one knows that $(F,G,H_1, \ldots, H_{d-2})=\mathcal{J}$, as was to be shown.
\(ii) While in (i) we stressed the bigraded structure of the Rees algebra as induced from the bigrading of the polynomial ring $S=R[t,u,v]$, for the purpose of this part we preliminarily focus on the usual standard $\NN$-grading as induced from the standard $\NN$-grading of $S$ with $S_0=R$. More explicitly, let $W$ be an additional (tag) variable of bidegree $(0,1)$. Write $\mathcal{R}(I)=\oplus_{i\geq 0}\, I^iW^i\subset R[W]$, so that in the minimal graded presentation $\mathcal{R}(I)\simeq S/\mathcal{J}$ the component $I^iW^i$ of $\NN$-degree $i$ is presented as $I^iW^i\simeq S_i/\mathcal{J}_i$. Thus, we get an exact sequence of $\NN$-graded $R$-modules $$\label{power_presentation} 0{\rightarrow}\mathcal{J}_i{\longrightarrow}S_i{\longrightarrow}I^iW^i{\rightarrow}0.$$
We now prove that, for $i\leq d-1$, the $R$-module $\mathcal{J}_i$ is free. For this purpose, drawing upon the notation in part (i), we contend that $\mathcal{J}_i$ is generated as a graded $R$-module by the elements $$\{(t,u,v)_{i-1}F,v^{i-1}G,v^{i-2}H_1,\cdots,vH_{i-2},H_{i-1}\},$$ where $(t,u,v)_{i-1}$ denotes the set monomials of degree $i-1$ in $k[t,u,v]$. Since the cardinality of this set is ${{i+1}\choose {2}}+i={{i+2}\choose {2}} -1$ which is the rank of $J_i$, we will be done.
As a slight check, the elements listed above all have bidegree $(j, i)$ for various $j$’s, hence they certainly belong to $\mathcal{J}_i$. We proceed by induction on $i$.
For $i=1$ the list consists of $\{F, G\}$; since $\mathcal{J}_1$ always generates the presentation ideal of the symmetric of $I$, the result follows immediately.
Consider the $2\times d$ matrix $$\mathfrak{H}=
\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
u & -x & G_y & (H_1)_y & \hdots & (H_{d-3})_y\\
-t & y & G_x & (H_1)_x & \hdots & (H_{d-3})_x
\end{array}
\right)$$ Then, by construction, the forms $\{F,G,H_1, \ldots, H_{d-2}\}$ are the $2$-minors of the initial $2\times 3$ submatrix and, in addition, the remaining minors fixing the first column (taking the ideal of all $2$-minors fixing the first two columns only gives repetitions).
We do the case $i=2$ to illustrate the pattern in the general inductive step. Thus, according to part (i), $\mathcal{J}_2$ is generated as a graded $R$-module by the set $$\label{apparent_gens}
\{(t,u,v)_1\mathcal{J}_1,H_1\}=\{tF,uF,vF,tG,uG,vG,H_1\}.$$ Now, the forms $F,H_1, G$ are the $2$-minors (up to a sign) of the following $3\times 2$ initial submatrix of $\mathfrak{H}$: $$\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
u & -x & G_y\\
-t & y & G_x
\end{array}
\right).$$ Using that the two rows are relations of the minors and noting that $G_x$ and $G_y$ have bidegree $(d-2,1)$, one readily sees that $tG, uG$ both belong to the graded $R$-submodule $R_1H_1+R_{d-2} (t,u,v)_1F$. Therefore in the set (\[apparent\_gens\]) of generators of $\mathcal{J}_2$, $tG$ and $uG$ are redundant.
Let now $3\leq i\leq d-1$ and assume that $\mathcal{J}_{i-1}$ is generated as a graded $R$-module by $$L_{i-1}:=\{(t,u,v)_{i-2}F,v^{i-2}G,v^{i-3}H_1,\cdots,vH_{i-3},H_{i-2}\}.$$ Then, again from part (i), $\mathcal{J}_i$ is generated as a graded $R$-module by $(t,u,v)_1L_{i-1}$ and by $H_{i-1}$. Using this time around the submatrix $$\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
u & -x & (H_{i-2})_y\\
-t & y & (H_{i-2})_x
\end{array}
\right)$$ of $\mathfrak{H}$, whose $2$-minors are $F,H_{i-1}, H_{i-2}$, a similar discussion as in the case $i=2$ shows that $tH_{i-2}$ and $uH_{i-2}$ belong to the graded $R$-submodule generated by $H_{i-1}$ and $(t,u,v)_{i-1}F$. Thus, the inductive step yields that, for $j=1,\cdots,i-2$, the elements $uv^jH_{i-j-2}$ and $tv^jH_{i-j-2}$ belong to the graded $R$-submodule generated by $v^jH_{i-j-1}$ and $v^j(t,u,v)_{i-j-1}F$, where $H_0:=G$, and hence are superfluous generators. Therefore $$\{(t,u,v)_{i-1}F,v^{i-1}G,v^{i-2}H_1,\cdots,vH_{i-2},H_{i-1}\}$$ generates the graded $R$-module $\mathcal{J}_i$, as needed to be shown.
To get the explicit minimal free graded $R$-resolution of $I^i$, with $i\leq d-1$, one uses the identification $S_i=R[t,u,v]_i\simeq R\otimes_k k[t,v,u]_i\simeq R\otimes_k k^{{i+2}\choose {2}}\simeq R^{{i+2}\choose {2}}$ of graded $R$-modules and the appropriate shift based on the bidegree $(di,0)+(0,i)=(di,i)$ of $I^iW^i$, in order to obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\label{res_of_power} \nonumber
0 &{\longrightarrow}& \left(R(-(d i+1))^{{i+1}\choose {2}}\right)\bigoplus \left(\oplus _{l=1}^{i} R(-(d-l+d i))\right)
\stackrel{\Psi_i}{{\longrightarrow}} R(-di)^{{i+2}\choose {2}}{\longrightarrow}I^i{\rightarrow}0,\end{aligned}$$ where $$\_i= (
[ll@r]{} &&\
), = (
[ccccc]{} 0 & 0 & & 0 & x\
0 & 0 & & 0 & -y\
0 & 0 & & x &0\
0 & 0 & & -y & 0\
& & & &\
x & 0 & & 0 & 0\
-y & 0 & & 0 &0\
0 & 0 & & 0 & 0
) $$ with:
- $\mathfrak{L_i}$ is of size $({{i+2}\choose {2}}-1)\times {{i+1}\choose {2}}$, induced by the linear syzygy of $I$;
- $\mathfrak{D_i}$ is of size ${{i+2}\choose {2}}\times (i-1)$, induced by the syzygy of $I$ of standard degree $d-1$ and by the subsequent syzygies of $I^l$, one for each Sylvester form $H_l$, $l=2,\ldots, i+1$.
Finally, we deal with the step $i=d$. By the previous argument $\mathcal{J}_{d-1}$ is minimally generated by $$\{(t,u,v)_{d-2}F,v^{d-2}G,v^{d-3}H_1,\cdots,vH_{d-3},H_{d-2}\}.$$ We prove that $\mathcal{J}_d$ is minimally generated by $$\{(t,u,v)_{d-1}F,v^{d-1}G,v^{d-2}H_1,\cdots,v^2H_{d-3},vH_{d-2},tH_{d-2},uH_{d-2}\}.$$ The elements of this list, except for the last three ones, are part of a minimal set of generators as it follows again by a similar prior argument. As to the last three elements $vH_{d-2},tH_{d-2},uH_{d-2}$ it is clear that they do not belong to the ideal generated by the previous ones since $H_{d-2}\not\in (x,y)S$ (as has been remarked in the proof of part (i)).
\(iii) If $d\leq 3$ we may assume that $d=3$ since $d=2$ is even a complete intersection. Then $\mathcal{J}$ is generated by the $2$-minors of the matrix $\mathfrak{H}$ as above. Clearly, this is Cohen–Macaulay. Conversely, suppose that $\mathcal{R}(I)$ is Cohen–Macaulay. Since the codimension of $\mathcal{J}$ is $2$, it is defined by a Hilbert–Burch type of matrix again. But the presence of a minimal generator of bidegree $(1,1)$ forces this matrix to be $3\times 2$. Therefore, $\mathcal{J}$ is $3$-generated, i.e., $d\leq 3$.
One suspects that $I$ as above is normal (i.e., $\mathcal{R}(I)$ is a normal domain) exactly when $d\leq 3\,$; (in other words, exactly when $\mathcal{R}(I)$ is Cohen–Macaulay.) Of course, in general, a Cohen–Macaulay ideal of codimension $2$ in $k[x,y,z]$ fails very often to even being integrally closed. The traditional examples are the defining ideals of some of the so-called affine monomial curves. For a homogeneous ideal in $k[x,y,z]$ generated in fixed standard degree, one can take the example of [@Jar], namely, $(x^dy^d,x^dz^d,y^dz^d)$ with $d\geq 2$. Although any such ideal is of linear type for $d\geq 1$, its integral closure is not unmixed for $d\geq 2$ – in any case, by the criterion of [@AHA], this ideal is not the base ideal of a Cremona map. This is an entirely different behavior as from the base ideal of a de Jonquières map. Thus, looking from the angle of the defining matrix, the de Jonquières base ideal is just on the border line, with one column in standard degree $1$.
Degree $\leq 4$
---------------
Plane Cremona defined by forms of degree $d\leq 3$ are easily disposed of:
\[degree3\] Let $I\subset R=k[x,y,z]$ be the base ideal of a plane Cremona map $F\colon
\pp^2\dasharrow \pp^2$ defined by forms of degree $\leq 3$. Then $F$ is a de Jonquières map$\,$[;]{} in particular, $I$ is saturated.
The case where the degree is $2$ is well-known and completely obvious by the equations of condition (\[eqs\_condition\]) and Bézout theorem. Namely, its weights are $(1,1,1)$. Therefore, $F$ is a de Jonquières map, hence the base ideal $I$ is saturated by Corollary \[jonquieres\].
Next let the degree of the three forms be $3$. This is not even a bit more difficult than the previous case. We use again the equations of condition and the fact that the number of base points is at least $3$ ([@alberich 2.6.1]). Since there exists at least one base point if $d\geq 2$, then for $d=3$ one base point $p$ is such that $\mu_p\geq 2$ ([@alberich 2.6.8]). Then an immediate calculation yields that the only possible sequence of multiplicities is $2,1,1,1,1$, in particular there are exactly $5$ proper or infinitely near base points. Thus, any plane Cremona map of degree $3$ is a de Jonquières map.
In degree $4$ the situation gets more involved. Using the equations of conditions and Noether’s inequality ([@alberich 2.6.10]), one has $$\sum_{p}\mu_p=9,\;\; \sum_{p}\mu_p^2=15,\; \; \mu_1+\mu_2+\mu_3\geq 5,$$ where $\mu_1\geq\cdots \geq\mu_r$. An elementary calculation yields only two possibilities, namely, either the map is a de Jonquières map (of homaloidal type $(4\,;3,1^6)$) or else it is of homaloidal type $(4\,;2^3,1^3)$.
We know by Corollary \[degree\_at\_most\_4\] that the base ideal of any Cremona map in degree $4$ is saturated. What is left is to describe the invariants of the two alternatives.
The first is dealt with using Corollary \[jonquieres\](a). For the second possibility, we have the following result:
\[degree12\] Let $I\subset R=k[x,y,z]$ stand for the base ideal of a Cremona map of homaloidal type $(4; 2^3,1^3)$, such that the base points are proper and in general position. Then $I=\mathfrak{F}_{\mathfrak{K}}$ and, in particular, the degree $e(R/I)$ of $R/I$ is $12$.
The $3$ quartics defining the map belong to the linear system of all quartics going through the six points with the prescribed multiplicities $2,2,2,1,1,1$. The degree of the corresponding $\boldsymbol\mu$-fat ideal $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathfrak{K}}$ is $3+3+3+1+1+1=12$. We will use the associativity formula: $$e(R/I)=\sum_j \ell(R_{P_j}/I_{P_j})\, e(R/P_j),$$ where $P_j$ runs through the minimal primes of $R/I$ and $\ell$ denotes length. To see how, note that $e(R/P_j)=1$ as $P_j$ is generated by linear forms (since $k$ is algebraically closed). Therefore, one has to show $\ell(R_{P_j}/I_{P_j})=3$ if the quartics pass through the corresponding point with multiplicity $2$, and $\ell(R_{P_j}/I_{P_j})=1$ if the corresponding point is a simple point on the quartics.
We can assume that $I$ is generated by $3$ quartics each having a double point at each of the coordinate points $(0:0:1), (0:1:0), (1:0:0)$, since these points cannot be on a line (see [@alberich Corollary 2.6.9]). Following [@Gibson Lemma 11.3], any such quartic can be written in the normal form $$\lambda x^2y^2+\mu x^2z^2+\nu y^2z^2+2xyz(u_1 x+u_2 y+u_3 z),$$ for suitable values of $\lambda\mu\nu$ not vanishing simultaneously.
Up to another change of coordinates, we may assume that three quartics generating $I$ are of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\label{quartics}\nonumber
&&x^2y^2+ xyz(t_1 x+t_2 y+t_3 z)=xy(xy+t_1xz+t_2yz+t_3z^2)\\
&& x^2z^2 + xyz(u_1 x+u_2 y+u_3 z)=xz(xz+u_1xy+u_2y^2+u_3yz)\\\nonumber
&&y^2z^2+ xyz(v_1 x+v_2 y+v_3 z)=yz(yz +v_1x^2+v_2 xy +v_3xz),\end{aligned}$$ for suitable $t_i,u_i,v_i\in k\setminus \{0\}$. One can further pick special values of the above parameters such that the parenthetical $2$-forms are reduced, so as to guarantee that the three quartics admit the remaining $3$ points as simple points and these points be not aligned (otherwise, the line would be a fixed component thereof). For example, one may choose the parameters so as to factor these three $2$-forms into products of linear factors taken two at the time for each point (see [@alberich 2.1.8] for a concrete example).
To check $\ell(R_P/I_P)=3$ for a corresponding coordinate point, because of the obvious symmetry, we can assume that $P=(x,y)$. Since $z$ is invertible in the localization at $P$, an easy manipulation of the equations in the format of the right-hand side of (\[quartics\]) yields $I_P=(x^2,xy,y^2)$, hence $\ell(R_P/I_P)=3$.
Non-saturated behavior in degree $\leq 7$
-----------------------------------------
In higher degrees the discussion becomes a lot more involved. For one thing, there are homaloidal types for which no Cremona map exists having these types as characteristic (see [@alberich 5.3.7]). On the bright side, such examples exist only if the number of base points exceeds $7$ ([@alberich 5.3.10]). Moreover, for any given proper homaloidal type there exist simple Cremona maps whose base points can be generically chosen ([@alberich 5.3.5]). For this reason, we will focus only on simple Cremona maps.
As explained in Subsection \[analogues\], the multiplicity (geometric degree) of the base locus of a simple Cremona map with weighted cluster $\mathcal{K}=(K,\boldsymbol\mu)$ is bounded below by the degree of the associated $\boldsymbol\mu$-fat ideal $\mathfrak{F}_{\mathcal{K}}$. We will say that a simple Cremona map has [*minimum multiplicity*]{} if the multiplicity of its base locus attains its lower bound. Clearly, a similar notion could be introduced for non-simple maps by resorting to the multiplicity of the associated full ideal of curves $I_{\mathcal{K}}$, but, unfortunately, we know no closed formula for the latter.
\[pminimaldegree\] The homaloidal type of a simple Cremona map of minimum multiplicity is one of the following: $$\label{minimal_multiplicity_types}
(5\,;2,2,2,2,2,2), \;(4\,;2,2,2,1,1,1),\; (3\,;2,1,1,1,1), \;(2\,;1,1,1)$$
Write $\boldsymbol\mu=\{\mu_1,\cdots,\mu_n\}$. By the associativity formula, the degree of the base locus is $$e(R/I)=\sum_{j=1}^n \ell(R_{P_j}/I_{P_j})\, e(R/P_j)=\sum_{j=1}^n \ell(R_{P_j}/I_{P_j}),$$ since the base field is assumed to be algebraically closed. The minimal multiplicity assumption means that $\sum_j \ell(R_{P_j}/I_{P_j})= \sum_j \ell((R/P_{j}^{\mu _j})_{P_j}) $, where $1\leq j\leq n$. But the minimal number of generators of $I_{P_j}$ is $3$ whereas $(P_{j}^{\mu _j})_{P_j}=({P_j}_{P_j})^{\mu_j}$ requires at least $4$ minimal generators if $\mu_j\geq 3$. Therefore, one must have $\mu_j\leq 2$ for $1\leq j\leq n$.
Thus, up to ordering, we may assume that $\{\mu_1,\cdots,\mu_n\}=
\{\underbrace{1,\ldots,1}_j; \underbrace{2,\ldots,2}_k\}$. Then the equations of condition read $$\label{eqsystem}
\left\lbrace
\begin{array}{c l}
j+2k=3d-3\\
j+4k=d^2-1.
\end{array}
\right.$$ This system gives $j=(5-d)(d-1)$ which yields $d\leq 5$ as $j\geq 0$. The asserted alternatives now follow by an easy case by case calculation.
\[tcharactrization\] Let $F$ be a simple plane Cremona map of degree $d\leq 7$ with base ideal $I$. Assume that $I$ is not saturated [(]{}hence, $d\geq 5$[)]{}.
- If $d=5$, $F$ has homaloidal type $(5\,;2^6):=(5\,;2,2,2,2,2,2)$, $e(R/I)=18$, and the minimal resolution of $R/I$ has the form $$0\rightarrow R(-9)\rightarrow R^3(-8)\rightarrow R^3(-5)\rightarrow R.$$
- If $d=6$, $F$ has homaloidal type $(6\,;4,2^4,1^3)$, $e(R/I)=26$, and the minimal resolution of $R/I$ has the form $$0\rightarrow R(-11)\rightarrow R^2(-10)\oplus R(-9) \rightarrow R^3(-6)\rightarrow R.$$
- If $d=7$, $F$ has homaloidal type $(7\,;5,2^5,1^3)$ or else $(7\,;4,3^2,2^3,1^2)$. In the second case $e(R/I)=36$ and the minimal resolution of $R/I$ has one of the following forms: $$0\rightarrow R(-12)\rightarrow R^3(-11) \rightarrow R^3(-7)\rightarrow R$$ or $$0\rightarrow R(-13)\rightarrow R^2(-12)\oplus R(-10) \rightarrow R^3(-7)\rightarrow R.$$
By the previous sections, one has only to consider the range $5\leq d\leq 7$.
\(i) According to Proposition \[P567\](i) the minimal free resolution of the base ideal of a plane Cremona map (not necessarily simple) of degree $5$ has the form mentioned there. Thus, for all such maps $e(R/I)=18$. This is the minimum value for simple maps (Proposition \[cupperbound\]). The result, now, follows from Proposition \[pminimaldegree\].
\(ii) By Proposition \[P567\](ii) there are two virtual resolutions of $R/I$. By Proposition \[pminimaldegree\], the first of these alternatives conflicts with the content of Proposition \[P567\](ii) as applied to simple plane maps. The second alternative says that $e(R/I)=26$, which is exactly one more than the minimum multiplicity. Thus among the inequalities $\ell((R/I)_{P_i})\geq \ell((R/P_{i}^{\mu _i})_{P_i})$ for $i=1,\cdots,n$, only one of them is strict. Hence, by the same argument as in the proof of Proposition \[pminimaldegree\], we may assume that $\mu_1\geq 3$ and $\mu_i\leq 2$ for all $i\geq 2$. According to Corollary \[jonquieres\](a), $\mu_1\leq 4$. Thus, $\mu_1\in\{3,4\}$. If $\mu_1=3$, the equation of conditions lead to the following system (with the similar notations as in (\[eqsystem\])) $$\left\lbrace
\begin{array}{c l}
j+2k=3d-3-3=12\\
j+4k=d^2-1-9=26
\end{array}
\right.$$ This system has no solution in nonnegative integers. For $\mu_1=4$, the solution yields the homaloidal type $(6\,;4,2^4,1^3)$.
\(iii) The case where $d=7$ is more involved. Again Proposition \[P567\](iii) implies that $33\leq e(R/I)\leq 36$, where $33$ is the minimum multiplicity. Then among the inequalities $\ell((R/I)_{P_i})\geq \ell((R/P_{i}^{\mu _i})_{P_i})$ for $i=1,\cdots,n$ at most three ones are strict. Therefore, we may assume that $3\leq \mu_1\leq 5$ and $\mu_i\leq 2$ for $i\geq 4$ as in the proof of Proposition \[pminimaldegree\] and by Corollary \[jonquieres\](a). We now deal separately with the three alternatives for $\mu_1$.
If $\mu_1=3$ we have $(d-\mu_1)/2=(7-3)/2=2$, hence $\mu_2=\mu_3=3$ ([@alberich Definition 8.2.1 and Lemma 8.2.6]). Plugging these data into the equations of condition yields no solution in positive integers.
Let $\mu_1=5$. In this case the equations of condition yield no solution in positive integers for $4\leq \mu_2\leq 5$ or $\mu_2=\mu_3=3$. Then the triple $(\mu_1,\mu_2,\mu_3)\in \{(5,3,2),(5,2,2)\}$. Plugging the first of these into the equations of condition yields the homaloidal type $(7\,;5,3,2^2,1^6)$. In a similar vein, $(5,2,2)$ yields the homaloidal type $(7\,;5,2^5,1^3)$. Now, an application of the Hudson’s test shows that the first of these homaloidal types is improper. Therefore, we are left with $(7\,;5,2^5,1^3)$ as the only possibility.
Finally, let $\mu_1=4$. The triple $(\mu_1,\mu_2,\mu_3)$ belongs to the following list $$(4,4,4),(4,4,3),(4,4,2),(4,3,3),(4,3,2),(4,2,2).$$ Now, let the set $\{\mu_i:i\geq4\}$ have $j$ elements equal to $1$ and $k$ elements equal to $2$. Consider the system given by the equations of condition: $$\left\lbrace
\begin{array}{c l}
j+2k=3d-3-(\mu_1+\mu_2+\mu_3)\\
j+4k=d^2-1-(\mu_1^2+\mu_2^2+\mu_3^2)
\end{array}
\right.$$ The solution pair $(j,k)$ is, respectively, $(-3,12),(0,7),(3,4),(3,2),(5,-1),(7,-4)$. Clearly, the first and the last two pairs are absurd. Next applying Hudson’s test to the first two possible homaloidal types shows that they are improper. Hence, the remaining possibility is $(7\,;4,3^2,2^3,1^2)$.
As to the form of the resolution of $R/I$ is, notice that, for this homaloidal type, the first three multiplicities exceed $2$. It follows that $e(R/I)\geq 3 +33=36$, which is the maximal possible value. Then among the virtual resolutions in Proposition \[P567\](iii) only the last two satisfy $e(R/I)=36$, as claimed.
We note that the converse of item (ii) in the above theorem is not true in general, at least if one does not assume that $F$ is simple.
The following non-simple Cremona map appears in [@alberich Example 2.1.14]: $$\bigl((x^3 - yz (y + x)) (x^2 - yz) (y + x)\,:\,(x^2- yz) x^2 (x + y)^2\,:\,x^3 (x^3 -yz(x + y))\bigr).$$
The homaloidal type of this map is $(6\,; 4,2^4,1^3)$, but it has a saturated base ideal.
Structure in degree $5$
-----------------------
Degree $5$ has special arithmetic features, such as being the only degree $d\geq 2$ having the property that $$\sum_{p}\mu_p=1/2 \sum_{p}\mu_p^2.$$ Further, an elementary scrutiny in the equations of condition yields that the only homaloidal types are
1. $4,\underbrace{1,\ldots,1}_8$ (de Jonquières type)
2. $3,3,\underbrace{1,\ldots,1}_6$
3. $3,2,2,2,1,1,1$
4. $\underbrace{2,\ldots,2}_6$ (symmetric type)
Of these, only type (b) is not proper (cf. [@alberich Example 5.3.7]) and the classical result the fact that for $7$ points or less every homaloidal type is proper). Some of this can be readily checked by Hudson’s test.
Our purpose is to give a precise characterization of the three proper homaloidal types in terms of the homological features of the corresponding base ideals.
\[proper\_types\_degree5\] Let $F\colon\pp^2\dasharrow \pp^2$ stand for a simple plane Cremona map of degree $5$ whose base points are in general position, and let $I\subset R=k[x,y,z]$ denote its base ideal. Then
1. $F$ is a de Jonquières map if and only if $R/I$ is Cohen–Macaulay of degree $21$ with resolution of the form $$\label{res_of_jonquieres_deg5}
0{\rightarrow}R(-9)\oplus R(-6){\longrightarrow}R(-5)^3{\longrightarrow}R\,{\rm ;}$$
2. $F$ has type $(5\,;3,2^3,1^3)$ if and only if $R/I$ is Cohen–Macaulay of degree $19$ with resolution of the form $$\label{res_of_extratype_deg5}
0{\rightarrow}R(-8)\oplus R(-7){\longrightarrow}R(-5)^3{\longrightarrow}R\,{\rm ;}$$
3. $F$ is symmetric of type $(5\,;2^6)$ if and only if $R/I$ is non Cohen–Macaulay of degree $18$ [(m]{}inimal possible[)]{} with resolution of the form $$\label{res_of_symmetric_deg5}
0{\rightarrow}R(-9)\stackrel{\psi_2}{{\longrightarrow}} R(-8)^3\stackrel{\psi_1}{{\longrightarrow}} R(-5)^3{\longrightarrow}R.$$ [Supplement.]{} The maps $\psi_1,\, \psi_2$ come out of the minimal free resolution of the corresponding fat ideal $\mathfrak{F}$ $$0{\rightarrow}R(-7)^3\stackrel{\phi}{{\longrightarrow}} R(-5)^3\oplus R(-6){\longrightarrow}R$$ as follows: up to shifts, $\psi_1$ is the the restriction of the dual map $\phi^t$, and $\psi_2$ is the tail of the Koszul complex on three $k$-linearly independent linear forms generating the coordinates of the syzygies of the additional minimal generator of $\mathfrak{F}$ of degree $6$.
We note at the outset that there are three virtual resolutions in this degree. Indeed, if $I$ is not saturated then according to Theorem \[tcharactrization\] the minimal resolution must be of the form $$0{\rightarrow}R(-9){\longrightarrow}R(-8)^3{\longrightarrow}R(-5)^3{\longrightarrow}R.$$ If $I$ is saturated then one easily sees that the only possible minimal resolutions are $$\label{res5sat1}0\rightarrow R(-9)\bigoplus R(-6)\rightarrow R^3(-5)\rightarrow R$$ or $$\label{res5sat2}0\rightarrow R(-8)\bigoplus R(-7)\rightarrow R^3(-5)\rightarrow R$$
Let us first prove (iii). Since we are assuming that the Cremona map is simple, the “if" part follows from Proposition \[pminimaldegree\] (or also from Theorem \[tcharactrization\]).
We now show the “only if” part of (iii). Thus assume that the homaloidal type is $(5\,;2^6)$. Let $\mathfrak{F}\subset k[x,y,z]$ stand for the associated $\mathbf{2}$-fat ideal based on the given points.
The homological nature of $\mathfrak{F}$ has been determined in [@Fich]: $$\label{six2_fat_points}
0{\rightarrow}R(-7)^3\stackrel{\phi}{{\longrightarrow}} R(-5)^3\oplus R(-6){\longrightarrow}R{\rightarrow}R/\mathfrak{F}.$$ In particular, $\mathfrak{F}=(I,f)$, where $f$ is a $6$-form and there are three linear forms $\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3$ such that $\ell_i\,f\in I$ for every $i$.
Suppose that $\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3$ are $k$-linearly dependent. Then a suitable $k$-linear combination of syzygies gives a syzygy of the generators of $I$ in standard degree $2$. Such a syzygy would necessarily be of minimal degree among the syzygies of $I$ since the latter cannot have linear syzygies because the resolution (\[six2\_fat\_points\]) is minimal. But, among the three virtual resolutions above, the only one having such a minimal syzygy is (\[res5sat2\]). We now argue that this is impossible.
Indeed, let $\{p_1,\ldots,p_n\}$ denote the set of proper base points and $\{P_1,\ldots,P_n\}$ the corresponding defining prime ideals. Now, for this free resolution, $e(R/I)=19$ which is exactly one more than the minimum degree. Therefore, there is exactly one prime ideal, say $P$, among $P_1,\ldots,P_n$ such that $\ell((R/I)_P)=\ell((R/P^2)_P)+1$. Without loss of generality we may assume that $P=(x,y)$. It then follows that $\ell((P^2/I)_P)=1$, that is, $(P^2/I)_P\simeq (R/P)_P$; in particular, $P^3_P\subset I_P$. Let us consider the three cases $(P^2/I)_P=(\overline{xy}/1)$, $(P^2/I)_P=(\bar{x}^2/1)$ or $(P^2/I)_P=(\bar{y}^2/1)$. Say, $(P^2/I)_P=(\overline{xy}/1)$. Then, $(\bar{x}^2/1)=\frac{a_1(z)}{a_2(z)}(\overline{xy}/1)$ and $(\bar{y}^2/1)=\frac{b_1(z)}{b_2(z)}(\overline{xy}/1)$ where $a_i(z)$ and $b_i(z)$ are polynomials in $k[z]$. Solving these equations, one finds polynomials $c_i(z)$ and $d_i(z)$ for $i=1,2$ such that $c_1(z)x^2-c_2(z)xy\in I$ and $d_1(z)y^2-d_2(z)xy\in I$. The fact that $I$ is a homogeneous ideal then implies that there are integers $n,m$ and elements $b,b' \in k$ such that $g_1=z^n(x^2-bxy)$ and $g_2=z^m(y^2-b'xy)$ belong to $I$. Thence, all of the base points of $F$ are contained in the variety defined by $g_1$ and $g_2$ which consists of two lines, (provided $bb'=1$). This, however, contradicts the assumption that the base points are in general position. The remaining two other cases are dealt with in an entirely similar fashion.
Therefore, it must be the case that $\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3$ are $k$-linearly independent, hence generate the maximal ideal $(x,y,z)$. It follows that, $f$ drives $(x,y,z)$ inside $I$. This means that depth$(R/I)=0$ as $f\not\in I$. In other words, $R/I$ is not Cohen–Macaulay and $I^{\rm sat}= \mathfrak{F}$; in particular, $e(R/I)=18$, as claimed in the statement. This concludes the proof of (iii).
The “only if” implication of (i) was already shown in Corollary \[jonquieres\].
We now prove the “only if” implication of (ii). The free resolution of the associated fat ideal $\mathfrak{F}$ is known ([@Harb]): $$\label{fat_extratype_deg5}
0{\rightarrow}R(-7)^3\stackrel{\phi}{\longrightarrow}R(-5)^3\oplus R(-6){\longrightarrow}R.$$
Therefore, up to a projective coordinate change, we may assume that $\mathfrak{F}$ is is defined by the three minimal generators of degree $5$ of $I$ and one extra generator of degree $6$, say $f$. Focusing on the entries of $\phi$, we see that there are $3$ linear forms $\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3$ such that $\ell_i\,f\in I$ for every $i$. By Theorem \[tcharactrization\] in this type, $(5\,;3,2^3,1^3)$, $I$ is saturated. This implies that $\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3$ are $k$-linearly dependent. Thus, by a projective coordinate change, one may assume that $\ell_3=0$. Therefore the third column in $\phi$ is a syzygy of (standard) degree $2$ of the generators of $I$. Since $R/I$ is Cohen–Macaulay and $I$ is generated in degree $5$ the resolution has got to be of the form indicated in (\[res\_of\_extratype\_deg5\]). From this we easily compute the degree of $R/I$, as stated.
In order to complete the proof it now suffices to prove the “if” parts of (i) and (ii). But since we have completed the proofs of the “only if” parts of all three items, this follows automatically.
It remains to deal with the supplement of item (iii), to explain the nature of the maps in the resolution of the non-saturated case. First dualize (\[six2\_fat\_points\]) into $R$: $$0{\rightarrow}J^*\simeq R{\longrightarrow}R(5)^3\oplus R(6)\stackrel{\phi^t}{{\longrightarrow}} R(7)^3.$$ Consider the restriction $\psi:=\phi^t\restr _{R(5)^3}: R(5)^3{\longrightarrow}R(7)^3$. Then consider the left tail of the Koszul complex on the regular sequence $\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3$ shifted by $5$: $$0{\rightarrow}R(3){\longrightarrow}R(4)^3{\longrightarrow}R(5)^3$$ Call $\psi$ the composite of the right most map with the restriction $\phi^t\restr _{R(5)^3}: R(5)^3{\longrightarrow}R(7)^3$ of $\phi^t$ to $R(5)^3$. The following sequence of maps obtains: $$0{\rightarrow}R(3){\longrightarrow}R(4)^3\stackrel{\psi}{{\longrightarrow}} R(7)^3.$$ Now shift by $-12$ to get $$0{\rightarrow}R(-9){\longrightarrow}R(-8)^3\stackrel{\Psi}{{\longrightarrow}} R(-5)^3,$$ where $\Psi=\psi(-12)$ for lighter reading. We claim this resolves $I$. Proving this involves first showing that it is a complex. For it, the only missing piece is that $\Psi(R(-8)^3)$ are syzygies of the three quintics generating $I$. But this is clear since the $i$th row of $\psi$ is $$(h_1^{(i)}, \, h_2^{(i)},\, h_3^{(i)})
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
0&\ell_3 & -\ell_2\\
-\ell_3& 0 & \ell_1\\
\ell_2 & -\ell_1 & 0
\end{array}
\right)=
(-h_2^{(i)}\ell_3 + h_3^{(i)}\ell_2,\, h_1^{(i)}\ell_3-h_3^{(i)}\ell_1,\, -h_1^{(i)}\ell_2+h_2^{(i)}\ell_1),$$ where $(h_1^{(i)}, \, h_2^{(i)},\, h_3^{(i)})$ denotes the $i$th row of $\phi^t$ chopping off the fourth coordinate, But the right most row above is obtained from the three syzygies of $J$ by multiplying by $\ell_j$ and by $\ell_k$ the syzygy involving $\ell_m$ as coordinate, where $\{j,k.m\}=\{1,2,3\}$, then subtracting in the obvious way.
To use the acyclicity criterion as formulated by Buchsbaum–Eisenbud ([@E Theorem 20.9]) it remains to argue that $I_2(\Psi)$ has height $\geq 2$. But $\Psi$ is the transpose of the composite $$R(-7)^3\stackrel{\phi}{{\longrightarrow}} R(-5)^3\oplus R(-6){\longrightarrow}R(-5)^3,$$ where the rightmost map is projection onto the first factor. Therefore, one has to show that the $2$-minors of the first $3$ rows of the latter matrix has codimension $\geq 2$. But this is clear as this ideal contains the ideal of $3$-minors of $\phi$, which has codimension $2$. This shows that the complex is exact.
\[bi\_homaloidness\]A Cremona map of degree $\leq 5$ and its inverse have the same homaloidal type.
Since there are only three homaloidal types and the inverse of a de Jonquières map is a de Jonquières map, it suffices to argue that a Cremona map and its inverse cannot be of type $(5\,;3^2,1^6)$ and $(5\,;2^6)$, respectively. But this follows from Clebsch theorem [@alberich Theorem 3.3.2].
It could be of some interest to give an independent proof of the preceding corollary, staged in the spirit of the rest of the paper. By the results obtained so far, it would suffice to know that a Cremona map of degree $5$ and its inverse have base ideals of the same (scheme) degree. A parallel challenge is to decide when the saturation $I^{\rm sat}$ of the base ideal $I$ of a simple Cremona map $F$ coincides with the associated $\boldsymbol\mu$-fat ideal (recall that, from Corollary \[sat\_is\_closure\], this implies that $I^{\rm sat}$ is the integral closure of $I$). Unfortunately, many Cremona maps do not share any of the two properties, which is already the case in degree $6$ [@alberich Example 2.1.14].
In principle it ought to be possible to explicitly enumerate all homaloidal nets stemming from ideals of fat points up to any given upper bound for the multiplicities of the given set of proper points. For any $3$ linearly independent forms of a fixed degree thus found, one could apply Hudson’s test. It would be interesting to understand the complexity of one such algorithm.
An algebraic test
-----------------
One often needs a more algebraic criterion to decide when a good candidate is indeed a Cremona map. The following statement gives such an alternative test for a special class of plane rational maps. It could be used to prove that the linear system of quartics through six points with multiplicities $2,2,2,1,1,1$ defines a Cremona map, regardless of the point configuration.
\[ideal\_squared\_replaces\_telescopic\] Let $J\subset R$ be a homogeneous ideal having a minimal free resolution of the form $$0{\rightarrow}R(-6)^2\stackrel{\phi}{{\longrightarrow}} R(-4)^3{\longrightarrow}R$$ and analytic spread $3$. If $R/J^2$ is also Cohen–Macaulay then the generators of $J$ define a Cremona map of $\pp^2$ of degree $4$.
Let $\phi$ also denote a matrix of the map $\phi$. Say, $$\varphi=\left(\begin{array}{rr}
\alpha_1 & \alpha_2 \\
\beta_1 & \beta_2 \\
\gamma_1 & \gamma_2\\
\end{array} \right)$$ It produces trivially the following matrix of syzygies of $J^2$: $$\phi^{[2]}=\left(\begin{array}{rrrrrr}
\alpha_1 & \alpha_2 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
\beta_1 & \beta_2 & \alpha_1 & \alpha_2 & 0 & 0\\
\gamma_1 & \gamma_2 & 0 & 0 & \alpha_1 & \alpha_2\\
0 & 0 & \beta_1 & \beta_2 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & \gamma_1 & \gamma_2 & \beta_1 & \beta_2\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \gamma_1 & \gamma_2
\end{array} \right)$$ We claim that $\phi^{[2]}$ has maximal possible rank, namely, $5$. The determinant of the first $5$ columns and last $5$ rows is $\pm \gamma_1(\beta_1\gamma_2-\beta_2\gamma_1)^2$. By symmetry, we find a similar determinant whose value is $\pm
\gamma_2(\beta_1\gamma_2-\beta_2\gamma_1)^2$. Since $\gamma_1,
\gamma_2$ cannot simultaneously vanish, we are through.
Now, since $\rk \phi^{[2]}=5$ and the total syzygy matrix $\Phi$ of $J^2$ is $5\times 6$ of rank $5$ - because by assumption the analytic spread of $J$ is $3$ and $R/J^2$ is Cohen–Macaulay – then the columns of $\Phi$ have standard degree $\leq 2$. However, its $5\times 5$ minors are the generators of $J^2$ which are of degree $8$, the only possibility that adds up correctly is that the columns of $\Phi$ be of degrees $1,1,2,2,2$.
This argument shows that the ideal $J^2$ has two independent syzygies with linear coordinates. Now consider a presentation of the Rees algebra $\mathcal{R}_R(J)\simeq R[t,u,v]/\mathcal{J}$, with $\mathcal{J}$ a bihomogeneous ideal in the standard bigrading of $R[t,u,v]=k[x,y,z,t,u,v]$. Then the two linear syzygies of $J^2$ induce generators of $\mathcal{J}$ of bidegree $(1,2)$ generating a subideal of codimension $2$. We can now apply [@AHA Proposition 3.9].
It seems natural, in the present stringent setup, to pose:
Under the hypotheses of Proposition \[ideal\_squared\_replaces\_telescopic\] is the converse true, i.e., if $J$ defines a Cremona map must $R/J^2$ be Cohen–Macaulay?
Observe that the assumption on $J^2$ is delicate. Thus, the general $3\times 2$ matrix $\phi$ with $2$-forms as entries defines a Cohen–Macaulay ideal $J$ whose square is not saturated and has minimal resolution of the form $0{\rightarrow}R(-12){\rightarrow}R(-10)^6{\rightarrow}R(-8)^6{\rightarrow}R$. As a matter of fact, the syzygies of any power $J^m$, with $m\geq 2$, have degree at least $2$, hence the rational map defined by a set of minimal generators of $J$ is not Cremona by the criterion of [@AHA]. There is an easy background explanation for the map failing to be Cremona and that is the fact that $J$ is a radical ideal, hence it is the fat ideal of points with multiplicities unit – this defines a Cremona map only in degrees $\leq 2$.
If $\phi$ is not general, an interesting side question is what are the homological properties of $J$ that trigger the existence of a unique linear syzygy among all powers of $J$? By [@AHA] such an ideal does not define a Cremona map, however the nature of the base points is subtler.
[99]{}
[**Authors’ addresses:**]{}
[*S.H.Hassanzadeh*]{}, Departamento de Matemática, CCEN, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Cidade Universitária, 50740-540 Recife, PE, Brazil [*and*]{} Faculty of Mathematical Sciences and Computer, Tarbiat Moallem University, Tehran, Iran .\
email: [email protected]\
[*A.Simis*]{}, Departamento de Matemática, CCEN, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Cidade Universitária, 50740-540 Recife, PE, Brazil.\
email: [email protected]
[^1]: On a Post-Doc Fellowship (CNPq, Brazil).
[^2]: This author wishes to thank the hospitality and facilities provided by The Department of Mathematics at the Universidade Federal de Pernambuco and by IMPA during the preparation of this work.
[^3]: Partially supported by a CNPq grant.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this article we revisit the concept of abstraction as it is used in visualization and put it on a solid formal footing. While the term *abstraction* is utilized in many scientific disciplines, arts, as well as everyday life, visualization inherits the notion of data abstraction or class abstraction from computer science, topological abstraction from mathematics, and visual abstraction from arts. All these notions have a lot in common, yet there is a major discrepancy in the terminology and basic understanding about visual abstraction in the context of visualization. We thus root the notion of abstraction in the philosophy of science, clarify the basic terminology, and provide crisp definitions of visual abstraction as a process. Furthermore, we clarify how it relates to similar terms often used interchangeably in the field of visualization. Visual abstraction is characterized by a conceptual space where this process exists, by the purpose it should serve, and by the perceptual and cognitive qualities of the beholder. These characteristics can be used to control the process of visual abstraction to produce effective and informative visual representations.'
author:
- |
Ivan Viola\
King Abdullah University\
of Science and Technology (KAUST)\
Saudi Arabia\
`[email protected]`\
Min Chen\
University of Oxford\
United Kingdom\
`[email protected]`\
Tobias Isenberg\
Inria Saclay\
France\
`[email protected]`\
bibliography:
- 'paper.bib'
title: Visual Abstraction
---
Definitions
===========
The term *abstraction* often lacks a precise definition in many fields. While several fields have defined the term for their own purposes, there is only a vague understanding of its meaning that is shared by all fields. Some scientific disciplines and scholarly fields have adjusted the vaguely understood meaning to fit the needs of the respective discipline or field. In this article we first present our key definitions related to visual abstraction, and we then provide the justification for the definitions. In giving these definitions, we revise our previous set of definitions relating to the concept of abstraction [@Viola2018], based on new discussions related to, and insights from, our further literature study. Terminology related to abstraction has been adopted from Leppänen [@Leppanen2007] and is discussed in .
\[def:abstraction\] An **abstraction** is a process that transforms a *source thing* into a less concrete *sign thing* of the *source thing*. Abstraction uses a concept of *point-of-view*, which determines which aspects of source thing should be preserved in its sign thing and which should be suppressed.
\[def:representations\] A **data representation** is a sign thing that stands in digital form for a *referent thing* from reality or another *sign thing*, using data structures or *concept things*. Similarly, a **visual representation** is a *sign thing* that stands for a *referent* from reality or another *sign thing* so that it can be visually perceived and cognitively processed by a human observer.
\[def:visual\_abstraction\] Visual abstraction is a particular type of abstraction where the sign thing is visual, while the source thing is either non-visual or visual. A visual representation results from a process of **visual abstraction** if such transformation intentionally disregards certain aspects of data representations.
\[def:point-of-view\] The abstraction process also involves a **point-of-view** component defined through the task, which the visualization process aids to accomplish. This task is represented as a combination of *targets* on which particular *actions* are performed.
\[def:quantifying\_abstraction\] The amount or **significance of abstraction** of a thing can be, in computer or signal representations, quantified by means of information theory.
\[def:meaningful\_abstraction\] A **meaningful visual abstraction** is a visual abstraction such that, for a given point-of-view and for a given *purpose* or *goal*, key aspects of the underlying *referent thing* are preserved in the visual representation so that the cognitive load when perceiving it as a stimulus is significantly reduced.
\[def:visualization\] A **visualization** is a process that transforms data representations of a thing from reality into visual representations. Visualization is a process that is intended to be a meaningful visual abstraction process. The designers of visualization processes must understand the point-of-view component and tasks. Otherwise, they would not reach the full meaningfulness intended.
\[def:abstraction-axis-and-space\] An **abstraction axis** is the *perceived* sequence of visual representations that is assembled by the designer of a visualization system to illustrate a given point or series of points about reality. Each of the building blocks of an abstraction axis is the result of an individual abstraction process to a visual representation. Each transition between two successive abstraction axis building blocks can but does not have to remove information, some can also both remove and add information based on chosen blocks specific abstraction. If two or more abstraction axes are constructed such that they affect independent aspects of the visual representations, they can be combined into an **abstraction space** that observers can explore.
Flavors of Abstraction
======================
The notion of what is abstract and what is concrete is a fundamental discussion in philosophy, without a clear consensus. In its simplest terms, an abstract object has no physical referent, while concrete objects have physical referents. Reiterating Frege’s writings, “The Thought” [@Frege1918] is even stronger in restricting what an abstract thought is: “An object is abstract if and only if it is both non-physical and non-mental.” An object is acknowledged as mental when “it exists at a time if and only if it is the object or content of some mental state or process at that time.” This statement implies that an abstract object is an object if and only if it cannot be found in nature, cannot be constructed, and one cannot even form a mental image of it. Another definition of abstract objects is that they lack causal powers [@StanfordEOP]. This means that abstract objects cannot affect other objects in any way. An empty set is such a case of an abstract entity as it does not have any causal powers. The definition of abstract entity is often so strict that some philosophers deny the existence of an abstract entity as such. However, there seems to be better agreement on what an abstraction is: “It is a distinctive mental process in which new ideas or conceptions are formed by considering several objects or ideas and omitting the features that distinguish them” [@StanfordEOP]. Lewis [@Lewis1986] proposed that “abstract entities are abstractions from concrete entities. They result from somehow subtracting specificity, so that an incomplete description of the original concrete entity would be a complete description of the abstraction.” In the rest of the article we use the term abstraction aligned with these definitions to only describe a process, as we have also done in our own definitions at the beginning. The entity after abstraction is, in our case, denoted as a representation. We do not enter the dispute of whether it is an abstract entity or not. In such a way we build on the part that philosophers agreed upon, while we avoid the terminological controversy. Before we look at the use of abstraction in visualization, let us first consider its occurrence in related arts and sciences.
Abstraction in the arts
-----------------------
In the arts, the term *abstract art* refers to non-figurative artwork, where the intent is to develop art beyond depiction of natural or man-made objects. The composition may exist with a degree of independence from visual references in the world [@Arnheim1969]. This art movement started during early 20^th^ century and emerged from figurative art. Artists such as Picasso, Mondrian, Kandinski, and many others originally depicted natural objects. The beginning of non-figurative art started with a deep analysis and observation of the creative process, where the graphical elements that composed the rendering became themselves the subject of study. The natural objects were gradually represented through collection of simpler geometric primitives. The artists searched for an expression of minimal set of visual elements that is still able to carry the figurative meaning. But they did not stop there. Artists further experimented with the graphical elements beyond recognizability of any corresponding figure from the rendering itself. Interestingly, one can sometimes discover a correspondence to their earlier works where a particular figure is still recognizable, thus transitively the figure can be imagined in the fully abstract art with such aids as well. It indicates that the artists still had a particular figure in mind, when rendering a particular art, while, without the prior work context, this figure would not be discovered by another human observer. This gradual process, which transformed figurative art into what is now called abstract art, is abstraction.
Abstraction and generalization in cartography
---------------------------------------------
In cartography, depending on a chosen scale for a map and its type/target audience, a subset of information is selected, the elements to be depicted are simplified and their depiction is adjusted. For example, streets can be shown with a much larger width than in reality, yet fine details of their path are removed. When zooming out, important elements and landmarks in the map are depicted, while generally less relevant elements are suppressed. At a particular level of scale, for example, the post office, a religious place, a building of historical significance, a bridge over the river, or the main streets are clearly depicted in the map, while similar objects in terms of spatial dimensions are abstracted into very simplified representations, if they are shown at all. The field has created a solid vocabulary and guidelines on how certain elements should be depicted and when should they be visible. In cartographic visual language, the umbrella term for guidelines of how different scales should depict certain information is *map generalization* [@Buttenfield:1991:MGM]. We discuss the specific meaning of the term *generalization* below, but other principles such as *grouping* or *classification* are applied here as well. In prior work, these concepts are considered as distinct abstraction principles and we discuss their specifics below.
Abstraction in shape analysis
-----------------------------
In shape analysis, the term *abstraction* typically refers to a skeletonization or extraction of topological features that represent essential characteristics of the underlying shape [@Cornea2005; @Isenberg:2004:CTE]. Here, abstraction preserves the key properties of the geometric components such as their connectivity. The levels of detail of these abstracted representations are controlled through measures like persistence: this measure determines which structures are too small for particular scale to justify their validity and which are grouped into other larger-scale structures. Such abstracted representations facilitate the extraction of hierarchies in shapes to facilitate geometric linkage, multi-scale representations, and—importantly—the topological representation is much sparser and facilitates an unobstructed clear view on the key geometric properties. The same holds for the topology of flow data, where a flow field is *classified* into points and regions of certain uniform properties such as sinks, sources, and separatrices (curves or surfaces) that partition the flow according to its long-term behavior.
Mathematical abstraction
------------------------
The term mathematical abstraction refers to a process of transforming a specific real-world situation into generalized form using mathematical formalism.[^1] The specifics which do not affect the solution to a given problem are removed so that, in the end, only a set of key elements with properties and relations to each other remains, which can be expressed formally. Problems to solve in mathematics class are frequently expressed as real-world situations. The tasks are to abstract from the real-world specifics and apply a mathematical formalism that provides the answer to the given problem. The development of mathematics and physical sciences has advanced through mathematical abstraction into Euclidean geometry, algebra, and analysis. These developments have been possible due to humans being capable of thinking in an abstract way.
Abstract thinking
-----------------
School students are trained in abstract thinking by being challenged to solve a specific real-world problem. To be able to do so, they are trained to abstract from the case specifics by extracting only the essential components so that a formal solution can be calculated and, finally, interpreted back for the specific real-world scenario. Abstract thinking is, according to cognitive psychology [@Mosby2012], the most complex stage in the development of cognitive thinking, where generalizations and concepts are used in the thought process. From a set of observations, hypotheses can be formed and logical reasoning can lead to conclusive statements [@Mosby2012].
Abstraction in object-oriented design
-------------------------------------
In computer science, the term abstraction achieves yet another flavor of its meaning. In object-oriented design, the most frequently used programming methodology, it primarily relates to the definition of classes and methods that cannot be instantiated. Typically, classes and methods are hierarchically grouped into increasingly abstract constructs such that implementations of particular functionality can be shared among many different elements. While for most of these classes it is possible to create instances, an abstract class is a construct that itself cannot be instantiated but which organizes the functionality into a comprehensive representation. The class hierarchy as the outcome of such abstraction gives a clear understanding of differences in functionality among various classes as well as what they have in common. It also facilitates further extensibility of existing code to support new cases that were not considered in the initial software design.
Abstraction ontology {#sec:ontology}
--------------------
In the area of information and knowledge modeling, a particularly interesting past work closely relates to our own investigation. Leppänen [@Leppanen2007] distinguishes between first-order and second-order abstraction. First-order abstraction is associated with primary things, while second-order abstraction acts upon a predicate that defines the primary things. An example of a primary thing is *sedan* with several predicates, among others a *color*. The result of the abstraction of a sedan would be a *car* or a *vehicle*, which corresponds to first-order abstraction. Let us assume that an instance of a sedan is painted with a particular blue, for example *Maya Blue*. This predicate can also be abstracted to *light blue* or *blue*, a process which is of the second-order abstraction type and is also termed as predicate abstraction.
Importantly, Leppänen defines four elementary abstraction principles: classification, generalization, composition, and grouping. First, classification is defined through the term *isInstanceOf* or that instances are *typeOf*. The opposite to classification is instantiation. Second, generalization is a principle of abstraction where the differences of subtypes are suppressed to fit a supertype. This refers to an *isA* relationship and the antonym to generalization is specialization. Third, composition is a principle of abstraction in which a whole concept is composed of part concepts. These parts are abstracted to form a whole object. This refers to a *partOf* relationship and its opposite is the decomposition. Finally, the last principle of abstraction is grouping which relies on a *isMemberOf* relationship and whose opposite is individualization. For example, a particular person can be a member of a political party. This abstraction includes aggregation, set membership, and association. Both, first-order and second-order abstractions can benefit all four elementary abstraction principles. In all cases, an important property to highlight is that abstraction is associated with an intentional and controlled loss of information.
Leppänen’s work stresses the importance of the concept *point-of-view* that plays crucial role during the abstraction process. When using classification on a *thing* termed, for example, *Margaret Thatcher*, the abstraction along classification would lead to entity *female* or *UK Prime Minister*. If we would be using grouping, the abstraction would lead to *Conservative Party*. In case the composition principle is used for abstraction of *UK Prime Minister*, the outcome would be *UK Government*. Therefore, things might generally have many different kinds of abstractions as things from reality are typically embedded in a complex and intertwined abstraction hierarchies.
In his work, Leppänen combines philosophical and semiotic standpoints. In the context of semiotic frameworks [@Ogden1923], they refer to three kinds of *things*: a *concept thing*, a *referent thing*, and a *sign thing*. Concepts are mental constructs, words of mind, and form basic components of human knowledge. A referent is an element of reality that relates to the concept. A reality describes a set of anything that exists or can possibly exist, physically or virtually. A sign is anything that can stand for something else, including symbols, text, or images. As such it is a representation of a concept. These concepts are used below in the discussion of abstraction in visualization. We applied the same terminology in our definitions from the start of the article, but we added the concept of a *source thing* ().
Summary of abstraction in the world outside visualization
---------------------------------------------------------
The intuitive understanding of abstraction has been reinforced by this brief excursion into various fields and that stand and argue for abstraction. We can observe that the term is not used uniformly and that it is frequently exchanged with other terms. The recurrent pattern is that abstraction relates to formation of some higher-order constructs or representations that are result of a transformation of lower-level entities. The lowest entities are more tangible, while the higher levels of the abstraction hierarchy are further removed from tangibility and become more mental constructs and concepts (defined as *the constituents of thoughts* [@StanfordEOP]) that, in one way or another, allow humans to recognize certain characteristics clearer than the lower-level representations. The ability to abstract seems to be one of the core properties of humans, present while shaping the entire body of analytical knowledge humankind has formed throughout our history.
Abstraction for Visualization
=============================
Let us now investigate how abstraction manifests itself in visualization. We propose that abstraction is equally central to visualization as it is to other areas in which analytic reasoning is the core part of a processing workflow. Visualization is the process of transforming the digital representation of data into visual representations that are exposed to a human viewer (). It takes advantage of the fact that most humans are extremely efficient in comprehending information presented as a visual stimulus. Naturally, this stimulus has to be well designed to convey the intended information (). This aspect is the main concern of the visualization mapping stage of the visualization pipeline. Visualization is omnipresent in studying various real-world phenomena, conveying structures, methods, or concepts. In visualization, the abstraction process guides the transformation into visual representations (, \[def:visual\_abstraction\]), similar to the process of abstract thinking. In some sense it serves as an extension of the working memory, where needed information can be instantaneously accessed. We thus first clarify the meaning of abstraction in visualization and then discuss its core properties.
To bring visualization into the context of semiotic frameworks, the *sign* is termed as *representation*, both digital and visual, and the *referent* is the studied phenomenon from *reality* (, \[def:representations\]). The *concept* is what relates to the *referent* and can be conveyed through the representation. In visualization, abstraction is performed at least in three stages: first, the abstraction of the reality into data representations and, second, the data representation is, through abstraction, transformed into visual representations. Third, a visual representation is transformed to a mental model or a memory representation through the perceptual and cognitive processes of the human observer.
Abstraction has occurred if the quantum of information before the abstraction is higher than in the representation after abstraction, while some aspects of the original representation are preserved and become more prominent (). In case there is no intended information loss, we refer to a more general term *transformation* or *mapping*. For example, several simultaneous abstraction processes that individually work on different aspects of the *things* could be combined, some work in a positive direction (removal of information) and others in a negative direction. This could lead to composite *transformation* or *mapping* that transfer one representation into another, with information loss and information gain at the same time.
Task abstraction
----------------
Visualization is driven by a particular *intent*. There is a reason behind a visualization, even in the casual scenarios. This intent defines the *point-of-view* (), which, as a controlling mechanism, can steer how abstraction changes the representations. In the visualization literature, Munzner [@Munzner:2014:VAD] describes a hierarchical framework into which specific individual visualization usage scenarios can be abstracted. On the highest level, Munzner classifies the tasks as a combination of an *action* upon a *target*. The *action* class is instantiated into *analyze*, *search*, and *query*, which can be further instantiated into lower-level classes of *actions*. The *target* is instantiated into *data* in general, *attributes*, *networks*, and *spatial data* which are further instantiated into more detailed targets. It is the combination of the *action* and *target* that would define the *point of view* to guide the abstraction process.
Data abstraction
----------------
Munzner [@Munzner:2014:VAD] also defines various types of *data* and *data sets* for visualization. Data types are *items*, *attributes*, *links*, *positions*, and *grids*. Data set types are *tables*, *networks*, *trees*, *fields*, *geometry*, *clusters*, *sets*, and *lists*. All these types are *concept things* (). The data abstraction here refers to the transformation from the real-world phenomenon, the *referent thing*, into data structures (*concept thing*) and digital representations (*sign thing*), to facilitate an efficient and automatized computational processing. This task of data abstraction is somewhat similar to the mathematical abstraction process. In both cases we end up with a formal representation on which standardized mathematical or computational machinery can be applied.
The initial data abstraction is typically performed during the acquisition process. Either real-world observations are made and digitally stored in a particular data representation or even a mathematical model is formulated based upon these observations. Both forms are data representations abstracted from the thing that exists in reality, and these representations have been achieved through a classification process.
The result of the initial data abstraction is frequently further abstracted into another data representation to promote a particular *point-of-view*, neglecting unimportant aspects of the original data representation. As such, the filtering operation is typically applied, which might be considered to relate to map generalization and as such corresponds to the generalization abstraction principle. Once the data representation contains the relevant data prominently, a conversion into data representation is performed that can efficiently be visually represented.
Visual Abstraction
==================
![Abstraction space in which a *thing* from reality is gradually transformed into visual representations: a) initial abstraction into a digital form, b) data abstraction into new data representation, c) different data abstractions can lead to identical data representation, d) visual abstraction transforms the data representation into a visual representation, e) visual abstraction transforms one visual representation into another visual representation, f) the abstraction space encodes less and less information from the original *thing* from reality. The further from center the more sparse the representation is. g) the dotted line conveys a visualization pipeline that can be seen as a composite visual abstraction.[]{data-label="fig:space"}](abstraction_space.png){width="60.00000%"}
After series of data abstractions and transformations (the latter when no information loss happens), in visualization, the data is transformedabstracted into visual representations. A visual representation is then shown on a display, perceived, and further cognitively processed by a human observer. The visual abstraction process that generates this visual representation can be performed in many ways: In the case of kernel density estimation plots or clustering techniques, for instance, data can be visually abstracted using a composition principle such that smaller elements become a part of higher-order representations. In case of volumetric scalar fields, the voxel values can be classified into color and opacity ranges. By this, some voxels become abstracted into types such as air, soft tissue, or hard tissue. Level of detail techniques would typically relate to composition or grouping; in atomistic visualization, individual atoms become member of particular molecules, which in turn become members of certain compartments, up to cells. In many cases of particular visual abstraction it can be simultaneously argued for different abstraction principles, and there might be more principles than those proposed by Leppänen [@Leppanen2007].
Munzner [@Munzner:2014:VAD] provides a conceptual framework according to which visual representations or encoding can be categorized. This framework is rather extensive, however on the low level the visual encoding can abstract data representations through two key aspects. The first aspect is the graphical *mark* that positions each data element: *points*, *lines*, and *areas*. These marks further encode quantitative information or their mutual relationship is conveyed through various perceptual channels: *position*, *shape*, *color*, *size*, and *angle*. These basic low-level perception-driven visual elements can be combined to create rich spectrum of possible visual representations. These visual representations can be used to *encode*, *manipulate*, *compare*, or *reduce* the data in the visual representation space.
Data representations and visual representations can be ordered according to how much they abstract a particular phenomenon. The abstraction process is depicted in . We can see the abstraction space related to one *thing*, one entity from reality. There are several ways how the *thing* can be abstracted into a digital form. After this first stage of the process, the data representation has been abstracted from the *thing*. There could be several data abstractions applied, under which the data becomes sparser and sparser so that the information sought by the user or intended by the visualization creator becomes gradually clearer. Sometimes even the series of abstractions can take different paths yet still result into the same data representation. In practice, however, such data abstractions would only apply to a given path to a particular visual representation, as most visualization systems will maintain their original datasets to allow users to also observe different visual representations, which would be the result of a different sequence of data abstractions.
After the sequence of data abstractions, the data representation is still non-visual. If we apply a visual mapping to such data (whether with intentional loss of information or not), we achieve a visual representation that can be viewed on a display. But even visual representations can be further transformed into sparser visual representations by means of visual abstraction. The more far away in the abstraction space, the less information from the reality is preserved. If we concatenate a path from the reality to the final visual representation, we can see a visualization pipeline. In case we perform a transformation so that the distance between the original representation and the reality and the target representation and the reality are the same, we do not perform an abstraction. If the target representation is closer to the reality than the original representation, we perform an inverse operation to abstraction. Yet this inverse abstraction only happens in the eyes of the beholder, as we always remove information along the path from reality to visual representation.
Meaningful Abstraction
----------------------
It is not clear whether an abstraction has to be meaningful or whether its only condition is a loss of information. What if, for example, a high-dimensional data set is projected onto fewer dimensions? Projection is, in principle, a valid abstraction. But what if we project only every second data element and create a confusing data representation in which only half of the data set is projected onto lower-dimensional space. Is such a meaningless projection also an abstraction? From the information-theoretic point of view we have lost a certain amount of information, so it can be considered as an abstraction. To differentiate us from this view, we should define the term *meaningful abstraction* for those abstractions that are useful in some application contexts ().
Visual mapping may result into a representation with an equal amount of information, however, more visually confusing than the previous representation. For example, it is known that humans have difficulties with identifying portraits of known faces if they are rotated by 180 degrees from the natural portrait orientation [@Thomson:1980:MTN]. From the information-theoretic point of view, the rotation does not remove information from the image, but there is a significant difference in cognitive load between these two representations. Such a rotation is consequently not a meaningful visual mapping. The same holds for two visual representations of a graph, a node-link diagram and an adjacency matrix. When the one visual representation is transformed into another, no information is lost. Yet the cognitive load for viewers differs between these two representations. Building on the term of *meaningfulness*, a visual representation can be more meaningful (or effective) for a particular intent than another visual representation. Visual abstractions that lead to these representations might be ordered or perhaps even quantified in how meaningful they are. The concept of *meaningfulness* in terms of visual abstraction processes is tightly related to visual perception processes. In principle, a meaningful visual abstraction makes the job of visual processing simpler so that less of a cognitive processing needs to be invested, for a given purpose or goal, in comprehending the abstracted visual representation to understand the intended aspects of the reality. Therefore, visual abstractions relevant for visualization will need to result into lower cognitive load when comprehending the abstracted representation, for the chosen intention. Therefore the *meaningful visual abstraction* has to pass two conditions: the target visual representation has to formally contain less information and the cognitive load has to be lower. The perceived information, if not increase, should decrease at most linearly with the cognitive load.
At this point we solidify the previous discussion and define some key terms in visualization. Abstraction is a process, it is a transformation along which some information is intentionally lost to give prominence to the **higher-level** information within. The abstraction process results into a representation. For pure data abstraction, it results in a data representation, while, when visual abstraction is involved, it results in a visual representation. These abstractions can be considered as meaningful as long as they are benefiting particular application example or purpose. The meaningfulness property is scoped by the set of meaningful applications. A visual representation is the result of a visual transformation. When information is intentionally lost and the cognitive load is lower, while the perceived information loss is, at most, linear with the cognitive load difference, then we consider the visual abstraction as meaningful. Visual mapping and visual encoding, while both having their distinct meaning, can be used interchangeably with visual transformation. Visual metaphor operates on the concept of *analogy*. It presents a sign thing of a different referent thing from reality than the one originally regarded. This way visual mapping associates properties of one referent thing to another referent thing. An example of a visual metaphor are Chernoff faces, where different facial properties encode multivariate data [@Chernoff1973].
Abstraction Axes and Abstraction Spaces
---------------------------------------
So far we mainly discussed the process of abstraction from reality via data representations to visual representations. Yet we also showed that positive or negative abstraction can be *perceived* by a viewer as he or she is manipulating this abstraction chain or visualization pipeline. For better describing the latter aspect, Viola and Isenberg [@Viola2018], inspired by earlier examples in visualization [@Miao2018b; @Miao2018a; @Mohammed2018; @Zwan2011] as well as in the arts world, proposed the notion of *axes of abstraction* which could form an *abstraction space*. With these two concepts we can describe the abstraction that is perceived and controlled by the beholder, in contrast to the abstraction that is applied as a particular visual representation is generated ().
An *abstraction axis* in this concept is the previously mentioned virtual, perceived connection between different end points of the previously discussed abstraction process. This connection arises for observers as they adjust the settings of the visualization pipeline. This notion, however, assumes that, for each abstraction axis, there is a clearly identifiable succession of changes to the visual representation that (a) decreases the amount of information in each step and (b) provides a meaningful generalization of the depicted content to the viewer. In fact, Viola and Isenberg [@Viola2018] even state that abstraction axes do not need to be unique: for their chosen example from structural biology [@Zwan2011] they show that a molecular van-der-Waals surface-based molecular representation can be subjected to two alternative forms of structural abstraction (a phenomenon they call “forking” of axes)—one leading to a surface-based abstraction via different probe sizes and one leading to a second-order representation via balls-and-sticks, licorice (sticks-only), and backbone representations.
In particular for this latter form of abstraction, one could argue that condition (a) is not necessarily met: while the transition from van-der-Waals surfaces to the licorice representation in van der Zwan’s [@Zwan2011] model certainly removes the detail of the graphical atom representations, it simultaneously also adds representations of the bonds between atoms that did not exist in the starting configuration: the representations of atoms with implicitly represented bonds are continuously replaced with representations of bonds with implicitly represented atoms. One could thus argue that in this transition no abstraction happens, only one representation is smoothly transitioned into another. This transition, however, only happens in the eyes of the beholder; at any given point along the transition still abstraction happens from reality (source things) via data representations to visual representations.
A more recent example is the work by Miao et al. [@Miao2018a] who similarly constructed a progression of transitions from an atom-based representation of DNA nanostructures and the mechanical building blocks of the nanostructures to be built. Interesting in their progression of ten abstraction stages is that, while the first and last are fairly clear, the specific order of the sequence in-between is not and was created based on the discussions with and needs of their collaborating domain scientists.
Based on these two examples, we thus suggest that pure and continuous abstraction axes are rather rare. Instead, abstraction axes are typically composed of smaller building blocks where one representation is (typically) seamlessly transformed into another and as such forms a constructed sequence. In practice we often find abstraction axes that progress from a representation with more information to a representation with less detail, thus the name abstraction axis. We can also find transitions, however, that remove one type of visual detail and replace it with another type of visual information. Abstraction axes are always constructed with a given purpose and application case in mind and are not unique. If two abstraction axes work on independent attributes of the visual representation and can thus be independently controlled, then they form an *abstraction space* ().
An Information-Theoretic Analysis of Abstraction as a Process {#sec:InfoT}
=============================================================
As described above, the notion of “abstraction” encompasses a wide range of definitions in different contexts. It can be quite difficult for a single mathematical formulation to encapsulate the essences of these definitions. In this section, we examine the characteristics of the process of abstraction using information-theoretic measures. We show that the definitions given at the beginning of this article can be explained using an information-theoretic metric, which therefore offers a potential means for modelling and measuring visual abstraction.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
![Examples of visualization images that may attract different views as to whether they are the results of visual abstraction processes. Most would agree that (a)-(d) are visually abstract, many would content that (e) and (f) are considered so, and some might be hesitant about (g) and (h).[]{data-label="fig:ABS-examples"}](London.png "fig:"){height="36mm"} ![Examples of visualization images that may attract different views as to whether they are the results of visual abstraction processes. Most would agree that (a)-(d) are visually abstract, many would content that (e) and (f) are considered so, and some might be hesitant about (g) and (h).[]{data-label="fig:ABS-examples"}](VolumeNPR.pdf "fig:"){height="36mm"}
\(a) London underground map [@TfL:2018:map] \(b) pen-and-ink volume rendering [@Bruckner2007]
\[2mm\] ![Examples of visualization images that may attract different views as to whether they are the results of visual abstraction processes. Most would agree that (a)-(d) are visually abstract, many would content that (e) and (f) are considered so, and some might be hesitant about (g) and (h).[]{data-label="fig:ABS-examples"}](Oster2018CGF.jpg "fig:"){height="36mm"} ![Examples of visualization images that may attract different views as to whether they are the results of visual abstraction processes. Most would agree that (a)-(d) are visually abstract, many would content that (e) and (f) are considered so, and some might be hesitant about (g) and (h).[]{data-label="fig:ABS-examples"}](VideoVis.png "fig:"){height="36mm"}
\(c) 3D streamline flow visualization [@Oster:2018:CGF] \(d) glyph-based video visualization [@Duffy:2015:TVCG]
\[2mm\] ![Examples of visualization images that may attract different views as to whether they are the results of visual abstraction processes. Most would agree that (a)-(d) are visually abstract, many would content that (e) and (f) are considered so, and some might be hesitant about (g) and (h).[]{data-label="fig:ABS-examples"}](Miao2018CGF.jpg "fig:"){height="36mm"} ![Examples of visualization images that may attract different views as to whether they are the results of visual abstraction processes. Most would agree that (a)-(d) are visually abstract, many would content that (e) and (f) are considered so, and some might be hesitant about (g) and (h).[]{data-label="fig:ABS-examples"}](Wang2018CGF.jpg "fig:"){height="36mm"}
\(e) network visualization [@Miao2018b] \(f) parallel coordinates visualization [@Wang:2018:CGF]
\[2mm\] ![Examples of visualization images that may attract different views as to whether they are the results of visual abstraction processes. Most would agree that (a)-(d) are visually abstract, many would content that (e) and (f) are considered so, and some might be hesitant about (g) and (h).[]{data-label="fig:ABS-examples"}](Zhai2017CGF.jpg "fig:"){height="36mm"} ![Examples of visualization images that may attract different views as to whether they are the results of visual abstraction processes. Most would agree that (a)-(d) are visually abstract, many would content that (e) and (f) are considered so, and some might be hesitant about (g) and (h).[]{data-label="fig:ABS-examples"}](birkeland_peeling.jpg "fig:"){height="36mm"}
\(g) 3D flow visualization [@Zhai:2017:CGF] \(h) volume visualization and deformation [@Birkeland2009]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
shows several visualization images generated using some typical visualization techniques. Most visualization researchers would unreservedly refer to the first four images, (a)–(d), as results of visual abstraction, and many would contentedly accept a suggestion that (e) and (f) are also results of visual abstraction, but some would be hesitant to consider (g) and (h) as such abstracted representations. Nevertheless, one can also argue that the latter four images, (e)–(h), are also results of visual abstraction because, in comparison with the source data, some information has been abstracted away and, in comparison with statistical abstraction of the source data, the information presented is visual.
First, the level of willingness for people to consider a visualization image as an abstracted visual representation does not appear to be related to the quality of the image or the usefulness of the technique that generates the image. Second, we can observe that both (a) and (h) feature some deformation, and deformation does not seem to be a critical factor that influences the perception of visual abstraction results. Similarly, from a comparison of (b) vs. (h) and (c) vs. (g) we can observe that the types of data to be visualized do not have decisive influence upon the perception of the term “visual abstraction”. Third, we can also observe that an impression of photorealism or just a perceived intention seems to bring about the hesitation in characterizing a visualization image as the result of visual abstraction. Meanwhile, having no or less photo-realistic effect in an image (e.g., (e) or (f)) does not immediately imply visual abstraction either, at least to some people. Here the adjective “photo-realistic” indicates that the rendering algorithm used was designed to achieve a photo-realistic effect, without implying that the image resulting from the rendering process actually resembles a photograph.
One hypothesis is that our willingness or hesitation to consider a visualization image as resulting from visual abstraction relates to an unconsciously-integrated reasoning about two conditions of visual abstraction.
1. **A visual abstraction is a transformation from data to its visual representation with some information loss**—Here data can be of any data types including visual data (e.g., image corpora and videos). This can be considered as a broad definition of visual abstraction, and encapsulates the aforementioned definitions in cartography and shape analysis. While introducing a constraint of visual output, it exhibits a parallel with the definitions in relation to mathematical abstraction, abstract thinking, and grouping in object-oriented design. All eight images in satisfy this condition in general. We will discuss information loss in detail later.
2. **A visual abstraction is a transformation from a more photo-realistic visual representation to a less photo-realistic one**—This can be considered as a narrow definition of visual abstraction, and encapsulates the aforementioned definitions in art, cartography, and shape analysis. It applies to transformations with visual input as well as visual output. Considering the examples in , for images (a), (b), (c), and (d), it is relatively easy for one to imagine their photo-realistic counterparts. Although some of these images can be generated directly from source data that may not be visual, a subjective impression of a transformation that decreases photorealism is sufficient for viewers to associate these images with abstraction. Meanwhile, it is harder to imagine a photo-realistic version of (e) or (f), and therefore this condition does not appear to be applicable to them. For images (g) and (h), it is intuitive to consider them more photo-realistic than less. They not only fail to satisfy, but also negate, this condition.
We can easily see that reading data using a spreadsheet or reading their statistical summary do not meet either condition. Images (a), (b), (c), and (d) in satisfy both conditions. Images (e) and (f) satisfy condition A but not B. Images (g) and (h) satisfy condition A but negate B. Suppose that we had a numerical score 2 for condition A, score 1 for condition B, score 0 for not applicable, and score $-1$ for negation. Spreadsheet or statistical summary would score 0; (g) and (h) would score 1; (e) and (f) would score 2; (a), (b), (c), and (d) would score 3. Such a scoring system would reflect the level of willingness for one to characterize a visualization image as the result of visual abstraction.
We can also infer that condition A is more essential than condition B. Without A, images (e) and (f) would not be considered as results of visual abstraction at all. Without B, there would not be any hesitation about whether images (g) and (h) are results of visual abstractions.
However, condition A does not in itself meet the expectation for the minimal quality that the process of meaningful visual abstraction should possess, since arbitrarily throwing away information should not be referred to as meaningful abstraction. Below we use several information-theoretic measures to clarify Condition A.
Let $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ be a process for transforming a dataset $d$ to a visualization image $v$. Let $\mathbb{D}$ be the data space containing all possible datasets that $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ can take as its input, and $\mathbb{V}$ be the data space containing all possible visualization images that $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ can generate. In information theory, $\mathbb{D}$ and $\mathbb{V}$ are referred to as *alphabets*. The dataset $d$ is thus a letter in the input alphabet $\mathbb{D}$, and the visualization image $v$ is a letter of the output alphabet $\mathbb{V}$. The process $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ can thus be written as $P_{d \rightarrow v}: \mathbb{D} \longrightarrow \mathbb{V}$.
The Shannon entropy measures the amount of uncertainty or variation of an alphabet. Let $p(d)$ be the probability of a dataset $d$ in the context of an application. The Shannon entropy of $\mathbb{D}$ is thus defined as: $$\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{D}) = - \sum_{d \in \mathbb{D}} p(d) \log_2 p(d)$$ When all letters in $\mathbb{D}$ have the same probability, we have $\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{D}) = \log_2 \| \mathbb{D} \|$, where $ \| \mathbb{D} \|$ is the number of different letters in $\mathbb{D}$. Similarly, we can measure the Shannon entropy $\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{V})$ as the amount of uncertainty or variation of $\mathbb{V}$.
*Alphabet Compression* [@Chen:2016:TVCG:78] is the difference $\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{D}) - \mathcal{H}(\mathbb{V})$, which is a coarse indication of the amount of information loss of the visualization process $P_{d \rightarrow v}$. Consider a simple example. $\mathbb{D}$ is defined by a real variable, $X$, which may take valid values between 0.00 and 10,000.00 at two decimal point precision. There are thus 1,000,001 possible values. Let all values have the same probability. We have $\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{D}) \approx 20$ bits.
Meanwhile, we consider a process $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ that plots a value $d \in \mathbb{D}$ as a bar in a single-variable bar chart using a canvas with 1000H $\times$ 100W pixels. The maximum resolution available for the mapping function $P_{d \rightarrow v}: \mathbb{D} \longrightarrow \mathbb{V}$ is 1000 pixels, thus 1001 bar charts with different bar heights. We have $\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{V}) \approx 10$ bits. The alphabet compression is therefore about 10 bits. In terms of Condition A, there is about 10 bits of information loss. Therefore, any visualization process, which features many-to-one mapping from data to visual objects, typically exhibits positive alphabet compression. Only when the variation of $\mathbb{D}$ is very small, e.g., using the above canvas to plot an integer variable in the range of \[0, 100\], the amount of alphabet compression can be zero. In the worst scenario, the plotting function randomly depicts a bar with a height between 0 and 1000 pixels, the amount of alphabet compression would be negative.
All images in feature many-to-one mappings. For example, the distortion in (a) is a kind of many-to-one mapping, since many potential track layouts would lead to the same metro map. In the image rendered with a pen-and-ink effect in (b), each white pixel could be a placeholder for many differently colored pixels that have been abstracted away. Each glyph in (d) is a very low resolution visual representation of some 20 values, most of which are real numbers. In the volume-rendered image in (h), each pixel results from a rendering integral that transforms a few hundred voxel values to an RGB trio. Many different combinations of these voxel values could result in pixels with the same color.
Hence, a process for generating visualization images from relatively complex datasets features many-to-one mappings, which means information loss or positive alphabet compression. According Condition A, such a process is thus a process of visual abstraction.
However, what quantifies a visualization or a meaningful visual abstraction must be a process that is intended to generate “meaningful” visualization images from input datasets. The word “meaningful” implies three factors: (i) the viewer can interpret what is being depicted; (ii) the viewer’s interpretation of what is depicted is reasonably correct in relation to the original data; and (iii) the viewer’s interpretation errors due to information loss do not have serious impact on the viewer’s task.
![The effectiveness of a visual abstraction process depends on the succeeding task process as well as the viewer’s knowledge, biases, and cognitive capability.[]{data-label="fig:TwoProcesses"}](TwoProcesses.pdf){width="100mm"}
Consider that a viewer’s interpretation is a process $Q_{d \leftarrow v} = P^{-1}_{d \rightarrow v}$ that attempts to reconstruct a dataset from a given visualization image. This process can be written as $Q_{d \leftarrow v}: \mathbb{V} \longrightarrow \mathbb{D}'$. We use $\mathbb{D}'$ to denote an alphabet that has the same set of letters as $\mathbb{D}$ but a different probability mass function from that of $\mathbb{D}$. For example, given a bar that is 499 pixels tall, a viewer may interpret it as one of these values in the original $\mathbb{D}$, $\{498.00, 498.01, ..., 499.99, 500.00\}$. Imagine that the interpretation is biased towards 500.00 due to the corresponding mark on the vertical axis. The probability $q(500)$ would be undesirably higher than the original probability $p(500)$.
In information theory, such errors in the interpretation can be collectively measured by the Kullback-Leibler divergence, which is defined as: $$\mathcal{D}_{KL}(\mathbb{D}' \| \mathbb{D}) = \sum_{d \in \mathbb{D}} q(d) \log_2 \frac{q(d)}{p(d)}$$ where $p()$ and $q()$ are the probability mass functions of $\mathbb{D}$ and $\mathbb{D}'$ respectively, and $q(d)/p(d)$ is a discrete representation of the Radon-Nikodym derivative of $q$ with respect to the original $p$.
In the context of visual abstraction, this measurement offers a counterbalance to the measurement alphabet compression. It is referred to as *Potential Distortion* [@Chen:2016:TVCG:78]. While it is desirable to have the results of visual mapping $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ as abstract as possible, i.e., for $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ to have a high amount of alphabet compression, it is also necessary to keep the inaccuracy of the interpretation function $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$ as low as possible, i.e., for $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$ to have a low amount of potential distortion.
Since $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$ is a human-centric process, $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$ may feature inaccuracy due to perceptual errors and cognitive biases. However, $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$ can also make use of human knowledge that is not encoded in the data to help more accurate reconstruction. For example, imagine that a viewer is asked to guess what would be the original colors on the patch of white pixels between two black lines in the pen-and-ink visualization image in (b). A na[ï]{}ve guess would be either white (as what is seen) or an arbitrary selection from various grey colors. Most viewers, especially those familiar with the depicted object or volume visualization methods, can do much better than the na[ï]{}ve guess. Hence the process of “knowledge-assisted guessing”—a heuristic process—has a lower amount of potential distortion than the na[ï]{}ve guessing. In general, it is this human knowledge that enables visual abstraction to be deployed effectively in many situations, such as those illustrated in . Whether users have the adequate ability to interpret the results of visual abstraction is thus one of the key criteria for judging if a visual abstraction process is appropriate or its results are meaningful, which reflecting the two factors (i) and (ii) described above.
Nevertheless, since $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ is usually a many-to-one mapping, and $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$ is usually a one-to-many mapping, one may wonder why we should go through such “unnecessary fuss” to apply the process $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ first to $\mathbb{D}$ and another process $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$ to reconstruct $\mathbb{D}'$. One important rationale is about the *task* succeeding $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ and $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$. The judgment about whether a visual abstraction process is appropriate or its results are meaningful thus depends on another process $P_{v \rightarrow t}$. As illustrated in , $P_{v \rightarrow t}$ takes $\mathbb{V}$ as the input, and generates another output alphabet $\mathbb{T}$ that may consist of a collection of letters, e.g., different options of a decision, different levels of an assessment, different categories of a situation, etc.
The process of visual abstraction $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ and the reconstructive interpretation $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$ can collectively affect the task process $P_{v \rightarrow t}$, especially its *Cost* $\mathbf{Ct}(P_{v \rightarrow t}, Q_{v \leftarrow t})$. Similar to $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$, here $Q_{v \leftarrow t}$ is an interpretation process for reconstructing $\mathbb{V}$ from $\mathbb{T}$. For a univariate value (e.g., 499.38), there is little merit to visualize it using a bar chart. The difference of the cost for reading the number and that of viewing a bar is negligible for most tasks. The potential distortion caused by visual abstraction can only affect the process $P_{v \rightarrow t}$ negatively. However, if the number of variables increases, e.g., 10 variables, the cognitive load for viewing and comparing 10 numbers is likely to be higher than viewing and comparing 10 bars using a bar chart. It is not difficult to imagine the merits of visualization when the number of variables increases. For the volume datasets featured in (b,h), the number of variables in a dataset is typically at the scale of $256 \times 256 \times 256$ or more. It is inconceivable to perform a decision task by reading the numerical values of such a volume dataset. Hence, visual abstraction can be used to transform a volume dataset with a huge number of variables to visualization images as shown in (b) and (h), which reduces the cost $\mathbf{Ct}(P_{v \rightarrow t}, Q_{v \leftarrow t})$ significantly.
The above information-theoretic discourse on visual abstraction is based on the cost-benefit metric for data intelligence proposed by Chen and Golan [@Chen:2016:TVCG:78]. For any data intelligence process $P_i$ with an input alphabet $\mathbb{Z}_i$ and an output alphabet $\mathbb{Z}_{i+1}$, its cost-benefit ratio is defined as: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\textit{Benefit}}{\textit{Cost}}
=& \frac{\textit{Alphabet Compression}-\textit{Potential Distortion}}{\textit{Cost}}\\
=& \frac{\mathbf{AC}(P_i) - \mathbf{PD}(Q_i)}{\mathbf{Ct}(P_i, Q_i)}
= \frac{\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{Z}_i)-\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{Z}_{i+1}) - \mathcal{D}_{KL}(\mathbb{Z}'_{i} \| \mathbb{Z}_{i})}{\mathbf{Ct}(P_i, Q_i)}\end{aligned}$$
When this metric is applied to the two processes in , we have the combined cost-benefit ratio as: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:DVT}
\frac{\textit{Benefit}}{\textit{Cost}} & \bigl( d \rightarrow v \rightarrow t \bigr)
= \frac{\mathbf{AC}(P_{d \rightarrow v}) - \mathbf{PD}(Q_{d \leftarrow v})
+ \mathbf{AC}(P_{v \rightarrow t}) - \mathbf{PD}(Q_{v \leftarrow t})} {\mathbf{Ct}(P_{d \rightarrow v}, Q_{d \leftarrow v})
+ \mathbf{Ct}(P_{v \rightarrow t}, Q_{v \leftarrow t})} \\
=& \frac{\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{D})-\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{V})
- \mathcal{D}_{KL}(\mathbb{D}' \| \mathbb{D})
+ \mathcal{H}(\mathbb{V})-\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{T})
- \mathcal{D}_{KL}(\mathbb{V}' \| \mathbb{V})} {\mathbf{Ct}(P_{d \rightarrow v}, Q_{d \leftarrow v}) + \mathbf{Ct}(P_{v \rightarrow t}, Q_{v \leftarrow t})} \nonumber\\
=& \frac{\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{D}) - \mathcal{H}(\mathbb{T})
- \mathcal{D}_{KL}(\mathbb{D}' \| \mathbb{D})
- \mathcal{D}_{KL}(\mathbb{V}' \| \mathbb{V})} {\mathbf{Ct}(P_{d \rightarrow v}, Q_{d \leftarrow v}) + \mathbf{Ct}(P_{v \rightarrow t}, Q_{v \leftarrow t})} \nonumber\end{aligned}$$
In comparison, if one has to perform the task by reading the data without visualization, the cost-beneficial ratio would be: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:DT}
\frac{\textit{Benefit}}{\textit{Cost}} \bigl( d \rightarrow t \bigr)
=& \frac{\mathbf{AC}(P_{d \rightarrow t}) - \mathbf{PD}(Q_{d \leftarrow t})} {\mathbf{Ct}(P_{d \rightarrow t}, Q_{d \leftarrow t})}\\
=& \frac{\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{D}) - \mathcal{H}(\mathbb{T})
- \mathcal{D}_{KL}(\mathbb{D}'' \| \mathbb{D})} {\mathbf{Ct}(P_{d \rightarrow t}, Q_{d \leftarrow t})} \nonumber\end{aligned}$$
Note that the term $\mathcal{D}_{KL}(\mathbb{D}' \| \mathbb{D})$ in Eq.(\[eq:DVT\]) and the term $\mathcal{D}_{KL}(\mathbb{D}'' \| \mathbb{D})$ in Eq.(\[eq:DT\]) are of different quantities as they relate to $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$ and $Q_{d \leftarrow t}$ respectively.
When the dataset $d$ is large and complex, we can see that the cost $\mathbf{Ct}(P_{d \rightarrow t}, Q_{d \leftarrow t})$ in Eq.(\[eq:DT\]) would be much higher than the combined costs in Eq.(\[eq:DVT\]) in terms of time and cognitive load in performing the task. In other words, we have: $$\mathbf{Ct}(P_{d \rightarrow t}, Q_{d \leftarrow t}) > \mathbf{Ct}(P_{d \rightarrow v}, Q_{d \leftarrow v}) + \mathbf{Ct}(P_{v \rightarrow t}, Q_{v \leftarrow t})$$ Although reading data might appear to be more accurate, the reconstruction process $Q_{d \leftarrow t}$ from the task alphabet $\mathbb{T}$ (e.g., the patient has a tumor or not) to the data alphabet $\mathbb{D}$ (e.g., a volume dataset) is much more error-prone than the reconstruction process via visualization. In other words, we have: $$\mathbf{PD}(Q_{d \leftarrow t}) > \mathbf{PD}(Q_{d \leftarrow v}) + \mathbf{PD}(Q_{v \leftarrow t})$$ With $\mathbf{AC}(P_{d \rightarrow v}) + \mathbf{AC}(P_{v \rightarrow t}) = \mathbf{AC}(P_{d \rightarrow t})$, it is not difficult to conclude: $$\frac{\textit{Benefit}}{\textit{Cost}} \bigl( d \rightarrow v \rightarrow t \bigr)
> \frac{\textit{Benefit}}{\textit{Cost}} \bigl( d \rightarrow t \bigr)$$
Under Condition A, we can thus mathematically reason that, for any slightly large or complex dataset, the process from data alphabet $\mathbb{D}$ to task alphabet $\mathbb{T}$ with visual abstraction is usually more cost-beneficial than the process without.
For some very simple datasets, such as a univariate value, visual abstraction may not have an information-theoretic merit. However, this is not to say that it could not have cognitive merit in disseminative visualization. More likely, the results of visual abstraction could attract more attention from the viewers who unconsciously devote more cognitive load to the task. Although the viewers’ cost-beneficial ratio increases, the presenter of the disseminative visualization benefits from the contribution of extra cognitive load from the viewers. In many ways, this is similar to scenarios of disseminative visualization, where the amount of visual abstraction is purposely reduced in order to attract viewers’ attention, and hence their cognitive load. Such scenarios may include, for instance, showing an animated chart, whilst a static chart could adequately convey the information, or showing visualization in theatre-based virtual environments [@Chen:2019:TVCG].
Similarly, we can also use the cost-benefit metric to analyze the scenarios under condition B by comparing the cost-benefit ratio of a more photo-realistic technique with a less photo-realistic technique. Similar to Condition A, the potential distortion is affected by viewers’ knowledge as well as their biases. The cost is affected by the viewer’s task as well as cognitive capability.
Furthermore, this metric can be applied to human-centric processes (e.g., visualization and interaction) as well as machine-centric processes (e.g., statistics and algorithms). In general, statistical abstraction and algorithmic abstraction usually result in more alphabet compression as well as more potential distortion but less cost than visual abstraction. In designing a visual analytics workflow, the metric can be used to compare the cost-benefit of a human-centric process with that of a machine-centric process by analyzing the trade-off among alphabet compression, potential distortion, and cost. The metric can also be used to guide a visualization designer in choosing different forms of visual abstraction, e.g., in reasoning about the trade-off among the amount of abstraction, the potential perceptual errors, and the cost of task performance.
In summary, as defined at the beginning of this article, meaningful visual abstraction depends on some points of view and some tasks. From the perspective of information theory, the **points of view** may be in either or both of the following forms:
- The factors that influence the *alphabet compression* and *cost* of the process $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ for transforming data to visualization. These factors may include the designers’ wish to keep or highlight some information while removing or deemphasizing other information, their understanding of the task requirements, their appreciation of the resources available for visualization, and their awareness of the viewers’ knowledge of visual representations and skills of visual analysis.
- The factors that influence the *potential distortion* and the *cost* of the process $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$ for reconstructing data from visualization. These factors may include the viewers’ knowledge related to the data being depicted and the visual representations used, their understanding about the information required for performing their tasks, and their cognitive load and time constraint in executing the process $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$.
Meanwhile, **tasks** can be defined as processes that succeed the processes $P_{d \rightarrow v}$ and $Q_{d \leftarrow v}$. As long as the tasks fall broadly in the category of data intelligence tasks, the cost-benefit metric proposed by Chen and Golan [@Chen:2016:TVCG:78] can also be applied to these succeeding processes. Therefore, from the information-theoretic perspective, the most meaningful visual abstraction, or the most effective visualization in general, is the process with the optimal cost-benefit measure.
Summary
=======
In this article we thus formally defined the concepts of abstraction and visual abstraction as they relate to the field of visualization and based on existing notions of the terms in related fields such as the arts and in philosophy. We argued that any visual representation is the result of multiple abstraction steps from reality, and we called the step from data representation to visual representation visual abstraction. We also showed that as users of a visualization system we do not observe this abstraction process but instead adjust settings to transition from one visual representation to another—each being an independent result of the abstraction process from source thing to sign thing. Yet as designers of visualization systems we can provide guided interaction such that several results of meaningful abstractions can be assembled into sequences that we call abstraction axes to better illustrate how different aspects of reality relate to each other, and several of these abstraction axes can be assembled into abstraction spaces to illustrate the interrelation of several independent aspects. So while we argue that any visual representation is the result of an abstraction process, it is still important to discuss abstraction and visual abstraction as it teaches us about visualization as a process in general.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
The authors would like to thank Jos Roerdink, Helwig Hauser, Stefan Bruckner, Hans-Christian Hege, and Torsten Möller for fruitful discussion that helped shaping the article. Thanks to Peter Mindek for illustrating the abstraction space in .
[^1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction\_(mathematics)
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- 'Letterio Gatto, Taíse Santiago'
title: 'Schubert Calculus on a Grassmann Algebra[^1]'
---
Introduction
============
In the paper [@Gat1] one shows that the cohomology ring of the complex grassmannian $G(k,n)$, parametrizing $k$-dimensional subspaces of $\CC^n$, can be realized as a commutative ring of endomorphism of the $k^{th}$ exterior power of a free $\ZZ$-module $M$ of rank $n$. Such a result was achieved by studying a natural [*Hasse-Schmidt derivation*]{} on the exterior algebra of $M$; Laksov and Thorup ([@LakTh] and [@LakTh1]) generalized it to the more interesting situation regarding the cohomology of Grassmann bundles. Their point of view is quite different, as it is based on the fact that the $k^{th}$-exterior power of a free $A$-module of rank $n$ can be endowed with a natural module structure over the ring of symmetric polynomials (with $A$-coefficients): this leads to a beautiful and natural description of the cohomology of $G(k,E)$, the Grassmann bundle of $k$-dimensional subspaces in the fibers of a vector bundle $E$, in terms of the [*universal splitting algebra*]{} of a certain monic polynomial $\ttp$ (encoding the Chern classes of $E$) into the product of two monic polynomials, one of degree $k$ (Cf. remark \[rmklakth\]).
The main goal of this paper is to generalize [@Gat1] via a translation of Laksov and Thorup’s formalism into the language of derivations. A [*derivation*]{} on $\wM$, the exterior algebra of a module $M$ over a commutative ring with unit, is a sequence $D:=(D_0,D_1,\ldots)$ of endomorphisms, such that the $h^{th}$ order Leibniz’s rule: D\_h()=\_D\_[h\_1]{}D\_[h\_2]{},\[eq:hleibrul\] holds for each $h\geq 0$ and each $\alpha,\beta\in\wM$ (see \[ref3.2\]). In [@tesi], any such a derivation is called a [*Schubert Calculus on a Grassmann Algebra*]{}. The terminology is motivated by the fact that if one takes $M$ to be a finite free module over a graded commutative $\ZZ$-algebra of characteristic $0$, there is a [*canonical derivation*]{} on $\wM$ (generalizing that studied in [@Gat1]; see Section \[sect2\]) describing, within a unified framework, different kind of cohomology theories on complex grassmannian varieties, such as, e.g., the classical, the small quantum or the equivariant one. Working on the exterior algebra, instead of on a single exterior power, many formal manipulations get easier: as an example we offer Theorem \[generalpres\], the main result of this paper, that consists in a simple formula [*giving, in a unified way, the presentation of the classical, small quantum and equivariant cohomology ring of the complex grassmannian*]{} $G(k,n)$. In fact, the (classical, small quantum, equivariant) cohomology ring of all the grassmannians $G(k,n)$, $1\leq k\leq n$, are quotient of a same commutative ring of endomorphisms of the exterior algebra of a free module of rank $n$ (see Sect. \[ref4.7\]). As the latter is generated by derivations, the (classical, small quantum, equivariant) Schubert calculus on $G(k,n)$ can be reduced to that, much easier, on $G(1,n)=\PP^{n-1}$ (as in [@Gat1]; see also [@Gat2]). Our best application of such a philosophy regards an elementary description, as in [@GatSant2] (see also [@tesi]), of the equivariant Schubert calculus on a grassmannian acted on by a torus with isolated fixed locus, recovering, in particular, the case studied in [@KT] (see also [@formalism]).
The first author wants to thank the warm ospitality of the STID of Menton, Université de Nice, Sophia-Antipolis, notably that of its chairmain, Guy Choisnet, where most part of this paper, originated from [@Gat1] and [@tesi], has been written. The current exposition has been deeply influenced by the work of D. Laksov and A. Thorup on related subjects ([@LakTh], [@LakTh1], [@formalism]) and by many conversations the authors had with the former, to whom they want to address a warm feeling of gratitude. We also thank I. Vainsencher for some key suggestions as well as the Referee for his valuable and (especially) patient remarks.
Derivations on Exterior Algebras {#sect1}
================================
\[prel3\] Let $M$ be an $A$-module, $A[[t]]$ be the ring of formal power series in an indeterminate $t$ over $A$ and $\wM[[t]]:=(\wM)[[t]]$ be the $A[[t]]$-module of formal power series with coefficients in $\wM=\bigoplus_{k\geq 0}\wkM$, the exterior algebra of $M$. The [ former]{} gets a structure of $A[[t]]$-algebra by setting $
\sum_{i\geq 0}\alpha_it^i\wedge \sum_{j\geq 0}\beta_jt^j=\sum_{h\geq 0}\sum_{i+j=h}(\alpha_i\w\beta_j)t^h.
$
\[ref3.2\] An $A$-module homomorphism $D_t:\wM\sra \wM[[t]]$ is said to be a [*derivation*]{} on $\wM$ if it is an $A$-algebra homomorphism, i.e. if for each $\alpha,\beta\in\wM$: D\_t()=D\_tD\_t.\[eq:fundeq\] The algebra homomorphism $D_t$ can be written as a formal power series $\sum_{i\geq 0}D_it^i$, with coefficients in the $A$-algebra $End_A(\wM)$. Denote by $D$ the sequence $(D_0,D_1,\ldots)$ of the coefficients of $D_t$. Equation (\[eq:fundeq\]) implies that for each $h\geq 0$, the $A$-endomorphism $D_h$ of $\wM$ satisfies the $h^{th}$-order Leibniz rule (\[eq:hleibrul\]), got by expanding both sides of (\[eq:fundeq\]) and equating the coefficients of $t^h$ occurring on both sides. Let $\jmath:Hom_A(\wM,\wM[[t]])\sra End_A(\wM[[t]])$ be the natural map sending any $\Psi_t=\sum_{i\geq 0}\psi_it^i\in Hom_A(\wM,\wM[[t]])$ to the endomorphism $\jmath(\Psi)$ of $\wM[[t]]$, defined, on each $\sum_{i\geq 0}\alpha_it^i\in\wM[[t]]$, as: $$\jmath(\Psi)(\sum_{i\geq 0}\alpha_it^i)=\sum_{i\geq 0}\Psi(\alpha_i)\cdot t^i=\sum_{h\geq 0}\big(\sum_{i+j=h}\psi_i (\alpha_j)\big)t^h.$$ If $D_t$ is a derivation, then $\jmath({D}_t)$ is itself an $A[[t]]$-algebra endomorphism of $\wM[[t]]$. In fact it is obviously an $A[[t]]$-module endomorphism and, moreover: $$\begin{aligned}
\jmath(D_t)\Big(\sum_{i\geq 0}\alpha_it^i\wedge\sum_{j\geq 0}\beta_jt^j\Big)&=&\jmath(D_t)\sum_{h\geq 0}\Big(\sum_{i+j=h}\alpha_i\w\beta_j\Big)t^h=\nonumber\\=\sum_{h\geq 0}\Big(\sum_{i+j=h}D_t(\alpha_i\w\beta_j)\Big)t^h&=&\sum_{h\geq 0}\Big(\sum_{i+j=h}D_t\alpha_i\w D_t\beta_j\Big)t^h=\nonumber\\=\sum_{i\geq 0}D_t\alpha_i\cdot t^i\wedge \sum_{j\geq 0}D_t\beta_j\cdot t^j&=&\jmath(D_t)\sum_{i\geq 0}\alpha_i\cdot t^i\w\jmath(D_t)\sum_{j\geq 0}\beta_j\cdot t^j.\label{eq:dcapaom}\end{aligned}$$
For each pair $D_t, D_t'\in Hom_A(\wM,\wM[[t]])$, define a product $D_t*D'_t$ through the equality: $
(D_t*D'_t)\alpha=\jmath(D_t)(D'_t\alpha).
$ Clearly $\jmath(D_t)\alpha=D_t\alpha$ for each $\alpha\in\wM$ and $$\begin{aligned}
(D_t*D'_t)(\alpha)&=&\sum_{h\geq 0}\big(\sum_{i+j=h}D_i(D'_j\alpha)\big)t^h=\jmath(D_t)(\sum_{j\geq 0}D'_j\alpha\cdot t^j)=\nonumber\\&=&\jmath(D_t)(D'_t\alpha)=(\jmath(D_t)\circ\jmath({D}'_t))\alpha.\label{eq:ddcap}\end{aligned}$$
\[dt\*dt’\] The product $D_t*D'_t$ of two derivations on $\wM$ is a derivation on $\wM$. Indeed, using (\[eq:dcapaom\]) and (\[eq:ddcap\]): $$\begin{aligned}
(D_t*D'_t)(\alpha\w\beta)&=&\jmath(D_t)(D'_t(\alpha\w\beta))=\jmath(D_t)(D'_t\alpha\w D'_t\beta)=\\&=&\jmath(D_t)(D'_t\alpha)\w \jmath(D_t)(D'_t\beta)=(D_t*D'_t)\alpha\w (D_t*D'_t)\beta,\end{aligned}$$ as desired. Let now $D^{(1)}=(D_i^{(1)})_{i\geq 0}$ be any (possibly finite) sequence of endomorphisms of $M$ and, for each $m\in M$, let $D_t^{(1)}(m)=\sum_{i\geq 0}D_i^{(1)}(m)t^i$. Then $
D_t^{(1)}:M\sra M[[t]]
$ is an $A$-module homomorphism.
\[extder\] [*There exists a unique derivation $D_t:\wM\sra\wM[[t]]$ such that ${D_t}_{|_M}=D_t^{(1)}$ (or, equivalently, ${D_i}_{|_M}=D_i^{(1)}$).*]{}
For each $k\geq 1$, consider the $A$-multilinear map $
M^{\otimes k}\sra(\wkM)[[t]]
$ defined by $
m_{i_1}\otimes\ldots\otimes m_{i_k}\mapsto D_t^{(1)}m_{i_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge D_t^{(1)}m_{i_k}
$, which is clearly alternating. By the universal property of exterior powers, it factors through a unique $A$-module homomorphism $\wkM\sra (\wkM)[[t]]$, given by $
D_t^{(k)}(m_{i_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge m_{i_k})=D_t^{(1)} m_{i_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge D_t^{(1)} m_{i_k}
$ on monomials. Let $D_t\alpha=D_t^{(k)}\alpha
$ for all $\alpha\in\wkM$ and all $k\geq 0$. It follows that if $\alpha\in \bigwedge^{k_1}M$ and $\beta\in \bigwedge^{k_2}M$, equation (\[eq:fundeq\]) holds by definition of $D_t$ and the fact that $\alpha\wedge\beta$ is a finite $A$-linear combination of elements of the form
$
\{m_{i_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge m_{i_{k_1}}\wedge m_{i_{k_1+1}}\wedge\ldots\wedge m_{i_{k_1+k_2}}; \quad 1\leq i_1<\ldots<i_{k_1+k_2}\}.
$
Since any element of $\wM$ is a finite sum of homogeneous ones, equation (\[eq:fundeq\]) holds for any arbitrary pair as well. The unicity part is straightforward: were $D'_t$ another extension of $D_t^{(1)}$, one would have $
D_t'( m_{i_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge m_{i_k})= D_t^{(1)} m_{i_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge D_t^{(1)} m_{i_k}=D_t( m_{i_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge m_{i_k}),
$ for each $ m_{i_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge m_{i_k}$ and each $k\geq 1$. Hence $D_t'=D_t$.
Let ${\cal S}_t(\wM)$ be the set of all derivations $D_t:=\sum_{i\geq 0} D_it^i$ such that ${D_i}_{|_M}\in End_A(M)$ (i.e. the submodule $M$ of $\wM$ is $D_i$[-stable]{}) and ${D_0}_{|_M}$ is an isomorphism. Hence $D_0:\wM\sra \wM$ is an isomorphism too.
By \[dt\*dt’\], ${\cal S}_t(\wM)$ is closed under $*$. By its very definition, $*$ is associative. The map ${\bf 1}:\wM\sra(\wM)[[t]]$, sending any $\alpha\in \wM$ to itself, thought of as a constant formal power series, is the $*$-neutral element. Thinking to $D_t$ as a formal power series with coefficients in $End_A(\wM)$, the formal inverse ${D^{-1}_t}$ of $D_t$ (existing because of the invertibility of $D_0$) is a derivation as well. In fact $$\begin{aligned}
{ D^{-1}_t}(\alpha\w\beta)&=&\jmath({{D}}^{-1}_t)\big((D_t*{ D^{-1}_t})\alpha\w(D_t*{ D^{-1}_t})\beta)=\\&=&\jmath({{D}}^{-1}_t)(\jmath(D_t){ D^{-1}_t}\alpha\w\jmath(D_t){ D^{-1}_t}\beta)=\\&=&(\jmath({D}^{-1}_t)\circ\jmath(D_t))({ D^{-1}_t}\alpha\w{ D^{-1}_t}\beta)={ D^{-1}_t}\alpha\w { D^{-1}_t}\beta,\end{aligned}$$ [ since]{} ${ D^{-1}_t}*D_t=D_t*{ D^{-1}_t}={\bf 1}$.
\[convx3.8\] We fix another piece of notation. Let $A[\TT]$ be the polynomial ring in infinitely many indeterminates $\TT=(T_1,T_2,\ldots)$. For each $k$-tuple $I:=(i_1,\ldots, i_k)$ of positive integers, we denote by $\Delta_I(\TT):=\Delta_{(i_1,\ldots,i_k)}(\TT)$ the [*Schur polynomial*]{} $\det[(T_{i_j-i})_{1\leq i,j\leq k}]\in A[\TT]$ (setting $T_0=1$ and $T_j=0$, if $j<0$). By expanding $\Delta_I(\TT)$ along the last column, one sees that $\Delta_I(\TT)$ belongs to the ideal $(T_{i_k-1},\ldots, T_{i_k-k})$ of $A[\TT]$. In particular $\Delta_{(2,3,\ldots,h+1)}(\TT)\in (T_1,\ldots, T_h)$. If $D:=(D_0,D_1,\ldots, )$ is the sequence of coefficients of some $D_t\in{\cal S}_t(\wM)$ such that $D_0=id_{\wM}$, one defines $\Delta_I(D)$ to be the evaluation of $\Delta_I(\TT)$ at $D$ (via the substitution $T_i\mapsto D_i$).
\[conv3.9\] For each $i\geq 0$, define $\ovD_i\in End_A(\wM)$ via the equality ${ D^{-1}_t}=\sum_{i\geq 0}(-1)^i{\ovD}_it^i
$. By equating the coefficients of the same power of $t$ on both sides of the equation $D_t*{ D^{-1}_t}=1$, one gets $\ovD_0=D_0^{-1}$, while, for each $h\geq 1$: \_h-\_[h-1]{}D\_1+…+(-1)\^hD\_h=0, \[eq:invDt1\] so that, e.g., $\ovD_1=D_1$, $\ovD_2=D_1^2-D_2$. In general, one has (see [@Fu1], Appendix A): \_h=\_[(2,3,…,h+1)]{}(D).\[eq:invDt2\]
One expands both sides of the equality $
\jmath(D_t)(\alpha\wedge { D^{-1}_t}\beta)=D_t\alpha\wedge\beta
$, and then compares the coefficients of $t^h$ occurring on each side.
[ ]{} One has $
D_1\alpha\wedge D_0\beta=D_1(\alpha\wedge\beta)-D_0\alpha\wedge\ovD_1\beta$ and: $$D_2\alpha\wedge D_0\beta=D_2(\alpha\wedge\beta)-D_1(\alpha\wedge\ovD_1\beta)+D_0\alpha\wedge\ovD_2\beta.$$
Schubert Calculus on a Grassmann Algebra {#sect2}
========================================
\[recalling01\] From now on, $A$ will be assumed to be any graded ring $\bigoplus_{i\geq 0}A_i$ such that $A_0=\ZZ$. Let $X$ be an indeterminate over $A$, $M:=XA[X]$ and $M(\ttp):=M/\ttp M$, where $\ttp$ is either the $0$ polynomial or a monic polynomial $X^n-e_1X^{n-1}+\ldots +(-1)^ne_n\in A[X]$ such that $e_i\in A_i$. Then $M(\ttp)$ is a free $A$-module generated by ${\bm\ep}=(\ep^i)_{1\leq i\leq n}$, where $n$ is either $\deg(\ttp)$ if $\ttp\neq 0$, or $\infty$ if $\ttp= 0$.
\[not23\] Let ${\cal I}^k=\{I=(i_1,\ldots,i_k)\in\NN^k\,|\,1\leq i_1<\ldots<i_k\}$ (as in [@anderson], §5, Section 1, and [@Gat1]). The [*weight*]{} of $I\in{\cal I}^k$ is $wt(I)=\sum_{j=1}^k(i_j-j)$. It coincides with the weight of the associated partition $(i_k-k, i_{k-1}-(k-1),\ldots,i_1-1)$. If $I:=(i_1,\ldots,i_k)\in{\cal I}^k$, let $\w^I{\bm\ep}$ denote $\ikformep$. Each exterior power $\wkM(\ttp)$ is a free $A$-module with basis $\Bw^k{\bm\ep}:=\{\w^I\ep:I\in{\cal I}^k_n\}$. If $a\in A_h$, the [*weight*]{} of $a\cdot\w^I{\bm\ep}$ is, by definition, ${ h}+wt(I)$. Set $(\bw^kM({\tt p}))_w=\bigoplus_{0\leq h\leq w}\big(\bigoplus_{wt(I)=h}A_{w-h}\cdot\w^I{\bm \ep}\big)
$. Then $\wkM(\ttp)=\bigoplus_{w\geq 0}(\bw^k M({\tt p}))_w$, a graded $A$-module via [*weight*]{}. \[rec24\] By Proposition \[extder\] there is a unique sequence $D:=(D_0,D_1,\ldots)$ of $A$-endomor- phisms of $\wM(\ttp)$ such that i) (the $h^{th}$-order) [*Leibniz’s rule*]{} (\[eq:hleibrul\]) holds for each $h\geq 0$ and each $\alpha,\beta\in\wkM(\ttp)$ and ii) the [*initial conditions*]{} $D_h\ep^i=\ep^{i+h}$ are satisfied, for each $h\geq 0$ and each $ i\geq 1$. Notice that $D_i\circ D_j=D_j\circ D_i$ in $End_A(\wM(\ttp))$, as a simple induction shows.
\[prepierprop\][*The following formula holds: D\_h=\^[i\_1+h\_1]{}…\^[i\_k+h\_k]{},\[eq:prepier\] the sum over all $h$-tuples $(h_i)_{1\leq i\leq k}$ of non negative integers such that $h_1+\ldots+h_k=h$.* ]{} See [@LakTh] or, since equality (\[eq:prepier\]) is defined over the integers, use the same inductive proof as in [@Gat1], Proposition 2.3.
When expanding $D_h\ep^{i_1}\w\ldots\w \ep^{i_k}$, cancellations may occur on the right hand side of (\[eq:prepier\]), due to the $\ZZ_2$-symmetry of the $\wedge$-product. For instance: $$D_2(\ep^1\w \ep^2)=\ep^3\w \ep^2+\ep^2\w \ep^3+\ep^1\w \ep^4=\ep^1\w \ep^4.$$ The surviving summands are predicted by [*Pieri’s formula*]{} for $D_h$, a rule to speed up computations of “derivatives" of $k$-vectors.
[**Theorem (Pieri’s formula).**]{} \[pieri3.8\] [*[*Pieri’s formula*]{} holds: D\_h(\^[i\_1]{}…\^[i\_k]{})=\_[[(h\_i)P(I,h)]{}]{} \^[i\_1+h\_1]{}…\^[i\_k+h\_k]{}, \[eq:pieruno\] where, if $I=(i_1,\ldots,i_k)\in{\cal I}^k$, we denote by ${\cal P}(I,h)$ the set of all $k$-tuples of non negative integers $(h_1,\ldots,h_k)$ such that $
i_1+h_1<i_2\leq i_2+h_2<\ldots<i_{k-1}\leq i_k
$ and $h_1+\ldots+h_k=h$.* ]{}
See [@LakTh] or, since formula (\[eq:pieruno\]) is defined over the integers, use the same proof as in [@Gat1], Theorem 2.4.
\[ref4.7\] Let $A$ be as in \[recalling01\] and $A[\TT]$ be as in \[conv3.9\]. If $a\in A_l$, the [*degree*]{} of the monomial $aT_{i_1}^{m_1}\ldots T_{i_j}^{m_j}$ is [ defined to be]{} $l+m_1i_1+\ldots+m_ji_j$. Then $A[\TT]$ is itself a graded ring $\bigoplus_{h\geq 0}A[\TT]_h$, where $A[\TT]_h$ is the submodule of all elements of $A[\TT]$ of degree $h$. There is a natural evaluation map, $\ev_D:A[\TT]\rightarrow End_A(\wM(\ttp))$, sending $P\in A[\TT]$ to $P(D)$ (got by “substituting" $T_i\mapsto D_i$ into $P$). We denote by ${\cal A}^*(\wM(\ttp))$ the image of $\ev_D$ in $End_A(\wM(\ttp))$ and by ${\cal A}^*(\wkM(\ttp))$ the image of the natural restriction map $$\rho_k:{\cal A}^*(\wM(\ttp))\rightarrow End_A(\wkM(\ttp)),$$ given by $P(D)\mapsto (D)_{|_{\wkM(\ttp)}}$. Pieri’s formula implies [*Giambelli’s formula*]{}, a special case of the general determinantal formula stated in [@LakTh], Main Theorem, which reads, in this case, as: \^[i\_1]{}…\^[i\_k]{}=\_[(i\_1…i\_k)]{}(D)\^1…\^[k]{},\[eq:giambform\] where, as in \[conv3.9\], $
\Delta_{(i_1\ldots i_k)}(D)=\ev_D(\Delta_{(i_1\ldots i_k)}(\TT))$. We have hence [ shown]{} that:
[**Theorem.**]{}\[thm1rec\] [*The natural evaluation map $\ev_\kformep:{\cal A}^*(\wM(\ttp))\rightarrow\wkM(\ttp)$, mapping $P(D)\mapsto P(D)\kformep$ is surjective.*]{}
\[ref4.10\] It follows that $\ker(\rho_k)=\ker(\ev_\kformep)$ and then: \^\*(())=[[A]{}\^\*(())(\_)]{}. The induced map $\Pi_k:{\cal A}^*(\wkM(\ttp))\sra \wkM(\ttp)$, defined by $$P(D)+\ker\ev_\kformep\mapsto P(D)\kformep,$$ we call the [*Poincaré isomorphism*]{}.
\[prel211\] Let ${\cal I}^k_n=\{I\in{\cal I}^k\,\,|\,\, i_k\leq n\}$. A routine check shows that if $I=(i_1,\ldots, i_k)\in {\cal I}^k_n$ and $H\in{\cal P}(I,h)$ then $I+H:=(i_1+h_1,\ldots,i_k+h_k)\in {\cal I}^k$. Denote by ${\cal I}^{k,w}$ the set of all $I\in{\cal I}^k$ such that $wt(I)=w$. Combining Pieri’s formula (\[eq:pieruno\]) with Giambelli’s formula (\[eq:giambform\]), one has, for each $I\in{\cal I}^k$ and each $h\geq 0$: $$D_h\Delta_{I}(D)\kformep=D_h\cdot \w^I{\bm\ep}= \sum_{{H\in {\cal P}(I,h)}}
\w^{I+H}{\bm\ep}=\sum_{{H\in {\cal P}(I,h)}}
\Delta_{I+H}(D)\kformep,$$ proving the equality $
D_h\Delta_{I}(D)=\sum_{{H\in {\cal P}(I,h)}}
\Delta_{I+H}(D)
$ in the ring ${\cal A}^*(\wkM(\ttp))$.
\[rmklakth\] Let $Split^k_A(\ttp)$ be the universal splitting algebra of the monic polynomial $\ttp$ into the product of two monic polynomials, one of degree $k$. Let $\ttp={\tt p}_1{\tt q}$ be the universal splitting of $\ttp$ in $Split^k_A(\ttp)$, where $\deg(\ttp_1)=k$, and denote by $s_i$ the complete symmetric polynomial of degree $i$ in the universal roots of $\ttp_1$. Then $Split_A^k(\ttp)$ is generated, as an $A$-algebra, by $(s_i)_{i\geq 1}$ and the map ${\cal A}^*(\wkM(\ttp))\sra Split^k_A(\ttp)$, defined by $D_i\mapsto s_i$, is an $A$-algebra isomorphism. This is because of the module structure of $\bw^kA[X]$ over the ring of symmetric functions defined and studied in [@LakTh]. In fact our formula (\[eq:pieruno\]) is the same as Pieri’s formula (2.1.1) of [@LakTh], after replacing $s_i$ with $D_i$. Let $p:E\sra {\cal Y}$ be a vector bundle of rank $n$ and let $p_k:G(k,E)\sra {\cal Y}$ be the Grassmann bundle over ${\cal Y}$ of $k$-planes in the fibers of $E$. In [@LakTh1] the authors show that, if $A:=A^*({\cal Y})$ is the Chow ring of ${\cal Y}$ and $\ttp=X^n+c_1X^{n-1}+\ldots+c_n\in A[X]$ is such that $c_i:=c_i(E)$ are the Chern classes of $E$, there is an isomorphism $Split_A^k(\ttp)\sra A^*(G(k,E))$. Let ${\cal Q}_k$ [ be]{} the universal quotient bundle over $G(k,E)$. Then, the same proof as in [@LakTh1] works using derivations: by the basis theorem ([@Fu1], p. 268) the unique $A$-module homomorphism $\iota_k: A^*(G(k,E))\sra {\cal A}^*(\wkM(\ttp))$, mapping $\Delta_I(c({\cal Q}_k-p_k^*E)$ to $ \Delta_I(D)$, is certainly an isomorphism. To check that it is also a ring homomorphism, [ it is sufficient]{} to check it on products of the form $c_h({\cal Q}_k-p_k^*E)\cdot\Delta_I(c({\cal Q}_k-p_k^*E)$: $$\begin{aligned}
\iota_k(c_h({\cal Q}_k-p_k^*E)\cdot \Delta_I(c({\cal Q}_k-p_k^*E))&=&\iota_k\big(\sum_{H\in {\cal P}(I,h)}\Delta_{I+H}(c({\cal Q}_k-p_k^*E))\big)=\\
=\sum_{H\in {\cal P}(I,h)}\Delta_{I+H}(D)=D_h\Delta_I(D)&=&\iota_k(c_h({\cal Q}_k-p_k^*E)\cdot \iota_k(\Delta_I((c({\cal Q}_k-p_k^*E)),\end{aligned}$$ by [@Fu1], Proposition 14.6.1, and \[prel211\].
\[rmk312\] Theorem \[thm1rec\] can be proven by showing that for each $I\in{\cal I}^k$, there exists $G_{I}\in A[\TT]$ such that $
\w^I{\bm\ep}=G_{I}(D)\cdot \kformep.
$ This can be achieved via [*integration by parts*]{} (\[eq:intpart2\]), as follows. [ We say]{} that $\wkM({\tt p})$ enjoys the property ${\bf G}_j$, for some $1\leq j\leq k$, if, for each $
i_{j+1}<\ldots <i_{k}
$ such that $j<i_{j+1}$, there exists a polynomial $G_{j,i_{j+1},\ldots,i_k}\in A[\TT]$ such that $
\ep^1\wedge\ldots\wedge \ep^j\wedge \ep^{i_{j+1}}\wedge\ldots\wedge \ep^{i_k}=G_{j,i_{j+1},\ldots,i_k}(D)\cdot \ep^1\wedge\ldots\wedge \ep^k.
$ We shall show, by descending induction, that $\wkM({\tt p})$ enjoys ${\bf G}_j$ for each $1\leq j\leq k$. In fact ${\bf G}_k$ is trivially true.
Let us suppose that ${\bf G}_j$ holds for some $2\leq j\leq k-1$. Then ${\bf G}_{j-1}$ holds. In fact, for each $j-1<i_{j}<\ldots<i_k$, $$\ep^1\wedge\ldots\wedge \ep^{j-1}\wedge \ep^{i_j}\wedge\ldots
\wedge \ep^{i_k}=D_{i_j-j}(\ep^1\wedge\ldots\wedge \ep^{j-1}\wedge \ep^j)\wedge \ep^{i_{j+1}}\wedge\ldots\wedge \ep^{i_k},$$ basically by [@Gat1], Corollary 2.5. By [ a]{}pplying integration by parts (\[eq:intpart2\]), one gets: $$\ep^1\wedge\ldots\wedge \ep^{j-1}\wedge \ep^{i_j}\wedge\ldots
\wedge \ep^{i_k}=\sum_{h=0}^{i_j-j}D_{i_j-j-h}( \ep^1\wedge\ldots\wedge \ep^j\wedge
\ovD_h( \ep^{i_{j+1}}\wedge\ldots\wedge \ep^{i_k})).$$ But $\ovD_h( \ep^{i_{j+1}}\wedge\ldots\wedge \ep^{i_k})$ is a sum of elements of the form $
\ep^{h_{j+1}}\wedge\ldots\wedge \ep^{h_k}
$, with $j<h_{j+1}<\ldots<h_j$. Then, by the inductive hypothesis, one concludes that ${\bf G}_{j-1}$ holds, too. In particular ${\bf G}_1$ holds and the claim is proven.
Presentations for Intersection Rings
====================================
[**Proposition.**]{}\[lemma32\] [*Let ${ D^{-1}_t}:=\displaystyle\sum_{j\geq 0}(-1)^j\ovD_jt^j$ be the inverse of $D_t\in{\cal S}_t(\wM(\ttp))$. Then ${\ovD_h}_{|_{\wkM(\ttp)}}=0$, for each $h>k$.* ]{}
By induction on $k$. If $k=0$ one has $
\ovD_h(m)=0,
$ for each $h\geq 2$ and each $m\in M(\ttp)$. In fact, if $m\in M(\ttp)$, ${D_t}m=\sum_{i\geq 0} D_{1}^im\cdot t^i$. Therefore ${ D_t^{-1}}m=1-D_1m\cdot t$, i.e. ${\ovD_h}_{|_{M(\ttp)}}=0$ for each $h\geq 2$. Suppose now the property true for $k-1$ and let $h>k$. Any $m_{k}\in\wkM(\ttp)$ is a finite $A$-linear combination of elements of the form $m\wedge m_{k-1}$, for suitable $m\in M(\ttp)$ and $m_{k-1}\in\bigwedge^{k-1}M(\ttp)$. It suffices then to check the property for elements of this form. One has: $
\ovD_h(m\wedge m_{k-1})=\sum_{j=0}^h\ovD_{j}m\wedge \ovD_{h-j}(m_{k-1}).
$ As $\ovD_jm=0$, for $j\geq 2$, it follows that $
\sum_{j=0}^h\ovD_{j}m\wedge \ovD_{h-j}m_{k-1}=\ovD_1m\wedge \ovD_{h-1}m_{k-1}.
$ By the inductive hypothesis, this last term vanishes as well, because $h-1>k-1$.
In the sequel $M$ will be as in \[recalling01\] (i.e. $M(\ttp)$ for $\ttp=0$).
[**Proposition.**]{}\[numgen\] [*The ring ${\cal A}^*(\bw^kM)$ is generated by $(D_1,D_2,\ldots, D_{k})$ as an $A$-algebra.*]{}
Let ${ D_t^{-1}}=\sum_{i\geq 0}(-1)^i\ovD_it^i$ be the inverse of $D_t$. First one observes that, for each $h\geq 1$, $
\ovD_h=\ev_D(\Delta_{(2,3,\ldots,h+1)}(\TT))=\Delta_{(2,3,\ldots,h+1)}(D)
$ and that $\Delta_{(2,3,\ldots,h+1)}(\TT)\in A[\TT]$ lands in fact in the subring $A[T_1,\ldots, T_h]$ of $A[\TT]$, by Remark \[convx3.8\]. One knows that $\ovD_{k+j}=0$ in ${\cal A}^*(\wkM({\tt p}))$ for each $j\geq 1$ (Proposition \[lemma32\]). Working modulo $\ker(\rho_k)$ (see \[ref4.7\]) we may hence write: $$\sum_{i\geq 0} D_it^i={1\over 1-\ovD_1t+\ovD_2t^2+\ldots+(-1)^k \ovD_kt^k}.$$ Define $\widetilde{D}_j(\TT_k)\in A[T_1,\ldots, T_k]\subseteq A[\TT]$ as \_[j0]{} \_j(\_k)t\^i=[11-\_[(2)]{}()t+\_[(23)]{}()t\^2+…+ (-1)\^k\_[(23…k+1)]{}()t\^k]{}.\[eq:genfunzdtil\] One clearly has that $D_j-\widetilde{D}_j({\bf D}_k)\in\ker(\rho_k)$ for each $j\geq 0$. Moreover, if $1\leq j\leq k$, $\widetilde{D}_j(\TT_k)=T_j$, proving the claim.
In ${\cal A}^*(\Bw^2M)$ one has, using the recipe (\[eq:genfunzdtil\]):
\_3(\_2):=\_3(T\_1,T\_2)=T\_2T\_1-T\_1(T\_1\^2-T\_2)=-T\_1\^3+2T\_1T\_2\[eq:d3(d)\] and \_4(\_2)=\_3T\_1-T\_2(T\_1\^2-T\_2)=(-T\_1\^3+2T\_1T\_2)T\_1-T\_2(T\_1\^2-T\_2)=-T\_1\^4+T\_1\^2T\_2+T\_2\^2.\[eq:d4(d)\]
\[noreleqnk\][**Proposition.**]{} [*Let $P\in A[T_1,\ldots,T_k]_w\subset A[\TT]_w$ such that $P(D)\kformep=0$ ($w\geq 0$). Then $P=0$.* ]{} Any polynomial $P\in A[T_1,\ldots,T_k]$ of degree $w$ is a unique $A$-linear combination of $\Delta_I(\TT)$, with $I\in{\cal I}^{k,w}$ (since the Schur polynomials $\{\Delta_I(\TT)\,|\, I\in{\cal I}^k\}$ are a $\ZZ$-basis of $\ZZ[\TT]$). Hence $
P=\sum_{I\in {\cal I}^{k,w}} a_I\Delta_I(\TT)
$ for some (unique!) $a_I\in A_{w-wt(I)}$ and if $P(D)\ep^1\w\ldots\w \ep^{k}=0$, then: $$0=P(D)\cdot \ep^1\w\ldots \w \ep^{k}=\sum_{I\in {\cal I}^{k,w}} a_I\Delta_I(D)\cdot \ep^1\w\ldots \w \ep^{k}=\sum_{I\in {\cal I}^{k,w}} a_I\cdot \w^I{\bm\ep}{ .}$$ Since $\{\w^I{\bm\ep}\}_{I\in I^{k,w}}$ are $A$-linearly independent, $a_I=0$ for all $I\in {\cal I}^{k,w}$, i.e. $P=0$.
\[presinf\][**Corollary.**]{} [*[ The map \[ref4.7\], $\ev_D:A[\TT]\lra {\cal A}^*(\wM)$ is an isomorphism]{}. Hence: \^\*(M)=A\[D\]:=A\[D\_1,D\_2,…\]A\[\],\[eq:presinfinf\] the polynomial ring in infinitely many indeterminates, while \^\*(\^kM)=A\[[**D**]{}\_k\]:=A\[D\_1,D\_2,…,D\_k\].\[eq:presinfk\]* ]{}
Apply Proposition \[noreleqnk\]. One may assume that $P\in A[\TT]$ is homogeneous of degree $w\geq 0$. Suppose that $\ev_D(P)=P(D)=0\in {\cal A}^*(\wM)$. There is $k\geq 1$ such that $P\in A[T_1,T_2,\ldots, T_{k}]$. But then $
P(D)\cdot \kformep=0
$ implies $P=0$, because otherwise one would have a relation (of degree $w$), whence (\[eq:presinfinf\]). Since $
{\cal A}^*(\bw^k M)=\rho_k\big({\cal A}^*(\bw M)\big)
$ and, by Proposition \[lemma32\], $\rho_k(\ovD_h)=0$ for all $h\geq k+1$, one gets the presentation (\[eq:presinfk\]). \[ref5.6\] For each $i\geq 1$, let $
\nu^{qn+i}=({\tt p}(X))^qX^{i}
$. Then ${\bm\nu}=(\nu^1,\nu^2,\ldots)$ is an $A$-basis of $M:=M(0)$, such that $\nu^i=X^i$ for each $1\leq i\leq n$. Let $
\wM\w {\tt p}M:=\bigoplus_{k\geq 1}\Bw^{k-1}M\w {\tt p}M
$ be the bilateral ideal of $\wM$ generated by ${\tt p}$. As ${\tt p}M$ is the submodule of $M$ generated by $\nu^i$ with $i>n$, the submodule $
\Bw^{k-1}M\w {\tt p}M
$ is the $A$-submodule of $\bw^kM$ generated by $\ikfornu$, with $i_k>n$. The natural map $
\wM\sra \wM({\tt p})\quad
$ (resp. $\wkM\sra \wkM({\tt p})$) is surjective and has kernel $\wM\w {\tt p}M$ (resp. $\bw^{k-1}M\w {\tt p}M$). Hence, one has canonical isomorphisms $$\Bw M({\tt p})={\wM\over \wM \w {\tt p}M}\qquad and \qquad \wkM({\tt p})={\wkM\over \Bw^{k-1}M\w {\tt p}M}.$$ Let $\phi_k:\wkM\sra\wkM(\ttp)$ be the canonical projection and let $$J_k({\tt p}):=\{ P(D)\in A[D_1,\ldots, D_k]\,|\, P(D)\ep^1\w\ldots \w \ep^{k}\in \bw^{k-1}M\w {\tt p}M\},$$ [ which]{} is an ideal of $A[D_1,\ldots, D_k]={\cal A}^*(\wkM)$.
\[thme1310\] [*For each $j\geq 1$, let $$\widetilde{D}_{n-k+j}({\bf D}_k,\ttp)=\widetilde{D}_{n-k+j}({\bf D}_k)+\sum_{i=1}^{n-k+j}c_i\widetilde{D}_{n-k+j-i}({\bf D}_k).$$ Then: J\_k([p]{})=(\_[n-k+1]{}([**D**]{}\_k,),…,\_[n]{}([**D**]{}\_k,)). \[eq:preintring\]* ]{} Let $D'_t=\sum_{i\geq 0}D'_it^i$ be the unique derivation on $\wM$ such that $D'_t\nu^j=\sum_{i\geq 0}\nu^{i+j}t^i$. Then
1. $D'_i\in {\cal A}^*(\wM(\ttp))$ for each $i\geq 0$,
2. $\rho_k(D'_i)=D_i$ if $1\leq i\leq n-k$ and
\_k([D]{}’\_[n-k+j]{})=\_[n-k+j]{}([**D**]{}\_k,),j1. \[eq:eqpres\] To check i), is sufficient to show that each $D'_i$ is an $A$-polynomial expression in the $D_i$s. As a matter of fact, if $i\leq n-k$: $$\begin{aligned}
D'_i(\kformX)&=&D'_i(\nu^1\w\ldots\w\nu^k)=\nu^1\w\ldots\w\nu^{k-1}\w\nu^{k+j}=\nonumber\\
&=&X^1\w\ldots\w X^{k-1}\w X^{k+i}=D_i(\kformX),\label{eq:final1}\end{aligned}$$ and, for each $j\geq 1$:
$
{D}'_{n-k+j}(\kformX)={D}'_{n-k+j}\nu^1\w\ldots\w\nu^k=\nu^1\w\ldots\w\nu^{k-1}\w \nu^{n+j}=
$
$
=X^1\w\ldots\w X^{k-1}\w (X^{n+j}+c_1X^{n+j-1}+\ldots+c_{n+j-k}X^{k}+\ldots+c_{n}X^{j})=
$
$
=X^1\w\ldots\w X^{k-1}\w X^{n+j}+\sum_{i=1}^{n-k+j} c_i(X^1\w\ldots\w X^{k-1}\w X^{n+j-i})=
$ \[eq:final2\]
Therefore formulas (\[eq:final1\]) and (\[eq:final2\]) show i), (\[eq:final1\]) shows ii) and (\[eq:final2\]) shows iii) above. We can now prove equality (\[eq:preintring\]). Clearly $(\widetilde{D}_{n-k+j}({\bf D}_k,\ttp))_{j\geq 1}\subseteq J_k({\tt p})$, because: $$\begin{aligned}
\widetilde{D}_{n-k+j}({\bf D}_k,\ttp)\kfornu&=&D'_{n-k+j}\kfornu=\\&=&\nu^1\w\ldots\w\nu^{k-1}\w\nu^{n+j}\in \Bw^{k-1}M\w {\tt p}M.\end{aligned}$$ To show that $J_k({\tt p})\subseteq (\widetilde{D}_{n-k+j}({\bf D}_k,\ttp))_{j\geq 1}$ as well, let $P\in A[T_1,\ldots,T_k]\subseteq A[\TT]$ such that $P({ D}')\kformX\in \Bw^{k-1}M\w {\tt p}M$. Without loss of generality one may assume that $P$ is homogeneous of degree $w$. Then $$P(D')\kfornu=\sum a_I\Delta_I(D')\kfornu=\sum \ikfornu,$$ where last sum is over all $(i_1,\ldots, i_k)\in{\cal I}^{k,{ w}}$ such that $i_k>n$. By \[convx3.8\], $\Delta_I(D')$ belongs to the ideal $({D}'_{i_k-1},\ldots,{D}'_{i_k-k})$ and, since $i_k>n$, one sees that if $\Delta_I(D')\kfornu \in \Bw^{k-1}M\w {\tt p}M$, then $\Delta_I(D')\in (\widetilde{D}_{n-k+j}({\bf D}'_k))_{j\geq 1}$. The relation $$D'_{n+1}-D'_n\ovD'_1+\ldots+(-1)^{n-k+1} D'_{n-k+1}\ovD'_k=0,$$ holding in ${\cal A}^*(\wkM(\ttp))$, implies that ${D}'_{n+1}\big(\wkM(\ttp)\big)\in ({D}'_{n-k+1},\ldots,{D}'_{n})\wkM(\ttp)$ (here $(-1)^i\ovD'_i$, as in \[conv3.9\], stands for the $i^{th}$ coefficient of ${(D_t')}^{-1}$).
By induction ${D}'_{n+j}\big(\wkM(\ttp)\big)\in({D}'_{n-k+1},\ldots,{D}'_{n})\bw^kM$ as well. Because of (\[eq:eqpres\]), one hence has $
J_k(\ttp)\subseteq (\rho_k(D'_{n-k+1}),\ldots,\rho_k(D'_{n}))=(\widetilde{D}_{n-k+1}({\bf D}_k,\ttp),\ldots, \widetilde{D}_{n}({\bf D}_k,\ttp)),
$ i.e. $J_k({\tt p})$ is given precisely by (\[eq:preintring\]).
\[generalpres\][*The following isomorphism holds: A\^\*(([p]{}))=[A\[D\_1,…, D\_k\](\_[n-k+1]{}([**D**]{}\_k,),…, \_[n]{}([**D**]{}\_k,))]{}.\[eq:presfinmp\]* ]{} Notation as in \[ref5.6\]. [ Recall that by Corollary \[presinf\], formula (\[eq:presinfk\]), $D_1,\ldots, D_k$, are algebraically independent elements of ${\cal A}^*(\wkM)$]{}. Clearly, $P(D)\in\ker(\phi_k)$ if and only if $P(D)\kformep\in \bw^{k-1}M\w \ttp M$, i.e. if and only if $P(D)\in J_k(\ttp)$. Hence $
{\cal A}^*(\wkM(\ttp))={{\cal A}^*(\wkM)/J_k(\ttp)},
$ and the conclusion follows by Corollary \[presinf\] and Theorem \[thme1310\].
By [@LakTh1], the polynomial $\ttp$, as above, splits in the ring ${\cal A}^*(\wkM(\ttp))[X]$ as the product $(X^k+D_1X^{k-1}+\ldots+D_k)\cdot {\tt q}$, where ${\tt q}$ is a monic polynomial of degree $n-k$ (with ${\cal A}^*(\wkM(\ttp))[X]$-coefficients).
\[ex89\] Let $M=XA[X]$ and ${\tt p}(X)=X^4+c_1X^3+c_2X^2+c_3X+c_4$, $c_i\in A_i$. Then one has: \^\*(\^2M([p]{}))=[A\[D\_1,D\_2\](\_3([**D**]{}\_2,),\_4([**D**]{}\_2,))]{},\[eq:irg24\] where
$\widetilde{D}_3({\bf D}_2,\ttp)=\widetilde{D}_3({\bf D}_2)+c_1\widetilde{D}_2({\bf D}_2)+c_2\widetilde{D}_1({\bf D}_2)+c_3=2D_1D_2-D_1^3+c_1D_2+c_2D_1+c_3$
and
$
\widetilde{D}_4({\bf D}_2,\ttp)=\widetilde{D}_4({\bf D}_2)+c_1\widetilde{D}_3({\bf D}_2)+c_2\widetilde{D}_2({\bf D}_2)+c_3\widetilde{D}_1({\bf D}_2)+c_4=$
$=D_2^2+D_1^2D_2-D_1^4+c_1(2D_1D_2-D_1^3)+c_2D_2+c_3D_1+c_4$,
which we obtained from (\[eq:d3(d)\]) and (\[eq:d4(d)\]). Let us enumerate some particular cases.
If $A=\ZZ$, thought of as a graded ring concentrated in degree $0$, then $c_i=0$, $1\leq i\leq 4$. Then ${\tt p}=X^4$ and presentation (\[eq:irg24\]) becomes: $${\cal A}^*(\bw^2M(X^4))={A[D_1,D_2]\over(2D_1D_2-D_1^3, D_2^2+D_1^2D_2-D_1^4)},$$ which coincides (Cf. [@Gat1], [@Gat2]) with the presentation of the integral cohomology ring of the grassmannian $G(2,4)$ of $2$-planes in $\CC^4$ (or of the grassmannian of lines $G(1,\PP^3)$ in the complex projective $3$-space).
If $A=\ZZ[q]$, and ${\tt p}(X)=X^4+q$, then (\[eq:irg24\]) reads: $${\cal A}^*(\bw^2M(X^4+q))={\ZZ[q][D_1,D_2]\over(2D_1D_2-D_1^3, D_2^2+D_1^2D_2-D_1^4+q)},$$ which is the Witten-Siebert-Tian presentation of the [*small quantum cohomology ring*]{} $QH^*(G(2,4))$ ([@Wi], [@SiebTi], [@Ber1]; see also [@Gat1]);
If $\pi:E\sra {\cal Y}$ is a holomorphic vector bundle of rank $4$ on a smooth complex variety of dimension $m\geq 0$, and ${\tt p}(X)= X^4+\pi^*c_1X^3+\pi^*c_2X^2+\pi^*c_3X+\pi^*c_4\in A^*({\cal Y})[X]$, where $c_i$ are the Chern classes of $E$ as in [@Fu1], p. 141, then $M({\tt p})=A_*(\PP(E))$, $A=A^*({\cal Y})$ and $D_1=c_1(O_{\PP(E)}(-1))$, thought of as operator on $A_*({\cal Y})$; in this case (\[eq:irg24\]) gives the presentation of $A^*(G(2,E))$ (Cf. \[rmklakth\]). If ${\cal Y}$ is a point, then $A^*({\cal Y})=\ZZ$, $c_i=0$ and one recovers once again the presentation of the Chow ring of the grassmannian $G(2,4)$.
Let $A=\ZZ[y_1,y_2,y_3,y_4]$ and $
\ttp(X)=\prod_{i=1}^4(X-y_i+y_1)+q\in A[q].
$ In this case presentation (\[eq:irg24\]) is that the [*quantum equivariant cohomology ring*]{} $QH^*_T(G(2,4))$ of the Grassmannian $G(2,4)$ under the action of a $4$-dimensional compact or algebraic torus via a diagonal action with only isolated fixed points, as studied by Mihalcea in [@Mihalcea2], Theorem 4.2, setting $p=2$ and $m=4$. This is compatible with the main result of the paper [@GatSant2] (Theorem 3.7), with Theorem 2.9 of [@Gat1] and is now a consequence of [@formalism]. Notice that our generators are not the same as used in [@Mihalcea2] (Cf. [@GatSant2]).
[99]{}
A. Bertram, [*Quantum Schubert Calculus*]{}, Adv. Math. [**128**]{}, (1997) 289–305.
W. Fulton, [*Intersection Theory*]{}, Springer-Verlag, 1984.
W. Fulton, [*Equivariant Intersection Theory*]{}, Notes by Dave Anderson, Mich. Univ., 2005–2006 ([http://www.math.lsa.umich.edu/\~danderson/notes.html]{}).
L. Gatto, [*Schubert Calculus via Hasse–Schmidt Derivations*]{}, Asian J. Math., [**9**]{}, No. 3, (2005), 315–322.
L. Gatto, [*Schubert Calculus: an Algebraic Introduction*]{}, Instituto de Matemática Pura e Aplicada, Rio de Janeiro, 2005.
L. Gatto, T. Santiago, [*Equivariant Schubert Calculus*]{}, Preprint Politecnicodi Torino, n. 11, 2006, ( [http://calvino.polito.it/\~gatto/preprints.htm]{}).
A. Knutson, T. Tao [*Puzzles and (equivariant) cohomology of Grassmannians*]{}, Duke Math. J. [**119**]{}, no. 2 (2003), 221–260.
D. Laksov, A. Thorup, [*A Determinantal Formula for the Exterior Powers of the Polynomial Ring*]{}, Indiana University Mathematics Journal, 2006, (to appear).
D. Laksov, A. Thorup, [*Schubert Calculus on Grassmannians and Exterior Products*]{}, preprint, 2005.
D. Laksov, [*The formalism of equivariant Schubert Calculus*]{}, Preprint, 2006.
L. C. Mihalcea, [*Giambelli Formulae for the Equivariant Quantum Cohomology of the Grassmannian*]{}, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. (to appear) [arXiv:math.CO/0506335 v2, 2004]{}
T. Santiago, [*Schubert Calculus on a Grassmann Algebra*]{}, Ph.D. Thesis, Politecnico di Torino, 2006.
B. Siebert, G. Tian, [*On Quantum Cohomology rings of Fano manifolds and a formula of Vafa and Intrilligator*]{}, Asian J. Math [**1**]{} (1997), 679–695.
E. Witten, [*The Verlinde Algebra and the cohomology of the Grassmannian*]{}, in “Geometry, Topology and Physics", Conference Proceedings and Lecture Notes in Geometric Topology, Vol. IV, pp. 357-422, International Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995.
Dipartimento di Matematica, Politecnico di Torino, C.so Duca degli Abruzzi, 24,
10129, Torino
[^1]: Work partially sponsored by PRIN “Geometria sulle Varietà Algebriche" (Coordinatore A. Verra), INDAM-GNSAGA and ScuDo, Politecnico di Torino.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The Electronic Product Code (EPC) Network is an important part of the Internet of Things. The Physical Mark-Up Language (PML) is to represent and de-scribe data related to objects in EPC Network. The PML documents of each component to exchange data in EPC Network system are XML documents based on PML Core schema. For managing theses huge amount of PML documents of tags captured by Radio frequency identification (RFID) readers, it is inevitable to develop the high-performance technol-ogy, such as filtering and integrating these tag data. So in this paper, we propose an approach for meas-uring the similarity of PML documents based on Bayesian Network of several sensors. With respect to the features of PML, while measuring the similarity, we firstly reduce the redundancy data except information of EPC. On the basis of this, the Bayesian Network model derived from the structure of the PML documents being compared is constructed.'
title: 'Measuring the similarity of PML documents with RFID-based sensors'
---
[**WANG Zhong-qin**]{} received the Bachelor of Electrical Engineering and Automation (Intelligent Building) from Nanjing Jinling Institute of Technology, Jiangsu, China in 2006. He is currently pursuing the Master degree in Computer Software and Theory from Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications. His research interests include data clustering, similarity computation, data management and data analysis of network.
[**YE Ning**]{} received the BSc in Computer Science from NanJing University, MSc in School of Computer & Engineering from Southeast University, and Ph.D. in Institute of Computer Science from Nanjing University of Post and Telecommunications, China, where, she is currently a professor. Professor YE Ning is also a senior member of CCF and a member of pervasive computing specialty committee in China. She was a Visiting Researcher in Department of Computer Science, University of Victoria, Canada in 2010. Her research focuses on the security and information processing of network.
[**Reza Malekian**]{} is a Senior Lecturer in Department of Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering at University of Pretoria. Previously, he was an Assistant Professor of Computer Science and Engineering at University for Information Science and Technology St. Paul the Apostle, Republic of Macedonia and a Postdoctoral Fellow in Faculty of Computing, Universiti Teknoligi Malaysia (Erasmus Partner). [**ZHAO Ting-ting**]{} received the Bachelor Degree in Digital Media Technology from Tongda College of Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Jiangsu, China in 2012. She is currently pursuing the Master degree in Computer Software and Theory at Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications.
[**WANG Ru-chuan**]{} is a professor and tutor of Ph.D.candidate of Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications,interested in VR,graphics and image,the security of network and mobile agent technology,computer network and grid computing and sensor network.
Introduction
============
The Internet of Things (IoT) is a novel network architecture that is rapidly gaining attention in the scenario [@1].The Physical Mark-Up Language (PML) is a collection of common, standardized XML vocabularies to represent and describe information related to EPC Network enabled objects as presented by [@2]. The documents of each component to exchange data in EPC Network system are XML documents based on PML Core schema, and this type document is called the PML document as described by [@3]. Among them, the purpose of the PML Core schema is to provide a standardized format for the exchange of the data captured by the sensors in an Auto-ID infrastructure, e.g. RFID readers. PML is to be regarded as the complementary vocabularies for business transactions or any other XML application libraries, which include a new library composed of relevant definitions about EPC Network system, rather than to replace the XML to be a new markup language.
EPC tags to identify each of objects are adapted by Auto-ID Center. Different sorts of sensors which equipped on shops, warehouses, workshops and so on [@4], are to acquire EPC data and other information, such as temperature and geography location. It is essential for EPC network to process these data signed by PML documents at speed of hundreds of millions per second. For managing theses huge data stream and reduce network traffic, it is inevitable to develop the high-performance technology for managing these PML documents, such as implementing a joint forensics-scheduling scheme[@5], applying a multi-layered algorithm to manage real-time data [@6], or compressing the amount of data, filtering and integrating these tag data.
For above purpose, one of the effective methods is clustering as presented by [@7], which could depend on the structure and semantics of these data. Indeed, the similarity computation, which measures the similarity of the compared PML documents, is the foundation of the clustering method. In this paper, we mainly focus on the similarity computation of PML documents. Many researches have proposed a wide range of algorithms for XML similarity computation, the kind of technique being used mainly include ED-based (Tree Edit Distance), IR-based (Information Retrieval) and others (e.g., edge matching, path similarity, etc.) to measure similarity of the XML documents.
Some of above methods of XML similarity mainly concern on the structural properties of XML data and disregard element/attribute values of XML[@8], but many others consider values in their similarity computations. With respect to XML documents which are less structurally disparate (they might originate from the same data source, and might even conform to the same grammar), similarity computation based on structure and content is a favorable method [@9]. As follow, we introduce algorithms of structure-and-content method.
Liang and Yokota[@10] provided an approximate XML similarity method based on leaf nodes (leaf node values in particular), entitled LAX (Leafclustering based Approximate XML join algorithm). Kade and Heuser[@11] developed a method for comparing XML documents as documents lists. Weis and Naumann[@12]put forward a method entitled Dogmatix for comparing XML elements (and consequently documents) based on their direct values, as well as corresponding parent and children similarities. An approach for document/pattern comparison, developed in the context of data integration and XML querying, is proposed by Dorneles et al.[@13]. Leitao[@14] provided a probabilistic approach, using a Bayesian network to combine the probabilities of children and descendents being duplicates, for a given pair of XML elements in the documents being compared. The similarity between two XML documents corresponds to the probabilities of their root nodes being duplicates.
PML document management in highly dynamic environments in EPC network systems is a hard task. In this environment, documents change very frequently, both in content and structure. Additionally, the same information may be represented in documents from different sources, leading to (partial or total) overlap of documents. Dealing with these overlaps and/or duplications in a dynamic environment is challenging in many aspects. In this paper, we improve the method of XML Fuzzy Duplicate Detection proposed by Leitao in accordance with the features of PML document, and propose a method of measuring the similarity of PML documents based on Bayesian Network. It not only considers the duplicate status of children, but rather the probability of descendants being duplicates. With respect to the features of PML, while measuring the similarity, we firstly reduce the redundancy data except information of EPC. On the basis of this, the Bayesian Network model derived from the structure of the PML documents being compared is constructed. And this model has taken into consideration not only the EPC values contained in the PML but also their internal structure. Then the similarity between two PML documents could be deduced. Finally, simulations show the proposed algorithm is able to maintain high precision and recall values.
The remainder of the article is organized as follows. In Sec.2, we describe the background of The remainder of the article is organized as follows. In Sec.2, we describe the background of PML documents and Bayesian network. In Sec.3, we present the Bayesian network for PML similarity computation, including the relationship between PML documents similarity and Bayesian network probability, redundancy reduction of PML documents, Bayesian network model for PML documents and the algorithm of constructing Bayesian network model, and elucidate how PML similarity measure is performed using the proposed Bayesian network. Section 4 presents our prototype and simulative tests. Section 5 concludes the paper and outlines future research directions.
Background
==========
PML document
------------
In order to stress the need for relatedness assessment in PML document comparisons, we consider the example in Fig. 1(a) and Fig. 2(a). It depicts PML document of data captured by RFID readers. RFID readers capture the Electronic Product Code stored on the individual Auto-ID compliant tags (e.g. 1:2.24.404 and 1:12.8.128).
PML document should enable to elaborate the process that RFID readers acquire data,including where is the certain RFID reader, which is identified by a unique identifier (e.g. 1:4.16.36), when certain tags in its read range are observed (e.g. 2002-11-06T13:04:34-06:00) and so on. Each such observation might need to be labeled with the command that was issued to trigger the observation (e.g. READ\_PALLET\_TAGS\_ONLY) and a unique label to reference a certain observation (e.g. $00000001$).
Within the EPC Network, RFID readers are one of the main components. The data they capture are routed within the EPC Network from readers to Savant as described by [@15] (the Savant is a middleware system which requests from upper application and receives data from sensors.) ,from one Savant to other, from Savant to the EPC Information Service. To standardize the mark-up of those captured data, PML document needs to adequately represent the observed values.
XML documents represent hierarchically structured information and can be modeled as Ordered Labeled Trees (OLTs)[@16]. In the OLTs, nodes represent XML elements and are labeled with corresponding element tag names. Element attributes mark the nodes of their containing elements. Some studies have considered OLTs with distinct attribute nodes, labeled with corresponding attribute names[@17]. Attribute nodes appear as children of their encompassing element nodes, sorted by attribute name, and appearing before all sub-element siblings[@18]. So we reference the XML document’s OLTs and describe the PML document’s OLTs in Fig.1 (b) and Fig.2 (b). Element/attribute values are also considered in the comparison process following the application of structureandcontent. As an example, consider the tree representation of two PML elements represented in Fig. 1(b) and Fig. 2(b) (Nodes are labeled by their PML tag name and an index for future reference). Both trees represent XML elements named sensor. They nest further XML elements representing ID and Observation. An Observation consists of ID, Command, DateTime and Tag, represented as children PML elements of Observation. And a Tag also consists of ID and other elements which might involve other children elements. All of those elements have a text node which stores the actual data. For instance, DateTime has a text node containing ‘2002-11-06T 13:04:34-06:00’ as string value.
{width="8cm" height="12cm"}
![Representation of PML document of tags with data captured by RFID readers []{data-label="Representation of PML document of tags with data captured by RFID readers"}](Fig2.jpg){width="8cm" height="12cm"}
Bayesian network
-----------------
Bayesian networks (BNs) provide a graphical formalism to explicitly represent the dependencies among the variables of a domain, thus providing a concise specification of a joint probability distribution as described by [@16; @17]. The network structure of the Bayesian network (belief networks or Bayes nets for short), belonging to the family of probabilistic graphical models (GMs), is an DAG (Directed Acyclic Graph), where each node represents an attribute or data variables and the arcs represent the probabilistic dependency relation between attribute nodes. The relationship of complex variables in specific issues is represented by a network structure, reflecting dependency relationship between variables in the problem areas. In addition to the DAG structure, which is often considered as the “qualitative” part of the model, one needs to specify the “quantitative” parameters of the model. The parameters are described in a manner which is consistent with a Markovian property, where the conditional probability distribution (CPD) at each node depends only on its parents as presented by [@18]. A mathematic model is used to express Bayesian network as follows: $$B=(V, E, P)$$ The set of collection of random variables is defined as: $$V=(V_{1}, V_{2},...,V_{n})$$ The collection of directed edges is defined as: $$E=(V_{i}V_{j}| V_{i},V_{j} \in V)$$ The set of Conditional probability distribution, namely Conditional probability table is defined as: $$P={P(V_{i}|V_{1},V_{2},..., V_{i-1}, V_{i} \in V)}$$ Consider the following example that illustrates some of the characteristics of BNs. The example shown in Figure 3 presents the Bayesian network of two PML documents being the rooted node of sensor, which have the same data structure but different value. Firstly, it considers Tag similarity, represented by the variable Tag (denoted by ST) might result from $ID^{'}$ similarity, represented by the variable $ID^{'}$ (denoted by $SI^{'}$). Secondly, Observation similarity represented by the variable Observation (denoted by SO) might result from DateTime similarity represented by the variable DateTime (denoted by SD). In the final case, it is reasonable to assume that sensor similarity represented by the variable Sensor (denoted by SS) will be determined by SO and ID similarity, represented by the variable ID (denoted by SI). All variables are binary; thus, they are either true (denoted by “T”) or false (denoted by “F”).
![Bayesian network of two sensors[]{data-label="Bayesian network of two sensors"}](Fig3.jpg){width="9cm" height="6cm"}
For example, the CPTs of Tag and ID’ are listed in Table 1 and Table 2. P(SI’) presents the same probability of two ID’s and P(ST) presents the same probability of two Tags.
P(SI’=F) P(SI’=T)
---------- ----------
0.5 0.5
: Same probability of two ID’s[]{data-label="table_five"}
SI’ P(ST=F) P(ST=T)
----- --------- ---------
F 1 0
T 0 1
: Same probability of two Tags with the same probability of two ID’s[]{data-label="table_five"}
From total probability formula, $$P(B)=\sum_{i=1}^{n} P(A_{i})P(B|A_{i})$$ We enable to demonstrate that the different probability of two tags P(ST=T) is 0.5, while the probability is defined as: $$\begin{aligned}
P(ST=T)=P(ST=T|ST'=T)P(SI'=T')\\
\nonumber +P(ST=T|SI'=F')=1 \times 0.5 + 0\times 0.5=0.5\end{aligned}$$ This results in: $$P(ST=F)=1-P(ST=T)$$ Similarly, by applying Eq. (1), probability $P(SS=T)$ is defined as: [$$\begin{aligned}
\footnotesize P(SS=T)=P(SS=T|SI=T)P(SI=T)+\\
\nonumber P(SS=T|SI=F)P(SI=F)+P(SS=T|SO=T)\\
\nonumber P(SO=T)+P(SS=T|SO=F)P(SO=F)\end{aligned}$$]{} And is result, $$P(SS=F)=1-P(SS=T)$$
Bayesian network for PML similarity computation
===============================================
Redundancy reduction of PML documents
-------------------------------------
The aim of this phase is to reduce the redundant nodes in the original tree before construction of Bayesian network. After researching the PML Core specification defined in ’PMLCore.xsd’ XML schema file, we know that the rooted element Sensor is main comprised of two subordinate ID element and Observation element. And the Observation element consists of the following:
- an optional ID element
- an optional Command element
- DateTime element
- zero or more Data elements
- zero or more Tag elements
Among them, the Tag element consists of the following elements:
- ID element
- optional Data element
- zero or more Sensor elements
A sensor is considered as any devices that make measurements and observations,such as an RFID reader or a temperature sensor. As mentioned earlier, each of objects, including different sensors, has a unique ID, namely EPC, to identify their information in EPC network. EPC regarded as a point enable to inquiry and retrieve information from supply chains. In the paper, we mainly concern on the similarity of PML documents rather than the concrete information that each PML document contain. For example in Fig. 2(a), the information stored in tag EEPROM is not important for PML comparison similarity. If the client wants to acquire these data, they enable to receive the EPC by RFID reader, which finding IP address to get the object information stored in EPC IS from internet. So redundancy is the data in addition to be able to identify EPC, including ID, Command, DateTime and Data in Observation element and Data , Sensor in Tag element, only retaining the ID in Tag element. Redundancy reduction of tree deletion operations between two rooted ordered labeled trees that represent two PML documents are defined as follows:
- Given a leaf node x and a tree $T$, $T$ containing node $p$ with first level sub-trees and $x$ being the $i$th child of $p$, e.g. ${P_{1},...P_{i-1},x,P_{i+1},...,P_{m}}$ $DelLeaf(x, p)$ is the deletion operation applied to node p that yields x with first level sub-trees ${P_{1},...P_{i-1},P_{i+1},...,P_{m}}$ (Figure 4).
- Given a sub-tree $A$ and a tree $T$, $T$ containing node $p$ with first level sub-trees, e.g.${P_{1},...P_{i-1},A,P_{i+1},...,P_{m}}$ $DelLeaf(A, p)$ is the deletion operation applied to node $p$ that deletes sub-tree $A$ in $T$ from among the children of ${P_{1},...P_{i-1},P_{i+1},...,P_{m}}$ (Figure 4).
![Delete leaf node and Delete sub-tree[]{data-label="Delete leaf node and Delete sub-tree"}](Fig4.jpg){width="9cm" height="6cm"}
In our model, we first simplify a PML tree using the algorithm Pred. The description of algorithm is as follows.
01:foreach node Ni in NodeList do\
02:if Ni==Observation then\
03: foreach childnode t of Observation do\
04:if t [ID, Command, DataTime]{} then\
05: DelLeaf(Observation, t);\
06: else if t==Tag then\
07: foreach childnode s of Tag do\
08:if s==Data then\
09: DelTree(Tag, Data);
The input of the algorithm is a PML tree, as shown in in Fig.1 (b) and Fig. 2 (b). We assume that all nodes are stored in a dynamic list NodeList in accordance with the gradation in the tree. And the parent-child relationship between the nodes is also shown in the list. The algorithm traverses the list NodeList and at the same time, using the functions of DelLeaf and DelTree to respectively delete the redundant nodes and subtrees. Definition of DelLeaf $(c, a)$ is to delete a leaf node c that is eligible for deleting and is parented at node a. What’s more, $DelTree (S, a)$ is used to delete a eligible subtree S that is parented at a.
The result of the algorithm is to obtain a new NodeList made of the remaining nodes by the way of deleting those redundant nodes and subtrees. Of course, the deleting operation will not change the original gradation relationship. The output is shown in Figure 5.
![Result of redundancy reduction from PML documents in Fig.1 (a) and Fig. 2 (a)[]{data-label="Result of redundancy reduction from PML documents in Fig.1 (a) and Fig. 2 (a)"}](Fig5.jpg){width="9cm" height="6cm"}
![Bayesian network model[]{data-label="Bayesian network model"}](Fig6.jpg){width="7cm" height="7cm"}
Bayesian network model for PML documents
----------------------------------------
For measuring the similarity of PML documents, we construct a Bayesian network model as illustrated in Fig. 6. The network model has a rooted node labeled Sensor representing the possibility of node sensor in two compared PML trees. If a tree A and tree B are two compared trees, the node Sensor represents the possibility of node Sensor in tree A being a duplicate of the node Sensor in tree B. The probability of the Sensor nodes being duplicates depends on the probability of each pair of children nodes being duplicates. Then the node ID represents the possibility of node ID in tree A being a duplicate of the node ID in tree B; node Observation represents the possibility of node Observation in tree A being a duplicate of node Observation in tree B. Similarly, we enable to repeat the process of other two nodes.
However, it is a slightly different procedure of PML nodes labeled ID of the children of Tag node. In this case, we wish to compare the full set of nodes, instead of each node independently. In this case, the set of ID nodes of the children of Tag nodes being duplicate depends on each ID node in tree $A$ being a duplicate of any ID node in tree $B$. It is presented by nodes $ID_{M*N}$, $ID_{MN}$ and $ID_{in}$ in Fig.6. Because the nodes $ID_{in}$ have no children, their probability of being duplicates only depends on their values $ID_{in}[Value]$.
We know that elements of Sensor, ID and Observation are contained in each of PML documents from the PML Core schema. And the probability of the two PML nodes being duplicates depends on (1) whether or not their values of nodes are duplicates, and (2) whether or not their children of nodes are duplicates. The node is assigned a binary random variable. If a node exists in the same location of two PML trees, this variable takes the value 1 to present. Otherwise, the variable takes the value 0 to express. With respect to the Bayesian network model, we could compute the probability in Fig. 1 (a) and Fig. 2 (a). Three types of conditional probabilities are defined as follows:
- The probability of the values of the nodes being duplicates depends on each individual pair of values being duplicates;
- The probability of two nodes being duplicates depends on their values and their children being duplicates or each pair of children nodes being duplicates (i.e. Sensor).
- The probability of a set of nodes of the same type being duplicates depends on each pair of individual nodes in the set are duplicates. In our example, these two types of conditional probabilities correspond to the respective probabilities listed in Tables 3, 4, 5.
Conditional Probability
------------------------------- -- --
$P(ID| ID [Value])$
$P(ID_{mm}| ID_{mm} [Value])$
: Conditional Probabilities[]{data-label="table_five"}
Conditional Probability
------------------------------ -- --
$P(Tag| ID_{M*N})$
$P(Observation| Tag)$
$P(Sensor| ID, Observation)$
: Conditional Probabilities[]{data-label="table_five"}
Conditional Probability
------------------------------------- -- --
$P(ID_{iN}| ID_{i1,..., IDin})$
$P(ID_{M*N}| ID_{1N},..., ID_{MN})$
: Conditional Probabilities[]{data-label="table_five"}
The algorithm of constructing Bayesian network model
----------------------------------------------------
In this paper, a PML tree is defined as a triple $T=(S, V, W)$, where
- $S$ is a root node label, e.g., for tree $T$ in Fig.5, $S=Sensor$.
- $V$ node label with (attribute, v) pair, where v is the value of this node. If the node itself has a value, we define it as a special (attribute, v) pair. For tree T in Fig.5, we have a node V with (ID, urn: epc: 1:4.16.36) pair.
- $W$ is a set of PML trees, means that $W$ is the set of subtrees of $T$. These subtrees are again each described as a triple. For tree $T$ in Fig.5 , $W$ contains subtree rooted at observation.
01:Input: $T=(S, V, W)$\
02: $T'=(S^{'}, V^{'}, W^{'})$\
03:Output: A directed graph $G=(N,E)$\
/\* ————– Initialization ————— \*/\
04:$X= Y =0;$\
/\* ——————————————— \*/\
05:if $S==S^{'}$ then // Two root nodes are the same.\
06:Insert a node $S$ into $N$;\
07:if $V \cup V' \neq \emptyset$ then // At least one of the two nodes is not NULL.\
08: if $V == V^{'}$ then // Two nodes are the same including attributes and values.\
09:Insert a node $V$ into $N$;\
10:Insert an edge into E from this node to $S$;\
11: Insert a node $v$ into $N$; $v$ represents value.\
12: Insert an edge into $E$ from this node to $V$;\
13: Insert a node $v^{'}$ into $N$;\
14: Insert an edge into E from this node to $V$;\
15:if $W \cup W^{'} \neq \emptyset$ then // At least one of the two sets is not NULL.\
16:foreach $W_{i} \in W$ do\
17:foreach $W_{j}^{'}\in W'$ do //These two nested loops are used to implement one-to-one comparison of all nodes in two sets.\
18:if $Wi \neq Tag$ and $W_{j}^{'} \neq Tag$ then //None of them owns a Tag.\
19: R=S;\
20:$G'=(N^{'},E^{'})\leftarrow Merg(Wi,W_{j}^{'})$ // It recursively invoke function Merg.\
21:foreach node $n \in N^{'}$ do //The following three loops are used to link the directed graph G’=（N’，E’）of subtree with the already generated G.\
22: Insert n into $N$;\
23:foreach edge $e \in E'$ do\
24: Insert e into $E$;\
25:foreach node $n \in N^{'}$ without outgoing edges do\
26: Insert an edge into $E$ from this node to $R$;\
27: else (Any of them owns at least a Tag).\
28:Insert a node Tag into $N$;\
29: Insert an edge into $E$ from this node to $S$;\
30:if $W_{i}$==Tag then // Count the number of Tag in W.\
31: $X++$;\
32: if $W_{j}^{'}$==Tag then // Count the number of Tag in W’.\
33: $Y++$;\
34: Insert a node $ID_{X*Y}$ into ${N}$;\
350: Insert an edge into $E$ from this node to Tag;\
36:foreach Tag $t_{i}(1 \leq i \leq X) \in W$ do //The following two loops are used to generate about X\*Y nodes IDi\*j and other X\*Y nodes named with the value of each Tag.\
37: $P=ID$ value of Tag $t_{i}$;\
38: Insert a node $ID_{i*Y}$ into $N$;\
39: Insert an edge into $E$ from this node to $ID_{X*Y}$;\
40:foreach Tag $t_{j}(1\leq j \leq Y)$ $W^{'}$ do\
41: Q=ID value of Tag $t_{j}$;\
42: Insert a node $ID_{i*j}$ into $N$;\
43: Insert an edge into $E$ from this node to $ID_{i*Y}$;\
44: Insert a node $P$ into $N$;\
45: Insert an edge into $E$ from this node to $ID_{i*j}$;\
46: Insert a node Q into $N$;\
47:Insert an edge into $E$ from this node to $ID_{i*j}$;
The idea of designing Algorithm is to merge two PML trees into one tree, which is starting from the root nodes. We assume that two trees can only be merged in the case of that the root nodes are the same. In our example, the root nodes are the identical S=Sensor, while $V$ has only one element (ID, value). And $W$ is the subtree rooted at Observation. There are two variables, $X$ and $Y$, which are respectively used to store the number of Tags in the two trees. It is clear that they are initialized as Null.
In this algorithm, we define the structure of the input PML tree, as described above, a triple. The algorithm takes as input two sets of PML trees $T$ and $T^{'}$(line$01-02$). We only deal with the case of root node $S=S^{'}$(line $05-47$), otherwise we will exit the algorithm and the output is Null. In the former case, we judge $V = V^{'}$ whether to set up. Under the condition of $V = V^{'}$, we respectively construct new nodes named as the values $v$ of elements of $V$ and $V^{'}$(line $11-14$). After that the function will construct a new edge pointed to the root node (line $09-10$). In the subtree, we recursively invoke the merging function Merg (line $15-20$). In the case of meeting with Tag, it is inevitable to make a one-to-one comparison for which requires a new node $ID_{i*j}$ (line $36-47$). So it is necessary to generate nodes with the number of $X*Y$(line $30-35$). The result of this algorithm is a directed graph $G=(N,E)$, where $N$ is the set of nodes in G while E represents the set of edges between these nodes(line $03$). This graph is initialized as NULL (line$04$). When applying this algorithm to the PML tree $T$ and $T^{'}$ of Fig.5, we can obtain the directed graph in Fig.6.
Defining the probabilities
--------------------------
As illustrated in previous section, we describe how to construct the Bayesian network model, so we need to define the conditional probabilities to inner nodes and prior probabilities to leaf nodes. Here we also define the notion $P(x)$ to mean $P(x=1)$, presenting the probability of two same nodes occurring at the same time.
### Conditional probabilities
[**Conditional Probability CP1**]{}: CP1 denotes that the probability of the values of the nodes being duplicates depends on each individual pair of values being duplicates. In this case, we enable to define $P$ $(ID_{t_{ij}} | t_{ij}[n_{1}], t_{ij}[n_{2}],...)$ to correspond to above presentation, where $ID_{t_{ij}}$ is a leaf node ID of parent node $t_{ij}, t_{ij}[n]$ is the value of attribute n of the $i$-th node with tree $t$ in the PML tree.
If all values of attribute $n$ are duplicates, we consider the value of leaf node ID of parent node $t_{ij}$ as duplicates, and this value represents the importance of the corresponding attribute in determining whether the nodes are duplicates. For instance, if the attribute $ID_{11}[Value]$ is equal to 1, then we consider the leaf node $ID_{11}$ values are duplicates.
This definition is represented in Eq. (10), and we determine that the probability of the PML nodes being duplicates equals a given value, $w$.
$$P(ID_{t_{ij}}|t_{ij}[n_{1}],t_{ij}[n_{2}],...)=\sum_{1 \leq k \leq n, t_{ij}[a_{k}]=1} W_{a_{k}}$$
Subject to $\sum_{1 \leq k \leq n} W_{a_{k}}$ In this case, since all of leaf nodes have only an attribute value, Equation (11) is represented as follows: $$P(ID_{t_{ij}}|t_{ij}[n_{1}])=\sum_{1 \leq k \leq n, t_{ij}[a_{k}]=1} W_{a_{k}}=1$$ For instance, $P(ID|ID[Value])=1$ and $P(ID_{11}|ID_{11}[Value])=1$
[**Conditional Probability CP2**]{}: CP2 denotes that the probability of two nodes being duplicates depends on their values and their children being duplicates or each pair of children nodes being duplicates. i.e., $P(Sensor| ID_{Sensor}, Ob_{Sensor})$, if both ID and Observation values and their children are duplicates, we could consider the nodes as duplicates. So this definition is represented in Eq. (12). $$\begin{aligned}
P(t_{ij}|ID_{t_{ij}},Ob_{t_{ij}})= = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
1 & \quad \textrm{if $ID_{t_{ij}}=Ob_{t_{ij}}=1$}\\
0 & \quad \textrm{Otherwise}
\end{array} \right.\end{aligned}$$
[**Conditional Probability CP3**]{}: CP3 denotes that the probability of a set of nodes of the same type being duplicates depends on each pair of individual nodes in the set are duplicates, i.e., $P(ID_{M*N}|ID_{1N}, ID_{2N},...)$ and $P(ID_{1N}|ID_{11}, ID_{12},...)$, the set of nodes ID depends on that each of its nodes is a duplicate. We also assume that the more nodes ID are duplicates, the higher the probability that the whole set of nodes is a duplicate. So this definition is represented in Eq. (13). $$P(t_{M*N}|t_{1*N}, t_{2*N},...)=\frac{1}{n}\sum{k=1}^{n} t_{kN}$$
And the probability $P(ID_{1N}|ID_{11}, ID_{12},... )$, which reflects the fact that a node ID in an PML tree is a duplicate if it is a duplicate of at least one node of the same type in the other PML tree. This is represented in Eq. (14). $$\begin{aligned}
P(t_{iN}|t_{i1},t_{i2},...t_{iN})= = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
1 & \quad \textrm{if $\exists j |t_{ij}=1$}\\
0 & \quad \textrm{Otherwise}
\end{array} \right.\end{aligned}$$
### Prior probabilities
Note that the $P(t_{ij}[n])$ can be defined based on the similarity between values, the greater the probability is, the greate the similarity will be. For instance, the probability of the ID attributes in two Sensor elements being the same can be similar between both ID nodes. We normalize this similarity to a value between $0$ and $1$. Thus, we define [$$P(t_{ij}[n])= = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
sim(ID_{i}[n],ID_{j}[n]) & \quad \textrm{if similarity
was measured}\\
1-sim(ID_{i}[n],ID_{j}[n]) & \quad \textrm{Otherwise}
\end{array} \right.$$]{} Where $sim( )$ is a similarity function, normalized to fit between $0$ and $1$. For instance, for the ID attribute in the Sensor nodes, we can define $sim(ID, ID^{'})=1$ if $ID[Value]= ID^{'}[Value]$, and otherwise $sim(ID, ID')=0$.
### Finally probability
All conditional and prior probabilities are defined, so we could depend on the knowledge of Bayesian network to compute the probability of two PML trees. And the Bayesian network model has been described in sec. 3.2. According to the network, and applying Eq. (12), the probability is defined as: [$$\begin{aligned}
P(Sensor)=\sum{ID,Ob} P(Sensor|ID_{Sensor},Ob_{Sensor})\\
\nonumber P(ID_{Sensor},Ob_{Sensor})=\sum{ID, Ob}P(Sensor|ID_{Sensor},\\
\nonumber Ob_{Sesnor})P(ID_{Sensor})P(Ob_{Sensor}) P(ID_{Sesnor}) P(Ob_{Sesnor})\end{aligned}$$]{}
Similarly, by applying Eq. (10), probability $P(ID_{Sensor})$ is defined as: [$$\begin{aligned}
P(Sensor)=P(Sensor|ID_{Sensor}[Value])P(ID_{Sensor}\\
\nonumber [Value])= w_{value}P(ID_{Sensor}[V(ID_{Sensor}[Value])\\
\nonumber=P(ID_{Sensor}[Value])P(ID_{Sensor}[Value])\end{aligned}$$]{} Since $w_{value} = 1$, according to Eq. (10). As for probability $P(Ob_{Sensor})$, according to Eq. (14), we have:
$$\begin{aligned}
P(Ob_{Sensor})=P(Tag_{Ob})=P(ID_{M*N})=\\
\nonumber \frac{P(ID_{1N}+...+P(ID_{MN}))}{M}\end{aligned}$$
Using Eqs.(12) and (10) we can compute probability $P(ID_{1N})$ as: $$P(ID_{1N})=1-\prod_{i=1}^{n}(1-P(ID_{1i}[Value]))$$ A similar equation can be obtained from $P_(ID_{2N})$ to $P(ID_{MN})$. Finally, join Eqs. (16) through (19), we have: [$$\begin{aligned}
P(Sensor)=P(ID_{Sensor})P(Ob_{Sensors})=P(ID_{Sensor}[Value])\times \\
\nonumber (\frac{1-\prod_{i=1}^{n}(1-P(ID_{1i}[Value]))+ ...+1-\prod_{i=1}^{n}(1-P(ID_{mi}[Value]))}{M}\end{aligned}$$]{}
Simulation
==========
We measure the PML similarity in terms of timing results and effectiveness on data, which is followed XML Schemas of PmlCore.xsd and Identifier.xsd and is generated randomly by PML generator. Our evaluation covers (1) timing result for various sizes of PML documents, (2) the impact of various sizes of PML documents on effectiveness, and (3) the impact of various sizes of the same elements in PML documents on effectiveness.
Data Sets
---------
We use four different data sets.
\[table 6\]
Num.Data Set Degree of duplicates
-------------- ------------------------------------- --
Data Set $1$ $500$ random PML documents
Data Set $2$ $20$% of the same 500 PML documents
Data Set $3$ $50$% of the same 500 PML documents
Data Set $4$ $80$% of the same 500 PML documents
: Data Sets
And theses data sets are extracted from PML data generator designed by our project team, which enable to generate different PML documents in accordance with our needs. In the generator, the parameters of self-definition include (1) amount of Tag element, (2) type of Tag element, and (3) value of ID element. Hence, Dataset 1 represents the scenario where we don’t understand the structure and duplicate of PML documents, and all of theses PML documents are randomly generated. Dataset 2, 3, 4 are used to show the impact of different degree of duplicates to timing result and effectiveness of our algorithm.
These tests were done on a Thinkpad X220i computer with dual processor CPU of Core i3 2370M Processors, running at 2.4 GHz. All simulative approaches, include measure of timing result and effectiveness, were implemented by us in Matlab. And we know that the timing results of algorithm could be influence by different computer. In this section we describe some simulations that measure the PML similarity in terms of timing results and effectiveness on data, which is followed XML Schemas of PmlCore.xsd and Identifier.xsd and is generated randomly by PML generator. We have three main goals in our simulations:
- Probability mean—the average of duplicate probability.We use the range of probability mean to evaluate what is the value of final probability that could be considered as duplicates for two PML documents.
- Time performance—the timing result of our algorithm for different amounts of duplicate data.We use the data to evaluate the timing result of our algorithm in accordance to different scenarios.
- Precision and recall values—the standard for evaluating information retrieval methods.We use recall/precision curve [@22] to evaluate the impact of various sizes of the same elements in PML documents on effectiveness
Simulative Setup
----------------
Firstly, we define the prior probability as follow.
$$\begin{aligned}
P(ID_{ij}[Value])=Sim(ID_{i},ID_{j})=\\
\nonumber 1-\frac{Compare(ID_{i},ID_{j})}{Max(|ID_{i}|,|ID_{i}|)}\end{aligned}$$
Where $Compare(ID_{i},ID_{j})$ presents the comparison of strings $ID_{i}$ and $ID_{j}$ and the result is the integer value of difference of two strings. $|ID|$ is the length of string ID. So the result of $Max(|ID_{i}|,|ID_{j}|)$ is the maximum value of two strings. To measure effectiveness, we use the commonly used precision and recall as presented by [@19]. Precision measures the percentage of correctly identified duplicates contained over the total set of objects determined as duplicates by the system. Recall measures the percentage of duplicates correctly identified by the system over the total set of duplicate objects as presented by [@20].
Simulations
-----------
[**Simulation 1**]{} to measure what the value of final probability could be considered duplicates for two PML documents by using Data Set 1. Firstly, we should determine whether a distribution of statistics follows a normal distribution compared with the probability density function of normal distribution graph. The frequency histograms are constructed in Figure 7.
![Frequency histogram[]{data-label="Frequency histogram"}](Fig7.jpg){width="9cm" height="8cm"}
Secondly, a normal distribution could be verified by Figure 8. With the increase of Data Set, the discrete points close to the inclined straight line segments. So the conclusion is that the values of final probability approximate normal distribution.
![Distribution normality test[]{data-label="Distribution normality test"}](Fig8.jpg){width="9cm" height="7cm"}
Finally, we perform three sets of random experiments, the average of the data show as follows.
![Range of probability mean in three random simulations[]{data-label="Range of probability mean in three random simulations"}](Fig9.jpg){width="9cm" height="7cm"}
From the Figure 9, the average mostly concentrates in the \[0.4095, 0.4435\]. So only objects whose duplicate probability is above or equal to the value range \[0.4095, 0.4435\] are considered similarity.
[**Simulation 2**]{} to evaluate the timing result of our algorithm in accordance to different scenarios by using Dataset 1-4. From the Figure 10, the time to compare pairs of PML documents of various sizes grows in an almost perfect linear fashion with size and duplicate of PML documents.
![Time performance for different amounts of duplicate data[]{data-label="Time performance for different amounts of duplicate data "}](Fig10.jpg){width="9cm" height="7cm"}
[**Simulation 3**]{} to evaluate the impact of various sizes and duplicates PML documents on effectiveness. The simulation was performed to determine the impact of the quality of the data being processed on the performance of the Bayesian network model. Figure 11 shows the results for varying the probabilities of $20\%$, $50\%$ and $80\%$ respectively.
![Precision and recall values for different amounts of duplicate data[]{data-label="Precision and recall values for different amounts of duplicate data"}](Fig11.jpg){width="9cm" height="7cm"}
Conclusion
==========
In this paper, we introduce the function and application area of PML documents and illustrate the necessity for computing the similarity of PML documents in EPC Network. Then we propose an approach for measuring the similarity of PML documents based on Bayesian Network. With respect to the feature of PML, while measuring the similarity, we firstly reduce the redundancy data except information of EPC. On the basis of this, the Bayesian Network model derived from the structure of the PML documents being compared is constructed. And this model has accounted for both the ID values contained in the PML and their internal structure. Then the similarity between two PML documents could be deduced. Finally, the simulations evaluate the value range of similarity, timing result and the effectiveness of the similarity measure. We intend to further validate our similarity measures by considering Real-World Data, which could exist errors, such as missing data (e.g. lack of EPC) or incompleteness data (e.g. the EPC less than 96 bit) and so on, so we still need to validate this observation. Another issue we should intend to consider is the scalability ether in space or in time. Scaling to large amounts of PML document with the help of external memory units also needs to be studied in the future.
Acknowledgement {#acknowledgement .unnumbered}
===============
The research is support by National Natural Science Foundation of P. R. China (Grant No. 61170065 and 61003039), Peak of Six Major Talent in Jiangsu Province (Grant No.2010DZXX026), Project sponsored by Jiangsu provincial research scheme of natural science for higher education institutions (Grant No.12KJB520009), Science & Technology Innovation Fund for higher education institutions of Jiangsu Province (Grant No.CXZZ11-0405).
[10]{} Liang Zhou, Han-Chieh Chao.Multimedia Traffic Security Architecture for Internet of Things J. IEEE Network, 25(3):29-34,2011.
Floerkemeier C, Anarkat D, et al. PML core specification 1.0 J. Auto-ID Center Recommen- dation, 2003, 15.
Clark S, Traub K, Council D A U C, et al. Auto-ID Savant Specification 1.02. 2003.
Brock D L, Milne T P, et al. The physical markup language J. Auto-ID Center White Paper MIT-AUTOID-WH-003, 2001.
Liang Zhou, Han-Chieh Chao,et al.Joint Forensics-Scheduling Strategy for Delay-Sensitive Multimedia Applications over Heterogeneous Networks J. IEEE JSAC,29(7):1358-1367,2011.
Ousmane Diallo, Joel J. P. C. Rodrigues, et al.Real-time Data Management on Wireless Sensor Network: a Survey J. Journal of Network and Computer Applications,35(3):1013–1021,2012.
Dalamagas T, Cheng T, et al. A methodology for clustering XML documents by structure J. Information Systems,31(3):187-228, 2006.
Manning C. D., Raghavan P. Introduction to information retrieval M. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Tekli J, Chbeir R. An overview on XML similarity: background, current trends and future directions J. Computer science review,3(3):151-173, 2009.
Liang W, Yokota H. LAX: An efficient approximate XML join based on clustered leaf nodes for XML data integration J. Database: Enterprise, Skills and Innovation,:82-97,2005.
A.M.Kade., Heuser C.A., Matching XML documents in highly dynamic applicationsb, in: Proceeding of the 8th ACM Symposium on Document Engineering, DocEng’08, Brazil,191-198,2008.
M. Weis, Naumann F., Dogmatix tracks down duplicates in XML, in: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD Conference, USA,431-442,2005.
Dorneles C.F.Heuser C.A., Lima A.E.N., Da Silva A.S., De Moura E.S., Measuring similarity between collections of values, in: Proceedings of the ACM international Workshop on Web Information and Data Management, USA,56-63,2004.
Leitao L., Calado P., Weis M. Structure-based inference of XML similarity for fuzzy duplicate detection, in: Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM’07, Portugal,293-302,2007.
Leong K. S., Ng M L, Engels D W. EPC network architecture. Auto-ID labs research workshop. Zurich, Switzerland, 2004.
WWW Consortium, The Document Object Model, http://www.w3.org/DOM.
Zhang Z., Li R., Similarity metric in XML documents, in: Knowledge Management and Experience Management Workshop, Germany, 2003.
Nierman A., Jagadish H.V., Evaluating structural similarity in XML documents, in: Proceedings of the 5th ACM SIGMOD International Workshop on the Web and Databases, WebDB,61-66,2002.
Pearl J. Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausble Inference M. Morgan Kaufmann Pub, 1988.
Silander T, Myllymaki P. A simple approach for finding the globally optimal Bayesian network structure J. arXiv preprint arXiv:1206.6875, 2012.
Ben Gal I. Bayesian networks J. Encyclopedia of statistics in quality and reliability, 2007.
Davis J, Goadrich M. The relationship between Precision-Recall and ROC curves. Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning. ACM,233-240,2006.
Manning C D, Raghavan P, Sch�tze H. Introduction to information retrieval M. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'eSports industry has greatly progressed within the last decade in terms of audience and fund rising, broadcasting, networking and hardware. Since the number and quality of professional team has evolved too, there is a reasonable need in improving skills and training process of professional eSports athletes. In this work, we demonstrate a system able to collect heterogeneous data (physiological, environmental, video, telemetry) and guarantying synchronization with 10 ms accuracy. In particular, we demonstrate how to synchronize various sensors and ensure post synchronization, i.e. logged video, a so-called demo file, with the sensors data. Our experimental results achieved on the CS:GO game discipline show up to 3 ms accuracy of the time synchronization of the gaming computer.'
author:
-
bibliography:
- 'main.bib'
title: Sensors and Game Synchronization for Data Analysis in eSports
---
embedded system, synchronization, GPS, wearable sensing, eSports
Introduction
============
eSports is organized video gaming where the teams or single players compete against each other with the aim to achieve a specific goal by the end of the game. The eSports industry has progressed a lot within the last decade [@esports-2018]: huge number of professional and amateur teams take part in numerous competitions where the prize pools achieve tens millions US dollars. Its global audience has already reached 380 mln. in 2018 and is expected to reach more than 550 mln. in 2021 [@newzoo-2018]. eSports industry includes so far a number of promising directions, e.g. streaming, hardware, game development, connectivity, analytic and training.
The latter point currently deals with the analytics based on the game statistics and available .demo files allowing for replicating the game and performing fundamental analysis. This kind of analytics is available for both amateur players and professional eSports athletes. However, for gaining deeper knowledge on how to better play and which particular skills must be improved - is the information and analytic services required for professional athletes since the competition is getting harder. Up to date, there are just a few services and research works trying to tackle this problem. At the same time, there is a limited number of research results based on real data, i.e., data collected from the acting professional eSports athletes and in real conditions. Psychological studies [@welford1980choice], [@brebner1980introduction] states that some individuals have reaction time close to 190 ms (0.19 sec) for light stimuli and about 160 ms for sound stimuli. For correct comparison of reaction time of individual players we should have ability to measure sensors values much faster than human reaction time is. Only in this case we will have acceptable discretization step value. This leads us to $<$ 20 ms requirement for sensors synchronization accuracy. Although the eSports research is in its infancy, there is a fundamental research problem on the data collection synchronization which is relevant for the following areas: Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) and Body Sensor Networks (BSN) [@wsn-2015; @bsn-2015]. It is worth noting that for the most application scenarios the data collected by the WSNs and BSNs are typically homogeneous while the data collected for the eSports are truly heterogeneous: physiological, environmental, video, telemetry (keyboard and mouse), game statistics.
At present, the problem of heterogeneous data collection could be solved from different points of view. For example, by using a data collection framework [@iot-2014]. However, these frameworks focus primarily on data collection tasks and designing a virtual object (a counterpart of the physical object) instead of solving problems associated with accurate synchronization. In eSports data analysis it is vital to synchronization game video log file, environmental sensors and physiological sensors for getting practically feasible analytics on later steps.
In terms of sensors synchronization, there are two main types of synchronization [@sarvghadi2014overview], [@khediri2012analysis], [@el2016game], [@shahabi2007immersidata], [@lee2008arcade]. First of all, it is *online* sensor synchronization when all sensors share the trigger-sampling signal or all sensors has synced on-board timer. This type of sync is useful since no additional data processing is required after the experiment. Second one is post-synchronization. Some sensors or application, e.g. video games, does not have trigger availability or absolute time stamps. In this case only data processing after the end of experiment is available for synchronization.
In this work, we propose both synchronization types and share our experience for *heterogeneous* eSports data collection.
This paper is organized as follows: in Section II we introduce the reader to the relevant research work in the area. We present the systems architecture used in this work and its implementation in Section III and Section IV, respectively. Experimental results are demonstrated in Section V. Finally, we provide concluding remarks in Section VI.
State-of-the-Art
================
Recent trends of data analytics in eSports are based on heterogeneous sensing technologies including video. At the same time the eSports disciplines, e.g. CS:GO, are extremely dynamic environments where the game scenario and actions change quickly. For guarantying accurate inference and analytics the data collection has to be properly synchronyzed. It should be noted that for the data collection procedure wireless sensors as well typical ’wired’ solutions are involved. Synchronization in WSN is highly relevant topic to our research.
The importance and relevant problems on time synchronization are described in details in [@elson2003wireless]. It is clearly stated that physical time synchronization is a crucial point for WSN. There are several popular metrics for evaluating the WSN performance: Accuracy, Computation load, Robustness against failures
In [@sarvghadi2014overview], [@sundararaman2005clock], [@rhee2009clock], [@khediri2012analysis], [@sivrikaya2004time] an overview of time synchronization approaches and protocols for WSN was presented. Three clock synchronization frameworks are available: master-slave, peer-to-peer, and distributed. Synchronization is usually done by either aligning the clock readings (called clock offset synchronization, or simply clock synchronization in many references) or aligning the clock rates (called clock rate synchronization, or skew compensation) or both. The so-called drift compensation (aligning the rate of a clock rate) is rarely done [@xie2018fast]. Selection of an algorithm and a protocol is defined by the design requirements. For all tasks the goal is to achieve high accuracy, low computation load and robustness against many kinds of failure and there are cases to deal with problems of energy cost, energy transfer and environmental issues, i.e., [@warier2014spacecraft], [@blaabjerg2006overview].
For other tasks, e.g. when the biometrical data is collected by the sensors located on different parts of a human body or when the sensors are used as an input tool, the synchronization is an important issue, but reaching high accuracy and low computation load is not essential. For this kind of task, the required energy budget is available, and there are no negative or isolating environmental conditions preventing the data synchronization. We discuss several cases in this section below when few sensors were used to collect and synchronize data acquired from a game and from other sensors, e.g. eye tracker, EEG, EMG, etc., showing the methods to synchronize the data.
For example, in [@el2016game] it is suggested to use the microsecond timestamps for all the logged events. It is important to have the same detectable event for each sensor (a fingerprint marked by a mouse and visible by a camera). There is an option to synchronize various sources after the game session including the situations when external data sources are used, e.g. from psycho-physiological sensors. There is a set of features that are common to all the events that can be logged. A dedicated web server to establish synchronization is acceptable for the analysis of the most game events.
In [@mandryk2008physiological] audio streams was captured with a boundary microphone. The game output, the camera recordings, and the screen containing the physiological data were synchronized into a single quadrant video display and recorded onto a hard disk. In this case the video recording was used as a synchronization tool.
ISIS (Immersidata analySIS) system is proposed in [@shahabi2007immersidata]. The idea of ISIS is to collect and synchronized the telemetry/video data and putting the collected dataset in a context. The system demonstrated reasonable efficiency in the lab trial, but could not handle a large amount of incoming data in real scenario.
Another relevant work is proposed in [@lee2008arcade]: the beacons wirelessly communicate with the sink node through the Radio Frequency (RF) signals whereas the sink node is wired to the game-service PC. The beacon is equipped with a wireless sensor node which has an RF transceiver (transmitter and receiver) and an ultrasonic sensor. The node is also embedded in the headband of the game player. The sink node has only an RF transceiver and synchronizes and coordinates the headband and beacons. In [@bannach2007waving] the implementation prototype is based on Java-3D for the graphics display and a CRN Toolbox is used for sensor integration.
In [@zheng2014multimodal] data from EEG sensor and data from an eye tracking sensor were received by a single device and there was no requirement to solve synchronization task.
This discussion demonstrates that there are no examples when many sensors are used at the same time. If several sensors are used simultaneously simple basic approaches are used to achieve required quality of synchronization. In eSports data analytics we do need to synchronize multiple heterogeneous data sources and in the next two paragraphs we provide reasoning.
The first example is the analysis of mouse movements by a player during a game. If only mouse coordinates are recorded, then some values would be missing. Data is missed when a player, for instance, rapidly lifts a mouse and moves it to the center of a mouse pad. The only way to understand and analyze the distance between the *before* and *after* mouse positions is to add a different sensor. For example, it is an option to use an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) attached to a mouse or a player’s hand, or inside the mouse. An IMU sensor could be connected either by a wire or wirelessly to reduce the interference with the player’s movements. In this case, it is possible to record the data continuously with small time intervals (0.01 s) between the transactions. All mouse movements will be recorded.
The second example deals with the analysis of the in-game actions (in terms of movements) of a player during the game. In a CS:GO environment, a player often performs “jump” or “crouch” actions to overcome the obstacles and avoid opponents. Analysis of game telemetry allows determining the moments where a player made specific movements. However, this analysis does not allow measuring these movements in terms of speed and quality. A player uses fingers to press the keyboard keys to make the in-game actions. For example, how long the “space” key is pressed during a “jump,” or what is an interval between pressing the “space” and “ctrl” keys when the “jump with squat” action is performed.
Recording and analyzing several synchronized sensors at once allows determining the hidden features of a player and helps deal with the situations provided in these two examples.
System architecture
===================
For ensuring the analysis of a player’s behavior, determining the characteristic features and prediction his further actions is possible only if we have enough data generated by heterogeneous sensors. The appropriate synchronization tool allowing one to achieve high accuracy is mandatory for the data acquisition system. Synchronization accuracy determined by the hardware capabilities and also by the game played by an eSports athlete. There is a time unit called “tick” in Counter-Strike Global Offence (CS: GO) game discipline. Different game servers have different “tick-rate”. Professional players accept the tick-rate equal to 1/128 s.
From this point of view, we can conclude that the sensor synchronization with 10 ms or less precision is suitable for analyzing players in CS GO.
To get a solution, it’s required to perform some tasks: find a stable source of accurate time , select correct synchronization options for a gaming PC, solve issues with synchronization of game telemetry (which often does not have a link to real “off-game” time).
![System architecture.[]{data-label="fig"}](pic1.PNG){width="45.00000%"}
Our system setup is presented in Figure 1. The system has a dedicated storage server (based on Intel NUC PC), gamer PC (high-speed Intel I7 PC with a lot of DDR4 memory and latest GPU card), set of embedded sensors (based on Raspberry PI single-board PC). Also, there is an NTP server with GPS/PPS support. A high-speed wireless router connects devices together. PC with strict requirements to ping value (gamer PC, NTP server) has wired to the router (LAN). Some sensors have wired connection to the game PC: mouse (we call MXY) and keyboard loggers, eye-tracker. Other sensors (heart-rate HRM, Inertial Measurement Unit IMU, skin-resistance GSR, electromyography sensor EMG) have a wireless connection because of placement near an eSports athlete (WLAN). The router has a low latency connection to the Internet (WAN).
![Experimental setup.[]{data-label="fig"}](test-bed-new.png){width="45.00000%"}
Our experimental test-bed is presented on Figure 2. We have set of pro- gamer equipment: mouse, keyboard, headset, monitor with 240fps frame rate, gamer PC (Intel i7/Nvidia 980TI). Also we have high-performance wireless router and separate PC (Intel NUC) for data storage. Our self-made equipment include set of Raspberry PI single board PC. Figure 2 has special marks for RPI based environment sensor (CO2/temp/humidity), RPI based NTP server with external GPS antenna (usually placed near the window) and RPI based analog sensors (HRM/GSR/EMG/IMU). Typical measurement session does not require any special abilities from player-side. First of all we put necessary sensors on player’s body (HRM/GSR/EMG), then activates all recording software and then player plays couple of round on selected game server. All measurements are synchronous by default, except game telemetry which requires post-sync procedure. Details how we able to achieve this task is presented below.
Implementation
==============
Sensors Synchronization
-----------------------
### NTP Server
There are many options for building time synchronous systems for industrial applications (one of many examples is TSN from NI However, the cost of such solutions is considerably higher and these solutions cannot be integrated into the player’s PC. It happens because the PC is primarily selected according to the 3D games performance criteria and does not contain specific hardware devices. Therefore, we decided to realize the synchronization on a single NTP server A reliable server (always available) that would be located close enough (had the minimum delay in transmitting packets over the network) was required. The available options did not suit us by the criteria mentioned above. It led us to the conclusion that the creation of our local time server is required. A single-board computer Raspberry PI 3B was selected as a server, and a GPS signal was used as a source of accurate time. The signal from the satellite was received by a separate module (based on the MTK MT3333 chipset) having the UART interface and supporting the PPS signal On Raspbian Stretch OS, GPS support packages (gpsd, gpsd -clients, pps-tools) and Chrony time server was installed. Raspberry PI was located near the window for better satellite signal reception and connected to the local area network via a wired interface. The presence of a dedicated PPS signal acquired by a separate IO pin (GPIO) Raspberry PI made it possible to ensure time accuracy in the range of $10^{-5}-10^{-6}$ s (time accuracy of $1 - 10$ us).
### Used Sensors
Sensors in our system (HRM, IMU, GSR, EMG and others) are deployed on Raspberry PI. Broadcast network “sync” command was sent to sensors before every measurement. After command reception special script synchronized local time to local NTP server (Stratum 1) time on each RPI. Feedback status with current time difference was also reported from every RPI to local data storage PC. In this case all RPI were synchronized before measurement starts. Time drift of local RPI time was measured and it has value around $10-20$ ms per hour. In this case sync command was repeated every $10$ minutes. This allows us to have synchronized sensors all the time.
### Gamer PC Synchronization
Gamer PC also has several local sensors (mouse and keyboard loggers, eye-tracker and etc.). Performing time synchronization on a gaming PC was a separate important task. Players use MS Windows OS on their PCs, which, by default, does not provide accurate time to user (you can check how accurate the clock on the PC is, for example, on a site like [www.time.is](www.time.is)). The default settings in Windows 7/8/10 allow you to synchronize time with an NTP server only once a week. At the same time, the average time drift of the clock is 50 ms per hour and even more for an ordinary PC (based on our measurements). In MS Windows 10 OS build 1607 and newer, there is a way to reduce the synchronization period and get significantly higher time accuracy by setting the registry. Then Windows Time Service should be switched to Auto (always loaded after the PC starts) start mode.
An accuracy of the clock within 1 ms require to fulfillment a number of conditions[^1]. In our experiment (taking into account the local time server Stratum 1 based on RPI), all requirements were met with the exception of the ping value (it was $<1$ ms, instead of the required value $<0.1$ ms). However, this did not prevent us to achieve the necessary synchronization accuracy.
![Win 10 PC time accuracy (default settings).[]{data-label="fig"}](Graph01_A.png){width="45.00000%"}
![Win 10 PC time accuracy (modified settings).[]{data-label="fig"}](Graph01_B.png){width="45.00000%"}
The figure 3 and 4 shows the clock accuracy on the PC with Win10 (3 is the default settings, 4 is the settings above). The Y axis represents the difference of local time and the time of the time server. The X axis represents the current PC time. It can be seen that with the default registry settings, no time correction is made at all (during several hours), and the clock gradually drifts with the speed $\cong50$ ms per hour. In the case of ”right” registry settings after some time, drift is compensated by the internal Windows algorithms and the clocks become synchronous with the time server (within $2-3$ ms accuracy).
Post synchronization
--------------------
### Game Data Synchronization
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive server uses special bot (GOTV) to log all in-game events into *\*.dem* file (replay file). This is a binary file format developed by Valve Corporation To access *\*.dem* file contents we used the official format parser the source code of which is freely available at Valve repository on GitHub[^2].
The parsing tool allows extracting all in-game events (player movements, jumps, shots, death, etc.) from *\*.dem* replay into a readable json-like text file. Each extracted event is represented by a dictionary of parameters and their values. Also there is a special time stamp for each event which determines the time when this event happened on the game server.
The game server uses its own discrete time line. Each of these time line moments is called tick. Events are processed by the server (and logged into the *\*.dem* file) at the frequency 128 Hz, i.e. there are 128 ticks in each second. The ticks are numbered by integers starting from first tick, which corresponds to the moment when all the game environment is set up on the server.
The *\*.dem* format does not have any linkage to the real world time when the replay was recorded (e.g. in UTC time format). This raises the problem of synchronization of the game log with other parts of the system. One may try to restore the UTC time of ticks time using the system *\*.dem* file creation time as the time of the last recorded tick in the replay. However, there are no guarantees that the last recorded tick happened at the end of the replay (there may happen several ticks when nothing happened, thus, nothing recorded). Moreover, when the recording of the replay is finished, some time is required to render and save the resulting *\*.dem* file. Usually, this time delta is about $1-2$ seconds, which is unacceptably big for synchronization purposes.
We describe an algorithm to perform synchronization of the game log with other sensors used in our system below. Our main idea is to synchronize the event data of the game log with the mouse key pressing of the player, for which we know the exact UTC time. Indeed, from the game log we know all the ticks when player shot from the weapon. At these moment player must have pressed the left mouse button (LMB). Thus, the problem reduces to finding the best match of two binary time series - player fire event from the game and the left mouse button pressing indicator. It is worth noting that not every LMB pressing corresponds to the fire event: players may also use LMB to select element of the game menu, user interface, etc.
In our system the mouse data is recorded at a rate of 128Hz that is equal to the tickrate of the replay. Thus, for simplicity we can consider the time series of the LMB press indicator to have integer index $t=0,1\dots, N-1$, i.e. the elements are ${g_{0},g_{1}\dots, g_{N-1}\in \{0, 1\}}$, where each time moment $t$ corresponds to some known real UTC time and the gap between two sequential time moments is $\frac{1}{128}$ seconds. The value of $g_{t}$ is $1$ iff the player had the LMB pressed at the time moment $t$, otherwise it is $0$. At the same time we denote the time series of player fire indicator by $f_{0},f_{1},\dots, f_{M-1}$, where $t=1,2,\dots$ is the natural tick index of the game log.
Mathematically, the problem reduces to finding the best integer shift $s^{*}$, such that $$s^{*}=\operatorname*{arg\,max}_{s\in[-M+1;N-1]}\bigg[\sum_{m}\mathbb{I}\big[(f_{m}=1)\wedge (g_{m+s}=1) \big]\bigg],
\label{optimal-shift}$$ where for convenience we assume that ${g_{n}\equiv 0}$ for ${n\notin [0, N-1]}$ and ${f_{m}\equiv 0}$ for ${m\notin [0, M-1]}$. In other words, we try to find the time shift, for which we observe the maximal number of matches of in-game player’s fire events and the LMB press moments.
Since $f_{m}$ and $g_{n}$ take values in $\{0, 1\}$, it is easy to see that $$s^{*}=\operatorname*{arg\,max}_{s\in[-M+1;N-1]}\bigg[\sum_{m}f_{m}g_{m+s}\bigg].
$$ Denote $\tilde{g}_{m}=g_{-m}$ for all $m$. We observe that
$$\sum_{m}f_{m}g_{m+s}=\sum_{m}f_{m}\tilde{g}_{-m-s}=(f\star \tilde{g})_{-s}$$
where $\star$ is a discrete convolution operation. Thus, the problem \[optimal-shift\] reduces to the following:
$$s^{*}=\operatorname*{arg\,min}_{s\in[-M+1;N-1]}(f\star \tilde{g})_{-s}.$$
Using the fast algorithm for computing the discrete convolution (see e.g. [@burrus1985and]), this problem is solved in ${O\big((M+N)\log{(M+N)}\big)}$ time, i.e. the time complexity of the algorithm is almost linear (omitting the logarithm term) in the total time of replay and mouse data signal.
Results
=======
During this work we built a sensing system for the eSports athletes monitoring in real-time. This system allows one to measure the synced data from various type of sensors with reasonable time sync accuracy ($<$10 ms). The system details can be helpful not only in eSport field of science, but another field as well, e.g. medical systems.
In this section we discuss how the created synchronous data collection system helps address the problems raised in the introduction, i.e. losses in recording coordinates when moving the mouse and synchronizing game events with recording keystrokes.
In the first case, the presence of two sensors (recording the coordinates of a mouse and an IMU sensor attached to a eSports athlete’s arm) synchronously in time allows data to be recorded even at times when one of them (the mouse) due to its construction (reflection of the laser from the surface of the table or mat) cannot be recorded (mouse transfer in the air). Sufficient synchronization accuracy ($<$10ms) with regard to the measurement period (10ms) allows even at these moments to have a continuous set of data for analysis. An example is shown in the figure 5.
![IMU and MXY sensors comparison.[]{data-label="fig"}](Graph2.png){width="50.00000%"}
The *Y axis* on Figure 5 represents the sensors value, the *X axis* represents the current time. The upper graph (A) corresponds to the data received from the IMU sensor, the lower graph (B) corresponds of the mouse coordinates data. The graph is shown for a length of $15$ seconds. The red lines marks shows the example situations of missing data in the mouse coordinate record. It is seen that the analysis of two synchronous graphs is more informative, gives less data loss and allows one to detect additional features for data analysis.
For the second case (when game events should be synced with keystrokes record) we proposed special post-synchronization algorithm. In Figure \[fig:game-sync\] we illustrate the synchronized segments of the game. All weapon fire events match with some mouse log event of left key pressing (the inverse is not true because not every mouse click results in weapon fire).
![Moments of left mouse button pressings, synchronized with the game events of weapon fire.[]{data-label="fig:game-sync"}](pressing.png){width="50.00000%"}
As we can see in both cases synchronization accuracy $<$10 ms were achieved. This value is $10 - 20$ times smaller than typical humans reaction time. So we can conclude that presented system allows one to collect multi-modal data for future data analysis in the field of physiology, psychology, eSports athletes training and so on.
Conclusion
==========
During this work a synchronous data collection system was created for monitoring of an esports athlete in CS:GO game. Various sensors were used, including data from a mouse, IMU, keyboard, gaming telemetry, etc. All collected data is synchronous (with the accuracy of 10ms) due to a configured local Stratum 1 time server on the Raspberry PI with a GPS signal (and PPS support). This is a distinctive feature of the created system. The ability to synchronize the time of the gaming computer with an accuracy of $2-3$ ms was confirmed. There is enough accuracy achieved for a comprehensive analysis of the in-game telemetry and physiological indicators of the player. The necessity of using a set of sensors to search for hidden features in the data of eSports athletes is shown. A method for synchronizing CS: GO in-game telemetry with real time is presented. The proposed approach and methodology could be used to get synchronous data from heterogeneous sensors to ensure high quality of data for further analysis. It’s possible to apply them to collecting data from other eSports disciplines , e.g., MOBA, RTS, fighting games, console games,etc. The second possible option is to apply it to a different field, for instance, to medical.
Acknowledgement {#acknowledgement .unnumbered}
===============
The reported study was funded by RFBR according to the research project No. 18-29-22077$\backslash$18.
[^1]: <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/networking/windows-time-service/support-boundary>
[^2]: <https://github.com/ValveSoftware/csgo-demoinfo>
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We establish necessary and sufficient conditions on a weight pair $(v,w)$ governing the boundedness of the Riesz potential operator $I_{\alpha}$ defined on a homogeneous group $G$ from $L^p_{dec,r}(w, G)$ to $L^q(v, G)$, where $L^p_{dec,r}(w, G)$ is the Lebesgue space defined for non-negative radially decreasing functions on $G$. The same problem is also studied for the potential operator with product kernels $I_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2}$ defined on a product of two homogeneous groups $G_1\times G_2$. In the latter case weights, in general, are not of product type. The derived results are new even for Euclidean spaces. To get the main results we use Sawyer type duality theorems (which are also discussed in this paper) and two–weight Hardy type inequalities on $G$ and $G_1\times G_2$ respectively.'
address:
- 'Department of Mathematical Analysis, A. Razmadze Mathematical Institute, I. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, 2. University Str., 0186 Tbilisi, Georgia.'
- 'Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Informatics and Control Systems, Georgian Technical University, 77, Kostava St., Tbilisi, Georgia.'
- 'Department of Mathematics, GC University, Faisalabad, Pakistan.'
- ' Department of Mathematics University of Malakand, Chakdara, Dir(L), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan'
author:
- Alexander Meskhi
- Ghulam Murtaza
- Muhammad Sarwar
title: 'A Characterization of the Two-weight Inequality for Riesz Potentials on Cones of Radially Decreasing Functions'
---
Riesz potential, multiple Riesz potential, homogeneous group, cone of decreasing functions, two-weight inequality, Sawyer’s duality theorem 42B20, 42B25.
Introduction
============
A homogeneous group is a simply connected nilpotent Lie group G on a Lie algebra g with the one-parameter group of transformations $\delta_{t}=exp(A\ log\ t)$, $t>0$, where A is a diagonalized linear operator in $G$ with positive eigenvalues. In the homogeneous group $G$ the mappings $exp\ o \ \delta_t\ o\
exp^{-1}$, $t>0$, are automorphisms in G, which will be again denoted by $\delta_{t} $. The number $Q=tr\ A $ is the homogeneous dimension of $G$. The symbol $e$ will stand for the neutral element in $G$.
It is possible to equip $G$ with a homogeneous norm $ r:G\rightarrow [
\ 0,\infty)$ which is continuous on $G$, smooth on $G\backslash\{e\}$ and satisfies the conditions:
\(i) $r(x)=r(x^{-1})$ for every $x\in \ G$;
(ii) $r(\delta_t x)= tr(x) $ for every $x\in G$ and $t>0$;
(iii) $ r(x) = 0$ if and only if $x=e$ ;
\(iv) There exists $ c_o >0 $ such that $$r(xy) \leq c_o (r(x)+r(y)),\;\; x,y \in G.$$
In the sequel we denote by $B(a,t)$ an open ball with the center $a$ and radius $t>0$, *i.e.*\
$$B(a,t ) : = \{ y \in \ G; \ r(ay^{-1}) < t \}.$$
It can be observed that $ \delta _ t B(e,1) =B(e, t).$
Let us fix a Haar measure $|\cdot|$ in G such that $|B(e,1)|=1$. Then $|\delta_{t} E|=t^Q|E|$. In particular, $|B(x,t)|=t^Q \hbox { for }x
\ \in \ G , \ t>0$.
Examples of homogeneous groups are: the Euclidean n-dimensional space $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, the Heisenberg group, upper triangular groups, etc. For the definition and basic properties of the homogeneous group we refer to [@FS], p. 12.
+0.2cm
An everywhere positive function $\rho$ on $G$ will be called a weight. Denote by $L^p(\rho, G) \ (1<p<\infty)$ the weighted Lebesgue space, which is the space of all measurable functions $f:G\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ defined by the norm $$\|f\|_{L^p(\rho, G)}=\Big(\int\limits_G
|f(x)|^p \rho(x)dx\Big)^{\frac{1}{p}}<\infty. \nonumber$$ If $\rho\equiv
1$, then we we use the notation $L^p(G).$
Denote by ${\mathcal{DR}}(G)$ the class of all radially decreasing functions on $G$ with values in ${\Bbb{R}}_+$, i.e. the fact that $\phi \in {\mathcal{DR}}(G)$ means that there is decreasing $\bar{\phi}: {\Bbb{R}}_+ \mapsto {\Bbb{R}}_+$ such that $\varphi(x)= \bar{\phi}(r(x))$. In the sequel we will use the symbol $\phi$ itself for $\bar{\phi}$; the fact that $\phi \in {\mathcal{DR}}(G)$ will be written also by the symbol $\varphi \downarrow r$. Let $G_1$ and $G_2$ be homogeneous groups. We say that a function $\psi: G_1\times G_2\mapsto {\Bbb{R}}_+$ is radially decreasing if it is such in each variable separately uniformly to another one. The fact that $\psi$ is radially decreasing on $G_1\times G_2$ will be denoted as $\psi \in {\mathcal{DR}}(G_1\times G_2)$.
Let $$(I_{\alpha}f)(x) = \int\limits_G f(y) \big(r(xy^{-1})\big)^{\alpha-Q} dy, \;\;\;\; 0<\alpha <Q,$$ be the Riesz potential defined on $G$, where $r$ is the homogeneous norm and $dy$ is the normalized Haar measure on $G$. The operator $I_{\alpha}$ plays a fundamental role in harmonic analysis, e.g., in the theory of Sobolev embeddings, in the theory of sublaplacians on nilpotent groups etc. Weighted estimates for multiple Riesz potentials can be applied, for example, to establish Sobolev and Poincaré inequalities on product spaces (see, e.g., [@ToPr]).
Let $G_1$ and $G_2$ be homogeneous groups with homogeneous norms $r_1$ and $r_2$ and homogeneous dimensions $Q_1$ and $Q_2$ respectively. We define the potential operator on $G_1\times G_2$ as follows $$I_{\alpha, \beta} f(x,y) = \iint\limits_{G_1\times G_2} f(t,\tau) \big(r_1(xt^{-1})\big)^{\alpha-Q_1} \big(r_2(y\tau^{-1})\big)^{\beta-Q_2}dtd\tau, \;\;\; (x,y)\in G_1\times G_2, \;\; 0<\alpha<Q_1,\; 0<\beta<Q_2.$$
Our aim is to derive two-weight criteria for $I_{\alpha}$ on the cone of radially decreasing functions on $G$. The same problem is also studied for the potential operator with product kernels $I_{\alpha, \beta}$ defined on a product of two homogeneous groups, where only the right–hand side weight is of product type. As far as we know the derived results for $I_{\alpha, \beta}$ are new even in the case of Euclidean spaces. The proofs of the main results are based on E. Sawyer (see [@Saw]) type duality theorem which is also true for homogeneous groups (see Propositions \[Saw-Dua\] and \[BHP2\] below) and Hardy type two-weight inequalities in homogeneous groups. Analogous results for multiple potential operators defined on ${\Bbb{R}}^n_+$ with respect to the cone of non-negative decreasing functions on ${\Bbb{R}}^n_+$ were studied in [@MMS], [@MM]. It should be emphasized that the two-weight problem for multiple Hardy operator for the cone of decreasing functions on ${\Bbb{R}}^n_+$ was investigated by S. Barza, H. P. Heinig and L. -E. Persson [@BHP] under the restriction that both weights are of product type.
Historically the one-weight inequality for the classical Hardy operator was characterize by M. A. Arino and B. Muckenhoupt [@AM] under the so called $B_p$ condition. The same problem for multiple Hardy transform was studied by N. Arcozzi, S. Barza, J. L. Garcia-Domingo and J. Soria [@ABGS]. This problem in the the two-weight setting was solved by E. Sawyer [@Saw]. Some sufficient conditions guaranteeing the two–weight inequality for the Riesz potential $I_{\alpha}$ on ${\Bbb{R}}^n$ was given by Y. Rakotondratsimba [@Rak]. In particular, the author showed that $I_{\alpha}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w, {\Bbb{R}}^n)$ to $L^q(v, {\Bbb{R}}^n)$ if the weighted Hardy operators $({\mathcal{H}}f)(x)=\frac{1}{|x|^{n-\alpha}} \int\limits_{|y|<|x|} f(y) dy $ and $({\mathcal{H}}'f)(x)= \int\limits_{|y|>|x|} \frac{f(y)}{|y|^{n-\alpha}} dy$ are bounded from $L^p(w, {\Bbb{R}}^n)$ to $L^q(v,{\Bbb{R}}^n)$. In fact the author studied the problem on the cone of monotone decreasing functions.
Now we give some comments regarding the notation: in the sequel under the symbol $A\approx B$ we mean that there are positive constants $c_1$ and $c_2$ (depending on appropriate parameters) such that $ c_1A \leq B \leq c_2 A$; $A \ll B$ means that there is a positive constant $c$ such that $A \leq c B$; integral over a product set $E_1\times E_2$ from $g$ will be denoted by $\iint\limits_{E_1\times E_2} g(x,y) dx dy$ or $\int_{E_1} \int_{E_2} g(x,y) dx dy$; for a weight functions $w$ and $w_i$ on $G$, by the symbols $W(t)$ and $W_i(t)$ will be denoted the integrals $\int\limits_{B(e,t)} w(x)dx $ and $\int\limits_{B(e_i,t)} w_i(x)dx $ respectively; for a weight $w$ on $G_1\times G_2$, we denote $W(t,\tau):= \int\limits_{B(e_1,t)\times B(e_2,\tau)} w(x,y) dx dy$, where $e_1$ and $e_1$ are neutral elements in $G_1$ and $G_2$ respectively. Finally we mention that constants (often different constants in one and the same lines of inequalities) will be denoted by $c$ or $C$. The symbol $p'$ stands for the conjugate number of $p$: $p'=p/(p-1)$, where $1<p<\infty$.
Preliminaries
=============
We begin this section with the statements regarding polar coordinates in $G$ (see e.g., [@FS], P. 14). +0.2cm
\[polar\] Let $G$ be a homogeneous group and let $S=\{x\in G:r(x)=1\}$. There is a (unique) Radon measure $\sigma$ on $S$ such that for all $u\in L^1(G)$, $$\int \limits_G u(x)dx=\int\limits_0^\infty \int\limits_S
u(\delta_t\overline y)t^{Q-1}d\sigma(\overline y)dt.$$
Let $a$ be a positive number. The two–weight inequality for the Hardy-type transforms $$(H^{a}f)(x)= \int\limits_{B(e, a r(x))} f(y) dy, \;\;\;\; x\in G,$$
$$(\widetilde{H}^{a}f(x) = \int\limits_{G\setminus B(e, a r(x))} f(y) dy, \;\;\;\; x\in G,$$ reeds as follows (see [@EKM], Ch.1 for more general case, in particular for quasi-metric measure spaces):
\[Hardy-G\] Let $1<p\leq q<\infty$ and let $a$ be a positive number. Then
[(i)]{}
The operator $H^a$ is bounded from $L^p(u_1, G)$ to $L^q(u_2,G)$ if and only if $$\sup_{t>0} \bigg( \int_{G\setminus B(e,t)} u_2(x) dx \bigg)^{1/q} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e,at)} u_1^{1-p'}(x) dx \bigg)^{1/p'}<\infty.$$
[(ii)]{}
The operator $\widetilde{H}^a$ is bounded from $L^p(u_1, G)$ to $L^q(u_2,G)$ if and only if $$\sup_{t>0} \bigg( \int_{B(e,t)} u_2(x) dx \bigg)^{1/q} \bigg( \int\limits_{G\setminus B(e,at)} u_1^{1-p'}(x) dx \bigg)^{1/p'}<\infty.$$
We refer also to [@DHK] for the Hardy inequality written for balls with center at the origin. +0.2cm
In the sequel we denote $H^{1}$ by $H$.
+0.2cm
The following statement for Euclidean spaces was derived by S. Barza, M. Johansson and L. -E. Persson [@BJP].
\[Duality\] Let $w$ be a weight function on $G$ and let $1<p<\infty$. If $f\in {\mathcal{DR}}(G)$ and $g \geq 0$, then $$\sup_{f \downarrow r} \frac{\int\limits_{G} f(x)g(x) dx }{\Big(\int\limits_G f(x)^p w(x) dx \Big)^{1/p}} \approx \|w\|_{L^1(G)}^{-1/p} \|g\|_{L^1(G)}+ \bigg( \int\limits_{G} H^{p'}(r(x)) W^{-p'}(r(x)) w(x) dx \bigg)^{1/p'},$$ where $H(t)=\int\limits_{B(e,t)}g(x) dx$, $W(t)=\int\limits_{B(e,t)}w(x) dx$.
The proof of Proposition \[Duality\] repeats the arguments (for ${\Bbb{R}}^n$) used in the proof of Theorem 3.1 of [@BJP] taking Proposition \[polar\] and the following lemma into account.
let $1<p<\infty$. For a weight function $w$, the inequality $$\int\limits_G w(x) \bigg( \int\limits_{G\setminus B(e, r(x))} f(y) dy\bigg)^p dx \leq p \int\limits_G f^p(x) W^p(r(x)) w^{1-p}(x) dx , \;\;\;\; f\geq 0,$$ holds.
[*Proof*]{} of this lemma is based on Theorem \[Hardy-G\] (part (ii)) taking $a=1$, $p=q$, $u_2(x)= v(x)$, $u_1= w^{1-p}(x) W^p(r(x))$ there. Details are omitted. $\;\;\; \Box$
+0.2cm
\[Duality-1\] Let the conditions of Proposition \[Duality\] be satisfied and let $\int\limits_{G}w(x) dx=\infty$. Then the following relation holds: $$\sup_{f \downarrow r} \frac{\int\limits_{G} f(x)g(x) dx }{\Big(\int\limits_G f^p(x) w(x)dx \Big)^{1/p}} \approx \bigg( \int\limits_{G} H^{p'}(r(x)) W(r(x)) w(x) dx \bigg)^{1/p}.$$
Corollary \[Duality-1\] implies the following duality result which follows by the standard way (see [@Saw], [@BJP] for details).
\[Saw-Dua\] Let $1< p,q<\infty$ and let $v,w$ be weight functions on $G$ with $\int\limits_{G} w(x) dx =\infty$. Then the integral operator $T$ defined on functions on $G$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w, G)$ to $L^q(v, G)$ if and only if $$\bigg( \int\limits_{G} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e, r(x))} (T^*g)(y) dy \bigg)^{p'} W^{-p'}(r(x)) w(x) dx \bigg)^{1/p'} \leq C \bigg( \int\limits_{G} g^{q'}(x) v^{1-q'}(x) dx \bigg)^{1/q'}$$ holds for every positive measurable $g$ on $G$.
The next statement yields the criteria for the two–weight boundedness of the operator $H$ on the cone ${\mathcal{DR}}(G)$. In particular the following statement is true:
\[Hardy-Inequality-G\] Let $1<p\leq q <\infty$ and let $v$ and $w$ be weights on $G$ such that $\|w\|_{L^1(G)}=\infty$. Then $H$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w,G)$ to $L^q_{v}(v,G)$ if and only if
[(i)]{} $$\sup_{t>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e,t)} w(x) dx \bigg)^{-1/p} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e,t)} v(x) r^{Qq}(x) dx\bigg)^{1/q}<\infty;$$ [(ii)]{} $$\sup_{t>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e,t)} r^{Qp'}(x) W^{-p'}(r(x)) w(x) dx \bigg)^{1/p'} \bigg( \int\limits_{G\setminus B(e,t)} v(x) dx \bigg)^{1/q} <\infty.$$
[*Proof*]{} of this statement follows by the standard way applying Proposition \[Saw-Dua\] (see e.g. [@Saw], [@BJP]). $\Box$. +0.2cm
Let $\rho$ be a locally integrable a.e. positive function on $G$. We say that $\rho$ satisfies the doubling condition at $e$ ( $\rho \in DC(G)$ ) if there is a positive constant $b>1$ such that for all $t>0$ the following inequality holds:
$$\int\limits_{B(e, 2t)} \rho(x) dx \leq b \int\limits_{B(e,t)} \rho(x) dx.$$
Further, we say that $w\in DC^{\gamma, p}(G)$, where $1<p<\infty$, $0<\gamma<Q/p$, if there is a positive constant $b$ such that for all $t>0$ $$\int\limits_{G\setminus B(e, t)} r^{\gamma p'}(x) W^{-p'}(r(x))w(x) dx \leq b \int\limits_{G\setminus B(e,2t)} r^{\gamma p'}(x) W^{-p'}(r(x))w(x) dx.$$
\[Rem\] It is also to check that under the assumption $1<p<\infty$, $0<\gamma<Q/p$ the condition $w\in DC^{\gamma, p}(G)$ is satisfied for $w\equiv \; const$.
We say that a locally integrable a.e. positive function $\rho$ on $G_1\times G_2$ satisfies the doubling condition with respect to the second variable ( $\rho \in DC^{(s)}(y)$ ) uniformly to the first one if there is a positive constant $c$ such that for all $t>0$ and almost every $x\in G_1$ the following inequality holds:
$$\int\limits_{B(e_2, 2t)} \rho(x,y) dy \leq c \int\limits_{B(e_2,t)} \rho(x,y) dy.$$
Analogously is defined the class of weights $DC^{(s)}(x)$.
Riesz Potentials on $G$
=======================
The main result of this section reeds as follows:
\[Main-Theorem\] Let $1<p\leq q<\infty$ and let $v$ and $w$ be weights such that either $w\in DC^{\alpha, p}(G) $ or $v\in DC(G)$; let $\|w\|_{L^1(G)}=\infty$. Then the operator $I_{\alpha}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w,G)$ to $L^q(v, G)$ if and only if
[(i)]{} $$\label{F1}
\sup_{t>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e,t)} w(x) dx \bigg)^{-1/p} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e,t)} r^{\alpha q}(x) v(x) dx \bigg)^{1/q}< \infty;$$
[(ii)]{} $$\label{F2}
\sup_{t>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e,t)} r^{p'Q}(x)W^{-p'}(r(x)) w(x)
dx \bigg)^{1/p'} \bigg(\int_{G\setminus B(e, t)} r^{(\alpha-Q)q}(x) v(x)dx \bigg)^{1/q} <\infty;$$
[(iii)]{} $$\label{F3}
\sup_{t>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e,t)} v(x) dx \bigg)^{1/q} \bigg(\int_{G\setminus B(e, t)} r^{\alpha p'}(x) W^{-p'}(r(x)) w(x) dx \bigg)^{1/p'} <\infty.$$
To prove this result we need to prove some auxiliary statements.
\[estimate\] Let $0<\alpha<Q$ and let $c_o$ be the constant from the triangle inequality of $r$. Then there is a positive constant $c$ depending only on $Q$, $\alpha$ and $c_o$ such that for all $s\in B(e, r(x)/2)$, $$\label{est}
I(x,y):= \int\limits_{B(e, r(x))\setminus B(e, 2c_0 r(y))} r(ty^{-1})^{\alpha-Q} dt \leq c r(xy^{-1})^{\alpha}.$$
We have $$I(x,y)= \int\limits_0^{\infty} |\{ t\in G: r(ty^{-1})^{\alpha-Q}>\lambda\}\cap B(e, r(x))\setminus B(e, 2c_0 r(y))|d \lambda = \int\limits_{0}^{r(xy^{-1})^{\alpha-Q}} (\cdots) + \int\limits_{r(xy^{-1})^{\alpha-Q}}^{\infty}(\cdots) =: I^{(1)}(x,y) + I^{(2)}(x,y).$$ Observe that, by the triangle inequality for $r$, we have $r^Q(x)\leq c^{Q}_0 2^{Q-1}( r^Q(xy^{-1}) + r^Q(y))$. This implies that $r^Q(x)- (2c_0)^Q r^Q(y) \leq c^{Q}_0 2^{Q-1} r^Q(xy^{-1})$. Hence, $$I^{(1)}(x,y) \leq r(xy^{-1})^{\alpha-Q} |B(e, r(x))\setminus B(e, 2c_0 r(y))| =r(xy^{-1})^{\alpha-Q} \Big( r^Q(x)- (2c_0)^Q r^Q(y)\Big) \leq c r(xy^{-1})^{\alpha}.$$ Further, it is easy to see that $$I^{(2)}(x,y) \leq c r(xy^{-1})^{\alpha}.$$
Finally we have .
Let us introduce the following potential operators $$(J_{\alpha}f)(x)= \int\limits_{B(e,2c_0 r(x))} f(y) r^{\alpha-Q}(xy^{-1}) dy, \;\;\; (S_{\alpha}f)(x)= \int\limits_{G\setminus B(e,2c_0 r(x))} f(y) r^{\alpha-Q}(xy^{-1}) dy,\;\;\;\ x\in G, \; 0<\alpha<Q.$$
It is easy to see that
$$\label{representation}
I_{\alpha}f = J_{\alpha}f + S_{\alpha}f.$$
We need also to introduce the following weighted Hardy operator $$(H_{\alpha}f)(x)= r(x)^{\alpha-Q} (Hf)(x).$$
\[main1\] The following relation holds for all $f\in {\mathcal{DR}}(G)$ $$J_{\alpha}f \approx H_{\alpha}f.$$
We have
$$(J_{\alpha}f)(x) = \int\limits_{B(e, r(x)/ 2c_0)} f(y) r^{\alpha-Q}(xy^{-1}) dy + \int\limits_{B(e, 2c_0 r(x))\setminus B \big(e, r(x)/(2c_0)\big)} f(y) r^{\alpha-Q}(xy^{-1}) dy=: (J^{(1)}_{\alpha}f)(x) + (J^{(2)}_{\alpha}f)(x).$$ If $y\in B(e, r(x)/ 2c_0)$, then $r(x) \leq c_0 (r(xy^{-1}) +r(y)) \leq c_0 r(xy^{-1}) + r(x)/2 $. Hence $r(x) \leq 2 c_0 (r(xy^{-1})$. Consequently, $$(J^{(1)}_{\alpha}f)(x) \leq c (H_{\alpha}f)(x).$$ Applying now the fact that $f\in DR (G)$ we see that $$\begin{aligned}
(J^{(2)}_{\alpha}f)(x)&\leq& f(r(x)/2c_0) \int\limits_{B(e, r(x)/ 2c_0)\setminus B(e, 2c_0 r(x))} r^{\alpha-Q}(xy^{-1}) dy \leq c f(r(x)/2c_0) r(x)^{\alpha} \leq c (H_{\alpha}f)(x).\end{aligned}$$
\[main2\]Let $1<p\leq q<\infty$ and let $v$ and $w$ be weights on $G$ such that $\| w \|_{L^1(G)}=\infty$. Then the operator $S_{\alpha}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w,G)$ to $L^q(v,G)$ if
$$\sup_{t>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{G\setminus B(e,t)} r^{\alpha p'}(x) W^{-p'}(r(x))w(x) dx \bigg)^{1/p'} \bigg( \int\limits_{B\big(e,t/(2c_0)\big)} v(x) dx \bigg)^{1/q}<\infty.$$Conversely, if $S_{\alpha}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w,G)$ to $L^q(v,G)$, then the condition $$\sup_{t>0} \bigg( \int_{G\setminus B(e,t)} r^{\alpha p'}(x) W^{-p'}(x)w(x) dx \bigg)^{1/q} \bigg( \int\limits_{B\big(e,t/(4c_0)\big)} v(x) dx \bigg)^{1/p'}<\infty$$ is satisfied. Furthermore, if either $w\in DC^{\alpha, p}$ or $v\in DC(G)$, then the operator $S_{\alpha}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w,G)$ to $L^q(v,G)$ if and only if $$\sup_{t>0} \bigg( \int_{G\setminus B(e,t)} r^{\alpha p'}(x) W^{-p'}(r(x))w(x) dx \bigg)^{1/q} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e,t)} v(x) dx \bigg)^{1/p'}<\infty.$$
Applying Proposition \[Saw-Dua\], $S_{\alpha}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w,G)$ to $L^q(v,G)$ if and only if $$\bigg( \int\limits_G \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e, r(x))} (S^*_{\alpha}f)(y) dy\bigg)^{p'} W^{-p'}(r(x)) w(x)dx \bigg)^{1/p'} \leq c\bigg( \int\limits_G g^{q'}(x) v^{1-q'}(x) dx \bigg)^{1/q'},$$ where $$(S^*_{\alpha}f)(x)= \int\limits_{B\big(e, r(x)/(2c_0)\big)} f(y) r^{\alpha-Q}(xy^{-1}) dy.$$
Now we show that $$\label{two-sided}
c_1 r^{\alpha}(x) \int\limits_{B\big(e, r(x)/ (4c_0)\big)} g(s) ds \leq \int\limits_{B(e, r(x))} (S^*_{\alpha}g)(y) dy \leq c_2 r^{\alpha}(x) \int\limits_{B\big(e, r(x)/ (2c_0)\big)}g(s) ds,\;\;\; g\geq 0.$$ To prove the right-hand side estimate in observe that by Tonelli’s theorem and Lemma \[estimate\] we have that $$\begin{aligned}
\int\limits_{B(e, r(x))} (S^*_{\alpha}g)(y) dy &=& \int\limits_{B\big(e, r(x)/(2c_0)\big)} f(s) \bigg( \int\limits_{B\big(e, r(x)\big) \setminus B \big(e, 2c_0 r(s)\big)} r^{\alpha-Q}(sy^{-1}) dy \bigg) ds \\
&\leq & c_2 r(x)^{\alpha} \int\limits_{B(e, r(x)/(2c_0))} f(s) ds .\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand,
$$\begin{aligned}
\int\limits_{B(e, r(x))} (S^*_{\alpha}g)(y) dy &\geq& c r^{\alpha-Q}(x) \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e, r(x))\setminus B(e, r(x)/2)} \bigg( \int\limits_{B\big(e, r(y)/(2c_0)\big)} f(s) ds \bigg) dy\bigg) \\
&\geq& c_1 r^{\alpha}(x) \bigg( \int\limits_{B\big(e, r(x)/(4c_0)\big) } f(s) ds \bigg) .\end{aligned}$$
Thus, Theorem \[Hardy-G\] completes the proof.
[*Proof*]{} of Theorem \[Main-Theorem\]. By it is enough to estimate the terms with $J_{\alpha}f$ and $S_{\alpha}f. $ By applying Proposition \[main1\] and Theorem \[Hardy-Inequality-G\] we have that $J_{\alpha}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w,G)$ to $L^q(v,G)$ if and only if the conditions (ii) and (iii) are satisfied. Now by Lemma \[main2\] and the equality (which is a consequence of Proposition \[polar\]) $$\bigg( \int\limits_{G\setminus B(e,t)} W(r(x)) w(x) dx\bigg)^{1/p'}= \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e,t)} w(x) dx \bigg)^{-1/p}$$ we have that $S_{\alpha}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w,G)$ to $L^q(v,G)$ if and only if (i) is satisfied. $\Box$
Multiple Potentials on $G_1 \times G_2$
=======================================
Let us now investigate the two–weight problem for the operator $I_{\alpha, \alpha_2}$ on the cone ${\mathcal{DR}}(G_1\times G_2)$. In the sequel without loss of generality we denote the triangle inequality constants for $G_1$ and $G_2$ by one and the same symbol $c_0$.
The following statement can be derived just in the same way as Theorem 3.1 was obtained in [@BHP]. The proof is omitted because to avoid repeating those arguments. +0.2cm
\[BHP1\] Let $1<p<\infty$ and let $w(x,y)= w_1(x)w_2(y)$ be a product weight on $G_1\times G_2$. Then the following relation $$\sup_{0\leq f \downarrow r}\frac{\iint\limits_{G_1\times G_2} f(x,y)g(x,y) dxdy}{ \bigg(\iint\limits_{G_1\times G_2} f^{p}(x,y) w(x,y)\bigg)^{1/p}} \approx \sum_{i=1}^4 I_k,$$ holds for a non-negative measurable function $g$, where $$I_1:= \|w\|_{L^1(G_1\times G_2)}^{-1/p} \|g\|_{L^1(G_1 \times G_2)},$$
$$I_2:= \| w_2\|^{-1/p}_{L^1(G_1)} \bigg( \int\limits_{G_1} \int\limits_{B(e_1,r_1(x))} \| g(t,\cdot)\|_{L^1(G_2)}dt \bigg)^{p'} W_1^{-p'}(r_1(x))w_1(x) dx\bigg)^{1/p'},$$
$$I_2:= \| w_1\|^{-1/p}_{L^1(G_1)} \bigg( \int\limits_{G_2} \int\limits_{B(e_2,r_2(y))} \| g(\cdot, \tau)\|_{L^1(G_1)}d\tau \bigg)^{p'} W_2^{-p'}(r_2(y))w_2(y) dy\bigg)^{1/p'},$$
$$I_4:=\bigg( \int\limits_{G_1\times G_2} \bigg( \int\limits_{G_1\times G_2} g(t,\tau) dt d\tau \bigg)^{p'} W^{-p'}(r_1(x),r_2(y))w(x,y) dx dy\bigg)^{1/p'}.$$
Applying Proposition \[BHP1\] together with the duality arguments we can get the following statement (cf. [@BHP]).
\[BHP2\] Let $1<p<\infty$ and let $v$ and $w$ be weights on $G_1\times G_2$ such that $w(x,y)= w_1(x) w_2(y)$, $\|w\|_{L^1(G_1\times G_2)}=\infty$. Then an integral operator $T$ defined for functions from ${\mathcal{DR}}(G_1\times G_2)$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec, r}(w, G_1\times G_2)$ to $L^p(v, G_1\times G_2)$ if and only if for all non-negative measurable $g$ on $G_1 \times G_2$, $$\bigg( \iint\limits_{G_1\times G_2} \bigg( \iint\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))\times B(e_2, r_2(y))} (T^*g)(t,\tau)dt d\tau\bigg)^{p'} W^{-p'}(x,y) w(x,y) dxdy\bigg)^{1/p'} \leq C \bigg( \iint\limits_{G_1\times G_2} g^{q'}(x,y) v^{1-q'}(x,y) dx dy\bigg)^{1/q'}.$$
The next statements deals with the double Hardy–type operators defined on $G_1\times G_2$
$$(H^{a,b}f)(x,y)= \int\limits_{B(e_1, a r_1(x))} \int\limits_{B(e_2, b r_2(x)) } f(t, \tau) dt d\tau, \;\;\;\; (x,y)\in G_1 \times G_2,$$
$$(\tilde{H}^{a,b}f)(x,y)= \int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1, a r_1(x))} \int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_2, b r_2(x))} f(t, \tau) dt d\tau, \;\;\;\; (x,y)\in G_1 \times G_2,$$
$$(H_1^{a,b}f)(x,y)= \int\limits_{B(e_1, a r_1(x))} \int\limits_{G_2 \setminus B(e_2, b r_2(y))} f(t, \tau) dt d\tau, \;\;\;\; (x,y)\in G_1 \times G_2,$$
$$(H_2^{a,b}f)(x,y)= \int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1, a r_1 (x))} \int\limits_{B(e_2, b r_2(y))} f(t, \tau) dt d\tau, \;\;\;\; (x,y)\in G_1 \times G_2.$$
\[Hardy-G\_1-G\_2\] Let $1<p\leq q<\infty$. Suppose that $v$ and $w$ be weights on $G_1\times G_2$ such that either $w(x,y)= w_1(x) w_2(y)$ or $v(x,y)= v_1(x) v_2(y)$. Then
[(i)]{} The operator $H^{a,b}$ is bounded from $L^p(w, G_1\times G_2)$ to $L^q(v, G_1\times G_2)$ if and only if $$A:= \sup_{t>0, \tau>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1,t)}\int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_2,\tau)} v(x,y) dxdy \bigg)^{1/q} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1,at)} \int\limits_{B(e_2,b\tau)} w^{1-p'}(x,y) dxdy \bigg)^{1/p'}<\infty.$$
[(ii)]{} The operator $\tilde{H}^{a,b}$ is bounded from $L^p(w, G_1\times G_2)$ to $L^q(v, G_1\times G_2)$ if and only if $$\sup_{t>0, \tau>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1,t)} \int\limits_{B(e_2,\tau)} v(x,y) dxdy \bigg)^{1/q} \bigg( \int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1,at)}\int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_2, b \tau)} w^{1-p'}(x,y) dxdy \bigg)^{1/p'}<\infty.$$
[(iii)]{} The operator $H_1^{a,b}$ is bounded from $L^p(w, G_1\times G_2)$ to $L^q(v, G_1\times G_2)$ if and only if $$\sup_{t>0, \tau>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1,t)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, \tau)} v(x,y) dxdy \bigg)^{1/q} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1,at)}\int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_2, b \tau)} w^{1-p'}(x,y) dxdy \bigg)^{1/p'}<\infty.$$
[(iv)]{} The operator $H_2^{a,b}$ is bounded from $L^p(w, G_1\times G_2)$ to $L^q(v, G_1\times G_2)$ if and only if $$\sup_{t>0, \tau>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1,t) } \int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_2,\tau )} v(x,y) dxdy \bigg)^{1/q} \bigg( \int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1,at)}\int\limits_{ B(e_2, b \tau)} w^{1-p'}(x,y) dxdy \bigg)^{1/p'}<\infty.$$
Let $w(x,y)= w_1(x) w_2(y)$. Then the proposition follows in the same way as the appropriate statements regarding the Hardy operators defined on ${\Bbb{R}}_+^2$ in [@MeJFSA], [@KoMe3] (see also Theorem 1.1.6 of [@KMP]). If $v$ is a product weight, i.e. $v(x,y)= v_1(x) v_2(y)$, then the result follows from the duality arguments. We give the proof, for example, for $H^{a,b}$ in the case when $w(x,y)= w_1(x) w_2(y)$.
First suppose that $S:=\int\limits_{G_2}w^{1-p'}_2(y)dy =\infty$. Let $\{x_k\}_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty}$ be a sequence of positive numbers for which the equality
$$\label{1.1.16}
2^k=\int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_k)} w_2^{1-p'}(y) dy$$
holds for all $k\in {\mathbb{Z}}$. This equality follows because of the continuity in $t$ of the integral over the ball $B(e_2, bt)$. It is clear that $\{x_k\}$ is increasing and ${\mathbb{R}}_+ = \cup_{k\in {\mathbb{Z}}}[x_k, x_{k+1})$. Moreover, it is easy to verify that $$2^k = \int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_{k+1})\setminus B(e_2, b x_{k})} w_2^{1-p'}(y)dy.$$ Let $f\geq 0$. We have that $$\begin{aligned}
&& \|H^{a,b}f\|^q_{L^q_{v}(G_1\times G_2)}= \iint\limits_{G_1\times G_2} v(x,y) \big(H^{a,b} f\big)^q (x,y) dxdy \\
&\leq& \sum_{k \in {\mathbb{Z}}} \int\limits_{G_1} \int\limits_{B(e_2, x_{k+1})\setminus B(e_2, x_{k})} v(x,y) \bigg( \iint\limits_{ B\big(e_1, a r_1(x)\big)\times B\big(e_2, b r_2(x)\big)}
f(t,\tau)dt d\tau \bigg)^q dxdy
\\ &\leq& \sum_{k \in {\mathbb{Z}}} \int\limits_{G_1} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_2, x_{k+1})\setminus B(e_2, x_{k})} v(x,y) dy\bigg)\bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, ar_1(x))} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_2, bx_{k+1})}
f(t,\tau)d\tau\bigg)dt \bigg)^q dx \\ &=& \sum_{k\in {\mathbb{Z}}} \int\limits_{G_1} V_k(x)\bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, ar_1(x))} F_k(t) dt \bigg)^q dx,\end{aligned}$$ where $$V_k(x):=\int\limits_{B(e_2, x_{k+1})\setminus B(e_2, x_{k})} v(x,y) dy;\;\; F_k(t):= \int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_{k+1})} f(t,\tau)d\tau.$$
It is obvious that $$A^q \geq \sup_{\substack{a>0 \\ j\in {\mathbb{Z}}}} \bigg(\int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1, t)}v_j (y) dy\bigg) \bigg(\iint\limits_{B(e_1, at)\times B(e_2, b x_j)} w^{1-p'}(x,y)dxdy\bigg)^{q/p'}.$$ Hence, by Theorem A $$\|H^{a,b}f\|^q_{L^q_{v}(G_1 \times G_2)} \leq c A^q \sum_{j\in {\mathbb{Z}}}\bigg[ \int\limits_{G_1} w_1(x) \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_2, bx_j)} w_{2}^{1-p'}(y)dy\bigg)^{1-p} (F_k(x))^p dx \bigg]^{q/p}$$ $$\leq cA^q \bigg[ \int\limits_{G_1} w_1(x) \sum_{j\in Z} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_j)} w_{2}^{1-p'}(y)dy\bigg)^{1-p} \\ \bigg(\sum_{k=-\infty}^{j} \int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_{k+1}) \setminus B(e_2, b x_{k})}
f(x,\tau)d\tau\bigg)^p dx \bigg]^{q/p}.$$ On the other hand, yields that $$\begin{aligned}
&& \sum_{k=n}^{+\infty} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_k)} w_2^{1-p'}(y) dy \bigg)^{1-p} \bigg(\sum_{k=-\infty}^{n} \int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_{k+1})\setminus B(e_2, b x_{k})}w_2^{1-p'}(y) dy \bigg)^{p-1}\\ & =& \sum_{k=n}^{+\infty} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_k)} w_2^{1-p'}(y) dy \bigg)^{1-p} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_{n+1})}w_2^{1-p'}(y) dy \bigg)^{p-1}\!\!\!=
\Big(\sum_{k=n}^{+\infty}2^{k(1-p)}\Big)2^{(n+1)(p-1)}\leq c\end{aligned}$$ for all $n\in {\mathbb{Z}}$. Hence by the discrete Hardy inequality (see e.g. [@Ben]) and Hölder’s inequality we have $$\begin{aligned}
\|H^{a,b}f\|^q_{L^q_{v}(G_1 \times G_2)} &\leq& c A^q \bigg[ \int\limits_{G_1} w_1(x) \sum_{j\in {\mathbb{Z}}} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_{j+1})\setminus B(e_2, b x_{j})} w_{2}^{1-p'}(y)dy\bigg)^{1-p} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_{j+1})\setminus B(e_2, bx_{j})} f(x,\tau)d\tau\bigg)^p dx \bigg]^{q/p} \\ &\leq& c A^q \bigg[ \int\limits_{G_1} w_1(x) \sum_{j\in {\mathbb{Z}}} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_2, b x_{j+1})\setminus B(e_2, b x_{j})}
w_2(\tau)f^p(x,\tau)d\tau\bigg) dx \bigg]^{q/p}= c A^q \|f\|_{L^p_w(G_1 \times G_2)}^q.\end{aligned}$$
If $S<\infty$, then without loss of generality we can assume that $S=1$. In this case we choose the sequence $\{ x_k \}_{k=-\infty}^{0}$ for which (\[1.1.16\]) holds for all $k\in {\mathbb{Z}}_-$. Arguing as in the case $S=\infty$ and using slight modification of the discrete Hardy inequality (see also [@KMP], Chapter 1 for similar arguments), we finally obtain the desired result.
Finally we notice that the part (i) can be also proved if we first establish the boundedness of the operator $({\mathcal{H}}^{a,b}\varphi)(t,\tau) =\int\limits_0^{at}\int\limits_0^{b\tau} \varphi(s,r) dsdr $ in the spirit of Theorem 1.1.6 in [@KMP] and then pass to the case of $G_1 \times G_2$ by Proposition \[polar\].
+0.2cm
The next statement will be useful for us.
\[double-Hardy\] Let $1<p\leq q<\infty$. Assume that $v$ and $w$ are weights on $G_1\times G_2$. Suppose that $w(x,y)= w_1(x)w_2(y)$ and that $W_i(\infty)=\infty$, $i=1,2$. Then the operator $H^{1,1}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w, G_1\times G_2)$ to $L^q(v, G_1 \times G_2)$ if and only if the following four conditions are satisfied:
${\rm{(i)}}$ $$\sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} w(x, y) dx dy \bigg)^{-1/p} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_1^{Q_1 q}(x) r_2(y) ^{Q_2 q} v(x,y) dx dy\bigg)^{1/q}< \infty;$$
${\rm{(ii)}}$ $$\sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_1^{Q_1 p'} (x) r_2(y)^{Q_2 p'} W^{-p'}(r_1(x), r_2(y)) w(x,y)
dx dy \bigg)^{1/p'} \bigg(\int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{G_2 \setminus B(e_2, a_2)} v(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/q} <\infty;$$
${\rm{(iii)}}$ $$\sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} w_1(r_1(x)) dx\bigg)^{-1/p} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_2(y)^{Q_2p'} W_2^{-p'}(r_2(y))w_2(y)dy\bigg)^{1/p'} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_2, a_2)} r_1(x)^{Q_1 q} v(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/q} <\infty;$$
${\rm{(iv)}}$ $$\sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} r_1(x)^{Q_1p'}W_1^{-p'}(r_1(x))w_1(x)dt_1\bigg)^{1/p'}\bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} w_2(y)d y\bigg)^{-1/p} \bigg(\int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_2(y)^{Q_2q} v(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/q} <\infty.$$
We follow the proof of Theorem 5.3 in [@BHP]. First of all observe that by Proposition \[BHP2\], if $w$ is a product weight, i.e., $w(x_1, x_2)= w_1(x_1) w_2(x_2)$, such that $W_i(\infty)=\infty$, $i=1, 2$, and $v$ is any weight on $G_1\times G_2$, then $H^{1,1}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w, G_1)$ to $L^q(v, G_2)$ if and only if
$$\bigg( \iint\limits_{G_1 \times G_2} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))} \int\limits_{B(e_2, r_2(x))} \bigg[ \int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B(e_1, r_1(t))} \int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B(e_2, r_2(\tau))} g(s, \varepsilon) ds d\varepsilon\bigg] dt d\tau\bigg)^{p'} W^{-p'}(r_1(x), r_2(y)) w(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/p'}$$
$$\label{dual}\leq
c \bigg( \iint\limits_{G_1\times G_2} g^{q'}(x,y) v^{1-q'}(x,y) dx dy \bigg)^{1/q'}, \;\; g\geq 0.$$
Further, we have that
$$\begin{aligned}
&& \iint\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))\times B(e_2, r_2(x))} \bigg( \int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B(e_1, r_1(t))} \int\limits_{G_2 \setminus B(e_2, r_2(t))} g(s,\varepsilon) ds d\varepsilon\bigg) dt d\tau \\
&=& \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))} \int\limits_{B(e_2, r_2(x))} r_1^{Q_1}(t) r_2^{Q_2}(\tau) g(t,\tau) dt d\tau + r_1^{Q_1}(x) \int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B(e_1, r_1(x))} \int\limits_{B(e_2, r_2(y))} r_2^{Q_2}(\tau) g(t, \tau) dt d\tau \\ & +& r_2^{Q_2}(y) \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))} \int\limits_{G_2 \setminus B(e_2, r_2(y))} r_1^{Q_1}(t) g(t, \tau) dt d\tau \\&+& r_1^{Q_1}(x)r_2^{Q_2}(y) \int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B(e_1, r_1(x))}\int\limits_{G_2 \setminus B(e_2, r_2(y))} g(t, \tau) dt d\tau \\ &=:& I^{(1)}(x,y) + I^{(2)}(x,y)+ I^{(3)}(x,y)+ I^{(4)}(x,y).
\end{aligned}$$
It is obvious that holds if and only if $$\label{j-inequality} \bigg( \iint\limits_{G_1\times G_2} (I^{(j)})^{p'}(x,y) W^{-p'}(r_1(x), r_2(y))w(x,y) dxdy\bigg)^{1/p'}
\leq c \bigg( \iint\limits_{G_1\times G_2} g^{q'}(x,y) v^{1-q'}(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/q'}$$ for $j= 1, 2, 3,4. $ By using Proposition \[Hardy-G\_1-G\_2\] (Part (i)) we find that $$\Bigg( \iint\limits_{G_1 \times G_2} (I^{(1)})^{p'}(x,y) W^{-p'}(r_1(x), r_2(y))w(x,y) dxdy \Bigg)^{1/p'}\leq c \Bigg( \iint\limits_{G_1 \times G_2} g^{q'}(x,y) v^{1-q'}(x,y) dx dy \Bigg)^{1/q'}$$ if and only if
$$\begin{aligned}
&& \bigg( \int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B(e_1, t)} \int\limits_{G_2 \setminus B(e_2, \tau)} W^{-p'}(r_1(x), r_2(y)) w(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/p'} \bigg( \iint\limits_{B(e_1, t)\times B(e_2,\tau)} \bigg( \frac{v^{1-q'}(x,y)}{r_1^{Q_1 q'}(x) r_2^{Q_2 q'}(y)}\bigg)^{1-q} dxdy \bigg)^{1/q} \\ &=& c_p \bigg( \iint\limits_{B(e_1, t)\times B(e_2, \tau)} w(x,y) dx dy \bigg)^{-1/p} \bigg( \iint\limits_{B(e_1, t)\times B(e_2, \tau)} v(x,y) r_1^{Q_1 q}(x)r_2^{Q_2 q}(y) dx dy \bigg)^{1/q} \leq C.
\end{aligned}$$
In the latter equality we used the equality
$$\bigg( \int\limits_{G_i \setminus B(e_i, t)} W_i^{-p'}\big(r_i(x)\big) w_i(x) dx \bigg)^{1/p'}=\bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_i, t)} w_i(x) dx \bigg)^{-1/p}, \;\;\ i=1,2,$$ which is direct consequence of integration by parts and Proposition \[polar\]. Taking now Proposition \[Hardy-G\_1-G\_2\] (Part (ii)) into account we find that holds for $j=4$ if and only if condition (ii) is satisfied, while Proposition \[Hardy-G\_1-G\_2\] (Parts (iii) and (iv)) and the following observation:
$$\begin{aligned}
&& \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B(e_1, a_1)} w_1(x) W_1^{-p'}(r_1(x))dx\bigg)^{1/p'}
\bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_2^{p' Q_2}(y) W_2^{-p'}(r_2(y))w_2(y)dy\bigg)^{1/p'} \\ &\times& \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{G_2 \setminus B(e_2, a_2)} r_1^{Q_1q}(x) v(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/q}\\ &=& c_p \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} w_1(x) dx \bigg)^{-1/p} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_2^{Q_2p'}(y) W_2^{-p'}(r_2(y)) w_2(y)dy\bigg)^{1/p'}
\\&\times& \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_2, a_2)} r_1^{Qq}(x) v(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/q} <\infty;\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
&& \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} r_1^{Q_1p'}(x) W_1^{-p'}(r_1(x))w_1(x)dx \bigg)^{1/p'}\bigg( \int\limits_{G_2 \setminus B(e_2, a_2)} w_2(y)W_2^{-p'}(r_2(y)) dy \bigg)^{1/p'}
\\
&\times & \bigg(\int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_2^{Q_2 q}(y) v(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/q} \\ &=& c_p\sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} r_1^{Q_1 p'}(x) W_1^{-p'}(r_1(x))w_1(x)dx \bigg)^{1/p'}
\bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} w_2(t_2) dt_2\bigg)^{-1/p} \\
&\times & \bigg(\int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1, a_1)}\int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_2^{Q_2 q}(y) v(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/q} <\infty\end{aligned}$$
yield for $j=2,3$.
Let $$(J_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2}f)(x,y)= \int\limits_{B \big(e_1, 2 c_0 r_1(x)\big)}\int\limits_{B \big(e_2, 2 c_0 r_2(y)\big)} f(t,\tau) r_1(xt^{-1})^{\alpha_1-Q_1} r_2(y\tau^{-1})^{\alpha_2-Q_2} dt d\tau,$$
$$(J_{\alpha_1}S_{\alpha_2}f)(x,y)= \int\limits_{B \big(e_1, 2 c_0 r_1(x)\big)}\int\limits_{G_2 \setminus B\big(e_2, 2 c_0 r_2(y)\big)} f(t,\tau) r_1(xt^{-1})^{\alpha_1-Q_1} r_2(y\tau^{-1})^{\alpha_2-Q_2} dt d\tau,$$
$$(S_{\alpha_1}J_{\alpha_2}f)(x,y)= \int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B \big(e_1, 2 c_0 r_1(x)\big)}\int\limits_{ B\big(e_2, 2 c_0 r_2(y)\big)} f(t,\tau) r_1(xt^{-1})^{\alpha_1-Q_1} r_2(y\tau^{-1})^{\alpha_2-Q_2} dt d\tau,$$
$$(S_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2}f) (x,y) = \int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B \big(e_1, 2 c_0 r_1(x)\big)}\int\limits_{G_2\setminus B \big(e_2, 2 c_0 r_2(y)\big)} f(t,\tau) r_1(xt^{-1})^{\alpha_1-Q_1} r_2(y\tau^{-1})^{\alpha_2-Q_2} dt d\tau,$$ where $c_0$ is the constant from the triangle inequality for the homogeneous norms $r_1$ and $r_2$.
It is obvious that $$\label{rep}
I_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2}f = J_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2}f+ J_{\alpha_1}S_{\alpha_2}f +S_{\alpha_1}J_{\alpha_2}f +S_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2}f.$$
Now we formulate the main result of this section.
\[Main-theorem\] Let $1<p\leq q<\infty$. Assume that $v$ and $w$ are weights on $G_1\times G_2$ such that $w(x,y)= w_1(x)w_2(y)$. Suppose that either $w_i\in DC^{\alpha_i,p}$, $i=1,2$, or $v\in DC(x) \cap DC(y)$. Then the operator $I_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w, G_1\times G_2)$ to $L^q(v, G_1 \times G_2)$ if and only if the following conditions are satisfied:
[[(i)]{}]{}
$$A_1:= \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} w(x,y) dx dy\bigg)^{-1/p} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} \Big( r_1^{\alpha_1}(x) r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \Big)^qv(x,y) dx dy \bigg)^{1/q}< \infty;$$
[[(ii)]{}]{} $$A_2:= \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_1^{Q_1 p'}(x)r_2^{Q_2 p'}(y)W^{-p'}(r_1(x), r_2(y)) w(x,y)
dx dy \bigg)^{1/p'}$$ $$\times \bigg(\int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{G_2 \setminus B(e_2, a_2)} \Big( r_1^{\alpha_1 -Q_1}(x) r_2^{\alpha_2 -Q_2}(y)\Big)^qv(x,y )dx dy \bigg)^{1/q} <\infty;$$
[[(iii)]{}]{} $$A_3:= \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} w_1(x) dx\bigg)^{-1/p} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_2^{Q_2 p'}(y) W_2^{-p'}(r_2(y))w_2(y)dy\bigg)^{1/p'}$$ $$\times \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_2, a_2)} r_1^{\alpha_1 q}(x) r_2^{ q(\alpha_2 -Q_2)}(y) v(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/q} <\infty;$$ [(iv)]{} $$A_4:= \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} r_1^{ Q_1 p'} (x) W_1^{-p'}(r_1(x))w_1(x)dx \bigg)^{1/p'}\bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} w_2(y)dy \bigg)^{-1/p}$$ $$\bigg(\int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1, a_1)}\int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_1^{q(\alpha_1 -Q_1)}(x) r_2^{q\alpha_2} (y) v(x,y)dx dy \bigg)^{1/q} <\infty.$$
[(v)]{} $$A_5:= \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{ G_1 \setminus B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_2, a_2)} r_1^{\alpha_1 p'}(x) r_2^{\alpha_2 p'}(y) W^{-p'}(r_1(x), r_2(y)) w(x,y) dx dy\bigg)^{1/p'}$$ $$\times \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} v(x,y) dx dy \bigg)^{1/q}< \infty;$$
[(vi)]{} $$A_6:=\sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{ B(e_1, a_1)} w_1(x) dx\bigg)^{-1/p} \bigg(\int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_2, a_2)} r_2^{\alpha_2 p'}(y) W_2^{-p'}(r_2(y)) w_2(y) dy\bigg)^{1/p'}$$ $$\times \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_1^{\alpha_1 q}(x) v(x,y) dx dy \bigg)^{1/q}< \infty;$$
[(vii)]{} $$A_7:= \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{ B(e_1, a_1)} r_1^{Q_1 p'}(x) W_1^{-p'}(r_1(x)) w_1(x) dx\bigg)^{1/p'} \bigg( \int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_2, a_2)} r_2^{\alpha_2 p'}(y) W_2^{-p'}(r_2(y)) w_2(y) dy\bigg)^{1/p'}$$ $$\times \bigg(\int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_1^{(\alpha_1 -Q_1)q}(x) v(x,y) dx dy \bigg)^{1/q}< \infty;$$
[(viii)]{} $$A_8:= \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{G_2\setminus B(e_1, a_1)} r_1^{\alpha_1 p'}(x) W_1^{-p'}(r_1(x)) w_1(x) dx\bigg)^{-1/p} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} w_2(y) dy\bigg)^{1/p'}$$ $$\times \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} r_2^{\alpha_2 q}(x) v(x,y) dx dy \bigg)^{1/q}< \infty;$$
[(ix)]{} $$A_9:= \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1) } r_2^{Q_2 p'}(y) W_2^{-p'}(r_2(y)) w_2(y) dy\bigg)^{1/p'} \bigg(\int\limits_{G_1 \setminus B(e_1, a_1) } r_1^{\alpha_1 p'}(x) W_1^{-p'}(r_1(x)) w_1(x) dx\bigg)^{1/p'}$$ $$\times \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{G_2 \setminus B(e_2, a_2)} r_2^{(\alpha_2 -Q_2)q}(y) v(x,y) dx dy \bigg)^{1/q}< \infty.$$
Let us assume that $v\in DC(x) \cap DC(y)$. The case when $w_i\in DC^{\alpha_i,p}(G_i)$, $i=1,2$ follows analogously. By using representation we have to investigate the boundedness of the operators $J_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2}f$, $J_{\alpha_1}S_{\alpha_2}f$, $S_{\alpha_1}J_{\alpha_2}f$, $S_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2}f$ separately.
Since $f\in \mathcal{DR}(G_1\times G_2)$ by using the arguments of the proof of Proposition \[main1\] it can be checked that $$(J_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2}f)(x,y) \approx r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(x) r_2^{\alpha_2-Q_2}(y) \iint\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))\times B(e_2, r_2(y))} f(t,\tau) dt d\tau$$ (see also [@MMS] for similar estimate in the case of the multiple one-sided potentials on ${\Bbb{R}}_+^2$). Hence, by Proposition \[double-Hardy\] we have that $J_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w, G_1\times G_2)$ to $L^q(v, G_1 \times G_2)$ if and only if conditions (i)- (iv) hold.
Observe that the dual to $S_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2}$ is given by $$(S^{*}_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2} g)(x,y)= \iint\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x)/(2c_0))\times B(e_2, r_2(y)/(2c_0))}g(t,\tau) r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(xt^{-1}) r_2^{\alpha_2-Q_2}(y\tau^{-1})dt d\tau.$$ Further, Tonelli’s theorem together with Lemma \[estimate\] for both variables implies that there are positive constants $c_1$ and $c_2$ such that for all $(x,y)\in G_1 \times G_2$ for the dual (see also the proof of Lemma \[main2\])
$$\begin{aligned}
&&
r_1^{\alpha_1}(x) r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \iint\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x)/(4c_0))\times B(e_2, r_2(y)/(4c_0))}g(t,\tau) dt d\tau \leq c_1 \iint\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))\times B(e_2, r_2(y))} \big( S^*_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2} g\big) (t, \tau) dt d\tau \\
&\leq& c_2
r_1^{\alpha_1}(x) r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \iint\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x)/(2c_0))\times B(e_2, r_2(y)/(2c_0))}g(t,\tau) dt d\tau.\end{aligned}$$
Applying Propositions \[Hardy-G\_1-G\_2\] and \[double-Hardy\] with the condition that $v\in DC(G_1\times G_2)$ we find that the operator $S_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w, G_1\times G_2)$ to $L^q(v, G_1 \times G_2)$ if and only if condition (v) is satisfied.
Further, observe that due to the fact that $f$ is radially decreasing with respect to the first variable we have
$$(J_{\alpha_1} S_{\alpha_2} f)(x,y)\approx ({\mathcal{H}}_{\alpha_1} S_{\alpha_2} f)(x,y),$$ where $$({\mathcal{H}}_{\alpha_1} S_{\alpha_2} f)(x,y) = r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(x) \int\limits_{B\big(e_1, 2 c_0 r_1(x)\big)}\int\limits_{ G_2 \setminus B\big(e_2, 2 c_0 r_2(y)\big)} f(t,\tau) r_2(y\tau^{-1})^{\alpha_2-Q_2} dt d\tau.$$
Dual of ${\mathcal{H}}_{\alpha_1} S_{\alpha_2}$ is given by $$\big( {\mathcal{H}}^{*}_{\alpha_1} S^{*}_{\alpha_2} g\big)(t,\tau) = \int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1, r(t))}
\int\limits_{B(e_2, r(\tau)/2c_0)}r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(s) r_2^{\alpha_2-Q_2}(\varepsilon \tau ^{-1}) f(s,\varepsilon) ds d\varepsilon.$$ Further, we have $$\begin{aligned}
T(x,y)&:=& \iint\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))\times B(e_2, r_2(y))} ({\mathcal{H}}^{*}_{\alpha_1} S^{*}_{\alpha_2} g)(t,\tau) dt d\tau \\
&=& \iint\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))\times B(e_2, r_2(y))} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))\setminus B(e_1, r(t))}
\int\limits_{B(e_2, r(\tau)/2c_0)}r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(s) r_2^{\alpha_2-Q_2}(\tau \varepsilon^{-1}) f(s,\varepsilon) ds d\varepsilon\bigg) dt d\tau \\
&+& \iint\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))\times B(e_2, r_2(y))} \bigg( \int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1, r_1(x))}
\int\limits_{B\big(e_2, r(\tau)/(2c_0)\big)}r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(s) r_2^{\alpha_2-Q_2}(\tau \varepsilon^{-1}) f(s,\varepsilon) ds
d\varepsilon\bigg) dt d\tau \\
&=:& T_1(x,y)+T_2(x,y).\end{aligned}$$ Tonelli’s theorem for $G_1$ , the inequality $r_2^{\alpha_2-Q_2}(\tau \varepsilon^{-1})\geq c r_2^{\alpha_2-Q_2}(y)$ for $\tau\in B(e_2, r(y))$, $\varepsilon \in B\big(e_2, r(\tau)/(2c_0)\big)$, and the fact that the integral $\int\limits_{B(e_1, \tau)} f(s, \varepsilon) ds $ is decreasing in $\tau$ uniformly to $\varepsilon$ yield that $$\begin{aligned}
T_1(x,y) &\geq& c r_2^{\alpha_2-Q_2}(y) \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))} \int\limits_{B(e_2, r_2(y))\setminus B(e_2, r_2(y)/2)} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))\setminus B(e_1, r(t))}
\int\limits_{B\big(e_2, r_2(y)/(4c_0)\big)}r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(s) f(s,\varepsilon) ds d\varepsilon\bigg) dt d\tau \\
&= & c r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))\setminus B(e_1, r(t))}\bigg( r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(s) \bigg( \int\limits_{B\big(e_2, r_2(y)/(4c_0)\big)} f(s,\varepsilon) d\varepsilon\bigg) ds \bigg) dt \\
&=& c r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))} \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))\setminus B(e_1, r(t))} F(s,y) ds \bigg) dt = c r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))} F(s,y) \bigg( \int\limits_{ B(e_1, r(s))} dt \bigg)ds \\ &=& c r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))} \int\limits_{B\big(e_2, r_2(y)/(4c_0)\big)} r_1^{\alpha_1}(s) f(t,\tau) d\varepsilon ds .\end{aligned}$$ Here we used the notation $$F(s,y): = \int\limits_{B\big(e_2, r_2(y)/(4c_0)\big)} f(s,\varepsilon) d\varepsilon.$$
Taking into account that the function $\int\limits_{B(e_2, 2c_0\lambda)} f(s, \varepsilon) d\varepsilon $ is decreasing in $\lambda$ uniformly to $s$, the inequality $r_2(\tau\varepsilon^{-1})\leq c r_2(y)$ for $\tau\in B(e_2, r(y))$, $\varepsilon \in B\big(e_2, r(\tau)/(2c_0)\big)$, and Tonelli’s theorem for $G_1$ we find that
$$T_2(x,y) \geq c r_1^{Q_1}(x) r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \int\limits_{G_1\setminus B(e_1, r_1(x))} \int\limits_{B\big(e_2, r_2(y)/(4c_0)\big)} r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(s) f(t,\tau) d\varepsilon ds .$$
To get the upper estimate, observe that Tonelli’s theorem for $G_1\times G_2$ and Lemma \[estimate\] for $r_2$ yield that $$\begin{aligned}
T_1(x,y) &\leq& \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(x))} \int\limits_{B\big(e_2, r_2(y)/(2c_0)\big)} r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(s)f(s,\varepsilon) \bigg( \int\limits_{B(e_1, r_1(s))}
\int\limits_{B\big(e_2, r_2(y)\big)\setminus B\big(e_2, 2c_0 r_2(\varepsilon)\big)}r_2^{\alpha_2-Q_2}(\tau\varepsilon^{-1}) dt d\tau \bigg) ds d\varepsilon \\
&\leq& c r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \iint\limits_{B\big(e_1, r_1(x)\big)\times B\big(e_2, r_2(y)/(2c_0)\big)} r_1^{\alpha_1}(s) f(s,\varepsilon) ds d\varepsilon.\end{aligned}$$
Similarly, $$T_2(x,y) \leq c r_1^{Q_1}(x) r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \iint\limits_{G_1 \setminus B\big(e_1, r_1(x)\big)\times B\big(e_2, r_2(y)/(2c_0)\big)} r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(s) f(s,\varepsilon) ds d\varepsilon.$$
Summarazing these estimates we see that there are positive constants $c_1$ and $c_2$ depending only on $\alpha_1$, $\alpha_2$, $Q_1$ and $Q_2$ such that
$$\begin{aligned}
&& r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \iint\limits_{B\big(e_1, r_1(x)\big)\times B\big(e_2, r_2(y)/(4c_0)\big)} r_1^{\alpha_1}(s) f(s,\varepsilon) ds d\varepsilon \\
&+& r_1^{Q_1}(x) r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \iint\limits_{G_1 \setminus B\big(e_1, r_1(x)\big)\times B\big(e_2, r_1(y)/(4c_0)\big)} r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(s) f(s,\varepsilon) ds d\varepsilon.
\\
&\leq & c_1 T(x,y) \leq r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \iint\limits_{B\big(e_1, r_1(x)\big)\times B\big(e_2, r2(y)/(2c_0)\big)} r_1^{\alpha_1}(s) f(s,\varepsilon) ds d\varepsilon \\
&+& r_1^{Q_1}(x) r_2^{\alpha_2}(y) \iint\limits_{G_1 \setminus B\big(e_1, r_1(x)\big)\times B\big(e_2, r_1(y)/(2c_0)\big)} r_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1}(s) f(s,\varepsilon) ds d\varepsilon.\end{aligned}$$
Taking Propositions \[Hardy-G\_1-G\_2\] and \[BHP2\] into account together with the doubling condition for $v$ with respect to the second variable we see that the operator $J_{\alpha_1} S_{\alpha_2}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w,G_1)$ to $L^q(v,G_2)$ if and only if the conditions (vi) and (vii) are satisfied.
By the similar manner (changing the roles of the first and second variables) we can get that $S_{\alpha_1} J_{\alpha_2}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(w,G_1)$ to $L^q(v,G_2)$ if and only if the conditions (viii) and (ix) are satisfied.
Theorem \[Main-theorem\] and Remark \[Rem\] imply criteria for the trace inequality for $I_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2}$. Namely the following statement holds:
\[Main-theorem-1\] Let $1<p\leq q<\infty$ and let $0<\alpha_i<Q_i/p$, $i=1,2$. Then $I_{\alpha_1, \alpha_2}$ is bounded from $L^p_{dec,r}(G_1\times G_2)$ to $L^q(v, G_1 \times G_2)$ if and only if the following condition holds
$$B:= \sup_{a_1, a_2>0} \bigg(\int\limits_{B(e_1, a_1)} \int\limits_{B(e_2, a_2)} v(x,y) dx dy\bigg)^{1/q} a_1^{\alpha_1-Q_1/p} a_2^{\alpha_2-Q_2/p} < \infty.$$
Sufficiency is a consequence of the inequality $\max \{ A_1, \cdots, A_9\}\leq c B$, while necessity follows immediately by taking the test function $f_{a_1, a_2}(x,y) = \chi_{B(e_1, a_1)}(x) \chi_{B(e_2, a_2)}(y)$, $a_1, a_2>0$.
+0.2cm
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
The first author is grateful to Professor V. Kokilashvili for drawing his attention to the two-weight problem for multiple Riesz potentials.
The first author was partially supported by the Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation Grant (Contract Numbers: D/13-23 and 31/47).
[20]{}
K. F. Andersen, Weighted generalized Hardy inequalities for nonincreasing functions, [*Can. J. Math.*]{} [**43**]{} (1991), No. 6, 1121–1135.
N. Arcozzi, S. Barza, J. L. Garcia-Domingo and J. Soria, Hardy’s inequalities for monotone functions on partially ordered measure spaces, [*Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect*]{}. A [**136**]{} (2006), No. 5, 909–919.
M. A. Arino and B. Muckenhoupt, Maximal functions on classical Lorentz spaces and Hardy’s inequality with weights for nonincreasing functions. [*Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**320**]{} (1990), No.2, 727–735.
S. Barza, P. H. Heinig and L.–E. Persson, Duality theorem over the cone of monotone functions and sequences in higher dimensions, [*J. Inequal. Appl*]{}. **7** (2002), No. 1, 79–108.
S. Barza, M. Johanson and L. -E. Persson, A Sawyer duality principle for radially monotone functions in ${\Bbb{R}}^n$, [*J. Ineq. Pure Appl. Math.*]{} [**6**]{}(2005), No.2, 1-31.
G. Bennett, Some elementary inequalities, [*Quart. J. Math. Oxford*]{} [**(2) 38**]{} (1987), No. 152, 401–425.
P. Drabek, H. P. Heinig and A. Kufner, [*Higher dimensional Hardy inequality*]{}, General inequalities, 7 (oberwolfach, 1995), 3-16, Internat. Ser. Numer. Math., 123, Birkhäuser, Basel, 1997.
D. E. Edmunds, V. Kokilashvili and A. Meskhi, [*Bounded and compact integral operators*]{}, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, London, 2002.
G. B. Folland and E. M. Stein, Hardy spaces on homogeneous groups, *Princeton University Press, Princeton,* 1987.
V. Kokilashvili and A. Meskhi, On one–sided potentials with multiple kernels, [*Integr. Transf. Spec. Funct.*]{} [**16**]{} (2005), No. 8, 669–683.
V. Kokilashvili and A. Meskhi, On a trace inequality for one-sided potentials with multiple kernels. [*Frac. Calc. Appl. Anal.*]{} [**6**]{} (2003), No.4, 461–472.
V. Kokilashvili and A. Meskhi, Two-weight estimates for strong fractional maximal functions and potentials with multiple kernels. [*J. Korean Math. Soc.*]{} [**46**]{} (2009), No. 3, 523–550
V. Kokilashvili, A. Meskhi and L.-E. Persson, Weighted Norm Inequalities for Integral Transforms with Product Kernels, [*Nova Science Publishers, New York,*]{} 2009.
A. Meskhi, A note on two-weight inequalities for multiple Hardy-type operators, [*J. Funct. Spaces Appl.*]{} [**3**]{} (2005), 223–237.
A. Meskhi and G. Murtaza, Potential operators on cones of non-increasing functions, [*J. Funct. Spaces Appl.*]{}, vol. 2012, Article ID 474681, 26 pages, 2012. doi:10.1155/2012/474681.
A. Meskhi, G. Murtaza and M. Sarwar, Weighted criteria for one-sided potentials with product kernels on cones of decreasing functions. [*Math. Ineq. Appl*]{}. [**14**]{}(2011), No. 3, 693–708.
I. Rakotondratsimba, Weighted inequalities for the fractional integral operators on monotone functions, [*Z. Anal. Anwendungen*]{}, [**15**]{} (1996), No. 1, 75–93.
E. Sawyer, Boundedness of classical operators on classical Lorentz spaces, [*Studia Math.,*]{} [**96**]{} (1990), 145–158.
V. D. Stepanov, Two–weight estimates for Riemann-Liouville integrals, (Russian) [*Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat*]{}. [**54**]{} (1990), No. 3, 645–656; translation in [*Math. USSR-Izv.*]{} [**36**]{} (1991), No. 3, 669–681.
X. Shi and A. Torchinsky, Poincaré and Sobolev Inequalities in Product Spaces, [*Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**118**]{}, No. 4, 1117–1124
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We give a quantitative interpretation of the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion. Actually we show that an operator which satisfies the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion is necessarily $A$-frequently hypercyclic, where $A$ refers to some weighted densities sharper than the natural lower density. In that order, we exhibit different scales of weighted densities that are of interest to quantify the “frequency” measured by the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion. Moreover we construct an example of unilateral weighted shift which is frequently hypercyclic but not $A$-frequently hypercyclic on a particular scale.'
address:
- 'Romuald Ernst, LMPA, Centre Universitaire de la Mi-Voix, Maison de la Recherche Blaise-Pascal, 50 rue Ferdinand Buisson, BP 699, 62228 Calais Cedex'
- 'Augustin Mouze, Laboratoire Paul Painlevé, UMR 8524, Cité Scientifique, 59650 Villeneuve d’Ascq, France, Current address: École Centrale de Lille, Cité Scientifique, CS20048, 59651 Villeneuve d’Ascq cedex'
author:
- 'R. Ernst, A. Mouze'
title: a quantitative interpretation of the frequent hypercyclicity criterion
---
Introduction {#sec_intro}
============
The notion of frequent hypercyclicity was introduced in the context of linear dynamics by Bayart and Grivaux in 2006 [@Baygrihyp], [@Baygrifrequentlyhcop]. This latter is now a central notion in that field and is highly connected to combinatorics, number theory and ergodic theory. Let $X$ be a metrizable and complete topological vector space and $L(X)$ be the space of continuous linear operators on $X.$ An operator $T\in L(X)$ is said to be *hypercyclic* if there exists $x\in X$ such that for any non-empty open set $U\subset X$, the return set $\{n\geq 0:T^nx\in U\}$ is non-empty or equivalently infinite. Such a vector $x$ is called a hypercyclic vector for $T$. Furthermore an operator $T$ is called *frequently hypercyclic* if there exists $x\in X$ such that for any non-empty open set $U\subset X$, the set of integers $n$ satisfying $T^nx\in U$ has positive lower density, i.e. $$\liminf_{N\rightarrow +\infty}\frac{\#\{k\leq N:T^kx\in U\}}{N}>0,$$ where as usual $\#$ denotes the cardinality of the corresponding set. Thus the notion of frequent hypercyclicity extends the classical hypercyclicity and appraises *how often* the orbit of a hypercyclic vector visits every non-empty open set. In the sequel we denote by $\mathbb{N}$ the set of positive integers and for any $x\in X$ and any subset $U\subset X$ we set $N(x,U):=\{n\in\mathbb{N}: T^nx\in U\}.$ Given a subset $E\subset\mathbb{N},$ we define its *lower and upper* densities respectively by $$\underline{d}(E)=\liminf_{N\rightarrow +\infty}\frac{\#\{k\leq N:k\in E\}}{N}\hbox{ and }
\overline{d}(E)=\limsup_{N\rightarrow +\infty}\frac{\#\{k\leq N:k\in E\}}{N}.$$ In other words, an operator $T\in L(X)$ is hypercyclic (resp. frequently hypercyclic) if there exists $x\in X$ such that for any non-empty open set $U\subset X,$ the set $N(x,U)$ is non-empty (resp. has positive lower density). To prove that an operator is hypercyclic we have at our disposal the so-called Hypercyclicity Criterion (see [@Bay], [@Grope] and the references therein). In the same spirit, Bayart and Grivaux stated the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion, which ensures that an operator is frequently hypercyclic [@Baygrifrequentlyhcop]. Let us recall it here.
\[frequ\_hyp\_crit\] Let $T$ be an operator on a separable Fréchet space $X.$ If there is a dense subset $X_0$ of $X$ and a map $S:X_0\rightarrow X_0$ such that, for any $x\in X_0,$
(i) $\displaystyle\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}T^nx$ converges unconditionally,
(ii) $\displaystyle\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}S^nx$ converges unconditionally,
(iii) $TSx=x,$
then $T$ is frequently hypercyclic.
We already know that the above result does not characterize frequently hypercyclic operators. Indeed Bayart and Grivaux have exhibited a frequently hypercyclic weighted shift on $c_0$ that does not satisfy this criterion [@Baygriinv]. A natural question arises: what does the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion really quantify? In order to answer this question, Bès, Menet, Peris and Puig recently generalized the notion of hypercyclic operators by introducing the concept of $\mathcal{A}$-frequent hypercyclicity, where $\mathcal{A}$ refers to a family of subsets of $\mathbb{N}$ satisfying suitable conditions [@Besmenperpuig]. In particular, $\mathcal{A}$ has to satisfy the following separation condition: $$\begin{aligned}
&\mathcal{A} \text{ contains a sequence $(A_k)$ of disjoint sets such that for any $j\in A_k$, any $j'\in A_{k'}$, $j\neq j'$,}\\
&\text{we have $\vert j'-j\vert\geq\max(k,k')$.}\end{aligned}$$
In this abstract framework, they also obtain an $\mathcal{A}$-Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion and prove that the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion has very strong consequences in the sense that if $T$ satisfies the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion, then $T$ also satisfies the $\mathcal{A}$-Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion for any suitable family $\mathcal{A}$. Bonilla and Grosse-Erdmann also studied specific notions related to the concept of $\mathcal{A}$-frequent hypercyclicity in the article [@BongrossUFHC].\
On the other hand, the notion of frequent hypercyclicity measures the frequency and the length of the intervals when iterates of a hypercyclic vector visits every non-empty open set in a very specific way, that is given by the natural density. Actually, there are many types and notions of densities different from the natural one. Our goal is to give quantified consequences to the Frequent Hypercyclicty Criterion in terms of weighted densities. To that purpose, we consider a special kind of lower weighted densities, generalizing the natural one but sharper than this one, by using the formalism of matrix summability methods. For such a matrix $A$, we use the concept of $A$-density and $A$-frequent hypercyclicity (see Definitions \[defdens\] and \[defiA\] below). These general densities were already used in the context of linear dynamics to study frequently universal series [@Mouzemupol]. In the present paper, we show that the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion gives a stronger conclusion than frequent hypercyclicity, that we quantify thanks to explicit weighted densities on different scales. We refer the reader to Proposition \[main\_prop\] and Theorem \[main\_theorem\] below. Therefore an operator which satisfies the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion is necessarily $A$-frequently hypercyclic, where $A$ refers to some weighted densities sharper than the natural lower density.
Let us return to the formalism of $\mathcal{A}$-frequent hypercyclicity. For instance $\mathcal{A}$ could be a family of subsets with positive given lower weighted density satisfying the aforementioned separation property. However from [@Besmenperpuig], there is an underlying question: does there exist a frequently hypercyclic operator not being $\mathcal{A}$-frequently hypercyclic? We give a positive answer by constructing an unilateral weighted shift on $c_0$ which is frequently hypercyclic but not $A$-frequently hypercyclic with respect to some $A$-densities covered by the criterion (see Theorem \[counterexample\] below).\
The paper is organized as follows: in Section \[ad\] we introduce some densities that will be of interest in the sequel and some properties on these densities. Section \[const\_classical\] is devoted to an improvement of the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion for a certain scale of weighted densities. In Section \[furth\_result\], we modify this proof in order to obtain a stronger result to the criterion. Finally in Section \[fhc\_op\], we exhibit a new example, inspired by [@Bayru], of an operator which is frequently hypercyclic although it does not satisfy the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion. To ensure this latter property, we will show that this operator is not $A$-frequently hypercyclic for some suitable matrix $A.$
Densities: preliminary results {#ad}
==============================
In this section, we state some definitions and results we shall need throughout the paper. Let us first introduce the concept of summability matrix and its connections with some kind of densities on subsets of $\mathbb{N}.$
[A [*summability matrix*]{} is an infinite matrix $M=(m_{n,k})$ of complex numbers.]{}
Let us recall that, if $(x_n)$ is a sequence and $M=(m_{n,k})$ is a summability matrix, then by $Mx$ we denote the sequence $((Mx)_1,(Mx)_2,\dots)$ where $(Mx)_n=\sum_{k=1}^{+\infty}m_{n,k}x_k.$ The matrix $M$ is called [*regular*]{} if the convergence of $x$ to $c$ implies the convergence of $Mx$ to $c.$ By a well-known result of Toeplitz (see for instance [@Zygmund]), $M$ is regular if and only if the following three conditions hold: $$\label{CondToeplitz}
\left\{\begin{array}{rl}
(i)&\displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}m_{n,k}=0,\hbox{ for all }k\in\mathbb{N},\\
(ii)&\displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty}\sum_{k\geq 1}m_{n,k}=1,\\
(iii)&\sup_n \sum_{k\geq 1}\vert m_{n,k}\vert<\infty.\end{array}\right.$$
Freedman and Sember showed that every regular summability matrix $M$ with non-negative real coefficients defines a density $\underline{d}_M$ on subsets of $\mathbb{N}$, called lower $M$-density [@Freedman].
\[defdens\] [For a regular matrix $M=(m_{n,k})$ with non-negative coefficients and a set $E\subset \mathbb{N},$ the lower $M$-density of $E,$ denoted $\underline{d}_M(E),$ is defined by $$\underline{d}_M(E)=\liminf_{n\rightarrow +\infty}\sum_{k=1}^{+\infty}m_{n,k}{\mathds{1}_{E}}(k),$$ and the associated upper $M$-density, denoted by $\overline{d}_M(E),$ is defined by $$\overline{d}_M(E)=1-\underline{d}_M(\mathbb{N}\setminus E).$$ ]{}
[For a non-negative regular matrix $M=(m_{n,k})$, Proposition 3.1 of [@Freedman] ensures that the upper $M$-density of any set $E\subset\mathbb{N}$ is given by $$\overline{d}_M(E)=\limsup_{n\rightarrow +\infty}\sum_{k=1}^{+\infty}m_{n,k}{\mathds{1}_{E}}(k).$$]{}
Let $(\alpha_k)_{k\geq 1}$ be a non-negative sequence such that $\sum_{k=1}^n\alpha_k\rightarrow +\infty$ as $n$ tends to $\infty.$ Then, we deal with the special case of $A$-density where we write $A=\left(\alpha_k/\sum_{j=1}^n\alpha_j\right),$ when $A=(\alpha_{n,k})$ with $\alpha_{n,k}=\alpha_k/\sum_{j=1}^n\alpha_j$ for $1\leq k\leq n$ and $\alpha_{n,k}=0$ for $k>n.$ It is easy to check that $A$ is a non-negative regular summability matrix. In summability theory the transformation given by $x=(x_n)\mapsto Ax$ is called the Riesz mean $(A,\alpha_n).$ Here the associated $A$-density can be viewed as a weighted density with respect to the non-negative weight sequence $(\alpha_k)_{k\geq 1}.$
[A summability matrix $A=\left(\alpha_k/\sum_{j=1}^n\alpha_j\right)$ as above will be called an [*admissible*]{} matrix. We define its summatory function $\varphi_{\alpha}$ as follows: $\varphi_{\alpha}: {\mathbb{N}}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}_+,$ $\varphi_{\alpha}(n)=\sum_{k\leq n}\alpha_k.$]{}
\[examplelogdensity\]
\[examplelogdensity1\] If $\alpha_k=1,$ $k=1,2,\dots,$ then the summability matrix $A$ is the well-known Cesàro matrix and $\underline{d}_A$ is the natural lower density.
\[examplelogdensity2\] If $\alpha_k=1/k,$ $k=1,2,\dots,$ $\underline{d}_A$ is the so-called lower logarithmic density, which is derived from the well-known logarithmic summability method. We have $\varphi_{\alpha}(k)\sim \log (k),$ as $k$ tends to $+\infty.$
\[examplelogdensity3\] The special case $\alpha_k=k^r,$ $r\geq -1$, for $k=1,2,\dots,$ generalizes both the natural density ($r=0$) and the logarithmic density ($r=-1$). Clearly we have $\varphi_{\alpha}(k)\sim \frac{k^{r+1}}{r+1},$ as $k$ tends to $+\infty,$ when $r>-1.$
\[examplelogdensity4\] If $\alpha_k=e^{k^r},$ $0<r< 1,$ for $k=1,2,\dots,$ an easy calculation gives $\varphi_{\alpha}(k)\sim \frac{k^{1-r}}{r}e^{k^r},$ as $k$ tends to $+\infty.$
\[examplelogdensity5\] If $\alpha_k=e^{k}$, for $k=1,2,\dots,$ then $\varphi_{\alpha}(k)\sim \frac{e}{e-1}e^{k},$ as $k$ tends to $+\infty.$
\[examplelogdensity6\] If $\alpha_1=1$ and $\alpha_k=e^{k/\log^r(k)},$ $r> 0,$ for $k=2,3,\dots,$ a summation by parts gives $\varphi_{\alpha}(k)\sim \log^r(k)e^{k/\log^r(k)},$ as $k$ tends to $+\infty.$
\[examplelogdensity7\] Let $h_s$ be the real function defined by $h_{s}=\log.\log^{(s)},$ with $\log^{(s)}=\log\circ\log\dots\circ\log,$ where $\log$ appears $s$ times. If $\alpha_k=e^{k/h_s(k)},$ $l\in\mathbb{N},$ $s\geq 2,$ for $k$ large enough, again a summation by parts gives $\varphi_{\alpha}(k)\sim h_s(k)e^{k/h_s(k)},$ as $k$ tends to $+\infty.$
In the following sections, we shall use the following definitions connected to Example \[examplelogdensity\].
\[def1\]
For any subset $E\subset\mathbb{N},$ we can write $E$ as a strictly increasing sequence $(n_k)$ of positive integers. It is well-known that $\underline{d}(E)=\liminf_{k\rightarrow +\infty}
\frac{k}{n_k}$ which allows to deduce the following simple fact: $\underline{d}(E)>0$ if and only if the sequence $\left(\frac{n_k}{k}\right)$ is bounded [@Grope]. The following lemma extends this remark to suitable $A$-densities.
\[LemmaDensInfCalc\] Let $(\alpha_k)$ be a non-negative sequence such that $\sum_{k\in{\mathbb{N}}} \alpha_k=+\infty.$ Assume that the sequence $(\alpha_n/\sum_{j=1}^n\alpha_j)$ converges to zero as $n$ tends to $+\infty$. Let $(n_k)$ be an increasing sequence of integers forming a subset $E\subset\mathbb{N}.$ Then, we have $$\underline{d}_{A}(E)=\liminf_{k\rightarrow +\infty}\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{k}\alpha_{n_j}}{\sum_{j=1}^{n_k}\alpha_j}\right),$$ where $\underline{d}_{A}$ is the $A$-density given by the summability matrix $A=(\alpha_k/\sum_{j=1}^n\alpha_j).$
Let us consider $n_k\leq N <n_{k+1},$ then $$\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{k+1}\alpha_{n_j}}{\sum_{j=1}^{n_{k+1}}\alpha_j}-\frac{\alpha_{n_{k+1}}}{\sum_{j=1}^{n_{k+1}}\alpha_j}=
\frac{\sum_{j=1}^k\alpha_{n_j}}{\sum_{j=1}^{n_{k+1}}\alpha_j}
\leq
\frac{\sum_{n_j\leq N}\alpha_{n_j}}{\sum_{j=1}^N\alpha_j}\leq
\frac{\sum_{j=1}^k\alpha_{n_j}}{\sum_{j=1}^{n_k}\alpha_j}.$$ Thus, we deduce $$\underline{d}_{A}(E)=\liminf_{N\rightarrow +\infty}
\left(\frac{\sum_{n_j\leq N}\alpha_{n_j}}{\sum_{j=1}^N\alpha_j}\right)=
\liminf_{k\rightarrow +\infty}\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{k}\alpha_{n_j}}{\sum_{j=1}^{n_k}\alpha_j}\right).$$
In the present paper, we are mainly interested in sharper $A$-densities than the classical natural density. From this point of view, the following lemma gives some conditions to ensure that the sequence $(\alpha_k)$ leads to a sharper density.
\[lemmastieltjes\] Let $(\alpha_k)$ and $(\beta_k)$ be non-negative sequences such that $\sum_{k\in{\mathbb{N}}} \alpha_k=\sum_{k\in{\mathbb{N}}} \beta_k=+\infty.$ Assume that the sequence $(\alpha_k/\beta_k)$ is eventually decreasing to zero. Let $A=(\alpha_k/\sum_{j=1}^n\alpha_j)$ and $B=(\beta_k/\sum_{j=1}^n\beta_j)$ be the associated admissible matrices. Then, for every subset $E\subset\mathbb{N},$ we have $$\underline{d}_{B}(E)\leq \underline{d}_{A}(E) \leq \overline{d}_{A}(E) \leq \overline{d}_{B}(E).$$
Let $E$ be a subset of $\mathbb{N}.$ For every $n\geq 1,$ let us define $\Lambda_E^{\alpha}(n)=\sum_{k=1}^n\alpha_k {\mathds{1}_{E}}(k)$ (resp. $\Lambda_E^{\beta}(n)=\sum_{k=1}^n\beta_k {\mathds{1}_{E}}(k)$). In particular, one may observe that $\Lambda_{{\mathbb{N}}}^{\alpha}=\varphi_{\alpha}.$ Now, let $N\geq 1$ be an integer such that the sequence $(\alpha_k/\beta_k)_{k\geq N}$ is decreasing. Then for every $n\geq N+1,$ we have $$\begin{array}{rcl}\displaystyle\sum_{k=N+1}^n \alpha_k{\mathds{1}_{E}}(k)&=&\displaystyle
\sum_{k=N+1}^{n-1}\Lambda_E^{\beta}(k)\left(\frac{\alpha_k}{\beta_k} -
\frac{\alpha_{k+1}}{\beta_{k+1}}\right)+\Lambda_E^{\beta}(n)\frac{\alpha_n}{\beta_n}-\Lambda_E^{\beta}(N)\frac{\alpha_{N+1}}
{\beta_{N+1}}\\
&=&\displaystyle\sum_{k=N+1}^{n-1}\frac{\Lambda_E^{\beta}(k)}
{\varphi_{\beta}(k)}\varphi_{\beta}(k)\left(\frac{\alpha_k}{\beta_k} -
\frac{\alpha_{k+1}}{\beta_{k+1}}\right)+\frac{\Lambda_E^{\beta}(n)}{\varphi_{\beta}(n)}\varphi_{\beta}(n)
\frac{\alpha_n}{\beta_n}-\Lambda_E^{\beta}(N)\frac{\alpha_{N+1}}{\beta_{N+1}}.
\end{array}$$ Moreover, since $(\alpha_k/\beta_k)$ is a non-negative decreasing sequence and $\sum\alpha_k=+\infty,$ we deduce $$\begin{array}{rcl}\displaystyle\overline{d}_{A}(E)&=&
\displaystyle\limsup_{n\rightarrow +\infty}\left[\left(\varphi_{\alpha}(n)\right)^{-1}
\left(\sum_{k=1}^N\alpha_k{\mathds{1}_{E}}(k)+\displaystyle\sum_{k=N+1}^n \alpha_k{\mathds{1}_{E}}(k)\right)\right]\\
&=&
\displaystyle\limsup_{n\rightarrow +\infty}\left[(\varphi_{\alpha}(n))^{-1}
\left(\displaystyle\sum_{k=N+1}^{n-1}\frac{\Lambda_E^{\beta}(k)}
{\varphi_{\beta}(k)}\varphi_{\beta}(k)\left(\frac{\alpha_k}{\beta_k} -
\frac{\alpha_{k+1}}{\beta_{k+1}}\right)+\frac{\Lambda_E^{\beta}(n)}{\varphi_{\beta}(n)}\varphi_{\beta}(n)\frac{\alpha_n}{\beta_n}\right)\right]\\
&\leq &\displaystyle\sup_{k>N}\left(\frac{\Lambda_E^{\beta}(k)}{\varphi_{\beta}(k)}\right)
\limsup_{n\rightarrow +\infty}\left[(\varphi_{\alpha}(n))^{-1}\left(
\displaystyle\sum_{k=N+1}^{n-1}\varphi_{\beta}(k)\left(\frac{\alpha_k}{\beta_k} -
\frac{\alpha_{k+1}}{\beta_{k+1}}\right)+\varphi_{\beta}(n)
\frac{\alpha_n}{\beta_n}\right)\right].
\end{array}$$ Since $\sum_{k=N+1}^{n-1}\varphi_{\beta}(k)\left(\frac{\alpha_k}{\beta_k} -
\frac{\alpha_{k+1}}{\beta_{k+1}}\right)+\varphi_{\beta}(n)
\frac{\alpha_n}{\beta_n}=\varphi_{\beta}(N+1)\frac{\alpha_{N+1}}{\beta_{N+1}}+\sum_{k=N+2}^n\alpha_k,$ we get $$\overline{d}_{A}(E)\leq \sup_{k>N}\left(\frac{\Lambda_E^{\beta}(k)}{\varphi_{\beta}(k)}\right).$$ Hence letting $N\rightarrow +\infty,$ we obtain $\overline{d}_{A}(E)\leq \overline{d}_{B}(E)$.\
The other inequality is obtained using the relations $\underline{d}_A(E)=1-\overline{d}_A(\mathbb{N}\setminus E)$ and $\underline{d}_B(E)=1-\overline{d}_B(\mathbb{N}\setminus E).$
From now on, we are interested in densities given by special admissible matrices given in Definition \[def1\]. In this case, Lemma \[lemmastieltjes\] leads to the following inequalities.
\[lemmacomp\] For every subset $E\subset \mathbb{N}$ and for any $0<r\leq r',$ $0<s\leq s'<1,$ $1<t\leq t',$ $2\leq l\leq l',$ we have $$\underline{d}_{A_1}(E)=
\underline{d}_{B_0}(E)\leq
\underline{d}_{{\widetilde}{B}_{l'}}(E)\leq \underline{d}_{{\widetilde}{B}_{l}}(E)\leq
\underline{d}_{B_t}(E)\leq \underline{d}_{B_{t'}}(E)$$ and $$\underline{d}_{B_{t'}}(E)\leq
\underline{d}_{{A}_{s'}}(E)\leq \underline{d}_{{A}_{s}}(E)\leq
\underline{d}_{C_{r'}}(E)\leq \underline{d}_{C_{r}}(E)\leq
\underline{d}(E).$$
Moreover, observe that a subset $E$ of $\mathbb{N}$ possesses a strictly positive natural lower density if and only if it has a strictly positive lower $C_r$-density, for any $r>-1.$
\[lemme\_poly\] Let $r>-1$. Then, for every subset $E\subset \mathbb{N}$ the following assertions are equivalent
(i) \[firstpoly\] $\underline{d}_{C_r}(E)>0$,
(ii) \[secondpoly\] $\underline{d}(E)>0.$
Let $(n_k)\subset \mathbb{N}$ be the increasing sequence of elements of $E$. We divide the proof in two cases.\
*Case $r\geq 0$:* Lemma \[lemmastieltjes\] gives $\underline{d}_{C_r}(E)\leq \underline{d}(E),$ hence $(\ref{firstpoly})\Rightarrow(\ref{secondpoly}).$ For the other implication, assume that $\underline{d}(E)>0.$ This means that the sequence $\left(\frac{n_j}{j}\right)$ is bounded (see Lemma \[LemmaDensInfCalc\]). We deduce that there exists an integer $M\geq 1$ such that for every $k\in{\mathbb{N}}$, $k\leq n_k\leq Mk$ and $$\sum_{j=1}^{n_k}j^r\leq \sum_{j=1}^{Mk}j^r\leq \frac{(Mk+1)^{r+1}}{r+1}\leq
M^{r+1}\frac{(k+1)^{r+1}}{r+1}.$$ Using the fact that $\sum_{j=1}^{k}j^r\sim \frac{k^{r+1}}{r+1}\sim \frac{(k+1)^{r+1}}{r+1},$ as $k$ tends to $+\infty$ (cf Example \[examplelogdensity\]) we deduce that there exists $C>0$ such that $$\sum_{j=1}^{n_k}j^r\leq CM^{r+1}\sum_{j=1}^{k}j^r.$$ Therefore we have $$\sum_{j=1}^{n_k}j^r\leq CM^{r+1}\sum_{j=1}^{k}(n_j)^r$$ and $\liminf_{k\rightarrow +\infty}\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{k}(n_j)^r}{\sum_{j=1}^{n_k}j^r}\right)>0$ which is sufficient to conclude thanks to Lemma \[LemmaDensInfCalc\].\
*Case $-1<r < 0$:* As in the previous case, Lemma \[lemmastieltjes\] gives the implication $(\ref{secondpoly})
\Rightarrow (\ref{firstpoly})$ because $\underline{d}_{C_r}(E)\geq \underline{d}(E).$ For the converse, assume that $\underline{d}_{C_r}(E)>0.$ According to Lemma \[LemmaDensInfCalc\], there exists $C>0$ such that $$\sum_{j=1}^{n_k}j^r\leq C\sum_{j=1}^k (n_j)^r.$$ Using the inequality $j\leq n_j$ and since $r<0$, we get $$\frac{(n_k+1)^{r+1}}{r+1}-\frac{1}{r+1}
\leq \sum_{j=1}^{n_k}j^r\leq C\sum_{j=1}^k (n_j)^r\leq
C\sum_{j=1}^k j^r\leq
C\left(\frac{k^{r+1}}{r+1}-\frac{1}{r+1}+1\right).$$ The positivity of $r+1$ now ensures that the sequence $\left(\frac{n_k}{k}\right)$ is bounded and $\underline{d}(E)>0.$
Finally let us also extend the definition of frequently hypercyclic operators using the general notion of $A$-densities introduced before.
\[defiA\][Let $A=\left(\alpha_k/\sum_{j=1}^n\alpha_j\right)$ be an admissible matrix. Using the notations of Section \[sec\_intro\], an operator $T\in L(X)$ is said to be $A$-frequently hypercyclic if there exists $x\in X$ such that for any non-empty open set $U\subset X,$ the set $N(x,U)$ has positive lower $A$-density. ]{}
Frequent hypercyclicity criterion: classical construction {#const_classical}
=========================================================
According to Lemma \[lemme\_poly\], a frequently hypercyclic operator is necessarily $C_r$-frequently hypercyclic for any $r>-1.$ So, even if this is obvious, the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion allows to obtain the $B_r$-frequent hypercyclicity too. A careful examination of the well-known proof of this criterion leads to a more precise result. Indeed, in the classical proof of the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion the following constructive lemma plays a prominent role [@Grope Lemma 9.5].
\[Lemgrope\] There exist pairwise disjoint subsets $A(l,\nu),$ $l,\nu\geq 1,$ of $\mathbb{N}$ of positive lower density such that, for any $n\in A(l,\nu)$ and $m\in A(k,\mu)$, we have that $n\geq \nu$ and $$\vert n-m\vert\geq \nu+\mu\hbox{ if }n\neq m.$$
The proof of this result is based on a specific partition of $\mathbb{N}$ using the dyadic representation $n=\sum_{j=0}^{+\infty}a_j2^j=(a_0,a_1,\dots)$ of any positive integer. Actually the authors define the sets $I(l,\nu),$ $l,\nu\geq 1,$ as the sets of all $n\in\mathbb{N}$ whose dyadic representation has the form $n=(0,\dots,0,1,\dots,1,0,*)$ with $l-1$ leading zeros, exactly followed by $\nu$ ones, then one zero and an arbitrary remainder. Let $\delta_k=\nu,$ if $k\in I(l,\nu)$ for some $l\geq 1.$ Then they construct the following strictly increasing sequence $(n_k)$ of positive integers by setting $$n_k=2\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}\delta_i +\delta_k,\quad k\geq 1.$$ This construction clearly ensures that for any integers $i,j,$ with $i\ne j,$ the separation condition stated in Lemma \[Lemgrope\] holds, that is $$\vert n_i-n_j\vert\geq \delta_i+\delta_j.$$ Finally they define the sets $A(l,\nu)=\{n_k;k\in I(l,\nu)\}$ and they prove that these sets have positive lower density since $(n_k)$ does and the sets $I(l,\nu)$ are arithmetic sequences. Actually we are going to prove that the sequence $(n_k)$ has positive lower $B_2$-density. To do that, we start by giving an exact formula for this sequence that will allow to obtain easily its asymptotic behavior. We obtain the following result, whose proof will be given later (see Lemma \[retrouve\_lemme\] below).
\[lemmaestimgre\] If $k=2^n+\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}\alpha_i2^i$ with $\alpha_i\in\{0;1\}$ for every $0\leq i\leq n-1$, then $$n_k=4k-2\left(\sum_{i\in I_k} L_i(i+1)\right)-\delta_k,$$ where $I_k$ stands for the set of integers $i$ such that $\alpha_i$ is the first non-zero integer of a block (of consecutive non-zero coefficients) having length $L_i$ in the dyadic decomposition of $k$.
From this lemma, we deduce the following estimate using the same notations.
\[prop\_dens\_b2\] The sequence $(n_k)$ satisfies the following estimate $n_k-4k=O(\log ^2(k)).$ Moreover this estimate is optimal in the following sense: there exists an increasing sub-sequence $(\lambda_n)$ of positive integers such that the sequence $\frac{n_{\lambda_j}-4\lambda_j}{\log^2 (\lambda_j)}$ converges to a non-zero real number.
According to Lemma \[lemmaestimgre\], we have, for $k=2^l+\sum_{i=0}^{l-1}\alpha_i2^i$ with $\alpha_i\in\{0;1\}$ for every $0\leq i\leq l-1$, $$n_k=4k-2\left(\sum_{i \in I_k}L_i (i+1)\right)-\delta_k,$$ where $I_k=\{i\in\mathbb{N};\ \alpha_{i}\ne 0\hbox{ and }\alpha_{i-1}=0\},$ with the conventions $\alpha_{-1}=0$, $\alpha_{l}=1$ and for $i\in I_k,$ $L_i=\min\{j; \alpha_{i+j}=0\}.$ Obviously we deduce $$n_k\leq 4k-2\log_2(k)-1.$$ Notice that we have the equality $n_k=4k-2(\log_2(k)+1)-1$ for $k=2^l.$\
On the other hand, we can write $$\sum_{i\in I_k}L_i (i+1)=\sum_{i_1<i_2<\dots <i_{m_k}}L_{i_j} (i_{j}+1),$$ where $I_k=\{i_1<i_2<\dots <i_{m_k}\}.$ Observe that we have $$i_n+L_{i_n}+1\leq i_{n+1}\hbox{ for }n=1,\dots,m_{k}-1\hbox{ and }L_{i_{m_{k}}}=l-i_{m_k}+1.$$ Since $i_{m_k}\leq l,$ we get $$\sum_{i_1<i_2<\dots <i_{m_k}}L_{i_j} (i_{j}+1)\leq
\left(\sum_{j=1}^{m_{k}-1}(i_{j+1}-(i_j+1))(i_j+1)\right)+(l+1-i_{m_k})(i_{m_k}+1)\leq (l+1)^2.$$ By construction we have $$\delta_k\leq \log_2(k)+1.$$ Since $\log_2(k)\leq l\leq \log_2(k)+1,$ we conclude $$4k-2(\log_2(k) +2)^2- \log_2(k)-1\leq n_k\leq 4k-2\log_2(k)-1$$ and the estimate $n_k-4k=O(\log^2k)$ holds. Finally let us consider $\lambda_j=\sum_{l=0}^j2^{2l}.$ An easy calculation gives $$n_{\lambda_j}=4\lambda_j-2\sum_{l=0}^j(2l+1)-1=4\lambda_j-2j^2-4j-3.$$ Since $\lambda_j=(4^{j+1}-1)/3,$ the sequence $\left(\frac{n_{\lambda_j}-4\lambda_j}{\log^2(\lambda_j)}\right)$ converges to a non-zero real number.
We now prove that the sequence $(n_k)$ constructed above not only has positive lower density but has also positive lower $B_2$-density.
\[lemma\_b2\] We have $\underline{d}_{B_2}((n_k))>0.$
Using (\[examplelogdensity6\]) from Example \[examplelogdensity\], we have $$\underline{d}_{B_2}(n_k)=\liminf_{k\rightarrow +\infty}\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{k}e^{n_j/\log^{2}(n_j)}}
{\log^{2}(n_k)e^{n_k/\log^{2}(n_k)}}\right).$$ According to Proposition \[prop\_dens\_b2\], there exists a constant $C>0$ such that, for $N$ large enough, $$\frac{\sum_{j=N}^{k}e^{n_j/\log^{2}(n_j)}}
{\log^{2}(n_k)e^{n_k/\log^{2}(n_k)}}\geq \frac{\sum_{j=N}^{k}e^{(4j-C\log^2(j))/\log^{2}(4j-C\log^2(j))}}
{\log^{2}(4k)e^{4k/\log^{2}(4k)}}.$$ A summation by parts gives $$\sum_{j=N}^{k}e^{(4j-C\log^2(j))/\log^{2}(4j-C\log^2(j))}\sim \frac{\log^2(k)}{4}
e^{(4k-C\log^2(k))/\log^{2}(4k-C\log^2(k))},\hbox{ as }k\rightarrow +\infty.$$ Finally, a similar computation as those needed for Example \[examplelogdensity\], yields $$\frac{\sum_{j=N}^{k}e^{(4j-C\log^2(j))/\log^{2}(4j-C\log^2(j))}}
{\log^{2}(4k)e^{4k/\log^{2}(4k)}}\sim \frac{e^{-C}}{4},\hbox{ as }k\rightarrow +\infty,$$ which finishes the proof.
Lemma \[lemma\_b2\] allows us to show that the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion gives a strengthened result.
\[main\_prop\] Let $T$ be an operator on a separable Fréchet space $X.$ If there is a dense subset $X_0$ of $X$ and a map $S:X_0\rightarrow X_0$ such that, for any $x\in X_0,$
(i) $\displaystyle\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}T^nx$ converges unconditionally,
(ii) $\displaystyle\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}S^nx$ converges unconditionally,
(iii) $TSx=x,$
then $T$ is $B_2$-frequently hypercyclic.
The proof of this result is the same as the classical proof of the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion. Indeed, from Lemma \[lemma\_b2\], we can deduce that the sets $A(l,\nu)$ not only have positive lower density but even have positive lower $B_2$-density. We won’t detail the proof here because we will prove a stronger result in Section \[furth\_result\].\
Thanks to Lemma \[lemmacomp\], one may actually deduce the following corollary proving that the scale defined by matrices $A_r$ is not fine enough to exhibit the limit in term of densities of the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion.
\[coro\_ar\] Under the assumptions of the previous proposition, the operator $T$ is $A_r$-frequently hypercyclic for every $0\leq r<1$.
The previous result proves that for any $0\leq r<1$, the $A_r$-frequent hypercyclicity phenomenon exists and is even common. On the other hand, one may also notice that the geometric rate of growth (i.e. $r=1$) is unreachable in terms of dynamics. More precisely, we have the following result.
There is no $A_1$-frequently hypercyclic operator.
We argue by contradiction. Assume that $T$ is a $A_1$-frequently hypercyclic operator on a Banach space $X$ and $x$ is a $A_1$-frequently hypercyclic vector. Let also $U$ be a non-empty open subset in $X$. Then, by definition and with Example \[examplelogdensity\], we get $$0<\liminf_{N\to+\infty}\sum_{k\leq N}\frac{e^k}{\sum_{j=1}^{N}e^j}{\mathds{1}_{N(x,U)}}(k)=\liminf_{N\to+\infty}(1-e^{-1})\sum_{k\leq N}e^{k-N}{\mathds{1}_{N(x,U)}}(k).$$ Moreover one may remark that asserting that this limit is non-zero implies that the set $N(x,U)$ has bounded gaps. Indeed, if one suppose that $N(x,U)$ has unbounded gaps then there exists a sequence $(N_i)$ and a sequence $(p_i)$ tending to $+\infty$ such that for every $i\in{\mathbb{N}}$, $\{N_i-p_i+1;N_i-p_i+2;\ldots;N_i\}\cap N(x,U)=\emptyset$. This gives $$0<\liminf_{i\to+\infty}(1-e^{-1})\sum_{k\leq N_i}e^{k-N_i}{\mathds{1}_{N(x,U)}}(k)\leq \liminf_{i\to+\infty}(1-e^{-1})\sum_{k\leq N_i-p_i}e^{k-N_i}=\lim_{i\to+\infty}e^{-p_i}-1=0$$ and this contradiction shows that the set $N(x,U)$ has bounded gaps. Let us denote by $M$ an upper bound of the length of these gaps. It suffices to choose $V$ so far from the origin such that the norm of $T$ forbids $T^k(U)$ from intersecting $V$ for $k\leq M$. This means that the orbit of $x$ will never reach the open set $V$ contradicting the $A_1$-frequent hypercyclicity of $x$.
On the other hand, observe that the following result holds.
\[lemme\_dens\_br\] For every $0<r<1,$ $\underline{d}_{B_r}(n_k)=0.$
We have to estimate the following limit $$\underline{d}_{B_r}(n_k)=\liminf_{k\rightarrow +\infty}\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{k}e^{n_j/\log^{r}(n_j)}}
{\sum_{j=1}^{n_{k+1}-1}e^{j/\log^{r}(j)}}\right).$$
Remark that by definition of $\delta_k$, there exists an increasing sequence of integers $(\lambda_k)_{k\in{\mathbb{N}}}$ such that $n_{\lambda_k+1}-n_{\lambda_k}-1=\delta_{\lambda_{k}}
=k+1\sim\log_2(\lambda_k),$ as $k$ tends to $\infty$ (consider for example $\lambda_k=2^{k+1}-1$). Then, $$\underline{d}_{B_r}(n_k)\leq\liminf_{k\rightarrow +\infty}\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{\lambda_k}e^{n_j/\log^{r}(n_j)}}
{\sum_{j=1}^{n_{\lambda_k+1}-1}e^{j/\log^{r}(j)}}\right)\leq\liminf_{k\rightarrow +\infty}\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{n_{\lambda_{k}}}e^{j/\log^{r}(j)}}
{\sum_{j=1}^{n_{\lambda_k+1}-1}e^{j/\log^{r}(j)}}\right).$$ Using the estimate (\[examplelogdensity6\]) from Example \[examplelogdensity\] and the one from Proposition \[prop\_dens\_b2\], we get: $$\begin{aligned}
\underline{d}_{B_r}(n_k)&\leq\liminf_{k\rightarrow +\infty}\left(\frac{\log^r(n_{\lambda_{k}})e^{n_{\lambda_k}/\log^{r}(n_{\lambda_k})}}
{\log^{r}(n_{\lambda_k+1}-1)e^{n_{\lambda_k}/\log^{r}(n_{\lambda_k})}}\right)&\\
&\leq\liminf_{k\rightarrow +\infty}e^{n_{\lambda_k}/\log^{r}(n_{\lambda_k})-(n_{\lambda_k}+\delta_{\lambda_k})/\log^{r}(n_{\lambda_k}+\delta_{\lambda_k})}&\end{aligned}$$
We begin by studying the term in the exponent $$\frac{n_{\lambda_k}}{\log^{r}(n_{\lambda_k})}-\frac{n_{\lambda_k}+\delta_{\lambda_k}}{\log^{r}(n_{\lambda_k}+\delta_{\lambda_k})}=\frac{n_{\lambda_k}}{\log^r\left(n_{\lambda_k}+\delta_{\lambda_k}\right)}\left(\left(1+\frac{\log\left(1+\frac{\delta_{\lambda_k}}{n_{\lambda_k}}\right)}{\log(n_{\lambda_k})} \right)^r-\left(1+\frac{\delta_{\lambda_k}}{n_{\lambda_k}}\right)\right)$$ which reduces to the following thanks to a Taylor expansion: $$\frac{n_{\lambda_k}}{\log^r\left(n_{\lambda_k}+\delta_{\lambda_k}\right)}\left(\frac{1}{\log(n_{\lambda_k})}-1\right)+o\left(\frac{\delta_{\lambda_k}}{\log^{1+r}(n_{\lambda_k})}\right).$$ Now combining the estimate $\delta_{\lambda_k}\sim\log_2(\lambda_k)$ as $k$ tends to $\infty$ with the one given by Proposition \[prop\_dens\_b2\], we deduce that $\delta_{\lambda_k}/\log^{1+r}(n_{\lambda_k}){\rightarrow}0,$ as $k$ tends to $\infty.$ Hence we get $$e^{n_{\lambda_k}/\log^{r}(n_{\lambda_k})-(n_{\lambda_k}+\delta_{\lambda_k})/\log^{r}(n_{\lambda_k}+\delta_{\lambda_k})}\sim
e^{\frac{n_{\lambda_k}}{\log^r\left(n_{\lambda_k}+\delta_{\lambda_k}\right)}\left(\frac{1}{\log(n_{\lambda_k})}-1\right)}\underset{k\to+\infty}{\longrightarrow}0.$$ This proves that $\underline{d}_{B_r}(n_k)=0$.
Notice that Proposition \[prop\_dens\_b2\] combined with Lemma \[lemme\_dens\_br\] do not allow us to conclude to the $B_r$-frequent hypercyclicity or not in the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion for $1\leq r<2.$
Further results {#furth_result}
===============
In this section, we are going to improve the conclusion of the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion given by Proposition \[main\_prop\]. To do this, we will modify the sequence $(n_k)$ used in the proof of Lemma \[Lemgrope\] to obtain a new sequence possessing a positive $A$-density for an admissible matrix $A$ defining a sharper density than the natural density.\
Throughout this section, $(a_n)$ will be an increasing sequence of positive integers with $a_1=1$. Using this sequence we define the function $f:\mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{N},$ by $f(j)=m$ for all $j\in\{a_m,\ldots,a_{m+1}-1\}.$ In the spirit of the sequence studied in the previous section, we also define the sequence $(n_k(f))$ by induction: $$n_1(f)=f(1)=1\hbox{ and }n_{k}(f)=n_{k-1}(f)+f(\delta_{k-1})+f(\delta_{k})\hbox{ for }k\geq 2.$$ Clearly we obtain the following equality, for all $k\geq 2,$ $$\label{Eqnkmod}
n_{k}(f)=2\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}f(\delta_{i})+f(\delta_{k}).$$ Let us notice that, if we set $a_m=m$ for every $m\geq 1,$ then the corresponding sequence $(n_k(f))$ is the sequence $(n_k)$ of Section \[const\_classical\]. From now on, we will omit the notation $f$ in $(n_k(f))$ for sake of readability. Our purpose is to compute an exact formula for the new sequence $(n_k)$ to understand its asymptotic behavior. First of all, we obtain an expression for the subsequence $(n_{2^{a_m}}).$
\[lemfromuleam\] For all $m\in{\mathbb{N}},$ we have $$n_{2^{a_m}}=2^{a_m+1}\sum_{i=1}^{m}\frac{1}{2^{a_i-1}}-2m+1.$$
Set $\Delta_j^{(m)}=\{0\leq l\leq 2^{a_m}-1:\ \delta_l=j\}.$ First let us observe that we have, by definition, for every $1\leq j\leq a_m$, $$n_{2^{a_m}}=2\sum_{k=1}^{2^{a_m}-1}f(\delta_k)+f(\delta_{2^{a_m}})=2\sum_{j=1}^{a_m}f(j)\#\Delta_j^{(m)}+f(\delta_{2^{a_m}}).$$ Thus it suffices to compute the cardinal of the set $\Delta_j^{(m)}$. It easily follows that $\#\Delta_j^{(m)}=1+\sum_{i=0}^{a_m-j-1}2^{a_m-j-i}$. Indeed, we separate the case when the first block of ones in the dyadic decomposition of $l$ ends on $2^{a_m-1}$ and the case when the first block of ones ends before. In the first case, we have no choice, there is only one possibility but in the second case we have a certain number $i$ of zeros at the beginning, then the first block of ones, which is of length $j,$ then one zero (because the first block of ones has to be of length $j$) and then we have $2^{a_m-j-i}$ possible choices as shown below. $$(\overbrace{\underbrace{0,0,\ldots,0}_{\text{length } i},\underbrace{1,1,\ldots,1,1,0}_{\text{length } j+1},\star,\star,\ldots,\star,\star}^{\text{length } a_m+1},0,0,\ldots).$$ A quick calculation leads to $\#\Delta_j^{(m)}=1+\sum_{i=0}^{a_m-j-1}2^{a_m-j-i}=2^{a_m-j}.$ Therefore we get $$n_{2^{a_m}}=2\sum_{j=1}^{a_m}f(j)2^{a_m-j}+f(\delta_{2^{a_m}})=2\sum_{j=1}^{a_m} f(j)2^{a_m-j}+1.$$ Now we use the link between the values of $f(j)$ and the position of $j$ compared to the sequence $(a_m)$ to compute the sum: $$\begin{aligned}
n_{2^{a_m}}&=2\sum_{j=1}^{a_m} f(j)2^{a_m-j}+1&\\
&=2^{a_m+1}\sum_{j=1}^{a_m-1} f(j)2^{-j}+2m+1.\end{aligned}$$ Let us now split the sum according to the values of $f(j)$: $$\begin{aligned}
n_{2^{a_m}}&=2^{a_m+1}\sum_{i=1}^{m-1} \left(\sum_{j=a_i}^{a_{i+1}-1}f(j)2^{-j}\right)+2m+1&\\
&=2^{a_m+1}\sum_{i=1}^{m-1} i\left(\sum_{j=a_i}^{a_{i+1}-1}2^{-j}\right)+2m+1&\\
&=2^{a_m+1}\sum_{i=1}^{m-1} i\left(\frac{1}{2^{a_i-1}}-\frac{1}{2^{a_{i+1}-1}}\right)+2m+1&\\
&=2^{a_m+1}\sum_{i=1}^{m} \frac{1}{2^{a_i-1}}-2m+1.\end{aligned}$$
We strengthen the previous lemma as follows.
\[lemformuleamq\] Let $m\in{\mathbb{N}}.$ For every $q\in{\mathbb{N}}$ such that $q<a_m-a_{m-1},$ the following equality holds $$n_{2^{a_m-q}}=2^{a_m-q+1}\sum_{j=1}^{m-1}\frac{1}{2^{a_j-1}}-2(m-1)+1.$$
This proof works along the same lines as the proof of Lemma \[lemfromuleam\]. Thus, we adapt the preceding proof. It yields $$\begin{aligned}
n_{2^{a_m-q}}&=2\sum_{j=1}^{2^{a_{m}-q}-1} f(\delta_j)+f(\delta_{2^{a_m-q}})&\\
&=2\sum_{j=1}^{a_m-q} f(j)2^{a_m-q-j}+1&\\
&=2^{a_m-q+1}\left(\left(\sum_{i=1}^{m-2} \sum_{j=a_i}^{a_{i+1}-1}i2^{-j}\right)+\sum_{j=a_{m-1}}^{a_m-q}(m-1)2^{-j}\right)+1&\\
&=2^{a_m-q+1}\sum_{j=1}^{m-1}\frac{1}{2^{a_j-1}}-2(m-1)+1.\end{aligned}$$
\[lem2nfdec\] For $k=2^n+\sum_{i=0}^{n-2}\alpha_i2^i$ with $\alpha_i\in\{0;1\},$ $0\leq i\leq n-2$, and $(\alpha_0,\ldots,\alpha_{n-2})\ne (0,\ldots,0),$ we have
$$n_{k-2^n}=2\sum_{i=2^n+1}^{k-1}f(\delta_i)+f(\delta_k).$$ For $k=2^n+2^{n-1}+\sum_{i=0}^{n-2}\alpha_i2^i$ with $\alpha_i\in\{0;1\},$ $0\leq i\leq n-2$, we have $$n_{k-2^n}=2\sum_{i=2^n+1}^{k-1}f(\delta_i)-f(\delta_{k-2^n})-2(f(L)-1)+2f(\delta_k),$$ where $L$ is the length of the block of one’s containing the coefficient one of $2^n$ in the dyadic decomposition of $k$.
We begin by proving the first assertion. We have $$n_{k-2^n}=2\sum_{i=1}^{k-2^n-1}f(\delta_i)+f(\delta_{k-2^n}).$$ Since $k=2^n+\sum_{i=0}^{n-2}\alpha_i2^i,$ observe that for all $2^{n}+1\leq i\leq k-1$ the dyadic decomposition of $i$ contains a one for some $2^l$ with $0\leq l\leq n-2$ and the coefficient of $2^{n-1}$ is zero. Therefore, the first block of ones in the dyadic decomposition of $i$ does not contain the coefficient of $2^n$. Thus, for every such $2^n+1\leq i\leq k-1$, we have $\delta_i=\delta_{i-2^n}$. This proves the first part of the lemma since $\delta_k=\delta_{k-2^n}$.
To prove the second assertion, we begin by observing that $$2\sum_{i=2^n+1}^{k-1}f(\delta_i)=2\sum_{i=2^n+1}^{k}f(\delta_i)-2f(\delta_k).$$ Then, as above if the index $i$ is such that the coefficient of $2^n$ does not belong to the first block of ones (in the dyadic decomposition of $i$) then $\delta_i=\delta_{i-2^n}$. On the other hand, if the coefficient of $2^n$ belongs to the first block of ones and since we have $a_{n-1}=1$ then $i$ has to be of the form $i=\sum_{l=0}^{p}2^{n-l}$ for $p\in\{1,\ldots,L-1\}$ and $\delta_i=\delta_{i-2^n}+1$. Now let us pick a particular index $i$ of the form $i=\sum_{l=0}^{p}2^{n-l}$ with $p\in\{1,\ldots,L-1\}.$ We consider two cases:\
Case 1: for every $j\in\{2,\ldots,f(L)\}$, we have $p+1\ne a_j$. Then we have $f(\delta_i)=f(p+1)=f(\delta_i-1)=f(\delta_{i-2^n}).$\
Case 2: there exists an integer $j\in\{2,\ldots,f(L)\}$ with $p+1= a_j.$ Then we get $f(\delta_i)=f(a_j)=j=f(\delta_i-1)+1=f(\delta_{i-2^n})+1$.\
Finally we deduce $$\begin{aligned}
2\sum_{i=2^n+1}^{k-1}f(\delta_i)=2\sum_{i=2^n+1}^{k}f(\delta_i)-2f(\delta_k)&=
2\left(\sum_{i=1}^{k-2^n}f(\delta_i)+(f(L)-1)\right)-2f(\delta_k)&\\
&=n_{k-2^n}+f(\delta_{k-2^n})+2(f(L)-1)-2f(\delta_k).&\end{aligned}$$
From Lemma \[lem2nfdec\] we deduce the following result.
\[lemdec1\] Let $L$ be any non-zero integer and $q$ be an integer. If $k=\sum_{j=0}^{L-1}2^{q+j}+k'$ with $0\leq k'<2^{q-1}$ then either $k'\ne 0$ and $$n_k=n_{k'}+\sum_{j=0}^{L-1}n_{2^{q+j}}+2\sum_{j=2}^{L}(f(j)-1)+L,$$ or $k'=0$ and $$n_k=\sum_{j=0}^{L-1}n_{2^{q+j}}+2\sum_{j=2}^{L}(f(j)-1)+L-f(L).$$
We proceed by induction on $L.$ For $L=1$, set $k=2^q+k'$. First, observe that if $k'=0$, the result is clear by Lemma \[lem2nfdec\]. So assume that $0<k'<2^{q-1}.$ We divide $n_k$ into two sums $$n_k=\left(2\sum_{i=1}^{2^q-1}f(\delta_i)+f(\delta_{2^q})\right)+\left(f(\delta_{2^q})+2\sum_{i=2^q+1}^{k-1}f(\delta_i)+f(\delta_{k})\right).$$ It suffices to apply Lemma \[lem2nfdec\] to obtain $$n_k=n_{2^q}+f(\delta_{2^q})+n_{k'}=n_{2^q}+1+n_{k'}$$ and we have the desired conclusion. Now choose $L\geq 2$ and suppose that the result holds for every integer $l,$ with $1\leq l\leq L-1.$ By Lemma \[lem2nfdec\], we get $$\begin{aligned}
n_k&=\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}f(\delta_i)+f(\delta_k) &\\
&=\sum_{i=1}^{2^{q+L-1}-1}f(\delta_i)+2f(\delta_{2^{q+L-1}})+2\sum_{i=2^{q+L-1}+1}^{k-1}f(\delta_i)+f(\delta_{k})&\\
&=n_{2^{q+L-1}}+f(\delta_{2^{q+L-1}})+n_{k-2^{q+L-1}}+f(\delta_{k-2^{q+L-1}})+2(f(L)-1)-f(\delta_k).\end{aligned}$$ We have $f(\delta_{2^{q+L-1}})=1.$ Moreover suppose that $0<k'<2^{q-1}$, then the block of ones containing the coefficient one of $2^{q+L-1}$ is not the first one, thus $\delta_{k}=\delta_{k'}=\delta_{k-2^{q+L-1}}.$ Using the induction hypothesis, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
n_k&=n_{2^{q+L-1}}+n_{k-2^{q+L-1}}+2(f(L)-1)+1&\\
&=n_{k'}+\sum_{j=0}^{L-2}n_{2^{q+j}}+2\sum_{j=2}^{L-1}(f(j)-1)+L-1+n_{2^{q+L-1}}+2(f(L)-1)+1&\\
&=n_{k'}+\sum_{j=0}^{L-1}n_{2^{q+j}}+2\sum_{j=2}^{L}(f(j)-1)+L.\end{aligned}$$ On the other hand, in the case $k'=0$, the induction hypothesis gives $$\begin{aligned}
n_k&=n_{2^{q+L-1}}+1+n_{k-2^{q+L-1}}+f(L-1)+2(f(L)-1)-f(L)&\\
&=\sum_{j=0}^{L-2}n_{2^{q+j}}+2\sum_{j=2}^{L-1}(f(j)-1)+(L-1)-f(L-1)\\&\quad\quad +n_{2^{q+L-1}}+1+f(L-1)+2(f(L)-1)-f(L)&\\
&=\sum_{j=0}^{L-1}n_{2^{q+j}}+2\sum_{j=2}^{L}(f(j)-1)+L-f(L).\end{aligned}$$ This completes the proof.
From Lemma \[lemdec1\], we immediately get the following result since $f(1)=1$.
\[lemdecsum\] Let $L_1,\ldots, L_r$ be non-zero integers and $q_1,\ldots,q_r$ be integers such that $q_i+L_i<q_{i+1}$ for every $1\leq i\leq r-1$. For $k=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\sum_{j=0}^{L_i-1}2^{q_i+j}$ we have $$n_k=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\sum_{j=0}^{L_i-1}n_{2^{q_i+j}}+2\sum_{i=1}^{r}\sum_{j=1}^{L_i}f(j)-\sum_{i=1}^{r}L_i-f(L_1).$$
We are ready to obtain a general formula for the sequence $(n_k).$ Let us introduce some notations.
\[nota\_sequences\]
Let $L_1,\ldots, L_r$ be non-zero integers and $q_1,\ldots,q_r$ be integers such that $q_i+L_i<q_{i+1}$ for every $1\leq i\leq r-1$. We define the integers $m_i,t_i,s_i$ and $p_i$ as follows:
1. $m_i$ is the greatest integer such that $a_{m_i}\leq q_i+L_i-1,$
2. $t_i=q_i+L_i-1-a_{m_i},$
3. $p_i=\#\{l\in\mathbb{N}: l<m_i\hbox{ and } q_i\leq a_l\leq q_i+L_i-1\},$
4. $s_i=L_i-1-t_i-(a_{m_i}-a_{m_i-p_i}).$
To understand these notations, we give the following representation.
{width="14cm"}
Now we state an explicit formula for the sequence $(n_k(f)).$ This will allow us to obtain a good asymptotic formula for this sequence.
\[lemsumn\] Using the notations (\[nota\_sequences\]), for $k=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\sum_{j=0}^{L_i-1}2^{q_i+j}$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
n_k(f)&=2k\left(\sum_{l=1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)-\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left(\sum_{u=0}^{p_i-1}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m_i-u}-a_{m_i-(u+1)}}2^{a_{m_i-u}-j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i-u}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\right.&\\
&\left.+\left(\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}2^{a_{m_i}+j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i+1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)
+\left(\sum_{l=1}^{s_i}2^{a_{m_i-p_i}-l+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i-p_i}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\right)&\\
&-2\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left(\sum_{j=a_{m_i-p_i}-s_i}^{a_{m_i}+t_i}f(j)-\sum_{j=1}^{L_i}f(j)\right)-f(L_1).&\\\end{aligned}$$
We only prove the lemma for $t_i<L_i,$ the other case being similar but simpler. We use the notations (\[nota\_sequences\]) to write $$\label{equation_n2}
\sum_{j=0}^{L_i-1}n_{2^{q_i+j}}=\sum_{j=0}^{L_i-1}n_{2^{a_{m_i}+t_i-j}}=\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}n_{2^{a_{m_i}+j}}+\sum_{j=1}^{L_i-1-s_i-t_i}n_{2^{a_{m_i}-j}}+\sum_{j=1}^{s_i}n_{2^{a_{m_i-p_i}-j}}.$$
It remains to compute these three sums. We begin by the second one, dropping for the moment the index $i$ for sake of readability. Using Lemma \[lemformuleamq\], we write $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{j=1}^{L-1-s-t}n_{2^{a_{m}-j}}&=\sum_{u=0}^{p-1}\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m-u}-a_{m-(u+1)}}n_{2^{a_{m-u}-j}}\\
&=\sum_{u=0}^{p-1}\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m-u}-a_{m-(u+1)}}\left(2^{a_{m-u}-j+1}\sum_{l=1}^{m-(u+1)}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}-2(m-(u+1))+1\right).\end{aligned}$$ Thus, we deduce $$\label{equation_n3}
\begin{array}{rcl}\displaystyle\sum_{j=0}^{L-1-s-t}n_{2^{a_{m}-j}}&=&
\displaystyle\sum_{u=0}^{p-1}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m-u}-a_{m-(u+1)}}2^{a_{m-u}-j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=1}^{m-(u+1)}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\\
&&\displaystyle -2\sum_{u=1}^{p}(m-u)(a_{m-(u-1)}-a_{m-u})+L-s-t.\end{array}$$
In the same spirit we compute the first and third sums as follows $$\label{equation_n4}
\sum_{j=0}^{t}n_{2^{a_m}+j}=\left(\sum_{j=0}^{t}2^{a_m+j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=1}^{m}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)-2m(t+1)+t+1$$ and $$\label{equation_n5}\sum_{j=1}^{s}n_{2^{a_{m-p}-j}}=\left(\sum_{l=1}^{s}2^{a_{m-p}-l+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=1}^{m-(p+1)}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)-2(m-(p+1))s+s.$$
Moreover since we have by definition $t_i<a_{m_{i+1}}-a_{m_i}$ and $s_i<a_{m_i-p_i}-a_{m_i-p_i-1},$ when we gather equations (\[equation\_n3\]), (\[equation\_n4\]) and (\[equation\_n5\]), we have to compute the following sum $$\label{equation_n6}\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\sum_{u=1}^{p_i}(m_i-u)(a_{m_i-(u-1)}-a_{m_i-u})+m_i(t_i+1)+(m_i-(p_i+1))s_i\\
\quad =\displaystyle\sum_{u=1}^{p_i}\sum_{j=0}^{a_{m_i-(u-1)}-a_{m_i-u}-1}f(a_{m_i-u}+j)+
\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}f(a_{m_i}+j)+\sum_{j=1}^{s_i}f(a_{m_i-p_i}-j)\\
\quad =\displaystyle\sum_{j=a_{m_i-p_i}-s_i}^{a_{m_i}+t_i}f(j).\end{array}$$ Thus thanks to Lemma \[lemdecsum\] and the equations (\[equation\_n2\]), (\[equation\_n3\]), (\[equation\_n4\]), (\[equation\_n5\]), (\[equation\_n6\]), we deduce $$\begin{aligned}
n_k&=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\sum_{j=0}^{L_i-1}n_{2^{q_i+j}}+2\sum_{i=1}^{r}\sum_{j=1}^{L_i}f(j)-\sum_{i=1}^{r}L_i-f(L_1)\\
&=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left(\sum_{u=0}^{p_i-1}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m_i-u}-a_{m_i-(u+1)}}2^{a_{m_i-u}-j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=1}^{m_i-(u+1)}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)+\left(\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}2^{a_{m_i}+j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=1}^{m_i}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\right.\\
&\left.+\left(\sum_{l=1}^{s_i}2^{a_{m_i-p_i}-l+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=1}^{m_i-(p_i+1)}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)-2\sum_{j=a_{m_i-p_i}-s_i}^{a_{m_i}+t_i}f(j)+L_i\right)\\&+2\sum_{i=1}^{r}\sum_{j=1}^{L_i}f(j)-\sum_{i=1}^{r}L_i-f(L_1).\end{aligned}$$ We remark that a $\sum_{i=1}^{r}L_i$ comes out from the first sum and cancels the term lying in the end of the preceding equality, we also gather the sums over $f(j)$ and we get: $$\begin{aligned}
n_k&=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left(\sum_{u=0}^{p_i-1}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m_i-u}-a_{m_i-(u+1)}}2^{a_{m_i-u}-j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=1}^{m_i-(u+1)}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)+\left(\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}2^{a_{m_i}+j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=1}^{m_i}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\right.&\\
&\left.+\left(\sum_{l=1}^{s_i}2^{a_{m_i-p_i}-l+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=1}^{m_i-(p_i+1)}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\right)+2\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{L_i}f(j)-\sum_{j=a_{m_i-p_i}-s_i}^{a_{m_i}+t_i}f(j)\right)-f(L_1).&\end{aligned}$$ Then, we express the partial sums $\sum_{l=1}^{N}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}$ as the series minus its remainder of order $N$ which yields: $$\begin{aligned}
&n_k=\left(\sum_{l=1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left(\sum_{u=0}^{p_i-1}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m_i-u}-a_{m_i-(u+1)}}2^{a_{m_i-u}-j+1}\right)+\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}2^{a_{m_i}+j+1}+\sum_{l=1}^{s_i}2^{a_{m_i-p_i}-l+1}\right)&\\
&-\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left(\sum_{u=0}^{p_i-1}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m_i-u}-a_{m_i-(u+1)}}2^{a_{m_i-u}-j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i-u}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)+\left(\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}2^{a_{m_i}+j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i+1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\right.&\\
&\left.+\left(\sum_{l=1}^{s_i}2^{a_{m_i-p_i}-l+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i-p_i}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\right)+2\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{L_i}f(j)-\sum_{j=a_{m_i-p_i}-s_i}^{a_{m_i}+t_i}f(j)\right)-f(L_1).&\end{aligned}$$ Now it suffices to remark that coming back to notations with $q_i$’s, then $k$ can be expressed in the following way $$k=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left(\sum_{u=0}^{p_i-1}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m_i-u}-a_{m_i-(u+1)}}2^{a_{m_i-u}-j}\right)+\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}2^{a_{m_i}+j}+\sum_{l=1}^{s_i}2^{a_{m_i-p_i}-l}\right).$$ Thus we obtain: $$\begin{aligned}
&n_k=2k\left(\sum_{l=1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)-\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left(\sum_{u=0}^{p_i-1}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m_i-u}-a_{m_i-(u+1)}}2^{a_{m_i-u}-j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i-u}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\right.&\\
&\left.+\left(\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}2^{a_{m_i}+j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i+1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)
+\left(\sum_{l=1}^{s_i}2^{a_{m_i-p_i}-l+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i-p_i}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\right)&\\
&+2\sum_{i=1}^{r}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{L_i}f(j)-\sum_{j=a_{m_i-p_i}-s_i}^{a_{m_i}+t_i}f(j)\right)-f(L_1).&\end{aligned}$$
Observe that if we set $(a_m)_m=(m)_m,$ then $f(j)=j$ for every integer $j$ and Lemma \[lemsumn\] takes the following form.
\[retrouve\_lemme\] In the aforementioned case, if $k=2^n+\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}\alpha_i2^i$ with $\alpha_i\in\{0;1\}$ for every $0\leq i\leq n-1$, then $$n_k=4k-2\left(\sum_{i\in I_k} L_i(i+1)\right)-\delta_k,$$ where $I_k$ stands for the set of integers $i$ such that $\alpha_i$ is the first non-zero integer of a block (of consecutive non-zero coefficients) having length $L_i$ in the dyadic decomposition of $k$.
Using the notations of Lemma \[lemsumn\], we have: $t_i=s_i=0,$ $L_i=p_i+1,$ $m_i=i+L_i-1.$ Therefore we deduce $$\begin{aligned}
n_k&=4k-4\sum_{i=1}^r(p_i+1)-2\sum_{i=1}^r\left(\sum_{j=i}^{i+L_i-1}j-\frac{L_i(L_i+1)}{2}\right)-L_1\\
&=4k-4\sum_{i=1}^rL_i-\sum_{i=1}^r(2i+L_i-1)L_i+\sum_{i=1}^rL_i(L_i+1)-L_1\\
&=4k-2\sum_{i=1}^rL_i(i+1)-L_1.\end{aligned}$$ This last inequality gives the result since $L_1=\delta_k.$
Lemma \[retrouve\_lemme\] is exactly Lemma \[lemma\_b2\] announced in the previous section.\
Let us return to the general situation, using the notation $(n_k(f))$ again. From Lemma \[lemsumn\], we deduce the following estimate on the sequence $(n_k(f))$ for specific choices of functions $f.$
\[lemestimation\] Using the previous notations, assume that $a_m=2^{2^{\adots^{2^m}}},$ where $2$ appears $s$ times ($s\geq 1$). Then the associated function $f_s:\mathbb{N}\rightarrow \mathbb{N}$ is given by $f_s(j)=m,$ for $j\in\{a_m,\dots,a_{m+1}-1\},$ and the following estimate holds: $$2k\left(\sum_{l=1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)-2\log_2(k)f_s(\lfloor\log_2(k)\rfloor)
-14\log_2(k)-8f_s(\lfloor\log_2(k)\rfloor)\leq n_k^{(s)}\leq 2k\left(\sum_{l=1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right),$$ with $n_k(f_s)=n_k^{(s)}.$
We need Lemma \[lemsumn\] and its notations. The proof of the upper bound is obvious. For the lower bound, observe first that the subadditivity of $f_s$ implies that for $k=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\sum_{j=0}^{L_i-1}2^{q_i+j},$ $$\sum_{j=1}^{L_i}f_s(j)-\sum_{j=a_{m_i-p_i}-s_i}^{a_{m_i}+t_i}f_s(j)=
\sum_{j=1}^{L_i}\left(f_s(j)-f_s(a_{m_i-p_i}-s_i-1+j)\right)\geq -L_if_s(a_{m_i-p_i}-s_i).$$ In addition, since for every $u\geq 1$, we have $a_{u}+2<a_{u+2}$ and $\sum_{l=q}^{+\infty}2^{-j}= 2^{1-q}$, we obtain: $$\begin{aligned}
\left(\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}2^{a_{m_i}+j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i+1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)&=4\left(\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}2^{a_{m_i}+j}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i+1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l}}\right)&\\
&\leq 4\left(\sum_{j=0}^{t_i}2^{a_{m_i}+j}\right)\left(\frac{1}{2^{a_{m_i+1}}}+\frac{1}{2^{a_{m_i+1}+1}}+\frac{1}{2^{a_{m_i+1}+2}}\right)&\\
&\leq \frac{7}{2^{a_{m_i+1}-a_{m_i}}}\left(2^{t_i+1}-1\right)&\\
&\leq \frac{7}{2^{a_{m_i+1}-(a_{m_i}+t_i+1)}}&\\
&\leq7.&\end{aligned}$$ In the same spirit, we also have $$\begin{aligned}
\left(\sum_{l=1}^{s_i}2^{a_{m_i-p_i}-l+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i-p_i}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)&=4\left(\sum_{l=1}^{s_i}2^{a_{m_i-p_i}-l}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i-p_i}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l}}\right)&\\
&\leq 4\left(\sum_{l=1}^{s_i}2^{a_{m_i-p_i}-l}\right)\left(\frac{1}{2^{a_{m_i-p_i}}}+\frac{1}{2^{a_{m_i-p_i}+1}}+\frac{1}{2^{a_{m_i-p_i}+2}}\right)&\\
&\leq 7\left(\sum_{l=1}^{s_i}2^{-l}\right)&\\
&\leq 7.&\end{aligned}$$ The same method gives again $$\sum_{u=0}^{p_i-1}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m_i-u}-a_{m_i-(u+1)}}2^{a_{m_i-u}-j+1}\right)\left(\sum_{l=m_i-u}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)\leq7\sum_{u=0}^{p_i-1}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{a_{m_i-u}-a_{m_i-(u+1)}}2^{-j}\right)\leq 7p_i.$$ Finally we gather these estimates and we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
n_k^{(s)}&\geq 2k\left(\sum_{l=1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)-
7\sum_{i=1}^{r}(2+p_i)-2\sum_{i=1}^{r}L_if_s(a_{m_i-p_i}-s_i)-f_s(L_1)&\\
&\geq 2k\left(\sum_{l=1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)-7(2r+m_r) -2\left(\sum_{i=1}^{r}L_i\right)f_s(a_{m_r}+t_r)-f_s(L_1).\end{aligned}$$ Using the fact that $a_{m_r}+t_i=q_r+L_r-1\leq \log_2(k)<q_r+L_r$ and $k=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\sum_{j=0}^{L_i-1}2^{q_i+j},$ we get $$\begin{aligned}
n_k^{(s)}&\geq 2k\left(\sum_{l=1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)-7(2\log_2(k)+f_s(\lfloor\log_2(k)\rfloor))
-2\log_2(k)f_s(\lfloor\log_2(k)\rfloor)-f_s(\lfloor\log_2(k)\rfloor)&\\
&\geq 2k\left(\sum_{l=1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{2^{a_l-1}}\right)-2\log_2(k)f_s(\lfloor\log_2(k)\rfloor) -14\log_2(k)-
8f_s(\lfloor\log_2(k)\rfloor).\end{aligned}$$ This finishes the proof.
We now prove that the sequence $(n_k^{(s)})$ constructed above not only has positive lower density but has also positive lower ${\widetilde}{B}_s$-density, for every $s\geq 2.$
\[dens\_tilde\] We have $\underline{d}_{{\widetilde}{B}_s}((n_k^{(s)}))>0.$
According to (\[examplelogdensity7\]) from Example \[examplelogdensity\], we write $$\underline{d}_{B_s}(n_k^{(s)})=
\liminf_{k\rightarrow +\infty}\left(
\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{k}e^{n_j^{(s)}/h_s(n_j^{(s)})}}
{h_s(n_k^{(s)})e^{n_k^{(s)}/h_s(n_k^{(s)})}
}\right).$$
Observe that Lemma \[lemestimation\] ensures the existence of two constants $C_1,C_2>1$ such that for $N$ large enough, $$\frac{\sum_{j=N}^{k}e^{n_j^{(s)}/h_s(n_j^{(s)})}}
{h_s(n_k^{(s)})e^{n_k^{(s)}/
h_s(n_k^{(s)})}}
\geq
\frac{\sum_{j=N}^{k}e^{(C_1j-C_2h_s(j))/h_s(C_1j-C_2h_s(j))}}
{h_s(C_1 k)e^{C_1 k/h_s(C_1 k)}}.$$
A summation by parts gives $$\sum_{j=N}^{k}e^{(C_1j-C_2h_s(j))/h_s(C_1j-C_2h_s(j))}\sim
\frac{h_s(k)}{C_1} e^{(C_1k-C_2h_s(k))/h_s(C_1k-C_2h_s(k))},\hbox{ as }k\rightarrow +\infty.$$ Then, a similar computation as those needed for (\[examplelogdensity7\]) from Example \[examplelogdensity\] leads to the following estimate $$\frac{\sum_{j=N}^{k}e^{(C_1j-C_2h_s(j))/h_s(C_1j-C_2h_s(j))}}
{h_s(C_1 k)e^{C_1 k/h_s(C_1 k)}}\sim \frac{e^{-C_2}}{C_1},\hbox{ as }k\rightarrow +\infty,$$ which gives the desired conclusion.
This allows to prove the following combinatorial lemma which extends Lemma \[Lemgrope\].
\[Lemgropef\] There exist pairwise disjoint subsets $B^{(s)}(l,\nu),$ $l,\nu\geq 1,$ of $\mathbb{N}$ having positive ${\widetilde}{B}_s$ density such that, for any $n\in B^{(s)}(l,\nu)$ and $m\in B^{(s)}(k,\mu)$, we have that $n\geq f_l(\nu)$ and $$\vert n-m\vert\geq f_l(\nu)+f_l(\mu)\hbox{ if }n\neq m.$$
We consider the sequence $(n_{k}^{(s)})$ constructed above and also sets $I(l,\nu)$ constructed in [@Grope] that we recalled just after Lemma \[Lemgrope\]. We also define $B^{(s)}(l,\nu):=\{n_{k}^{(s)}; k\in I(l,\nu)\}.$ These sets are clearly pairwise disjoint since the sets $I(l,\nu)$ are, and the sequence is $(n_{k}^{(s)})$ increasing. Moreover by definition of the sets $I(l,\nu)$, that are arithmetic sequences, and Lemma \[lemestimation\], the conclusion of Lemma \[dens\_tilde\] remains true, i.e. the sets $B^{(s)}(l,\nu)$ have positive lower ${\widetilde}{B}_s$-density. Then by definition of $n_{k}^{(s)}$ from (\[Eqnkmod\]), we get $n_{k}^{(s)}\geq f_s(\delta_k)=f_s(\nu)$. Finally, if $n_{j}^{(s)}\in B^{(s)}(l,\nu)$ and $n_{m}^{(s)}\in B^{(s)}(k,\mu)$ with $j>m$, then $$n_{j}^{(s)}-n_{m}^{(s)}=f(\delta_m)+2\sum_{i=m+1}^{j-1}f(\delta_i)+f(\delta_j)\geq f(\mu)+f(\nu).$$
This strengthened version of Lemma \[Lemgrope\] allows us to give a stronger conclusion to the so-called Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion whose proof will be only sketched since it is an adaptation of the classical proof given in [@Grope Theorem 9.9].
\[main\_theorem\] Let $T$ be an operator on a separable Fréchet space $X.$ If there is a dense subset $X_0$ of $X$ and a map $S:X_0\rightarrow X_0$ such that, for any $x\in X_0,$
(i) $\displaystyle\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}T^nx$ converges unconditionally,
(ii) $\displaystyle\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}S^nx$ converges unconditionally,
(iii) $TSx=x,$
then $T$ is ${\widetilde}{B}_s$-frequently hypercyclic, for every $s\geq 2.$
Let $(y_n)$ be a dense sequence from $X_0$ that is dense in $X$. Let $\Vert .\Vert$ denote an $F$-norm that defines the topology of $X.$ The unconditional convergence of the series $(ii)$ and $(iii)$ allows to find, for every $l\in{\mathbb{N}}$, an integer $N_l\geq 1$ such that for every $j\leq l$ and every finite set $F\subset \{N_l;N_l+1;\ldots\}$, $$\left\Vert \sum_{n\in F}T^{n}y_l\right\Vert\leq \frac{1}{l2^l}\text{ and }\left\Vert \sum_{n\in F}S^{n}y_l\right\Vert\leq \frac{1}{l2^l}.$$ Now let $(M_l)$ be an increasing sequence such that $f_s(M_l)\geq N_l$ and $(f_s(M_l))$ is increasing. We also define $$B^{(s)}:=\bigcup_{l=1}^{+\infty}B^{(s)}(l,M_l)$$ and $$z_n=y_l\text{ if } n\in B^{(s)}(l,M_l).$$ Finally we claim that $$x=\sum_{n\in{\mathbb{N}}}S^n(z_n)$$ defines a ${\widetilde}{B}_s$-frequently hypercyclic vector for $T$. From this point, the proof is just an adaptation of the proof of the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion from [@Grope] replacing Lemma \[Lemgrope\] by Lemma \[Lemgropef\] stated above.
We may also deduce the following corollary using Lemma \[lemmacomp\].
Under the assumptions of the previous proposition, the operator $T$ is $B_r$-frequently hypercyclic for every $r>1$.
A frequently hypercyclic operator which is not $A_r$-frequently hypercyclic {#fhc_op}
===========================================================================
In this final section, we are going to show that there exists frequently hypercyclic operator, that do not belong to the class of $A_r$-frequently hypercyclic operator, for any $0<r\leq 1.$ According to Proposition \[main\_prop\] or Theorem \[main\_theorem\] such an operator cannot satisfy the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion. To build it, we are going to use several ideas of the work [@Bayru], where the authors provide some counterexamples to questions regarding frequent hypercyclicity.\
In a recent paper, Bayart and Ruzsa gave a characterization of frequently hypercyclic weighted shifts on the sequence spaces $\ell^p$ and $c_0$. We recall here their result on $c_0({\mathbb{N}})$ that will be useful in the following [@Bayru Therorem 13].
\[TheoBay\] Let $w=(\omega_n)_{n\in{\mathbb{N}}}$ be a bounded sequence of positive integers. Then $B_w$ is frequently hypercyclic on $c_0({\mathbb{N}})$ if and only if there exist a sequence $(M(p))$ of positive real numbers tending to $+\infty$ and a sequence $(E_p)$ of subsets of ${\mathbb{N}}$ such that:
(a) For any $p\geq 1$, $\underline{d}\left(E_p\right)>0$;
(b) For any $p,q\geq1$, $p\neq q$, $\left(E_p+[0,p]\right)\cap\left(E_q+[0,q]\right)=\emptyset$;
(c) $\lim_{n\to\infty,\ n\in E_p+[0,p]} \omega_1\cdots \omega_n=+\infty$;
(d) For any $p,q\geq1$, for any $n\in E_p$ and any $m\in E_q$ with $m>n$, for any $t\in\{0,\ldots,q\}$, $$\omega_1\cdots \omega_{m-n+t}\geq M(p)M(q).$$
In the same paper, the authors also provide examples of a $\mathcal{U}$-frequently hypercyclic weighted shift which is not frequently hypercyclic and of a frequently hypercyclic weighted shift which is not distributionally chaotic. In what follows, we modify these constructions in order to provide a frequently hypercyclic weighted shift on $c_0({\mathbb{N}})$ which is not $A_r$-frequently hypercyclic for any $0<r<1$. To that purpose, we will need the following lemma [@Bayru Lemma 1]:
There exist $a>1$ and $\varepsilon>0$ such that $\overline{d}\left(\cup_{u\geq1}I_{u}^{a,4\varepsilon}\right)<1$ and, for any integer $u>v\geq 1$, $$I_{u}^{a,2\varepsilon}\cap I_{v}^{a,2\varepsilon}=\emptyset, \ I_{u}^{a,2\varepsilon}-I_{v}^{a,2\varepsilon}\subset I_{u}^{a,4\varepsilon},$$ where $I_u^{a,\varepsilon}=[(1-\varepsilon)a^u,(1+\varepsilon)a^u].$
The philosophy of the previous lemma is that it suffices to choose $a$ very large and at the same time $\varepsilon$ very small to obtain the result stated. This allows us to strengthen this lemma demanding also that the following condition holds: $$\label{cond1}
\frac{1-\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}a>1.$$
From now on, we suppose that $a$ and $\varepsilon$ are given by the previous lemma with the additional condition $(\ref{cond1}).$
Let also $(b_p)$ be an increasing sequence of integers such that $$\label{cond2}
\sum_{q\geq 1}\frac{(4q+1)(2q+1)}{b_q}e^{2q}<\infty\text{ and } b_p\geq 8p.$$
Finally, let $(A_p)$ be any syndetic partition of ${\mathbb{N}}$ and $$E_p=\cup_{u\in A_p}\left(I_{u}^{a,\varepsilon}\cap\left(b_p{\mathbb{N}}+[0,p]\right)\right).$$
Bayart and Ruzsa construct such sets and they prove that these sets have positive lower density [@Bayru Lemma 2]. Then, for the same reasons we have $\underline{d}(E_p)>0.$ Further, the following lemma is almost the same as [@Bayru Lemma 3] once again and it still holds in our context:
Let $p,q\geq1$, $n\in E_p$, $m\in E_q$ with $n\neq m$. Then $\vert n-m\vert>\max(p,q)$.
In particular, $(E_p+[0,p])\cap(E_q+[0,q])=\emptyset$ if $p\neq q$.\
Thus, the sequence of sets $(E_p)$ satisfy conditions $(a)$ and $(b)$ from Theorem \[TheoBay\].
We now turn to the construction of the weights of the weighted shift we are looking for. For this construction, we also draw our inspiration from constructions made in [@Bayru]. We set: $$w_{0}^{p}\cdots w_{k-1}^{p}=\begin{cases}1 &\text{ if }k\notin b_p{\mathbb{N}}+[-4p,4p]\\
2^p &\text{ if }k\in b_p{\mathbb{N}}+[-2p,2p]
\end{cases}$$ and for every $k\in{\mathbb{N}}$, $\frac{1}{2}\leq w_{k}^{p}\leq 2$. Then for $p,q\geq1$, $u\in A_p$ and $v\in A_q$ with $u>v$ we define $$w_{0}^{u,v}\cdots w_{k-1}^{u,v}=\begin{cases}1 &\text{ if }k\notin I_{u}^{a,4\varepsilon}\\
\max(2^p,2^q) &\text{ if }k\in I_{u}^{a,\varepsilon}-I_{v}^{a,\varepsilon}+[0,p]
\end{cases}$$ and for every $k\in{\mathbb{N}}$, $\frac{1}{2}\leq w_{k}^{u,v}\leq 2$.
We are now able to give the definition of the weight $w$. This one is constructed in order to satisfy the following equality: $$w_{0}\cdots w_{n-1}=\max_{p,u,v}\left(w_{0}^{p}\cdots w_{n-1}^{p},w_{0}^{u,v}\cdots w_{n-1}^{u,v}\right).$$ It is clear by construction that for every $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$, $\frac{1}{2}\leq w_n\leq2$, so the weighted backward shift $B_w$ is bounded and invertible. Moreover this construction satisfies condition $(c)$ in Theorem \[TheoBay\].
Since we want to prove that $B_w$ is frequently hypercyclic, the only condition left to prove is condition $(d)$ from Theorem \[TheoBay\]. Thus let $p,q\geq1$, $n\in E_p$ and $m\in E_q$ with $m>n$ and $t\in[0,q]$. Then we have two cases:
$\bullet$ If $p=q$, then $m-n+t
\in b_q{\mathbb{N}}+[-q,2q]$ and the definition of $w$ ensures that $w_{0}\cdots w_{m-n+t}\geq 2^{q}$.
$\bullet$ If $p\neq q$, then there exists $u>v$ such that $n\in I_{v}^{a,\varepsilon}$ and $m\in I_{u}^{a,\varepsilon}$. Thus, by definition of $w$, $$w_{0}\cdots w_{m-n+t}\geq \max\left(2^p;2^q\right)\geq 2^{\frac{p+q}{2}}\geq \lfloor2^{\frac{p}{2}}\rfloor\cdot\lfloor2^{\frac{q}{2}}\rfloor.$$
Now, one may define $M(p):=\lfloor2^{\frac{p}{2}}\rfloor$ and each case above satisfies condition $(d)$ from Theorem \[TheoBay\]. Thus we have proved that the weighted shift $B_w$ is frequently hypercyclic.\
We now turn to the $A_r$-frequent hypercyclicity of $B_w$. We are going to prove by contradiction that $B_w$ is not $A_r$-frequently hypercyclic for every $0<r<1$.\
Let us suppose that $B_w$ is $A_r$-frequently hypercyclic and that $E\subset {\mathbb{N}}$ is such that $\underline{d}_{A_r}(E)>0$ and $\lim_{n\to\infty, n\in E} w_1\cdots w_n=+\infty$. Such a set exists since $B_w$ is $A_r$-frequently hypercyclic. Indeed it suffices to consider $E=\{n\in{\mathbb{N}}: \Vert B_{w}^{n}(x)-e_0\Vert\leq \frac{1}{2}\}$ where $x$ is a $A_r$-frequently hypercyclic vector.
For every $p\geq 1$, we consider the set: $$F_p=\{n\in E: w_1\cdots w_n>2^p\}.$$ This set is a cofinite subset of $E$, so it has the same lower $A_r$-density. We also consider an increasing enumeration $(n_k)$ of $A_p$.
Then $$\underline{d}_{A_r}(F_p)\leq \liminf_{k\to\infty}\left(
\displaystyle\frac{\displaystyle\sum_{n\leq (1+\varepsilon)a^{n_k},\atop n\in F_p}e^{n^r}+
\sum_{(1+\varepsilon)a^{n_{k}}< n\leq (1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}},\atop n\in \cup_{q>p}\left(b_q{\mathbb{N}}+[-2q,2q]\right)}e^{n^r}}
{\displaystyle\sum_{n\leq (1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}}e^{n^r}}\right).$$
Moreover, since we have $\sum_{n\leq N}e^{n^r}\sim\frac{1}{r}N^{1-r}e^{N^r}$, as $N$ tends to $\infty,$ we get $$\underline{d}_{A_r}(F_p)\leq \liminf_{k\to\infty}\left(
\displaystyle
\frac{\frac{1}{r}\left((1+\varepsilon)a^{n_k}\right)^{1-r}e^{\left((1+\varepsilon)a^{n_k}\right)^r}+
\displaystyle\sum_{(1+\varepsilon)a^{n_{k}}< n\leq (1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}},\atop n\in \cup_{q>p}\left(b_q{\mathbb{N}}+[-2q,2q]\right)}e^{n^r}}
{\frac{1}{r}\left((1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}\right)^{1-r}e^{\left((1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}\right)^r}}\right).$$ A straightforward computation using inequality (\[cond1\]) proves that the first term on the right-hand side tends to $0.$ We now focus on the second term: $$\begin{aligned}
\underline{d}_{A_r}(F_p)&\leq \liminf_{k\to\infty}\left(
\frac{\displaystyle\sum_{(1+\varepsilon)a^{n_{k}}< n\leq (1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}},\atop n\in \cup_{q>p}\left(b_q{\mathbb{N}}+[-2q,2q]\right)}e^{n^r}}{\frac{1}{r}\left((1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}\right)^{1-r}e^{\left((1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}\right)^r}}\right)\\
&\leq\liminf_{k\to\infty}\frac{\sum_{q>p}(4q+1)\sum_{j=1}^{\frac{(1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}}{b_q+2q}}e^{\left(jb_q+2q\right)^r}}{\frac{1}{r}\left((1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}\right)^{1-r}e^{\left((1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}\right)^r}}.\\\end{aligned}$$ An classical calculation ensures that we have $$\sum_{j=1}^{\frac{(1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}}{b_q+2q}}e^{\left(jb_q+2q\right)^r}\sim
\frac{\left(\frac{b_q(1-\varepsilon) a^{n_{k+1}}}{b_q+2q}+2q\right)^{1-r}}{r b_q}e^{\left(\frac{b_q(1-\varepsilon) a^{n_{k+1}}}{b_q+2q}+2q\right)^r},$$ as $k$ tends to $\infty.$ Thus we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\underline{d}_{A_r}(F_p)&\leq\liminf_{k\to\infty}\frac{\sum_{q>p}(4q+1)\left(\frac{b_q(1-\varepsilon) a^{n_{k+1}}}{b_q+2q}+2q\right)^{1-r}e^{\left(\frac{b_q(1-\varepsilon) a^{n_{k+1}}}{b_q+2q}+2q\right)^r}}{b_q\left((1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}\right)^{1-r}e^{\left((1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}\right)^r}}\\
&\leq \liminf_{k\to\infty}\sum_{q>p}\frac{4q+1}{b_q}\left(\frac{b_q}{b_q+2q}+\frac{2q}{(1-\varepsilon) a^{n_{k+1}}}\right)^{1-r}e^{\left((1-\varepsilon) a^{n_{k+1}}+2q\right)^r-\left((1-\varepsilon)a^{n_{k+1}}\right)^r}\\
&\leq\sum_{q>p}\frac{4q+1}{b_q}(1+2q)^{1-r}e^{(2q)^r}\\
&\leq\sum_{q>p}\frac{4q+1}{b_q}(1+2q)e^{2q}.\end{aligned}$$ Recall that this does not require any property on $p$ so we can let $p$ tend to infinity which, thanks to (\[cond2\]), implies that $\underline{d}_{A_r}(E)=\lim_{p\to\infty} \underline{d}_{A_r}(F_p)=0$, hence we obtain a contradiction. Thus the weighted shift $B_w$ is not $A_r$-frequently hypercyclic. From this construction together with Corollary \[coro\_ar\], we deduce the following result.
\[counterexample\] There exists a frequently hypercyclic operator being not $A_r$-frequently hypercyclic, for any $0<r\leq 1,$ hence which does not satisfy the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion.
[10]{}
F. Bayart and S. Grivaux. Hypercyclicité: le rôle du spectre ponctuel unimodulaire. , **338** (2004), no. 9, 703–708.
F. Bayart and S. Grivaux. Frequently hypercyclic operators. , **358** (2006), no. 11, 5083–5117.
F. Bayart and S. Grivaux. Invariant gaussian measures for operators on banach spaces and linear dynamics. , **94** (2007), no. 1, 181–120.
F. Bayart and [É]{}. Matheron. . Cambridge tracts in mathematics. Cambridge University Press, 2009.
F. Bayart and I.Z. Ruzsa. Difference sets and frequently hypercyclic weighted shifts. , **35** (2015), no. 3, 691–709.
A. Bonilla and K.-G. Grosse-Erdmann. Frequently hypercyclic operators and vectors. , **27** (2007), no. 2, 383–404.
A. Bonilla and K.-G. Grosse-Erdmann. Upper frequent hypercyclicity and related notions, arxiv:1601.07276 (2016).
J. Bès, Q. Menet, A. Peris, and Y. Puig. Recurrence properties of hypercyclic operators. , **366** (2016), no. 1, 545–572.
A. R. Freedman and J. J. Sember. Densities and summability. , **95** (1981), no. 2, 293–305.
K.-G. Grosse-Erdmann and A. Peris. . Universitext Series. Springer, 2011.
A. Mouze and V. Munnier. Polynomial inequalities and universal Taylor series. , **284** (2016), no. 3-4, 919–946.
A. Zygmund. . Number vol. 1 in Cambridge Mathematical Library. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
A search for excited state transitions of double beta decay in and double electron capture in has been performed in the HADES underground laboratory with two low background HPGe detectors in sandwich configuration. After an exposure of , no signal was found. The frequentist spectral analysis resulted in lower half-life limits of and ( CL) for the first $0^+$ and $2^+$ excited state in respectively. This is an improvement by more than a factor of 3 with respect to previous measurements. In , the lower half-life limit could be improved to ( CL) for the first $0^+$ excited state. Furthermore, first experimental lower half-live limits are found for all possible excited states in the and systems.\
Structured Abstract:\
[**Background:**]{} Excited state transitions in double beta decays are a powerful tool to validate and tune calculations of nuclear matrix elements.\
[**Purpose:**]{} The experimental lower half-life limits for double beta decays of and into the excited $2^+_1$ and $0^+_1$ are improved. Furthermore, first limits of transitions into the $2^+_2$, $0^+_2$ and $2^+_3$ states are published for as well as a first limit for the $2^+_2$ state transition in .\
[**Methods:**]{} The Pd sample was measured with two HPGe detector in sandwich configuration in the HADES underground laboratory during of life time. The analysis is performed with the frequentist Fieldman Cousisns method.\
[**Results:**]{} Lower half-life limits of and ( CL) have been found for the first $0^+$ and $2^+$ excited state in respectively. This is an improvement by more than a factor of 3 with respect to previous measurements. In , the lower half-life limit could be improved to ( CL) for first $0^+$ excited state. Furthermore, first experimental lower half-live limits are found for all possible excited states in the and systems\
[**Conclusions:**]{} Previous half-life limits have been improved and experimental results were obtained for all theoretical calculations of palladium double beta decays into excited states.\
author:
- Björn Lehnert
- Kai Zuber
- Erica Andreotti
- Mikael Hult
bibliography:
- './PdHADESPaper\_short.bib'
title: 'New Half-life Limits on Double Beta Decays of and into Excited States'
---
Introduction
============
The field of neutrino physics has made groundbreaking progress in recent years. Oscillation experiments studying neutrinos coming from the sun [@Abe2011; @SNOCollaboration2011; @Alimonti2009], the atmosphere [@Hatakeyama1998], nuclear reactors [@Kim2012a; @An2012; @Abe2008; @Lasserre2006] and in accelerator beams [@Adamson2008; @Abe2011a; @Agafonova2012] have found compelling evidence for flavor oscillation in the lepton sector. This changes the long believed assumption of neutrinos being mass-less particles. The implication from neutrino oscillation, that at least two neutrino mass eigenstates have a non-zero rest mass, does not allow fixing an absolute mass-scale and leaves two mass hierarchy scenarios open. Advanced oscillation experiments try to identify the hierarchy scenario by using oscillation effects in the earth or in dense stellar matter [@Mathews2012] but are not able to determine the absolute mass scale. This has to be done via beta-decay [@Wolf2010; @Monfardini2006a], cosmology [@Jarosik2011] or neutrinoless double-beta decay:
$$\label{eq:1}
(Z,A) \rightarrow (Z+2,A) + 2 e^- \quad (0\nu\beta\beta) \, ,$$
which would have a high sensitivity to determine the mass scale of neutrinos. This process violates total lepton number by two units and thus is not allowed in the Standard Model. Furthermore, it is the gold plated process to distinguish whether neutrinos are Majorana or Dirac particles.
For the process to exist, it is necessary to match the helicities of the intermediate neutrino states which is easiest done by introducing a neutrino mass. This mass is connected to the experimentally observable half-life via
$$\label{eq:1}
\left(T_{1/2}^{0 \nu}\right)^{-1} = G^{0 \nu}(Q, Z) \cdot \left| M_{GT}^{0\nu} - M_{F}^{0\nu} \right|^2 \cdot \left(\frac{{\ensuremath{\langle m_{\nu_e} \rangle}~}}{m_e}\right)^2 \, ,$$
where [$\langle m_{\nu_e} \rangle$ ]{}is the effective Majorana neutrino mass given by the coherent sum over the virtual electron neutrino mass eigenstates ${\ensuremath{\langle m_{\nu_e} \rangle}~}= \left| \sum_{i}U_{ei}^2m_i\right|$ with $U_{ei}$ as the lepton flavor mixing matrix, $G^{0 \nu}(Q, Z) $ is a phase space factor and $M_{GT}^{0\nu} - M_{F}^{0\nu}$ describes the nuclear transition matrix element. The experimental signature is the emission of two electrons with a sum energy corresponding to the Q-value of the nuclear transition. A potential evidence has been claimed for the mode of $^{76}$Ge with $T_{1/2}^{0 \nu} = \unit[2.23^{+0.44}_{-0.31} \times 10^{25}]{yr}$ at CL [@Klapdor2001; @Klapdor2006].\
Experimentally observed in 11 nuclides [@TRETYAK2002; @Ackerman2011c] is the SM process of neutrino accompanied double beta decay:
$$(Z,A) \rightarrow (Z+2,A) + 2 e^- + 2 \nu_e \quad (2\nu\beta\beta) \, ,$$
which is expected with half-lives around depending on the Q-value. For recent reviews see [@Avignone2008]. An alternative process is the double positron decay in combination with electron capture (EC). Three different decay modes can be considered:
$$\begin{aligned}
(Z,A) \rightarrow& (Z-2,A) + 2 e^+ + (2 {\mbox{$\nu_e$}}) &\mbox{({\ensuremath{\beta^+\beta^+}~}{})}\\
e^- + (Z,A) \rightarrow& (Z-2,A) + e^+ + (2 {\mbox{$\nu_e$}}) & \mbox{({\ensuremath{\beta^+/{\rm EC}}}{})}\\
2 e^- + (Z,A) \rightarrow& (Z-2,A) + (2 {\mbox{$\nu_e$}}) &\mbox{({\ensuremath{{\rm EC/EC}}~}{})}\end{aligned}$$
Decay modes containing a positron have a reduced Q-value as each generated positron accounts for a reduction of 2 $m_ec^2$ and thus can only occur in nuclides with sufficient energy difference to the daughter nuclide. The full energy is only available in the [${\rm EC/EC}$ ]{} mode and makes it the most probable one; however, it is also the most difficult to detect, only producing X-rays instead of gammas.\
Another set of searches focuses on excited state transitions in double beta decays. This is experimentally interesting because the event topology is enhanced by de-excitation gammas which are accessible with gamma ray spectroscopy. However, without information about the other final state particles, this technique cannot distinguish between the and the mode; hence, the deduced half-lives are valid for both. The investigation of modes into excited states provides information on nuclear structure which is valuable for matrix element calculations. The understanding and tuning of parameters in matrix elements for modes is imperative for translating the measured half-life of experiments into a Majorana neutrino mass (\[eq:1\]). So far only transitions to the first excited $0^+$ state have been observed in [@Barabash1995] and [@Barabash2004]. The searches described in this paper are searches for excited state transitions in palladium with gamma ray spectroscopy.\
Double Beta Decays in Palladium
===============================
The element under study is palladium with the isotopes of interest and . Among the 35 isotopes expected to undergo $\beta^-\beta^-$ decay, has the second highes natural abundance with . Recently, the Q-value was remeasured to [@Fink2012a] and places among the 11 $\beta^-\beta^-$ isotopes with a Q-value larger than . Two measurements of have been performed in the past in 1954 [@Winter1952] and more recently in 2011 [@Lehnert2011]. The latter measurement was the first to investigate excited states in palladium and is the direct predecessor of this search. There exist many theoretical calculations for transitions into the ground state and into the $2^+_1$, $0^+_1$, $2^+_2$, $0^+_2$ and $2^+_3$ excited states to which the experimental limits can be compared. The existing experimental and theoretical half-life limits ares summarized in \[tab:table2\]. This paper has the aim to provide experimental information about every decay mode into excited states in and that has been investigated theoretically. Furthermore, [ ]{}is an excellent candidate to probe the single-state dominance hypothesis for [2]{}, i.e. that only the lowest lying intermediate 1$^+$-state will contribute to the nuclear transition matrix element describing its [2]{}.\
The second isotope has a Q-value of , a natural abundance of and is able to decay via [${\rm EC/EC}$ ]{}and [$\beta^+/{\rm EC}$]{}. The only experimental half-life limit was quoted in [@Lehnert2011] and no theoretical calculation have been published up to date. A summary can be found in \[tab:table3\].\
[cccc]{} Exp / Th model & Lower Limit \[yr\] & Reference & Year of Publication\
\
Exp & ( CL) & [@Winter1952] & 1952\
PHFM & and & [@Chandra2005] & 2005\
SSDH & & [@Semenov2000] & 2000\
SSDH & & [@Civitarese1998] & 1998\
SRPA & & [@Stoica1994] & 1994\
OEM & & [@Hirsch1994] & 1994\
QRPA & & [@Staudt1990] & 1990\
SSD & & [@Domin2005] & 2005\
pnQRPA & and & [@Suhonen2011] & 2011\
\
Exp & ( CL) & [@Lehnert2011] & 2011\
SSD & & [@Domin2005] & 2005\
SRPA & & [@Stoica1994] & 1994\
pnQRPA & & [@Raduta2007] & 2007\
pnQRPA & and & [@Suhonen2011] & 2011\
\
Exp & ( CL) & [@Lehnert2011] & 2011\
SSD & & [@Domin2005] & 2005\
pnQRPA & and & [@Suhonen2011] &2011\
\
SSD & & [@Domin2005] & 2005\
pnQRPA & and & [@Suhonen2011] & 2011\
\
SSD & & [@Domin2005] & 2005\
\
SSD & & [@Domin2005] & 2005\
[ccccc]{} Exp / Th model & Lower Limit \[yr\] & Reference & Year of Publication\
\
Exp & ( CL) & [@Lehnert2011] &2011\
\
Exp & ( CL) & [@Lehnert2011] &2011\
The search is based on gamma spectroscopy, hence only gamma lines are considered in the event topology. Each excited state transition is followed by an unique set of decay branches and gamma cascades which are illustrated in \[fig:levelSchemePd110\] and \[fig:levelSchemePd102\].
![ \[fig:levelSchemePd110\] level scheme of investigated decay modes. Nuclear data from [@ENSDF2012].](./Pd110_LevelScheme.eps){width="99.00000%"}
![ \[fig:levelSchemePd102\] level scheme of investigated decay modes. Nuclear data from [@ENSDF2012].](./Pd102_LevelScheme.eps){width="99.00000%"}
Experiment
==========
Measuring Setup
---------------
The measurements were performed in the High Activity Disposal Experimental Site, HADES, underground laboratory on the premises of the Belgian Nuclear Research Centre SCK$\cdot$CEN in Mol. The underground laboratory is located at a depth of inside a Boom clay formation and has a flat overburden that amounts to roughly [@HADES].\
The detector setup consists of two HPGe detectors in a sandwich configuration with integrated muon veto panels on the top [@Wieslander2009a]. It is shown in \[fig:detector\]. The sample is placed between the top (Ge-7) and bottom (Ge-6) detector. The distance between the two can be adjusted in order to maximize the solid angle acceptance and the detection efficiency. Ge-6 is a p-type HPGe detector with efficiency and dead layer in a cryostat with Cu endcap whereas Ge-7 is an extended range p-type HPGe detector with efficiency and dead layer in an Al cryostat. The characteristics of Ge7 makes it suitable for the detection of low energetic X-rays while the configuration of Ge6 has the advantage of reducing the background and X-ray coincidences. The shielding consists of an outer layer of () lead, an intermediate layer of () low activity lead and an inner layer of electrolytic copper with less than and less than [@Wieslander2009a].\
![ \[fig:detector\] IRMM germanium detector sandwich setup.](./SandwichDetector.eps){width="90.00000%"}
The data acquisition is two-fold. The main DAQ is the IRMM self-fabricated DAQ2000 multi-parameter system that is recording events in list mode from the two HPGe detectors as well as from the two muon panels and enables coincidence analysis in the ROOT framework [@Antcheva2009]. Additionally, a standard GENIE DAQ system was used in histogram mode for each HPGe detector redundantly. The DAQ2000 was only operative for a reduced measuring time with limited sample exposure; thus the analysis in this work is performed with the GENIE DAQ and without muon veto or detector coincidence.\
The total background rate in the germanium detectors was previously measured with in an energy range of of which were identified as muon events [@Wieslander2009a].
Palladium Sample
----------------
of irregular shaped x plates of palladium were placed inside a measuring container of diameter and height. The plates are piled inside the container as dense as possible and an effective density of was calculated. The palladium is approximated with a homogeneous distribution and the effective density in the simulations for determining the detection efficiency. Recently, the sample was purified by C. HAFNER GmbH + Co. KG in 2010 to a certified purity of which lowered the continuous background in the peak regions by approximately [@Lehnert2011]. In order to avoid radioisotopes produced by cosmic ray spallation, the palladium was kept underground and exposed only during purification in 2010 and for transport in fall 2011. A picture of the palladium sample before and after purification is shown in \[fig:PdSample\].
![ \[fig:PdSample\] Palladium sample before (left) and after (right) purification inside the measuring container.](./PdOriginalPic.eps){width="95.00000%"}
Analysis
========
Stability Check
---------------
The histogram data of the GENIE DAQ is separated into individual runs of roughly for each of the two detectors Ge6 and Ge7. This enables the stability check of the DAQ system over the extended period of measurement and the removal of individual runs.\
The stability was checked by plotting the count rate and peak centroid of the background peaks at and as a function of time (spectrum number). Although counting statistics prevented detailed analysis of the short term stability, it was clear that there was no measurable energy drift during the measurement period. In addition, quality controls with a point source containing , and were carried out before, after and once in-between the measurement. The average activity concentration in the laboratory during the data taking was measured to and at no point higher than . No correlation to the background count rate was observed mainly due to effective Rn-removal by minimizing empty space inside the shield and flushing with N$_{2}$. The count rate remained stable over the 32 runs with one exception; in the first two runs an increase in total counts and counts from was observed, however not from . This behavior was cross checked with additional visible from and , and representing the and decay chains respectively. The increased count rate of the chain in the first days is only seen in the lower Ge6 with a Cu endcap and not in the upper Ge7 with an Al endcap. One possible explanation is that the short half-life of () implies that it is not flushed out by boil-off nitrogen and that its daughters preferentially stick to the copper surface of the lower detector (Ge6) than to the aluminum surface of the upper detector (Ge7). with longer half-life () will be flushed out of the shield before a significant amount of daughters are produced.
Consequently, the first two runs are removed from the analysis resulting in a total of 30 runs with of good data out of 32 runs with total data which translates into a total exposure of .
Data Processing
---------------
For the final analysis a single energy spectrum is used for which all individual runs are summed: In a first step, all selected runs of one detector are combined with the same energy calibration. In a second step, the single detector spectra are rebinned into a common binning of and a common energy range from . Additionally, the Ge6 spectrum is scaled to the life-time of the Ge7 spectrum which becomes the common life-time of the sum spectrum. The commonly binned and scaled spectra are added. These steps result in a non-integer sum spectrum that denotes the count per bin in the life-time of Ge7. The difference in life-time between the two detectors is less than for the selected runs. The combined spectrum of Ge6 and Ge7 together with a background spectrum of is shown in \[fig:SumSpec\].
![ \[fig:SumSpec\] Sum spectrum of Ge6 and Ge7 for selected data set () in red and background spectrum () in gray. The spectra are shown in common bins between .](./Spec_SampleVsBg.eps){width="95.00000%"}
Background Investigation
------------------------
The radiopurity of the palladium sample was assessed during the $\gamma$-spectrometry measurement performed in HADES. In the measured spectrum, the major emitted by natural radionuclides belonging to the , chains and as well as the lines are visible. The palladium spectrum is compared to the background spectrum measured without a sample. The background peak count rate is subtracted from that of the palladium sample. The result, if positive, is then used for the evaluation of the activity due to the impurities in the sample. In case of a negative result, a decision threshold is calculated according to [@ISO_11929_2010]. The results are reported in \[tab:bgResults\]. Decision thresholds are also calculated for the following radionuclides: (= ), (= ) and (= ). The reason is the possible interference with the search for and isotopes, because of the emission of from the same excited daughter states. No presence of these radionuclides is found, as reported in \[tab:bgIntermResults\].
-- --------- --------------- ------- ---------------
295.22 1.9 $\pm$ 1.0 1.4 1.4 $\pm$ 0.4
351.93 1.3 $\pm$ 0.5 0.6
609.32 1.9 $\pm$ 0.4 0.4 1.9 $\pm$ 0.4
1120.29 2.0$\pm$ 0.8 0.9
1238.11 — 2.2
1377.67 — 2.7
1764.54 — 3.2
46.54 — 414.3
911.20 — 0.5
968.97 — 0.9
238.63 — 0.7
583.19 — 0.6
2614.51 — 0.3
1460.82 — 1.0
661.66 — 0.2
1173.23 — 0.2
1332.49 — 0.1
-- --------- --------------- ------- ---------------
: \[tab:bgResults\] Massic activities (in ) of radioimpurities detected in the Pd sample.
-- --------- -----
1384.30 0.5
1505.04 1.0
475.05 0.4
631.28 0.3
697.49 0.3
-- --------- -----
: \[tab:bgIntermResults\] Decision thresholds for direct $\gamma$-background of DBD intermediate nuclei.\
Peak Finding
------------
The analysis is a peak search on the detector sum spectrum and either retrieves the number of counts in a respective peak or states an upper limit of counts according to a level of confidence. In an experiment with non negligible background, the background can fluctuate upwards or downwards. The sensitivity of an experiment is then defined as a resulting signal which originates from a upward fluctuation of the background. This can be calculated before performing the experiment if the background is known. In case of the observation of a downward fluctuation, which formally results in negative signal counts, the signal is usually set to zero and the sensitivity is quoted as an upper limit of the counts. On the other hand, when using classical uncertainties on the observed downward fluctuated counts, it is possible that in some cases even the upper limit its negative. In these cases it results in a poor coverage of the quoted confidence level at best and in an unphysical negative result at worst. Additionally there is a discontinuity in the coverage when crossing from a two-sided confidence interval definition to a one-sided one.
All these problems are addressed by the method of Feldman and Cousins in their paper [@Feldman1998]. They use a Neyman construction of a confident belt and an ordering principle based on likelihood ratios. The advantages are a physical yield in all background situations i.e. positive upper count limit and avoiding discontinuities in the coverage while crossing the statistical interpretation from a non-observation to an observation, i.e. from a one-sided to a two-sided confidence interval. The confidence intervals of the Feldman Cousins method are believed to have a better coverage for small numbers than gaussian ones [@Feldman1998].\
No prominent peak structures are observed in the signal region and the results of the analysis are upper limits only for the peak counts. In order to obtain a numerical value, all bins within a peak are combined into a single analysis bin that covers at least the FWHM of the peak. The real signal fraction coverage is calculated as the gaussian peak area in the analysis bin and depends on the actual binning of the spectrum. The peak background is fitted with a constant functions defined around the peak energy excluding a window of around the peak. In case of prominent background peaks in the side bands, they are included in the background function as gaussians. This was done for the background peaks at , and from , at from , at from and at from . In case of the peak which is close to the peak in the system, the flat background function was defined closer than into the signal region to improve the background estimation.\
The observed counts in the analysis bin are compared to the expected background with the ROOT class TFeldmanCousins, which returns the lower and upper bound of the signal confidence interval according to a specified confidence level that is set to in this work. All investigated peaks show a lower count limit of zero; this is in agreement with a non-observation of the peak. To account for the incomplete coverage of the peak area by the analysis bin, the upper count limit is divided by the fraction of coverage and thus adjusts the upper count limit in a conservative way.\
An illustration of the technique is shown in \[fig:657keV\] to \[fig:468keV\] with the energy spectrum in the solid black line, the background function in the dashed blue line, the peak fraction marked as the solid red area and the gaussian signal peak as it appears with the Feldman Cousins upper limit as the red solid line.
The Feldman and Cousins limits are cross checked with the ISO standard methods [@ISO_11929_2010] and agree better than within a factor of two with each other; this can be explained by the different treatment of statistical background fluctuations.
Monte Carlo Simulation for Efficiencies
----------------------------------------
The full energy peak efficiencies are determined using Monte Carlo simulations with the EGS4 software. The models of the detectors were first determined from manufacturer data and using information from radiography. Thereafter the dead layer thicknesses were adjusted in the model to agree with measured FEP efficiencies from point sources within . The final model has been validated using volume sources of similar size as the Pd source in this study. Each decay branch is simulated separately with information from [@ENSDF2012] and the calculations involved all the cascading $\gamma$-rays of each branch so that the resulting FEP efficiency is inherently corrected for the coincidence summing effect. X-ray coincidences and the angular correlations are neglected in the simulations and it was assumed that the activity was homogeneously distributed in the whole volume of the sample.
Results
=======
All participating in a $\gamma$-cascade are investigated and a half-life was calculated for each. Intrinsically, the calculation of limits is influenced by statistical fluctuations in the experimental spectrum, hence the largest calculated limit for an excited state transition is quoted as the half-life limit of this transition. A summary of all investigated can be found in \[tab:resultsDetailed\]: Quoted are the emission probability, the detection efficiency including summation effects, the upper count limit in the spectrum and the calculated half-life. The selected half-life for each transition are summarized in \[tab:resultsSummarized\]. The peak regions for the originating from the favored $0^+_1$ transitions are shown in \[fig:657keV\] and \[fig:815keV\] for and in \[fig:475keV\] and \[fig:468keV\] for .
Decay Mode Energy \[keV\] Emission Probability Detection Efficiency Signal Count Limit Limit \[yr\]
------------ ----------------- ---------------------- ---------------------- -------------------- ---------------
$2^+_1$ 12.4
$0^+_1$ 8.4
12.4
$2^+_2$ 11.5
16.3
12.4
$0^+_2$ 10.1
12.4
25.3
11.5
16.3
$2^+_3$ 6.2
12.0
12.4
$2^+_1$ 33.7
$0^+_1$ 29.3
33.7
$2^+_2$ 13.5
11.7
33.7
: \[tab:resultsDetailed\] Experimental results for each decay mode and . The columns from left to right denote the decay mode, the energy, the emission probability in % and the detection efficiency in %. The last two columns show the upper signal count limit and the deduced lower half-life limit at CL.\
Decay Mode Limit \[yr\] ()
------------ ------------------
$2^+_1$
$0^+_1$
$2^+_2$
$0^+_2$
$2^+_3$
$2^+_1$
$0^+_1$
$2^+_2$
: \[tab:resultsSummarized\] Summary of measured half-life limits for all and double beta decay excited state transitions.\
![ \[fig:657keV\] The peak region around the in and the .](./ROI_658.eps){width="90.00000%"}
![ \[fig:815keV\] The peak region around the from $0_1^+$.](./ROI_815.eps){width="90.00000%"}
![ \[fig:475keV\] The peak region around the from $2_1^+$.](./ROI_475.eps){width="90.00000%"}
![ \[fig:468keV\] The peak region around the from $0_1^+$.](./ROI_469.eps){width="90.00000%"}
Conclusion {#conclusion .unnumbered}
==========
A palladium sample has been investigated for double beta decay transitions into excited states in the low background laboratory HADES. Lower half-life limits could be improved for the $0^+_1$ and $2^+_1$ transitions in and and first limits are established for all possible higher energetic excited state transitions. The best limit could be set for the $0^+_1$ transition with a half-life larger than . The largest improvement compared to previous results is archived for the $2^+_1$ transition with which is an improvement by a factor of 3.9. For the system, the improvements are smaller due to upward fluctuations of the background in the peak region of the and .\
Possible improvements of the search of double beta decays in palladium is the consideration of X-rays. This requires a different geometric assembly of the palladium plates e.g. in a layer around an n-type HPGe detector with thin dead layer. Further improvement can be achieved considering $\gamma-$coincidences using the multi-parameter DAQ system. This would also reduce the muonic background. The intrinsic massive activity of the palladium sample was determined to be for the chain and below the detection threshold for the chain. Further purifications are not expected to yield significant improvement. However, accumulating storage underground will reduce the general background from cosmic activated radio isotopes in the palladium sample and the measuring system.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
Gerd Marissens is acknowledged for extensive technical support. Furthermore the HADES-staff of EURIDICE is acknowledged.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'A class of C\*-algebras is described for which the homomorphism from $C_0(0,1]$ to the algebra may be classified by means of the Cuntz semigroup functor. Examples are given of algebras—simple and non-simple—for which this classification fails. It is shown that a suitable suspension of the Cuntz semigroup functor deals successfully with some of these counterexamples.'
author:
- Leonel Robert
- Luis Santiago
title: 'Classification of homomorphisms from $C_0(0,1]$ to a C\*-algebra'
---
Introduction
============
In this paper we consider the question of classifying the homomorphisms from $C_0(0,1]$ to a C\*-algebra $A$. In [@ciuperca-elliott], Ciuperca and Elliott show that if $A$ has stable rank 1 then this classification is possible—up to approximate unitary equivalence—by means of the the Cuntz semigroup functor. They define a pseudometric $d_W$ on the morphisms from ${\mathrm{Cu}}(C_0(0,1])$ to ${\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$, and show if $A$ has stable rank 1 then $d_W({\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi),{\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi))=0$ for $\phi,\psi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ if and only if $\phi$ and $\psi$ are approximately unitarily equivalent by unitaries in $A^\sim$ (the unitization of $A$).
A classification result in the same spirit as Ciuperca and Elliott’s result is Thomsen’s [@thomsen Theorem 1.2]. Thomsen shows that if $X$ is a locally compact Hausdorff space such that $\dim X{\leqslant}2$ and $\check H^2(X)=0$, then the approximate unitary equivalence class of a positive element in $M_n(C_0(X))$ is determined by its eigenvalue functions.
Theorem \[1\] below applies to a class of C\*-algebras that contains both the stable rank 1 C\*-algebras and the C\*-algebras considered by Thomsen. For this class of algebras the classification of homomorphisms by the functor ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\cdot)$ must be rephrased in terms of stable approximate unitary equivalence. Given $\phi,\psi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ we say that $\phi$ and $\psi$ are stably approximately unitarily equivalent if there are unitaries $u_n\in (A\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$, $n=1,2\dots$, such that $u_n\phi u_n^*\to \psi$ pointwise (where $A$ is identified with the top left corner of $A\otimes \mathcal K$). If $A$ is stable or has stable rank 1, then stable approximate unitary equivalence coincides with approximate unitary equivalence, but these relations might differ in general.
The following theorem characterizes the C\*-algebras for which the pseudometric $d_W$ (defined in the next section) determines the stable approximate unitary equivalence classes of homomorphism from $C_0(0,1]$ to the algebra.
\[1\] Let $A$ be a C\*-algebra. The following propositions are equivalent.
\(I) For all $x,e\in A$ with $e$ a positive contraction and $ex=xe=x$, we have that $x^*x+e$ is stably approximately unitarily equivalent to $xx^*+e$.
\(II) If $\phi,\psi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ are such that $d_W({\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi),{\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi))=0$ then $\phi$ is stably approximately unitarily equivalent to $\psi$.
If (I) and (II) hold then $$\label{inequalities}
d_W(\phi,\psi){\leqslant}d_{U}(\phi,\psi){\leqslant}4d_W(\phi,\psi).$$
In $d_{U}$ denotes the distance between the stable unitary orbits of $\phi(\mathrm{id})$ and $\psi(\mathrm{id})$, where $\mathrm{id}\in C_0(0,1]$ is the identity function. The inequalities are derived in [@ciuperca-elliott] for the stable rank 1 case, though their factor of 8 has now been improved to 4.
By the bijective correspondence $\phi\mapsto \phi(\mathrm{id})$ between homomorphisms $\phi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ and positive contractions of $A$, the proposition (II) of the previous theorem may be restated as a classification of the stable unitary orbits of positive contractions in terms of the Cuntz equivalence relation of positive elements.
The following theorem extends Ciuperca and Elliott’s classification result beyond the stable rank 1 case.
\[2\] Suppose that $(A\otimes \mathcal K)^{\sim}$ has the property (I) of Theorem \[1\]. Let $h_A\in A^+$ be strictly positive. Then for every $\alpha\colon {\mathrm{Cu}}(C_0(0,1])\to {\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$, morphism in the category ${\mathbf{Cu}}$, with $\alpha([\mathrm{id}]){\leqslant}[h_A]$, there is $\phi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$, unique up to stable approximate unitary equivalence, such that ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)=\alpha$.
The class of algebras that satisfy (I) is closed under the passage to quotients, hereditary subalgebras, and inductive limits (see Proposition \[classI\] below). This class is strictly larger than the class of stable rank 1 C\*-algebras. Any commutative C\*-algebra satisfies (I). If $X$ is a locally compact Hausdorff space with $\dim X{\leqslant}2$ and $\check H^2(X)=0$ (the Cech cohomology with integer coefficients), then we deduce from [@thomsen Theorem 1.2] that $(C_0(X)\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$ satisfies (I) (and so, Theorem \[2\] is applicable to $C_0(X)\otimes \mathcal K$). On the other hand, the C\*-algebra $M_2(C(S^2))$, with $S^2$ the 2-dimensional sphere, does not satisfy (I). In fact, there exists a pair of homomorphisms $\phi,\psi\colon C_0(0,1]\to M_2(C(S^2))$ such that ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)={\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi)$ but $\phi$ is not stably approximately unitarily equivalent to $\psi$ (see Example \[sphere\] below). This phenomenon is not restricted to non-simple AH C\*-algebras: by a slight variation—to suit our purposes—of the inductive limit systems constructed by Villadsen in [@villadsen], we construct a simple, stable, AH C\*-algebra for which the Cuntz semigroup functor does not classify the homomorphism from $C_0(0,1]$ into the algebra (see Theorem \[example\]). These counterexamples raise the question of what additional data is necessary to classify, up to stable approximate unitary equivalence, the homomorphisms from $C_0(0,1]$ to an arbitrary C\*-algebra. In the last section of this paper we take a step in this direction by proving the following theorem.
\[extension\] Let $A$ be an inductive limit of the form $\varinjlim C(X_i)\otimes\mathcal K$, with $X_i$ compact metric spaces, and $\dim X_i{\leqslant}2$ for all $i=1,2,\dots$. Let $\phi,\psi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ be homomorphisms such that ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi\otimes \mathrm{Id})={\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi\otimes \mathrm{Id})$, where $\mathrm{Id}\colon C_0(0,1]\to C_0(0,1]$ is the identity homomorphism. Then $\phi$ and $\psi$ are approximately unitarily equivalent.
Preliminary definitions and results
===================================
In this section we collect a number of definitions and results that will be used throughout the paper.
Relations on positive elements.
-------------------------------
Let $A$ be a C\*-algebra and let $a$ and $b$ be positive elements of $A$. Let us say that
\(i) $a$ is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $b$ if there is $x\in A$ such that $a=x^*x$ and $b=xx^*$; we denote this by $a\sim b$,
\(ii) $a$ is approximately Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $b$ if there are $x_n\in A$, $n=1,2\dots$, such that $x_n^*x_n\to a$ and $x_nx_n^*\to b$; we denote this by $a\sim_{ap} b$,
\(iii) $a$ is stably approximately unitarily equivalent to $b$ if there are unitaries $u_n\in (A\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$, such that $u_n^*au_n\to b$, where $A$ is identified with the top left corner of $A\otimes \mathcal K$,
\(iv) $a$ is Cuntz smaller than $b$ if there are $d_n\in A$, $n=1,2\dots$, such that $d_n^*bd_n\to a$; we denote this by $a{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} b$,
\(v) $a$ is Cuntz equivalent to $b$ if $a{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} b$ and $b{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} a$, and we denote this by $a\sim_{Cu} b$.
We have (i)$\Rightarrow$(ii)$\Rightarrow$(v). By [@thomsen2 Remark 1.8], approximate Murray-von Neumann equivalence is the same as stable approximate unitary equivalence. We will make frequent use of this fact throughout the paper. The relations (i),(ii), and (iii) will also be applied to homomorphisms from $C_0(0,1]$ to $A$, via the bijection $\phi\mapsto \phi(\mathrm{id})$ from these homomorphisms into the positive contractions of $A$.
We will make frequent use of the following proposition.
\[rordam1\] Let $a\in A^+$ and $x\in A$ be such that $\|a-x^*x\|<{\varepsilon}$ for some ${\varepsilon}>0$. Then there is $y$ such that $(a-{\varepsilon})_+=y^*y$, $yy^*{\leqslant}xx^*$, and $\|y-x\|<C{\varepsilon}^{1/2}\|a\|$. The constant $C$ is universal.
The proof works along the same lines as the proof of [@kirchberg-rordam Lemma 2.2] (see also [@robert Lemma 1]). We briefly skecth the argument here. We have $a-{\varepsilon}_1{\leqslant}x^*x$, with ${\varepsilon}_1$ such that $\|a-x^*x\|<{\varepsilon}_1<{\varepsilon}$. So $(a-{\varepsilon})_+{\leqslant}ex^*xe$, with $e\in C^*(a)$ such that $e(a-{\varepsilon}_1)e=(a-{\varepsilon})_+$. Set $xe=\widetilde x$ and let $\widetilde x=v|\widetilde x|$ be its polar decomposition. Then $y=v(a-{\varepsilon})_+^{1/2}$ has the properties stated in the proposition.
It follows from the previous proposition (or from [@kirchberg-rordam Lemma 2.2]), that Cuntz comparison can be described in terms of Murray-von Neumann equivalence as follows: $a{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} b$ if and only if for every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is $b'$ such that $(a-{\varepsilon})_+\sim b'\in \mathrm{Her}(b)$. Here $\mathrm{Her}(b)$ denotes the hereditary subalgebra generated by $b$. We also have the following corollary of Proposition \[rordam1\].
\[mvnher\] If $a,b\in B^+\subseteq A^+$, where $B$ is a hereditary subalgebra of $A$, then $a\sim_{ap} b$ in $A$ if and only if $a\sim_{ap} b$ in $B$.
If $w^*w$ and $ww^*$ belong to $B$ for some $w\in A$, then $w\in B$. Thus, the proposition follows if $a$ and $b$ are Murray-von Neumann equivalent.
Suppose that $a\sim_{ap} b$. We may assume without loss of generality that $a$ and $b$ are contractions. For ${\varepsilon}>0$ let $x\in A$ be such that $\|a-x^*x\|<{\varepsilon}$ and $\|b-xx^*\|<{\varepsilon}$. Then by Proposition \[rordam1\] there exists $y$ such that $(a-{\varepsilon})_+=y^*y$ and $\|yy^*-b\|{\leqslant}C_1\sqrt{{\varepsilon}}$ for some constant $C_1$. Applying Proposition \[rordam1\] again we get that there exists $z\in A$ such that $(yy^*-{\varepsilon})_+=z^*z$, $\|zz^*-b\|{\leqslant}C_2\sqrt[4]{{\varepsilon}}$, and $zz^*{\leqslant}b$, for some constant $C_2$. Set $zz^*=b'$. We have $(a-2{\varepsilon})_+\sim (yy^*-{\varepsilon})_+\sim b'$ and $b'\in B$. So there is $w\in B$ such that $(a-2{\varepsilon})_+=w^*w$ and $b'=ww^*$. Since $\|b'-b\|{\leqslant}C_2\sqrt[4]{{\varepsilon}}$ and ${\varepsilon}$ is arbitrary, the desired result follows.
The Cuntz semigroup.
--------------------
Let us briefly recall the definition of the (stabilized) Cuntz semigroup in terms of the positive elements of the stabilization of the algebra (see [@rordam1] and [@coward-elliott-ivanescu]). Let $A$ be a C\*-algebra. Given $a\in (A\otimes \mathcal K)^+$ let us denote by $[a]$ the Cuntz equivalence class of $a$. The Cuntz semigroup of $A$ is defined as the set of Cuntz equivalence classes of positive elements of $A\otimes \mathcal K$. This set, denoted by ${\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$, is endowed with the order such that $[a]{\leqslant}[b]$ if $a{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} b$, and the addition operation $[a]+[b]:=[a'+b']$, where $a'$ and $b'$ are mutually orthogonal and Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $a$ and $b$, respectively.
If $\phi\colon A\to B$ then ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)\colon {\mathrm{Cu}}(A)\to {\mathrm{Cu}}(B)$ is defined by ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)([a]):=[\phi(a)]$. Coward, Elliott, and Ivanescu, showed in [@coward-elliott-ivanescu] that ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\cdot)$ is a functor from the category of C\*-algebras to a certain category of ordered semigroups denoted by ${\mathbf{Cu}}$. In order to describe this category, let us first recall the definition of the far below relation. Let $S$ be an ordered set such that the suprema of increasing sequences always exists in $S$. For $x$ and $y$ in $S$, let us say that $x$ is far below $y$, and denote it by $x\ll y$, if for every increasing sequence $(y_n)$ such that $y{\leqslant}\sup_n y_n$, we have $x{\leqslant}y_k$ for some $k$.
An ordered semigroups $S$ is an object of the Cuntz category ${\mathbf{Cu}}$ if it has a 0 element and satisfies that
\(1) if $(x_n)$ is an increasing sequence of elements of $S$ then $\sup_n x_n$ exists in $S$,
\(2) if $(x_n)$ and $(y_n)$ are increasing sequences in $S$ then $\sup_n (x_n+y_n)=\sup_n x_n+\sup_n y_n$,
\(3) for every $x\in S$ there is a sequence $(x_n)$ with supremum $x$ and such that $x_n\ll x_{n+1}$ for all $n$,
\(4) if $x_1,x_2,y_1,y_2\in S$ satisfy $x_1\ll y_1$ and $x_2\ll y_2$, then $x_1+x_2\ll y_1+y_2$.
The morphisms of the category ${\mathbf{Cu}}$ are the order preserving semigroup maps that also preserve the suprema of increasing sequences, the far below relation, and the 0 element.
The pseudometrics $d_U$ and $d_W$.
----------------------------------
Let us identify the C\*-algebra $A$ with the top left corner of $A\otimes \mathcal K$. Given positive elements $a,b\in A$ let us denote by $d_U(a,b)$ the distance between the unitary orbits of $a$ and $b$ in $A\otimes \mathcal K$ (with the unitaries taken in $(A\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$).
Following Ciuperca and Elliott (see [@ciuperca-elliott]), let us define a pseudometric on the morphisms from ${\mathrm{Cu}}(C_0(0,1])$ to ${\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$ as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{defdWmor}
d_W(\alpha,\beta):=\inf\left\{r\in {\mathbb{R}}^+\left|
\begin{array}{c}
\alpha([e_{t+r}])\le\beta([e_t]),\\
\beta([e_{t+r}])\le\alpha([e_t]),
\end{array}
\hbox{ for all }t\in {\mathbb{R}}^+\right\},
\right.\end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha,\beta\colon {\mathrm{Cu}}(C_0(0,1])\to {\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$ are morphisms in the Cuntz category and $e_t$ is the function $e_t(x)=\max(x-t,0)$, for $x{\geqslant}0$. It is easily shown that $d_W$ is a pseudometric.
*Notation convention.* All throughout the paper we will use the notations $(a-t)_+$ and $e_t(a)$ interchangeably, both meaning the positive element obtained evaluating the function $e_t(x)$ on a given selfadjoint element $a$.
The pseudometric $d_W$ may be used to define a pseudometric—that we also denote by $d_W$—on the positive elements of norm at most 1 by setting $d_W(a,b):=d_W({\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi),{\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi))$, where $\phi,\psi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ are such that $\phi({\mathrm{id}})=a$ and $\psi({\mathrm{id}})=b$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{defdW}
d_W(a,b)=\inf\left\{r\in {\mathbb{R}}^+\left|
\begin{array}{c}
e_{t+r}(a){\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} e_t(b),\\
e_{t+r}(b){\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} e_t(a),
\end{array}
\hbox{ for all }t\in {\mathbb{R}}^+\right\}.
\right.\end{aligned}$$ Notice that makes sense for arbitrary positive elements $a$ and $b$ without assuming that they are contractions. We extend $d_W$ to all positive elements using .
The following lemma relates the metrics $d_U$ and $d_W$ in a general C\*-algebra (this is [@ciuperca-elliott Corollary 9.1]).
\[continuous\] For all $a,b\in A^+$ we have $d_{W}(a,b){\leqslant}d_U(a,b){\leqslant}\|a-b\|$.
Let $r$ be such that $\|a-b\|<r$ and choose $r_1$ such that $\|a-b\|<r_1<r$. Then for all $t{\geqslant}0$ we have $a-t-r_1{\leqslant}b-t$. Multipliying this inequality on the left and the right by $e^{1/2}$, where $e\in C^*(a)$ is such $e(a-t-r_1)=(a-t-r)_+=e_{t+r}(a)$, we have $$e_{t+r}(a){\leqslant}e^{1/2}(b-t)e^{1/2}{\leqslant}e^{1/2}(b-t)_+e^{1/2}{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} e_t(b),$$ for all $t{\geqslant}0$. Similarly we deduce that $e_{t+r}(b){\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} e_t(a)$ for all $t{\geqslant}0$. It follows that $d_W(a,b){\leqslant}\|a-b\|$. Since $d_{W}$ is invariant by stable unitary equivalence, $d_W(a,b){\leqslant}\|a-ubu^*\|$ for any $u$ unitary in $(A\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$. Hence $d_W(a,b){\leqslant}d_U(a,b)$.
The question of whether $d_W$—as defined in —is a metric is linked to the property of weak cancellation in the Cuntz semigroup. Let us say that a semigroup in the category ${\mathbf{Cu}}$ has weak cancellation if $x+z{\ll}y+z$ implies $x{\leqslant}y$ for elements $x$, $y$, and $z$ in the semigroup. It was proven in [@ciuperca-elliott] that if ${\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$ has weak cancellation then $d_W$ is a metric on the morphisms from ${\mathrm{Cu}}(C_0(0,1])$ to ${\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$. Since this result is not explicitly stated in that paper, we reprove it here.
(Ciuperca, Elliott [@ciuperca-elliott]) If $Cu(A)$ has weak cancellation then $d_W$ is a metric on the Cuntz category morphisms from ${\mathrm{Cu}}(C_0(0,1])$ to ${\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$. \[metric\]
By [@robert Theorem 1], the map $[f]\mapsto (t\mapsto \operatorname{rank}f(t))$ is a well defined isomorphism from ${\mathrm{Cu}}(C_0(0,1])$ to the ordered semigroup of lower semicontinuous functions from $(0,1]$ to ${\mathbb{N}}\cup\{\infty\}$. This isomorphism maps $[e_t]$ to $\mathds{1}_{(t,1]}$ for all $t\in [0,1]$, with $\mathds{1}_{(t,1]}$ the characteristic function of $(t,1]$. Let us identify $\mathrm{Cu}(C_0(0,1])$ with the semigroup of lower semicontinuous functions from $(0,1]$ to ${\mathbb{N}}\cup\{\infty\}$ in this way. Then $d_W(\alpha,\beta)=0$ says that $\alpha(\mathds{1}_{(t,1]})=\beta(\mathds{1}_{(t,1]})$ for all $t$. In order to show that $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are equal it suffices to show that they agree on the functions $\mathds{1}_{(s,t)}$ (their overall equality then follows by additivity and preservation of suprema of increasing sequences).
Let ${\varepsilon}>0$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha(\mathds{1}_{(s+{\varepsilon}, t-{\varepsilon})})+\alpha(\mathds{1}_{(t-{\varepsilon}, 1]})&{\ll}\alpha(\mathds{1}_{(s, 1]})=\beta(\mathds{1}_{(s, 1]})\\&\le \beta(\mathds{1}_{(s,t)})+\beta(\mathds{1}_{(t-{\varepsilon},1]})\\
&=\beta(\mathds{1}_{(s,t)})+\alpha(\mathds{1}_{(t-{\varepsilon},1]}).\end{aligned}$$ Since $A$ has weak cancellation $\alpha(\mathds{1}_{(s+{\varepsilon}, t-{\varepsilon})})\le\beta(\mathds{1}_{(s,t)})$. Passing to the supremum over ${\varepsilon}>0$ we get that $\alpha(\mathds{1}_{(s, t)})\le\beta(\mathds{1}_{(s,t)})$. By symmetry we also have $\beta(\mathds{1}_{(s,t)})\le\alpha(\mathds{1}_{(s, t)})$. Hence, $\alpha(\mathds{1}_{(s, t)})=\beta(\mathds{1}_{(s,t)})$.
Rørdam and Winter showed in [@rordam-winter Theorem 4.3] that if $A$ has stable rank 1 then ${\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$ has weak cancellation. In the next section we will extend this result to the case when the property (I) of Theorem \[1\] holds in $(A\otimes\mathcal K)^\sim$.
Proofs of Theorems 1 and 2
==========================
Proof of Theorem 1
------------------
In this subsection we prove Theorem \[1\] of the introduction.
For positive elements $a,b\in A^+$ we use the notation $a\lhd b$ to mean that $b$ is a unit for $a$, that is to say, $ab=ba=a$. We start with a lemma.
Let $A$ be a C\*-algebra such that the property (I) of Theorem \[1\] holds in $A$. Let $e,f,\alpha,\beta\in A^+$ be such that $e$ is a contraction, and $$\alpha\lhd e,\, \alpha\sim \beta\lhd f, \hbox{ and $f\sim f'\lhd e$ for some $f'\in A^+$.}$$ Then for every $\delta>0$ there are $\alpha',e'\in A^+$ such that $$\alpha'\lhd e'\lhd e, \quad\beta+f\sim \alpha'+e', \hbox{ and }\|\alpha-\alpha'\|<\delta.$$
Since $f\sim f'$ there exists $x$ such that $f=x^*x$ and $xx^*=f'$. Let $x=w|x|$ be the polar decomposition of $x$ in the bidual of $A$. We have $wfw^*=f'$. Set $w\beta w^*=\alpha_1$. Then $\alpha_1\sim \alpha$, $\alpha_1\lhd e$, and $\alpha\lhd e$. Hence $\alpha_1+e\sim_{ap} \alpha+e$. By Proposition \[rordam1\] this implies that for every $\delta'>0$ there is $z\in A$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
&(\alpha_1+e-\delta')_+=z^*z, \quad zz^*{\leqslant}\alpha+e,\hbox{ and}\\
&\| zz^*-(\alpha+e)\|<C\sqrt{\delta'}. \label{z}\end{aligned}$$ Let $z=w_1|z|$ be the polar decomposition of $z$ in the bidual of $A$. Since $e$ is a unit for $\alpha_1$ we have $(\alpha_1+e-\delta')_+=\alpha_1+(e-\delta')_+$. It follows that the map $c\mapsto w_1cw_1^*$, sends the elements of $\mathrm{Her}((e-\delta')_+)$ into $\mathrm{Her}(e)$. By if we let $\delta'\to 0$ then $(zz^*-1)_+$ can be made arbitarily close to $(\alpha+e-1)_+$. Since $(zz^*-1)_+=w_1(a_1-\delta')_+w_1^*$ and $(\alpha+e-1)_+=\alpha$, this means that we can choose $\delta'$ small enough so that $\|w_1\alpha_1w_1^*-\alpha\|<\delta$. Let $\alpha'=w_1\alpha_1w_1^*$, $e'=w_1f'w_1^*$, and $y=w_1w(\beta+f)^{1/2}$. Then $\beta +f=y^*y$ and $yy^*= \alpha'+e'$.
\(II) $\Rightarrow$ (I). Let $\phi, \psi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ be the homomorphism such that $$\phi(\mathrm{id})=\frac{1}{\|x\|^2+1}(x^*x+e)\hbox{ and } \psi(\mathrm{id})=\frac{1}{\|x\|^2+1}(xx^*+e).$$ From the definition of the pseudometric $d_W$ we see $d_W({\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi),{\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi))=\frac{1}{|x|^2+1}d_W(x^*x+e, xx^*+e)$. In order to prove that $x^*x+e$ is stably approximately unitarily equivalent to $xx^*+e$ it is enough to show that $$d_W(x^*x+e, xx^*+e)=0.$$ That is, $(x^*x+e-t)_+\sim_{Cu} (xx^*+e-t)_+$ for all $t\in {\mathbb{R}}$.
Using that $e$ is a unit for $x^*x$ and $xx^*$ we deduce that $$\begin{aligned}
(x^*x+e-t)_+=x^*x+(e-t)_+, \quad (xx^*+e-t)_+=xx^*+(e-t)_+,\end{aligned}$$ for $0\le t<1$. Also, $x^*x(e-t)_+=x^*x(1-t)$ and $xx^*(e-t)_+=xx^*(1-t)$. It follows that $x^*x$ and $xx^*$ belong to the hereditary algebra generated by $(e-t)_+$. Therefore, $$(x^*x+e-t)_+\sim_{Cu}(e-t)_+\sim_{Cu} (xx^*+e-t)_+, \hbox{ for }0{\leqslant}t<1.$$ If $t\ge1$ then $(x^*x+e-t)_+=(x^*x+1-t)_+$ and $(xx^*+e-t)_+=(xx^*+1-t)_+$. Hence, $(x^*x+e-t)_+\sim_{Cu} (xx^*+e-t)_+$ for $t{\geqslant}1$.
\(I) $\Rightarrow$ (II). Set $\phi(\mathrm{id})=a$ and $\psi(\mathrm{id})=b$. Let $r$ be such that $d_W(a,b)<r$. Let $m\in {\mathbb{N}}$ be the number such that $mr{\leqslant}1<(m+1)r$. Finally, let the sequences $(a_i)_{i=1}^{m+1}$, $(b_i)_{i=1}^{m+1}$ be defined as $a_i=\xi_{m-i+1}(a)$, $b_i=\xi_{m-i+1}(b)$ for $i=1,2,\dots,m+1$, where $\xi_i\in C_0(0,1]$ is such that $\mathds{1}_{(ir+{\varepsilon},1]}\le\xi_i\le\mathds{1}_{(ir,1]}$ and ${\varepsilon}>0$ is chosen small enough so that $d_W(a,b)+2{\varepsilon}<r$.
The sequences $(a_i)_{i=1}^{m+1}$ and $(b_i)_{i=1}^{m+1}$ satisfy that $$\begin{aligned}
a_i\lhd a_{i+1}, \quad b_i\lhd b_{i+1}, \hbox{ for $i=1,\dots,m$},\\
a_i\sim d_i\lhd b_{i+1},\quad b_i\sim c_i\lhd a_{i+1},\hbox{ for $i=1,\dots,m$},\end{aligned}$$ for some positive elements $c_i$ and $d_i$. The first line follows trivially from the definition of the elements $a_i$ and $b_i$. Let us prove the second line. From $d_W(a,b)<r-2{\varepsilon}$ we get $$e_{(m-i+1)r-{\varepsilon}}(a){\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} e_{(m-i)r+{\varepsilon}}(b)\lhd b_{i+1}.$$ By the definition of Cuntz comparison there exists $d\in A^+$ such that $e_{(m-i+1)r}(a)\sim d\lhd b_{i+1}$. Since $a_i$ is expressible by functional calculus as a function of $e_{(m-i+1)r}(a)$, we get that there exists $d_i\in A^+$ such that $a_i\sim d_i\lhd b_{i+1}$. We reason similarly to get the existence of $c_i$.
Let us now show by induction on $n$, for $n=1,2,\dots,m$, that there are sequences of elements $(a_i')_{i=1}^n$ and $(b_i')_{i=1}^n$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
a_i'\lhd a_{i+1}', \quad b_i'\lhd b_{i+1}', &\hbox{ for }i=1,2,\dots n-1\label{kk1}\\
\|a_i-a_i'\|<{\varepsilon}, &\hbox{ for $i$ odd, }i{\leqslant}n,\label{kk2}\\
\|b_i-b_i'\|<{\varepsilon}, &\hbox{ for $i$ even, }i{\leqslant}n,\label{kk3}\\
\sum_{i=1}^n a_i' \sim &\sum_{i=1}^n b_i',\label{kk4}\end{aligned}$$ and $a_n'=a_n$, $b_n'\lhd b_{n+1}$ if $n$ is odd, and $b_n'=b_n$, $a_n'\lhd a_{n+1}$ if $n$ is even.
Since $a_1\sim d_1\lhd b_2$, the induction hypothesis holds for $n=1$ taking $b_1'=d_1$. Suppose the induction holds for $n$ and let us show that it also holds for $n+1$. Let us consider the case that $n$ is odd (the case that $n$ is even is dealt with similarly). We set $b_{n+1}'=b_{n+1}$ and leave the sequence $(b_i')_{i=1}^n$ unchanged. We are going to modify the squence $(a_i')_{i=1}^n$ in order to complete the induction step. Let $\alpha=\sum_{i=1}^n a_i'$, $e=a_{n+2}$, $\beta=\sum_{i=1}^n b_i'$, $f=b_{n+1}'$. Then the conditions of the previous lemma apply. We thus have that for every $\delta>0$ there are $\alpha'$ and $e'$, such that $$\alpha'\lhd e'\lhd a_{n+2}, \quad \|\alpha-\alpha'\|<\delta, \hbox{ and }\beta+f\sim \alpha'+e'.$$ It follows that $\beta\sim \alpha'$, and so $\alpha'=\sum_{i=1}^n a_i''$, with $a_i''\lhd a_{i+1}''$. We remark that the elements $a_i'$ are all in the C\*-algebra generated by $\alpha$ and the elements $a_i''$ are in the C\*-algebra generated by $\alpha'$. In fact, $$\begin{aligned}
(\alpha-i)_+-(\alpha-(i-1))_+=a_i',\label{f1}\\
(\alpha'-i)_+-(\alpha'-(i-1))_+=a_i''.\label{f2}\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, we may choose the number $\delta$ sufficiently small so that $\|a_i-a_i''\|<{\varepsilon}$ for all $i{\leqslant}n$. We now rename the sequence $(a_i'')_{i=1}^n$ as $(a_i')_{i=1}^n$ and set $a_{n+1}'=e'$. From $\beta+f\sim \alpha'+e'$ we get that $\sum_{i=1}^{n+1} b_i'\sim \sum_{i=1}^{n+1} a_i'$. This completes the induction.
Continuing the induction up to $n=m$ we find $(a_i')_{i=1}^m$ and $(b_i')_{i=1}^m$ that satisfy -.
For the last part of the proof we split the analysis in to cases, $m$ even and $m$ odd.
Suppose that $m=2k+1$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{mo}
\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{2k+1} a_i'}{2k+1}\sim \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{2k+1} b_i'}{2k+1}.\end{aligned}$$ Let $a'$ denote the sum on the left side of the last equation, and $b'$ the sum on the right. Let us show that $\|a'-a\|<2r+2{\varepsilon}$ and $\|b-b'\|<2r+2{\varepsilon}$. Since $a_i'\lhd a_{i+1}'$ for all $i$ and $\|a_i'\|\le 1$ for all $i$, we have $a_i'\le a_{i+1}'$ for all $i$. Hence, $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{2\sum_{i=1}^ka_{2i-1}'+a_{2k+1}'}{2k+1}\le\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{2k+1} a_i'}{2k+1}\le \frac{a_1'+2\sum_{i=1}^ka_{2i+1}'}{2k+1}.\end{aligned}$$ Using that $\|a_i'-a_i\|<{\varepsilon}$ for $i$ odd in the above inequalities we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{2\sum_{i=1}^ka_{2i-1}+a_{2k+1}}{2k+1}-{\varepsilon}\le \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{2k+1} a_i'}{2k+1}\le \frac{a_1+2\sum_{i=1}^ka_{2i+1}}{2k+1}+{\varepsilon}.\end{aligned}$$ It follows now from the inequalities $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{2\sum\limits_{i=1}^k\xi_{2i-1}(t)+\xi_{2k+1}(t)}{2k+1}\le t+2r+{\varepsilon},\quad
t-2r-{\varepsilon}\le \frac{\xi_1(t)+2\sum\limits_{i=1}^k\xi_{2i+1}(t)}{2k+1}, \end{aligned}$$ that $$\begin{aligned}
a-2r-2{\varepsilon}\le\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{2k+1} a_i'}{2k+1}\le a+2r+2{\varepsilon}.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore $\|a-a'\|<2r+2{\varepsilon}$.
Let us show that $\|b-b'\|<2r+2{\varepsilon}$. Using that $b_i'{\leqslant}b_{i+1}'$ for $i=1, 2, \ldots, 2k$, that $b_{2k+1}'\le b_{2k+2}$, and that $\|b_i'-b_i\|<{\varepsilon}$ for all $i$ even, we obtain the inequalities $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{2\sum_{i=1}^kb_{2i}}{2k+1}-{\varepsilon}\le \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{2k+1}b_i'}{2k+1}\le \frac{2\sum_{i=1}^{k}b_{2i}+b_{2k+2}}{2k+1}+{\varepsilon}.\end{aligned}$$ It follows from the estimates $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{2\sum_{1}^k\xi_{2i}(t)}{2k+1}\ge t-2r-{\varepsilon},\quad \frac{\xi_0(t)+2\sum_{1}^k\xi_{2i}(t)}{2k+1}\le t+2r+{\varepsilon},\end{aligned}$$ that $$\begin{aligned}
b-2r-2{\varepsilon}\le \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{2k+1}b_i'}{2k+1}\le b+2r+2{\varepsilon}.\end{aligned}$$ Hence $\|b-b'\|<2r+2{\varepsilon}$.
We have found $a',b'\in A^+$ such that $a'\sim b'$, $\|a'-a\|<2r+2{\varepsilon}$ and $\|b-b'\|<2r+2{\varepsilon}$. Therfore $d_U(a,b){\leqslant}4r+4{\varepsilon}$. Since ${\varepsilon}>0$ is arbitrary the desired result follows.
For the case that $m=2k$ we take $a'=\frac{1}{2k}\sum_{i=1}^{2k} a_{i}'$ and $b'=\frac{1}{2k}\sum_{i=1}^{2k} b_{i}'$, and we reason similarly to how we did in the odd case to obtain that $\|a'-a\|<2r+2{\varepsilon}$ and $\|b-b'\|<2r+2{\varepsilon}$.
\[completeness\] Let $A$ be a C\*-algebra with the property (I) of Theorem \[1\]. The following propositions hold true:
\(i) If $a$ and $b$ are positive elements of $A$ such that $d_W(a,b)<r$, then for all ${\varepsilon}>0$ there exists $b'\in A^+$ such that $\|a-b'\|<4r$ and $d_U(b,b')<{\varepsilon}$.
\(ii) The set of positive elements of $A$ is complete with respect to the pseudometric $d_U$.
\(i) We may assume without loss of generality that $a$ and $b$ are contractions. We may also assume that $A$ is $\sigma$-unital by passing to the subalgebra $\mathrm{Her}(a,b)$ if necessary (the property (I) holds for hereditary subalgebras by Proposition \[classI\]). Let $c\in A^+$ be strictly positive. By the continuity of the pseudometrics $d_U$ and $d_W$ (see Lemma \[continuous\]), it is enough to prove the desired proposition assuming that $a$ and $b$ belong to a dense subset of $A^+$. Thus, we may assume that $a,b\in \mathrm{Her}((c-\delta)_+)$ for some $\delta>0$. From $d_W(a,b)<r$ and the proof of Theorem \[1\] we get that there is $x\in \mathrm{Her}((c-\delta)_+)$ such that $$\|a-x^*x\|<2r,\quad\|b-xx^*\|<2r.$$ Let $e\in A^+$ be a positive contraction that is a unit for the subalgebra $\mathrm{Her}((c-\delta)_+)$. Then $x^*x+e\sim_{ap} xx^*+e$. This implies that for all ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is a unitary $u$ in $(A\otimes \mathcal{K})^\sim$ such that $$\|u^*eu-e\|<{\varepsilon},\quad \|u^*x^*xu-xx^*\|<{\varepsilon}.$$ Set $eubu^*e=b'$. If we take ${\varepsilon}$ small enough such that $$\|a-x^*x\|<2r-{\varepsilon},\quad\|b-xx^*\|<2r-{\varepsilon},$$ we then have the following estimates: $$\begin{aligned}
& \|a-b'\|\le \|a-ubu^*\|<4r-2{\varepsilon}+\|uxx^*u^*-x^*x\|<4r,\\
& \|u^*b'u-b\|\le \|u^*eubu^*eu-ebu^*eu\|+\|bu^*eu-be\|<2{\varepsilon}.\end{aligned}$$ From here part (i) of the corollary follows.
\(ii) Let $(c_i)_{i=1}^\infty$ be a sequence of positive elements of $A$ that is Cauchy with respect to the pseudometric $d_U$. In order to show that $(c_i)_{i=1}^\infty$ converges it is enough to show that it has a convergent subsequence. We may assume, by passing to a subsequence if necessary, that $d_U(c_i,c_{i+1})<\frac{1}{2^i}$ for all $i{\geqslant}1$. Using mathematical induction we will construct a new sequence $(c_i')_{i=1}^\infty$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{sequence}
\| c'_i-c'_{i+1}\|<\frac{1}{2^{i-3}}, \quad d_U(c_i, c_i')<\frac{1}{2^i},\end{aligned}$$ for all $i$.
For $n=1$ we set $c_1=c_1'$. Suppose that we have constructed $c_i'$, for $i=1, 2,\ldots, n$, and let us construct $c_{n+1}'$. We have $d_U(c_{n+1},c_{n})<\frac{1}{2^n}$ and $d_U(c_{n}',c_{n})<\frac{1}{2^n}$ (by the induction hypothesis). Hence $d_U(c_{n}',c_{n+1})<\frac{1}{2^{n-1}}$, and so $d_W(c_n', c_{n+1})<\frac{1}{2^{n-1}}$ (by Lemma ). Applying part (i) of the corollary to $a=c_n'$ and $b=c_{n+1}$, we find a positive element $d$ such that $$\|c_{n}'-d\|<\frac{1}{2^{n-3}},\quad d_U(c_{n+1}, d)<\frac{1}{2^{n+1}}.$$ Setting $c_{n+1}'=d$ completes the induction.
By the sequence $(c'_i)_{i=1}^\infty$ is a Cauchy sequence with respect to the norm of $A$. Hence, it converges to an element $c\in A^+$. Also by we have that $d_U(c_i, c_i')<\frac{1}{2^i}$ for all $i$. Hence, $d_U(c_i,c)\le d_U(c_i, c_i')+d_U(c_i',c)\to 0$. That is, $(c_i)_{i=1}^\infty$ converges to $c$ in the pseudometric $d_U$. Thus, $A^+$ is complete with respect to $d_U$.
Approximate existence theorem.
------------------------------
Let $A$ be a C\*-algebra and $h_A$ a strictly positive element of $A$. The main result of this subsection, Theorem \[existence\] below, states that every morphism $\alpha\colon {\mathrm{Cu}}(C_0(0,1])\to {\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$ in the category ${\mathbf{Cu}}$ such that $\alpha([\mathrm{id}]){\leqslant}[h_A]$, may be approximated in the pseudometric $d_W$ by a morphism of the form ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)$, with $\phi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ a C\*-algebra homomorphism.
\[cuntzorder\] Let $A$ be a C\*-algebra. The following propositions hold true:
\(i) If $a$ and $b$ are two positive elements of $A$ such that $a{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} b$, then for every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is $b'\in M_2(A)^+$ such that $b'\sim_{Cu} b$ and $$\left\|
\begin{pmatrix}
a & 0\\
0 & 0
\end{pmatrix}-b'
\right\|<{\varepsilon}.$$
\(ii) If $a$ and $b$ are two positive elements of $A\otimes \mathcal K$ such that $a{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} b$ then for every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there exists $b'\in (A\otimes \mathcal K)^+$ such that $b'\sim_{Cu} b$ and $\|a-b'\|<{\varepsilon}$.
\(i) Let ${\varepsilon}>0$ be given. Since $a{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} b$, by [@kirchberg-rordam Lemma 2.2] there exists $d\in A$ such that $(a-{\varepsilon}/2)_+=d^*bd$. Consider the vector $c=(b^{\frac{1}{2}}d, \delta b^{\frac{1}{2}})$, where $\delta>0$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
cc^*=b^{\frac{1}{2}}dd^*b^{\frac{1}{2}}+\delta^2 b\quad\text{and}\quad
c^*c=
\begin{pmatrix}
(a-{\varepsilon}/2)_+ & \delta d^*b\\
\delta bd & \delta^2 b
\end{pmatrix}.\end{aligned}$$ We may choose $\delta$ small enough such that $$\left\|
\begin{pmatrix}
a & 0\\
0 & 0
\end{pmatrix}-c^*c
\right\|<{\varepsilon}.$$ Since $\delta^2b{\leqslant}cc^*{\leqslant}(\delta^2+\|d\|^2)b$, we have $cc^*\sim_{Cu} b$. Thus, the desired result follows letting $b'=c^*c$.
\(ii) We may assume without loss of generality that $A$ is stable. This implies that for every $b\in (A\otimes \mathcal K)^+$ there is $b'\in A^+$ that is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $b$, where $A$ is being identified with the top corner of $A\otimes \mathcal K$. Thus, we may assume without loss of generality that $b\in A^+$. Every positive element $a$ in $(A\otimes \mathcal K)^+$ is approximated by the elements $p_nap_n\in M_n(A)$ (with $p_n$ the unit of $M_n(A^\sim)$). Therefore, we may also assume without loss of generality that $a\in M_n(A)$ for some $n$. So we have $a,b\in M_n(A)^+$ for some $n$. Now the existence of $b'\in M_{2n}(A)^+$ with the desired properties is guaranteed by part (i) of the lemma.
\[interpolation\] Let $A$ be a C\*-algebra and let $(x_k)_{k=0}^{n}$ be elements of ${\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$ such that $x_{k+1}\ll x_k$ for all $k$. There is $a\in (A\otimes \mathcal K)^+$, with $\|a\|{\leqslant}1$, such that $[a]=x_0$ and $x_{k+1}\ll[(a-k/n)_+]\ll x_k$ for $k=1,\ldots, n-1$.
Let ${\varepsilon}>0$. Let $a'_{n}\in (A\otimes \mathcal K)^+$ be such that $[a'_n]=x_n$ and $\|a'_n\|{\leqslant}{\varepsilon}$. Repeatedly applying Lemma \[cuntzorder\] (ii), we can find positive elements $(a'_k)_{i=0}^{n-1}$ such that $[a'_k]=x_k$ and $\|a'_k-a'_{k+1}\|<{\varepsilon}$ for $k=1,\ldots, n-1$. For all $k$ we have $\|a'_0-a'_k\|<k{\varepsilon}$. It follows from Lemma \[continuous\] that $d_W(a_0',a_k')<k{\varepsilon}$. Hence, $$(a'_k-2k{\varepsilon})_+{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} (a'_0-k{\varepsilon})_+{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} a'_k.$$ Since $x_{k+1}\ll x_k$ for all $k$, we can choose ${\varepsilon}$ small enough such that $$\begin{aligned}
x_0=[a'_0]{\geqslant}x_1 {\geqslant}[(a'_0-{\varepsilon})_+] {\geqslant}x_2 &{\geqslant}[(a'_0-2{\varepsilon})_+] {\geqslant}\ldots \\
\ldots &{\geqslant}[(a'_0-(n-1){\varepsilon})_+]{\geqslant}x_n.\end{aligned}$$ Set $a'_0/(n{\varepsilon})=a$. Then $[(a'_0-k{\varepsilon})_+]=[(a-k/n)_+]$ for all $k$. The lemma now follows by noticing that $\|a'_n\|{\leqslant}{\varepsilon}$ and $\|a_0-a'_n\|<(n-1){\varepsilon}$ imply that $\|a\|{\leqslant}1$.
\[existence\] Let $A$ be a C\*-algebra and let $h_A$ be a strictly positive element of $A$. Let $\alpha\colon {\mathrm{Cu}}(C_0(0,1])\to {\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$ be a morphism in ${\mathbf{Cu}}$ such that $\alpha([\mathrm{id}])\le [h_A]$. Then for every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there exists $\phi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ such that $d_W({\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi),\alpha)<{\varepsilon}$.
Let ${\varepsilon}>0$ be given and let $n$ be such that $1/2^{n-1}<{\varepsilon}$. Set $\alpha([e_t])=x_t$ for $t\in [0,1]$. By Lemma \[interpolation\], we can find $a\in (A\otimes \mathcal K)^+$ such that $\|a\|{\leqslant}1$, $[a]=x_0$, and $$\begin{aligned}
\label{int}
x_{(k+1)/2^n}\ll [(a-k/2^n)_+]\ll x_{k/2^n}\end{aligned}$$ for $k=1,\ldots, 2^n-1$. Let $\delta>0$ be such that still holds after replacing $a$ by $(a-\delta)_+$. This is possible since $$[(a-k/2^n)_+]=\sup_{\delta>0} [(a-\delta-k/2^n)_+].$$ We have $[a]=\alpha([\mathrm{id}])\le [h_A]$. By [@kirchberg-rordam Lemma 2.2], there exists $d\in A\otimes\mathcal K$ such that $(a-\delta)_+=dh_Ad^*$. Set $h_A^{1/2}d^*dh_A^{1/2}=a'$. Then $a'$ is in $A^+$ and is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $(a-\delta)_+$. It follows that $(a'-t)_+$ is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $(a-\delta-t)_+$ for all $t\in [0,1]$. Therefore, $[(a'-k/2^n)_+]=[(a-\delta-k/2^n)_+]$ for $k=1,\ldots, 2^n-1$. So we have found a positive element $a'$ in $A^+$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
x_{(k+1)/2^n}\ll [(a'-k/2^n)_+]\ll x_{k/2^n}\end{aligned}$$ for $k=1,\ldots, 2^n-1$. Notice also that $\|a'\|=\|(a-\delta)_+\|<1$.
Let $\phi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ be such that $\phi(\mathrm{id})=a'$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)([e_{k/2^n}])\le \alpha([e_{k/2^n}])\,\text{ and }\,\alpha([e_{(k+1)/2^n}])\le {\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)([e_{k/2^n}]).\end{aligned}$$ Any interval of length $1/2^{n-1}$ contains an interval of the form $(k/2^n, (k+1)/2^n)$ for some $k$. Thus, for every $t\in [0,1]$ there exists $k$ such that $(k/2^n, (k+1)/2^n)\subseteq (t, t+1/2^{n-1})$. It follows that $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)([e_{t+1/2^{n-1}}])\le {\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)([e_{k/2^n}])\le \alpha([e_{k/2^n}])\le \alpha([e_t])\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha([e_{t+1/2^{n-1}}])\le \alpha([e_{(k+1)/2^n}])\le {\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)([e_{k/2^n}])\le {\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)([e_t]).\end{aligned}$$ These inequalities imply that $d_W({\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi),\alpha)\le 1/2^{n-1}<{\varepsilon}$.
Weak cancellation in ${\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$
---------------------------------------
\[cancellation\] Suppose that $(A\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$ has the property (I) of Theorem \[1\]. Then $Cu(A)$ has weak cancellation.
Suppose that $[a]+[c]{\ll}[b]+[c]$ for $[a]$, $[b]$, and $[c]$ in ${\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$. Let us choose $a$, $b$, and $c$, such that $ac=bc=0$. Taking supremum over $\delta>0$ in $[(b-\delta)_+]+[(c-\delta)_+]$ we get that $[a]+[c]\le [(b-\delta)_+]+[(c-\delta)_+]$ for some $\delta>0$. Hence, for every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there are $a_1$ and $c_1$ in $(A\otimes \mathcal K)^+$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
a_1+c_1 \in \mathrm{Her}&((b-\delta)_+ +(c-\delta)_+),\\
a_1\sim (a-{\varepsilon})_+,& \quad c_1\sim (c-{\varepsilon})_+, \hbox{ and }a_1c_1=0.\end{aligned}$$ We assume that ${\varepsilon}<\delta/2$. Let us show that $a_1$ is Cuntz smaller than $b$.
Let $g\in C_0(0,1]$ be such that $0\le g(t)\le 1$, $g(t)=1$ for $t{\geqslant}\delta-{\varepsilon}$ and $g(t)=0$ for $t{\leqslant}\delta/2$. Then $g((c-{\varepsilon})_+)+g(b)$ is a unit for $a_1$ and $c_1$.
We have $g(c_1)\sim g((c-{\varepsilon})_+)$. Let $x$ be such that $g(c_1)=xx^*$ and $g((c-{\varepsilon})_+)=x^*x$. From $(g(b)+x^*x)xx^*=xx^*$ we deduce that $(1-(g(b)+x^*x))x=0$. Let $w\in (A\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$ be given by $$w=x+\sqrt{1-(g(b)+x^*x)}.$$ Then we have $w^*w=1-g(b)$. From $a_1g(c_1)=0$ and $g(c_1)=xx^*$ we get that $a_1x=0$. Also $a_1(1-(g(b)+x^*x))=0$. We conclude that $aw=0$. Let $\tilde b$ be defined by $ww^*=1-\tilde b$. Since we have assumed that the property (I) holds in $(A\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$, we have $w^*w+1\sim_{ap} ww^*+1$. From this we deduce $1-w^*w\sim_{ap} 1-ww^*$, i.e., $g(b)\sim_{ap} \tilde b$. So $\tilde b\sim_{Cu} g(b){\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} b$. On the other hand, from $a_1w=0$ we deduce that $a_1\tilde b=a_1$, and so $a_1{\leqslant}\|a_1\|\tilde b$. Hence $a_1{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu}\tilde b{\preccurlyeq}b$.
We have $[(a-{\varepsilon})_+]=[a_1]{\leqslant}[b]$ for all ${\varepsilon}>0$. Letting ${\varepsilon}\to 0$ we get $[a]{\leqslant}[b]$ as desired.
Proof of Theorem \[2\]
----------------------
The uniqueness of the homomorphism $\phi$ is clear by Theorem \[1\]. Let us prove its existence. By Theorem \[existence\], for every $n$ there exists $\phi_n\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ such that $d_W(\mathrm{Cu}(\phi_n),\alpha)<1/2^{n+2}$. It follows from Theorem \[1\] that $$\begin{aligned}
d_U(\phi_n(\mathrm{id}), \phi_{n+1}(\mathrm{id}))\le 4d_W(\mathrm{Cu}(\phi_n), \mathrm{Cu}(\phi_{n+1}))<1/2^n.\end{aligned}$$ This implies that $(\phi_n(\mathrm{id}))_n$ is a Cauchy sequence with respect to the pseudometric $d_U$. By Corollary \[completeness\], $A^+$ is complete with respect to $d_U$. Hence, there exists $\phi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$ such that $d_U(\phi(\mathrm{id}), \phi_n(\mathrm{id}))\to 0$. We have, $$\begin{aligned}
d_W(\mathrm{Cu}(\phi),\alpha) &\le d_W(\mathrm{Cu}(\phi), \mathrm{Cu}(\phi_n))+d_W(\mathrm{Cu}(\phi_n), \alpha),\\
& \le d_U(\mathrm{Cu}(\phi), \mathrm{Cu}(\phi_n))+d_W(\mathrm{Cu}(\phi_n), \alpha)\to 0\end{aligned}$$ So $d_W(\mathrm{Cu}(\phi),\alpha)=0$. By Propositions and Proposition \[metric\], $d_W$ is a metric. Therefore $\mathrm{Cu}(\phi)=\alpha$.
Examples and counterexamples
============================
Algebras with the property (I)
------------------------------
The following proposition provides us with examples of C\*-algebras with the property (I) of Theorem \[1\].
\[classI\] The following propositions hold true.
\(i) If $A$ is a C\*-algebra of stable rank 1 then (I) holds in $A$.
\(ii) If $X$ is a locally compact Hausdorff space such that $\dim X{\leqslant}2$ and $\check H^2(X)=0$, then (I) holds in $(C_0(X)\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$.
\(iii) If (I) holds in $A$ it also holds in every hereditary subalgebra and every quotient of $A$.
\(vi) If $A\cong \varinjlim A_i$ and (I) holds in the C\*-algebras $A_i$ then it also holds in $A$.
\(i) Let $x,e\in A$ be as in Theorem \[1\] (I). Let $B$ be the smallest hereditary subalgebra of $A$ containing $x^*x$ and $xx^*$. Then $B$ has stable rank 1, and $e$ is a unit for $B$. It is well known that in a C\*-algebra of stable rank 1 Murray-von Neumann equivalent positive elements are approximately unitarily equivalent in the unitization of the algebra. Therefore, there are unitaries $u_n\in B^\sim$, $n=1,2,\dots$, such that $u_n^*x^*xu_n\to xx^*$. We also have $u_n^*eu_n=e$ for all $n$, since $e$ is a unit for $B$. Hence $u_n^*(x^*x+e)u_n\to xx^*+e$, as desired.
\(ii) Let $x,e\in (C_0(X)\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$ be as in Theorem \[1\] (I). For every $t\in X$ the operators $x^*(t)x(t)+e(t)$ and $x(t)x^*(t)+e(t)$, in $\mathcal K^\sim$, are approximately unitarily equivalent, since $\mathcal K^\sim$ has stable rank 1. Let us denote by $\lambda\in {\mathbb{R}}$ the scalar such that $x^*x+e-\lambda \cdot 1\in C_0(X)\otimes \mathcal K$ and $xx^*+e-\lambda \cdot 1\in C_0(X)\otimes \mathcal K$. Then the selfadjoint elements $x^*x+e-\lambda \cdot 1$ and $xx^*+e-\lambda \cdot 1$ have the same eigenvalues for any point $t\in X$, and so by Thomsen’s [@thomsen Theorem 1.2] they are approximately unitarily equivalent in $C_0(X)\otimes \mathcal K$. (Thomsen’s result is stated for selfadjoint elements of $C_0(X)\otimes M_n$, but it easily extends to selfadjoint elements of $C_0(X)\otimes \mathcal K$). It follows that $x^*x+e$ and $xx^*+e$ are approximately unitarily equivalent in $(C_0(X)\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$.
\(iii) The property (I) passes to hereditary subalgebras because approximate Murray-von Neumann equivalence does (by Corollary \[mvnher\]).
In order to consider quotients by closed two-sided ideals we first make the following claim: for every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is $\delta>0$ such that if $\|x(1-e)\|<\delta$ and $\|(1-e)x\|<\delta$, with $e$ a positive contraction, then $d_W(x^*x+e,xx^*+e)<{\varepsilon}$. In order to prove this we notice that the inequality $d_W(x^*x+e,xx^*+e)<{\varepsilon}$ is implied by a finite set of relations of Cuntz comparison on positive elements obtained by functional calculus on $x^*x+e$ and $xx^*+e$ (see the proofs of Theorem \[existence\] and Lemma \[WTlimit\] (ii)). Using the continuity of the functional calculus, the argument used in the implication (II)$\Rightarrow$(I) of Theorem \[1\] can still be carried out, approximately, to obtain this finite set of Cuntz comparisons.
Let us suppose that the algebra $A$ has the property (I). Let $x,e\in A/I$ be elements in a quotient of $A$ such that $ex=xe=x$, and $e$ is a positive contraction. Let $\tilde x$ and $\tilde e$ be lifts of $x$ and $e$, with $\tilde e$ a positive contraction. Let $(i_\lambda)$ be an approximate identity of $I$. Let $\tilde e_\lambda\in A$ be the positive contraction defined by $1-\tilde e_\lambda=(1-\tilde e)^{1/2}(1-i_\lambda)(1-\tilde e)^{1/2}$. Then $\tilde e_\lambda$ is a lift of $e$ for all $\lambda$, and $(1-\tilde e_\lambda)\tilde x, \tilde x(1-\tilde e_\lambda)\to 0$. Thus, we can find lifts $\tilde x$ and $\tilde e_\lambda$ of $x$ and $e$, such that $\|(1-\tilde e_\lambda)\tilde x\|<\delta$ and $\|\tilde x(1-\tilde e_\lambda)\|<\delta$ for any given $\delta>0$. By the claim made in the previous paragraph we can choose $\delta$ such that $d_W(\tilde x^*\tilde x+\tilde e,\tilde x^*\tilde x+\tilde e)<{\varepsilon}$, for any given ${\varepsilon}>0$. Since $A$ has the property (I), we have by Theorem \[1\] that $d_U(\tilde x^*\tilde x+\tilde e,\tilde x^*\tilde x+\tilde e)<4{\varepsilon}$. Passing to the quotient by $I$ we get $d_U(x^*x+e,x^*x+e)<4{\varepsilon}$, and since ${\varepsilon}$ is arbitrary we are done.
\(iii) Let $x,e\in A$ be as in Theorem \[1\] (I). We may approximate these elements by the images of elements $x',e'\in A_n$, with $e'$ a positive contraction, within an arbitrary degree of proximity. By possibly moving the elements $x'$ and $e'$ further along the inductive limit, we may assume that $e'$ is approximately a unit for $x'$. We can then use the claim established in the proof of (ii), to get that $d_W((x')^*x'+e',x'(x')^*+e')$ can be made arbitrarily small (choosing $x'$ and $e'$ suitably). Since $A_n$ has the property (I), we have that $d_U((x')^*x'+e',x'(x')^*+e')$ can be arbitrarily small. Going back to the limit algebra this implies that $d_U(x^*x+e,xx^*+e)$ is arbitrarily small, and so it is 0.
Let $D$ denote the unit disc in ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ and $U$ its interior. Let $B\subseteq M_2(D)$ be the hereditary subalgebra $$\begin{pmatrix} C(D) & C_0(U)\\ C_0(U) &C_0(U)\end{pmatrix}.$$ By Propositions \[classI\] (ii) and (iv), (I) holds in $B$. Thus, the Cuntz semigroup functor classifies the homomorphisms from $C_0(0,1]$ to $B$ up to stable approximate unitary equivalence. Let us show that, unlike the case of stable rank 1 algebras, stable approximate unitary equivalence and approximate unitary equivalence do not agree in $B$. Let $p\in B$ be the rank 1 projection $\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0\\ 0 &0\end{pmatrix}$ and let $q\in B$ be a rank 1 projection that agrees with $p$ on the boundary of $D$, and such that the projection induced by $1-q$ in $D/\!\!\sim$, the disc with the boundary points identified, is nontrivial. Then $p$ and $q$ are Murray-von Neumann equivalent projections, and so they are stably unitary equivalent. However, if there were $u\in B^\sim$ unitary such that $u^*pu=q$, then the partial isometry $v=u^*(1-p)$ would be constant on $\mathbb{T}$ and such that $v^*v=1-q$ and $vv^*=1-p$ is trivial. This would contradict the nontriviality of $1-q$ in $D/\!\!\sim$.
Examples of C\*-algebras that do not have the property (I) are not hard to come by. If a unital C\*-algebra $A$ has (I), then for any two projections $p$ and $q$ in $A$ such that $p\sim q$, we have that $p+1\sim_{ap} q+1$ by (I). From this we deduce by functional calculus on $p+1$ and $q+1$ that $1-p\sim 1-q$. Thus, any unital C\*-algebra where Murray-von Neumann equivalence of projections does not imply that they are unitary equivalent does not have (I). In particular, the algebra $B^\sim$, with $B$ as in the previous example, does not have (I).
The isometry question
---------------------
The following question was posed to us by Andrew Toms: if $A$ has stable rank 1, is it true that $d_W=d_U$? We formulate this question here for the algebras covered by Theorem \[1\].
*Question.* Suppose that $A$ has the property (I) of Theorem \[1\]. Is it true that $d_W=d_U$?
We do not know the answer to this question, even in the case of stable rank 1 algebras. Proposition \[isometry\] below provides some evidence that the answer is yes.
\[WTlimit\] Let $A=\varinjlim (A_i, \phi_{i,j})$ be the C\*-algebra inductive limit of the sequence of C\*-algebras $(A_i)_{i=1}^\infty$ with connecting homomorphisms $\phi_{i,j}\colon A_i\to A_j$. Let $a,b\in A_k^+$ for some $k$. Then
\(i) $d_{U}^{A_i}(a_i,b_i)\to d_{U}^A(a_\infty,b_\infty)$ as $i\to \infty$, and
\(ii) $d_{W}^{A_i}(a_i,b_i)\to d_{W}^A(a_\infty,b_\infty)$ as $i\to \infty$,
where $a_i$ and $b_i$ denote the images of $a$ and $b$ by the homomorphism $\phi_{k,i}$, for $i=k+1, k+2,\ldots, \infty$.
\(i) We clearly have $d_{U}^{A_n}(a_n,b_n){\geqslant}d_U^{A_{n+1}}(a_{n+1},b_{n+1}){\geqslant}d_U^A(a_\infty,b_\infty)$ for all $n{\geqslant}1$. Therefore, it is enough to show that for every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is $n$ such that $d_U^{A_n}(a_n,b_n){\leqslant}d_U^A(a_\infty,b_\infty)+{\varepsilon}$.
Let us denote $d_U^A(a_\infty,b_\infty)$ by $r$ and let ${\varepsilon}>0$. Let $u\in (A\otimes \mathcal K)^\sim$ be a unitary such that $\|ua_\infty u^*-b_\infty\|<{\varepsilon}+r$. Since $A\otimes \mathcal K=\varinjlim A_i\otimes \mathcal K$, there are $n$ and a unitary $u'\in (A_n\otimes\mathcal K)^\sim$ such that $\|u'a_n(u')^*-b_n\|<{\varepsilon}+r$. Hence $d_U^{A_n}(a_n,b_n){\leqslant}d_U^A(a_\infty,b_\infty)+{\varepsilon}$.
\(ii) We may assume without loss of generality that $k=1$. As before, we have $d_{W}^{A_n}(a_n,b_n){\geqslant}d_W^{A_{n+1}}(a_{n+1},b_{n+1}){\geqslant}d_W^A(a_\infty ,b_\infty )$ for all $n{\geqslant}1$. Thus, we need to show that for every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is $n$ such that $d_W^{A_n}(a_n,b_n){\leqslant}d_W^A(a_\infty ,b_\infty)+{\varepsilon}$.
Let us denote $d_W(a_\infty,b_\infty)$ by $r$ and let ${\varepsilon}>0$. Let us choose a grid of points $\{t_i\}_{i=1}^m$ in $(0,1]$ such that $t_i<t_{i+1}$ and $|t_i-t_{i+1}|<{\varepsilon}$ for $i=1,\ldots,m-1$ (e.g., choose $m{\geqslant}1/\varepsilon$ and $t_i=i/m$ for $i=1,\ldots,m$). From the Cuntz inequality $e_{t_i+r+{\varepsilon}/4}(a_\infty){\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} e_{t_i}(b_\infty)$ and [@kirchberg-rordam Lemma 2.2], we deduce that there exists $d_i\in A$ such that $e_{t_i+r+{\varepsilon}/2}(a_\infty)=d_ie_t(b_\infty)d_i^*$. Since $A$ is the inductive limit of the C\*-algebras $A_n$, we can find $n$ and $d_i'\in A_n$ such that $$\|e_{t_i+r+{\varepsilon}/2}(a_n)-d_i'e_{t_i}(b_n)(d_i')^*\|<{\varepsilon}/2.$$ By [@kirchberg-rordam Lemma 2.2] applied in the algebra $A_n$, we have that $e_{t_i+r+{\varepsilon}}(a_n){\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} e_{t_i}(b_n)$ in $A_n$. Let us choose a value of $n$ such that this inequality holds in $A_n$ for all $i=1,2,\dots,m-1$, and such that we also have $e_{t_i+r+{\varepsilon}}(b_n){\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} e_{t_i}(a_n)$ for all $i=1,2,\dots,m-1$.
Let $t\in [0,1]$. Let $i$ be the smallest integer such that $t{\leqslant}t_i$. Then $[t_i,t_i+r+{\varepsilon}]\subseteq [t,t+r+2{\varepsilon}]$. We have the following inequalities in $A_n$: $$e_{t+r+2{\varepsilon}}(a_n){\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} e_{t_i+r+{\varepsilon}}(a_n){\preccurlyeq}_{Cu}
e_{t_i}(b_n){\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} e_t(b_n).$$ The same inequalities hold after interchanging $a_n$ and $b_n$. Thus, $d_W^{A_n}(a_n,b_n){\leqslant}r+2{\varepsilon}$.
\[isometry\] Let $A$ be such that $A\otimes \mathcal K$ is an inductive limit of algebras of the form $C(X_i)\otimes K$, with $\dim X_i{\leqslant}2$, $\check H^2(X_i)=0$. Then the pseudometrics $d_U$ and $d_W$ agree on the positive elements of $A$.
We may assume without loss of generality that $A$ is stable. Let $A=\varinjlim (C_0(X_i)\otimes \mathcal K,\phi_{i,i+1})$. Since both $d_U$ and $d_W$ are continuous (by Lemma \[continuous\]), it is enough to show that they are equal on a dense subset of $A^+$. Thus, we may assume that $a$ and $b$ belong to the image in $A$ of some algebra $C_0(X_i)\otimes \mathcal K$. Furthermore, in order to show that $d_U(a,b)=d_W(a,b)$, it is enough to show, by Lemma \[WTlimit\], that this equality holds on all the algebras $C_0(X_j)\otimes \mathcal K$, with $j{\geqslant}i$. Thus, we may assume that the algebra $A$ is itself of the form $C_0(X)\otimes \mathcal K$, with $\dim X\le 2$ and $\check H^2(X)=0$. Finally, since $\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty M_n(C_0(X))$ is dense in $C_0(X)\otimes \mathcal K$, we may assume that $a,b\in M_n(C_0(X))$ for some $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$.
So let $a,b\in M_n(C_0(X))$ be positive elements. Set $d_W(a,b)=r$. Then for every $x\in X$ we have $d_W(a(x),b(x)){\leqslant}r$, where $d_W$ is now taken in the C\*-algebra $M_n({\mathbb{C}})$. From the definition of $d_W$ we see that this means that for every $t>0$, the number of eigenvalues of $a(x)$ that are less than $t$ is less than the number of eigenvalues of $b(x)$ that are less than $t+r$, and vice-versa, the number of eigenvalues of $b(x)$ less than $t$, is less than the number of eigenvalues of $a(x)$ less than $t+r$. By the Marriage Lemma, this means that the eigenvalues of $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ may be matched in such a way that the distance between the paired eigenvalues is always less than $r$. By [@thomsen Theorem 1.2], this implies that $d_U(a,b)<r$.
Counterexamples.
----------------
The counterexamples of this subsection are C\*-algebras that not only do not have the property (I), but moreover the Cuntz semigroup functor does not distinguish the stable approximate unitary classes of homomorphisms from $C_0(0,1]$ to the algebra.
\[sphere\] Let $S^2$ denote the 2-dimensional sphere. Let us show that there are homomorphisms $\phi,\psi\colon C_0(0,1]\to M_2(C(S^2))$ such that ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)={\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi)$ but $\phi$ is not stably approximately unitarily equivalent to $\psi$.
Let $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ be continuous functions from $S^2$ to $[0,1]$ such that $\lambda_1>\lambda_2$, $\min \lambda_2=0$, and $\min\lambda_1{\leqslant}\max \lambda_2$. Let $P$ and $E$ be rank one projections in $M_2(C(S^2))$ such that $E$ is trivial and $P$ is non-trivial. Consider the positive elements $$a=\lambda_1 P+\lambda_2(1_2-P)\,\hbox{ and }\, b=\lambda_1 E+\lambda_2(1_2-E),$$ where $1_2$ denotes the unit of $M_2(C(S^2))$. Let us show that for every non-zero function $f\in C_0(0,1]$ we have $f(a)\sim f(b)$. In view of the computation of the Cuntz semigroup of $S^2$ obtained in [@robert], it is enough to show that the rank functions of $f(a)$ and $f(b)$ are equal and non-constant. We have $f(a)=f(\lambda_1)P+f(\lambda_2)(1-P)$ and $f(b)=f(\lambda_1)E+f(\lambda_2)(1-E)$. It is easily verified that the rank functions of $f(a)$ and $f(b)$ are both equal to $\mathds{1}_U+\mathds{1}_V$, where $U=\{x\mid f(\lambda_1(x))\neq 0\}$, $V=\{x\mid f(\lambda_2(x))\neq 0\}$, and $\mathds{1}_U$ and $\mathds{1}_V$ denote the characteristic functions of $U$ and $V$. Since $\min \lambda_2=0$, the open set $V$ is a proper subset of $S^2$. So if $V$ is non-empty, then the function $\mathds{1}_U+\mathds{1}_V$ is non-constant. On the other hand, if $V$ is empty, then $f$ is 0 on the interval $[0,\max\lambda_2]$; in particular, $f(\min\lambda_1)=0$. Thus, $U$ is a proper subset of $S^2$ in this case, and so $\mathds{1}_U+\mathds{1}_V$ is again non-constant.
Let $\phi,\psi\colon C_0(0,1]\to M_2(C(S^2))$ be the homomorphisms such that $\phi(\mathrm{id})=a$ and $\psi(\mathrm{id})=b$. It follows from the discussion in the previous paragraph that ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)={\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi)$. Let us show that $\phi$ and $\psi$ are not stably approximately unitarily equivalent.
Let $t=\max(\frac{\lambda_1}{\lambda_2})$ and $r>0$. Then $$e_t\left(\frac{a}{\lambda_1}\right)=(1-t)P\, \hbox{ and }\,
e_{t+r}\left(\frac{b}{\lambda_1}\right)=(1-t-r)E.$$ In order that $e_{t+r}(b/\lambda_1)$ be Cuntz smaller than $e_t(a/\lambda_1)$ the value of $r$ must be at least $1-t$. Thus, $d_W(\frac{a}{\lambda_1},\frac{b}{\lambda_1}){\geqslant}1-t$. Hence $\frac{a}{\lambda_1}\nsim_{ap}\frac{b}{\lambda_1}$, and so $a\nsim_{ap}b$. It follows that $\phi$ and $\psi$ are not stably approximately unitarily equivalent.
Next we construct a simple AH C\*-algebra for which the Cuntz semigroup functor does not classify the homomorphisms from $C_0(0,1]$ into the algebra.
Let us recall the definition given in [@villadsen] of a diagonal homomorphism from $C(X)\otimes \mathcal K$ to $C(Y)\otimes \mathcal K$ (here $X$ and $Y$ are compact Hausdorff spaces). Let $(p_i)_{i=1}^n$ be mutually orthogonal projections in $C(Y)\otimes\mathcal K$ and let $\lambda_i\colon Y\to X$, $i=1,2,\dots,n$, be continuous maps. Let us define a homomorphism $\phi\colon C(X)\to C(Y)\otimes\mathcal K$ by $$\phi(f)=\sum_{i=1}^n (f\circ\lambda_i)p_i.$$ The homomorphism $\phi$ gives rise to a homomorphism $\tilde\phi$ from $C(X)\otimes\mathcal K$ to $C(Y)\otimes\mathcal K$ as follows: $\tilde\phi$ is the composition of $\phi\otimes {\mathrm{id}}\colon C(X)\otimes \mathcal K\to C(Y)\otimes\mathcal K\otimes\mathcal K$ with ${\mathrm{id}}\otimes \alpha\colon C(Y)\otimes\mathcal K\otimes \mathcal K\to C(Y)\otimes\mathcal K$, where $\alpha$ is some isomorphism map from $\mathcal K\otimes \mathcal K$ to $\mathcal K$. A homomorphism $\tilde\phi$ obtained in this way is said to be a diagonal homomorphism arising from the data $(p_i,\lambda_i)_{i=1}^n$ (the choice of $\alpha$ does not change the approximate unitary equivalence class of $\tilde\phi$).
\[example\] There exists a simple stable AH C\*-algebra $A$, and homomorphisms $\phi,\psi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$, such that ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi)={\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi)$ but $\phi$ and $\psi$ are not approximately unitarily equivalent.
Let us define the sequence of topological spaces $(X_i)_{i=1}^\infty$ by $X_1=\mathrm{CP}(1)$ and $X_{i+1}=X_i\times \mathrm{CP}(n_i)$, where $n_i=2\cdot(i+1)!$ and $\mathrm{CP}(n)$ denotes the complex projective space of dimension $2n$. For every $n$ let us denote by $\eta_{n}$ the rank one projection in $C(\mathrm{CP}(n))\otimes \mathcal K$ associated to the canonical line bundle of $\mathrm{CP}(n)$. For every $i$ let $\pi_i\colon X_{i+1}\to X_i$ denote the projection map onto $X_i$. Let $\tilde\phi_i\colon C(X_i)\otimes K\to C(X_{i+1}\otimes \mathcal K)$ denote the diagonal homomorphism given by the data $(1,\pi_i)\cup (\eta_{n_i}^j,\delta_{y_i^j})_{j=1}^i$, where $(\eta_{n_i}^j)_{j=1}^i$ are mutually orthogonal projections all Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $\eta_{n_i}$, and $\delta_{y_i^j}\colon X_{i+1}\to X_i$ is the constant map equal to $y_i^j\in X_i$ for $j=1,2,\dots,i$. It is possible, and well known, to choose the points $y_i^j$ in such a way that the inductive limit $A=\varinjlim (C(X_i)\otimes K,\phi_i)$ is a simple C\*-algebra (see [@villadsen]). Let us show that this inductive limit $A$ provides us with the desired example.
Let $a,b\in C(X_1)\otimes \mathcal K$ be the two positive elements constructed in the proof of Theorem \[sphere\] (notice that $X_1$ is homeomorphic to $S^2$). Set $\phi_{1,i}(a)=a_i$ and $\phi_{1,i}(b)=b_i$ for $i=2,3,\dots,\infty$. For $i=2,\dots,\infty$, let us denote by $\phi_{a_i}$ and $\psi_{b_i}$ the homomorphisms from $C_0(0,1]$ to $A_i$ associated to the positive elements $a_i$ and $b_i$. Since ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi_{a_i})={\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi_{b_i})$, we have ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi_{a_\infty})={\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi_{b_\infty})$. Let us show, on the other hand, that the homomorphisms $\phi_{a_\infty}$ and $\psi_{b_\infty}$ are not approximately unitarily equivalent. Equivalently, let us show that $d_U(a_\infty,b_\infty)>0$. By Lemma \[WTlimit\], it suffices to show that $d_U(a_n,b_n)$ does not tend to 0. Let us show that $d_U(a_n,b_n){\geqslant}(\min \lambda_1)(1-\max(\lambda_2/\lambda_1))$ for all $n$, where $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ are the functions used in the definition of $a$ and $b$ in Theorem \[sphere\].
Let us denote by $\tilde\eta_i\in C(X_i)\otimes \mathcal K$ the projection $e_0\otimes 1\otimes\dots \otimes \eta_i\otimes \dots\otimes 1$, where $\eta_i$ is placed in the $i$-th position of the tensor product. Here we view $ C(X_i)\otimes \mathcal K$ as the tensor product $$(C(\mathrm{CP}(1))\otimes \mathcal K)\otimes C(\mathrm{CP}(n_2))\otimes\dots \otimes C(\mathrm{CP}(n_i)).$$ Let $p$ be an arbitrary projection in $C(X_1)\otimes \mathcal K$. It was observed in [@villadsen] that the image of $p$ by $\phi_{1,i}$ is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to the projection $$\begin{aligned}
(p\otimes 1\otimes \dots \otimes 1)\oplus k_1\tilde\eta_1 \oplus k_2\tilde\eta_2\oplus \dots\oplus k_i\tilde\eta_i,\end{aligned}$$ where $k_i\in {\mathbb{N}}$. In this expression the multiplication by the coefficients $k_i$ indicates the orthogonal sum of $k_i$ copies of the projection $\tilde\eta_i$. In a similar manner, one can show that for every scalar function $\lambda\in C(X_1)$ the image of $\lambda p$ by $\phi_{1,i}$ is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda (p\otimes 1\otimes \dots \otimes 1)\oplus \bigoplus_j \lambda(y_1^j)\tilde\eta_1 \oplus
\bigoplus_j \lambda(y_2^j)\tilde\eta_2\oplus\dots\oplus \bigoplus_j \lambda(y_i^j)\tilde\eta_i.\end{aligned}$$ Since $a$ and $b$ have both the form $\lambda_1 p\oplus \lambda_2 q$, for some projections $p$ and $q$, and scalar functions $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$, the formula above allows us to compute the images of $a$ and $b$ in $C(X_i)\otimes \mathcal K$, i.e., the elements $a_i$ and $b_i$, up to Murray-von Neumann equivalence. Thus, $a_i$ is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $$\begin{aligned}
&\lambda_1 \tilde\eta_1\oplus \bigoplus_j \lambda_1(y_1^j)\tilde\eta_1 \oplus
\bigoplus_j \lambda_1(y_2^j)\tilde\eta_2\oplus\dots\oplus \bigoplus_j \lambda_1(y_i^j)\tilde\eta_i\oplus\\
&\lambda_2 \tilde\eta_1'\oplus \bigoplus_j \lambda_2(y_1^j)\tilde\eta_1 \oplus
\bigoplus_j \lambda_2(y_2^j)\tilde\eta_2\oplus\dots\oplus \bigoplus_j \lambda_2(y_i^j)\tilde\eta_i,\end{aligned}$$ where $\tilde\eta_1'=(1_2-\eta_1)\otimes 1\otimes\dots\otimes 1$. A similar expression holds for $b_i$.
Let $a'_i=a_i/\lambda_1$ and $b_i'=b_i/\lambda_1$. Let $t=\max(\lambda_2/\lambda_1)$. Let us show that $d_W(a_i',b_i'){\geqslant}1-t$. We have that $(a_i'-t)_+$ is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $$\begin{aligned}
\label{bigoplus}
(1-t)\tilde\eta_1\oplus&\bigoplus_j \alpha_{1,j}(y)\tilde\eta_1 \oplus
\bigoplus_j \alpha_{2,j}(y)\tilde\eta_2\oplus\dots \oplus\bigoplus_j \alpha_{i,j}(y)\tilde\eta_i\oplus\\
&\bigoplus_j \beta_{1,j}(y)\tilde\eta_1 \oplus\bigoplus_j \beta_{2,j}(y)\tilde\eta_2\oplus\dots
\oplus\bigoplus_j \beta_{i,j}(y)\tilde\eta_i,\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha_{k,j}(y)=(\frac{\lambda_1(y_k^j)}{\lambda_1(y)}-t)_+$ and $\beta_{k,j}(y)=(\frac{\lambda_2(y_k^j)}{\lambda_1(y)}-t)_+$ for $k,j=1,\dots,i$. It follows that $$[(a_i'-t)_+]{\leqslant}[\tilde\eta_1]+\sum_{j=2}^i 2k_j[\tilde\eta_j]$$ in the Cuntz semigroup of $C(X_i)\otimes \mathcal K$. For the element $(b_i'-t)_+$ an expression identical to may be found, except that the first summand of is replaced with the term $(1-t)(1\otimes \dots\otimes 1)$. It follows that for all $r<1-t$ we have $[1\otimes\dots \otimes 1]{\leqslant}[(b_i'-t-r)_+]$. Since we do not have $[1\otimes\dots \otimes 1]{\leqslant}[\tilde\eta_1]+\sum_{j=2}^i 2k_j[\tilde\eta_j]$ (because the total Chern class of the projection on the right side is nonzero), we conclude that $d_W(a_i',b_i'){\geqslant}1-t$. By Lemma \[continuous\] we have $d_U(a_i',b_i'){\geqslant}1-t$. Hence $$d_U(a_i,b_i){\geqslant}(\min \lambda_1)\cdot d_U(a_i',b_i'){\geqslant}(\min \lambda_1)\cdot (1-\max(\lambda_2/\lambda_1)).\qedhere$$
Classification by the functor ${\mathrm{Cu}}(\cdot\otimes \mathrm{Id})$
=======================================================================
Let $A$ and $B$ be C\*-algebras. For $a\in (A\otimes \mathcal K)^+$ a contraction, let us denote by $d_W^a$ the pseudometric on the Cuntz category morphisms from ${\mathrm{Cu}}(A)$ to ${\mathrm{Cu}}(B)$ given by $$d_W^a(\alpha,\beta):= d_W(\alpha\circ{\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi_a),\beta\circ{\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi_a)),$$ where $\phi_a\colon C_0(0,1]\to A\otimes \mathcal K$ is such that $\phi(\mathrm{id})=a$. We consider the set $\mathrm{Mor}({\mathrm{Cu}}(A),{\mathrm{Cu}}(B))$ endowed with the uniform structure induced by all the pseudometrics $d_W^a$. A basis of entourages for this uniform structure is given by the sets $$U_{F,{\varepsilon}}=\{(\alpha,\beta)\mid d_W^a(\alpha,\beta)<{\varepsilon},a\in F\},$$ where ${\varepsilon}>0$ and $F$ runs through the finite subsets of positive contractions of $A\otimes \mathcal K$. We will prove the following theorem, of which Theorem \[extension\] of the introduction is an obvious corollary.
\[extension2\] For every ${\varepsilon}>0$ there is a finite set $F\subset C_0(0,1]\otimes C_0(0,1]$, and $\delta>0$, such that $$({\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi\otimes \mathrm{Id}),{\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi\otimes \mathrm{Id}))\in U_{F,\delta}\Rightarrow
d_U(\phi({\mathrm{id}}),\psi({\mathrm{id}}))<{\varepsilon},$$ for any pair of homomorphisms $\phi,\psi\colon C_0(0,1]\to A$, where the C\*-algebra $A$ is an inductive limit of the form $\varinjlim C(X_i)\otimes\mathcal K$, with $X_i$ compact metric spaces and $\dim X_i{\leqslant}2$ for all $i=1,2\dots$.
Before proving Theorem \[extension2\] we need some preliminary definitions and results. We will consider the relation of Murray-von Neumann equivalence on projections in matrix algebras over possibly non-compact spaces. If $P$ and $Q$ are projections in the algebra $M_n(C_b(X))$ of continuous, bounded, matrix valued functions on $X$, we say that $P$ and $Q$ are Murray-von Neumann equivalent, and denote this by $P\sim Q$, if there is $v\in M_n(C_b(X))$ such that $P=vv^*$ and $Q=vv^*$. For a subset $U$ of $X$, assumed either open or closed, we say that $P$ is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $Q$ on the set $U$ if the restrictions of $P$ and $Q$ to $U$ are Murray-von Neumann equivalent in the algebra $M_n(C_b(U))$.
\[pointsCW\] Let $X$ be a finite CW-complex of dimension at most 2, and let $C$ be a closed subset of $X$. If $P$ and $Q$ are projections in $M_n(C(X))$ such that $P$ is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $Q$ on the set $C$, then there exists a finite subset $F$ of $X\backslash C$ such that $P$ is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $Q$ on $X\backslash F$.
Let $X_1$ denote the 1-skeleton of $X$ and $(\Delta_i)_{i=1}^m$ the 2-cells of $X$. Suppose that $(\Delta_i)_{i=1}^{m_0}$ are the 2-cells intersected by the open set $X\backslash C$. Choose points $x_i\in \mathring{\Delta}_i\backslash C$ for $i{\leqslant}m_0$, and let $F$ be the set of these points. Since $X\backslash F$ contracts to $X_1\cup \bigcup_{i>m_0} \Delta_i$, it is enough to show that $P$ is Murray-von Neumann equivalent to $Q$ on $X_1\cup \bigcup_{i>m_0} \Delta_i$ (see [@vaserstein Theorem 1]). Let $v$ be a partial isometry defined on $\bigcup_{i>m_0} \Delta_i$ such that $P=vv^*$ and $Q=v^*v$ on $\bigcup_{i>m_0} \Delta_i$ ($v$ exists by hypothesis). Let us show that $v$ extends to $X_1\cup \bigcup_{i>m_0}\Delta_i$. For this, it is enough to show that $v$ extends from $X_1\cap \bigcup_{i>m_0} \Delta_i$ to $X_1$. This is true by [@phillips Proposition 4.2 (1)] (applied to 1-dimensional spaces).
\[CWcompare\] Let $X$ be a finite CW-complex of dimension at most 2. Let ${\varepsilon}>0$. Suppose that $a,b\in M_n(C(X))^+$ are of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\label{aandb}
a=\sum_{j=1}^n P_j\lambda_j, \quad b=\sum_{j=1}^n Q_j\lambda_j,\end{aligned}$$ where $(P_j)_{j=1}^n$ and $(Q_j)_{j=1}^n$ are sequences of orthogonal projections of rank 1, $(\lambda_j)_{j=1}^n$ is a sequence of scalar functions such that $\lambda_j{\geqslant}\lambda_{j+1}$ for $j=1,2\dots n-1$, and $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{j=1}^i P_j\sim\sum_{j=1}^i Q_j \hbox{ on the set }\{x\in X\mid\lambda_i(x)-\lambda_{i+1}(x){\geqslant}{\varepsilon}\},
\label{lammu2}\end{aligned}$$ for $i=1,\dots,n$ (for $i=n$ we take $\lambda_{i+1}=0$ in ). Then $d_U(a,b)<2{\varepsilon}$.
Let ${\varepsilon}>0$ and $a$ and $b$ be as in the statement of the lemma. Let us perturb the elements $a$ and $b$ by modifying the functions $(\lambda_i)_{i=1}^n$ in the following way: For $i=1,2,\dots,n$, let us denote by $C_i$ the set $\{x\in X\mid \lambda_i(x)-\lambda_{i+1}(x){\geqslant}{\varepsilon}\}$. By and Lemma \[pointsCW\], there are finite sets $F_i\subseteq X\backslash C_i$ such that $\sum_{j=1}^i P_j$ is Murray-von Neumann to $\sum_{j=1}^i Q_j$ on $X\backslash F_i$ for $i=1,2,\dots,n$. Let us choose the sets $F_i$ so that they are disjoint for different $i$s (it is clear from the proof of Lemma \[pointsCW\] that this is possible). Furthermore, for every $x\in \bigcup_{i=1}^n F_i$ let us choose an open neighbourhood $U(x)$ of $x$ such that $U(x)\cap U(x')=\varnothing$ for $x\neq x'$ and $U(x)\cap C_i=\varnothing$ for $x\in F_i$. Starting with $i=1$, and proceeding to $i=2,\dots,n$, let us perturb the function $\lambda_{i+1}$ on the set $\bigcup_{x\in F_i} U(x)$ by an amount less than ${\varepsilon}$, and so that $\lambda_{i+1}(x)=\lambda_i(x)$ for $x$ in some open set $V_i$ such that $F_i\subset V_i$ and $\overline {V_i}\subseteq\bigcup_{x\in F_i} U(x)$.
Since the sets $\bigcup_{x\in F_i} U(x)$ are disjoint for different values of $i$, the resulting perturbations of $a$ and $b$ are within a distance of ${\varepsilon}$ of their original values. These perturbations, which we continue to denote by $a$ and $b$, satisfy that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{abconds}
&a =\sum_{j=1}^n P_j\lambda_j ,\quad
b =\sum_{j=1}^n Q_j \lambda_j,\\
\label{abconds2}
&\sum_{j=1}^i P_j \sim \sum_{j=1}^i Q_j \hbox{ on }X\backslash V_i, \hbox{ for }i=1,2,\dots,n,\\
&V_i\subseteq \{x\mid \lambda_i(x)=\lambda_{i+1}(x)\}, \hbox{ and }V_i \hbox{ is open.}\label{abconds3}\end{aligned}$$ The proposition will be proved once we show that, under the conditions -, the elements $a$ and $b$ are Murray-von Neumann equivalent. This amounts to finding a sequence of orthogonal projections $(R_i)_{i=1}^n$ in $M_n(C(X))$ such that $a=\sum_{j=1}^n R_j\lambda_j$, and $R_i\sim Q_i$ for $i=1,\dots,n$. Let us show that this is possible.
The sequence $(R_i)_{i=1}^n$ will be obtained by a series of modifications on the sequence $(P_i)_{i=1}^n$. Let $k_0$ be the smallest index such that $P_{k_0}\nsim Q_{k_0}$. From $\sum_{j=1}^{k_0-1}P_i\sim \sum_{j=1}^{k_0-1}Q_i$ and , we get that $P_{k_0}\sim Q_{k_0}$ on $X\backslash V_{k_0}$ (since there is cancellation of projections over spaces of dimension at most 2). Let $v$ be the partial isometry defined on $X\backslash V_{k_0}$ such that $P_{k_0}=vv^*$ and $Q_{k_0}=v^*v$ on $X\backslash V_{k_0}$. It is guaranteed by [@phillips Proposition 4.2 (1)] that $v$ can be extended to a partial isometry $w$ on $X$ such that $w^*w=Q_{k_0}$ and $ww^*{\leqslant}P_{k_0}+P_{k_0+1}$. Set $ww^*=P_{k_0}'$, with $w$ being such an extension of $v$. Then $P_{k_0}'$ is such that $P_{k_0}'\sim Q_{k_0}$, $P_{k_0}'{\leqslant}P_{k_0}+P_{k_0+1}$, and $P_{k_0}'(x)=P_{k_0}(x)$ for all $x\in X\backslash V_{k_0}$. Let $P_{k_0+1}'$ be the projection such that $P_{k_0}'+P_{k_0+1}'=P_{k_0}+P_{k_0+1}$. We have $$P_{k_0}\lambda_{k_0}+P_{k_0+1}\lambda_{k_0+1}=P_{k_0}'\lambda_{k_0}+P_{k_0+1}'\lambda_{k_0+1}.$$ Thus, replacing $P_{k_0}$ and $P_{k_0+1}$ by $P_{k_0}'$ and $P_{k_0+1}'$ respectively, we obtain a new sequence of projections $(P_i)_{i=1}^n$ that satisfies and , and also $P_{k}\sim Q_{k}$ for $k{\leqslant}k_0$. Continuing this process we obtain the desired sequence $(R_i)_{i=1}^n$.
Let ${\varepsilon}>0$ (and assume ${\varepsilon}<1$). Let $g_{\varepsilon}\in C_0(0,1]$ be a function such that $g_{\varepsilon}(t)=\frac{{\varepsilon}}{t}$ for $t\in [{\varepsilon},1]$, and $0\le g_{\varepsilon}(t)\le 1$ for $t\in (0,1]$. Let $F\subseteq C_0(0,1]\otimes C_0(0,1]$ be the set $F=\{\mathrm{id}\otimes {\mathrm{id}},{\mathrm{id}}\otimes g_{\varepsilon}\}$. Let us prove that $$({\mathrm{Cu}}(\phi\otimes \mathrm{Id}),{\mathrm{Cu}}(\psi\otimes \mathrm{Id}))\in U_{F,\frac{{\varepsilon}^2}{2}}\Rightarrow
d_U(\phi({\mathrm{id}}),\psi({\mathrm{id}}))<2{\varepsilon}+\frac{{\varepsilon}^2}{2},$$ where $\phi$, $\psi$, and $A$ are as in the statement of the theorem. Let us express what we wish to prove in terms of positive contractions (via the bijection $\phi\mapsto \phi({\mathrm{id}})$). For $a,b\in A$ positive contractions, we have $$\begin{aligned}
d_W^{{\mathrm{id}}\otimes{\mathrm{id}}}(a\otimes {\mathrm{id}},b\otimes{\mathrm{id}})=d_W(a\otimes{\mathrm{id}},b\otimes{\mathrm{id}}),\\
d_W^{{\mathrm{id}}\otimes g_{\varepsilon}}(a\otimes{\mathrm{id}},b\otimes{\mathrm{id}})=d_W(a\otimes g_{\varepsilon},b\otimes g_{\varepsilon}). \end{aligned}$$ Thus, we want to show that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{withcontractions}
\begin{array}{l}
d_W(a\otimes{\mathrm{id}},b\otimes{\mathrm{id}})<\frac{{\varepsilon}^2}{2},\\
d_W(a\otimes g_{\varepsilon},b\otimes g_{\varepsilon})<\frac{{\varepsilon}^2}{2},
\end{array}
\Rightarrow d_U(a,b)<2{\varepsilon}+\frac{{\varepsilon}^2}{2},\end{aligned}$$ for $a$ and $b$ positive contractions.
Let us first show that if we have for the C\*-algebras $(A_i)_{i=1}^\infty$ of a sequential inductive system, then we also have for their inductive limit $A$. By the continuity of the pseudometrics $d_W$ and $d_U$ (see Lemma \[continuous\]), it is enough to prove assuming that $a$ and $b$ belong to a dense subset of the positive contractions of $A$. Thus, we may assume that $a$ and $b$ are the images in $A$ of positive contractions in some C\*-algebra $A_i$, $i\in {\mathbb{N}}$. Suppose we have $a',b'\in A_i$ such that their images in $A$ satisfy the inequalities of the left side of . By Lemma \[WTlimit\] (ii), it is possible to move $a'$ and $b'$ along the inductive limit to a C\*-algebra $A_j$, $j{\geqslant}i$, so that these same inequalities hold in the C\*-algebra $A_j$. We conclude that $d_U^{A_j}(\phi_{i,j}(a'),\phi_{i,j}(b'))<{\varepsilon}$. Moving $a$ and $b$ back to the limit we get the right side of .
From the discussion of the previous paragraph, it is enough to prove for $A=C(X)\otimes \mathcal K$, with $X$ a compact metric space of dimension at most 2. Moreover, since a compact metric space of dimension at most 2 is a sequential projective limit of finite CW-complexes of dimension at most 2 (see [@engelking Theorem 1.13.5]), we are reduced to proving for the case that $A=C(X)\otimes \mathcal K$, where $X$ is a finite CW-complex of dimension at most 2.
Let us suppose $A=C(X)\otimes \mathcal K$, where $X$ is a finite CW-complex of dimension at most 2. It is enough to prove assuming that $a,b\in M_n(C(X))$ for some $n\in {\mathbb{N}}$. Moreover, by Choi and Elliott’s [@choi-elliott Theorem 1], we may assume that $a(x)$ and $b(x)$ have distinct eigenvalues (as matrices in $M_n({\mathbb{C}})$) for all $x\in X$. (Choi and Elliott’s Theorem implies that such a set is dense in the set of positive contractions of $M_n(C(X))$ for $\dim X{\leqslant}2$.) This implies (see the proof of [@thomsen Theorem 1.2]) that $a$ and $b$ have the form $$\begin{aligned}
\label{abPQ}
a=\sum_{j=1}^n P_j\lambda_i \hbox{\, and \,}b=\sum_{j=1}^n Q_j\mu_i,\end{aligned}$$ for some sequences of orthogonal projections of rank 1 $(P_i)_{i=1}^n$ and $(Q_i)_{i=1}^n$, and scalar eigenfunctions $(\lambda_i)_{i=1}^n$ and $(\mu_i)_{i=1}^n$, such that $1{\geqslant}\lambda_1(x)>\lambda_2(x)>\dots>0$ and $1{\geqslant}\mu_1(x)>\mu_2(x)>\dots>0$.
From $d_W(a\otimes{\mathrm{id}},b\otimes{\mathrm{id}})<\frac{{\varepsilon}^2}{2}$ we deduce that $d_W(a,b)<\frac{{\varepsilon}^2}{2}$ (evaluating ${\mathrm{id}}$ at $t=1$), and so $\|\lambda_i-\mu_i\|<\frac{{\varepsilon}^2}{2}$ for all $i$ (see the proof of Theorem \[isometry\]). Let $b'\in M_n(C(X))$ be given by $b'=\sum_{i=1}^n Q_i\lambda_i$. Then $d_U(b,b')<{\varepsilon}^2/2$ and $$d_W(a\otimes g_{\varepsilon},b'\otimes g_{\varepsilon}){\leqslant}d_W(a\otimes g_{\varepsilon},b\otimes g_{\varepsilon})+d_W(b\otimes g_{\varepsilon},b'\otimes g_{\varepsilon})<{\varepsilon}^2.$$ The implication will be proven once we have shown that $$d_W(a\otimes g_{\varepsilon},b'\otimes g_{\varepsilon})<{\varepsilon}^2\Rightarrow d_U(a,b')<2{\varepsilon}.$$ In order to prove this, it is enough to show that the left side of this implication implies of Proposition \[CWcompare\] (applied to the elements $a$ and $b'$). Let us choose ${\varepsilon}'>0$ such that $d_W(a\otimes g_{\varepsilon},b'\otimes g_{\varepsilon})<{\varepsilon}^2-{\varepsilon}'{\varepsilon}$. By the definition of $d_W$ we have that $$(a\otimes g_{\varepsilon}-({\varepsilon}-{\varepsilon}'{\varepsilon}))_+{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} (b'\otimes g_{\varepsilon}-({\varepsilon}-{\varepsilon}^2))_+.$$ Let us identify $M_n(C(X))\otimes C_0(0,1]$ with $M_n(C_0(X\times (0,1]))$ and express the Cuntz comparison above in terms of the projections $(P_i)_{i=1}^n$ and $(Q_i)_{i=1}^n$, and the eigenfunctions $(\lambda_i)_{i=1}^n$. We get $$\label{cuntzineq}
\sum_{j=1}^n P_j(x)(\lambda_j(x)g_{\varepsilon}(t)-{\varepsilon}+{\varepsilon}'{\varepsilon})_+{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu}
\sum_{j=1}^n Q_j(x)(\lambda_j(x)g_{\varepsilon}(t)-{\varepsilon}+{\varepsilon}^2)_+,$$ for $(x,t)\in X\times (0,1]$. Note: this Cuntz relation comparison is not to be understood as a pointwise relation, but rather as a relation in the C\*-algebra $M_n(C(X\times (0,1]))$.
For $i{\leqslant}n$ let us define the set $$T_i=\{x\in X\mid \lambda_{i+1}(x)/\lambda_{i}(x){\leqslant}1-{\varepsilon}\hbox{ and }\lambda_i(x){\geqslant}{\varepsilon}\}.$$ Let $C_i\subseteq X\times (0,1]$ be the closed set $C_i=\{(x,\lambda_i(x))\mid x\in T_i\}$. Restricting the Cuntz comparison to the set $C_i$, and using the definition of $g_{\varepsilon}$, we get that $$\begin{aligned}
P_1 &\left(\frac{\lambda_1}{\lambda_i} - (1-{\varepsilon}')\right)_+ + P_2 \left(\frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_i}-(1-{\varepsilon}')\right)_+ +\dots +{\varepsilon}' P_i
\preceq_{Cu} \\
& Q_1 \left(\frac{\lambda_1}{\lambda_i}-(1-{\varepsilon})\right)_+ + Q_2 \left(\frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_i}-(1-{\varepsilon})\right)_+ +\dots +
{\varepsilon}Q_i,\end{aligned}$$ on the closed set $T_i$. It follows that $\sum_{j=1}^i P_j{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} \sum_{j=1}^i Q_j$ on $T_i$. In the same way we can prove that $\sum_{j=1}^i Q_j{\preccurlyeq}_{Cu} \sum_{j=1}^i P_j$ on $T_i$, and so $\sum_{j=1}^i P_j\sim \sum_{j=1}^i Q_j$ on $T_i$. If $\lambda_i(x)-\lambda_{i+1}(x){\geqslant}{\varepsilon}$ then $\lambda_{i+1}(x)/\lambda_{i}(x){\leqslant}1-{\varepsilon}$ and $\lambda_i(x){\geqslant}{\varepsilon}$. Hence, $\{x\in X\mid \lambda_i(x)-\lambda_{i+1}(x){\geqslant}{\varepsilon}\}\subseteq T_i$. Therefore, the elements $a$ and $b'$ satisfy the condition of Proposition \[CWcompare\]. This completes the proof of the theorem.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The Be star $\delta$ Scorpii is an interesting binary system, whose primary companion created a circumstellar disk after the periastron passage of the secondary in 2000, being since then classified as Be. This work presents the results of a long-term monitoring of this star in broad-band imaging polarimetry. The observational data collected since 2006 in the Pico dos Dias Observatory (Brazil) show a variable polarization that seems to correlate with the photometric light curve. From this data we see that the disk density varied since 2006; furthermore, the data suggests that there was some disturbance of the disk during the last periastron passage in July, 2011.'
author:
- 'D. Bednarski and A. C. Carciofi'
bibliography:
- 'p03\_bednarski.bib'
title: 'Monitoring the Polarimetric Variability of $\delta$ Scorpii'
---
Introduction
============
Delta Scorpii is a binary system, whose primary component is a Be star and the secondary’s nature is still unknown (see Miroshnichenko, these proceedings). After the 1990 passage of the secondary companion at the periastron there was some detectable line emission (suggestive of circumstellar material), which became more intense in next passage, in 2000. Since then, the primary star has developed a quite large and strong disk [e.g., @carciofi_2006].
Be stars have an intrinsic linear polarization, which arises from the scattering of starlight from the free electrons in disk. Polarization has since long been used in Be star research as a disk diagnostics [see, e.g., @Wood_1997]; recently, @Draper_2011 have studied the usefulness of polarization as a diagnostic of disk evolution.
In this contribution, we show the results of a polarization monitoring of $\delta$ Sco carried out since 2006.
Observations
============
The polarimetric data were obtained primarily in the 0.60m Boller & Chivens telescope at the Pico dos Dias Observatory (Minas Gerais, Brazil). The Perkin-Elmer (1.60m) and Zeiss (0.60m) telescopes were used in few missions.
The instrument used was the IAGPOL polarimeter, capable of obtaining high precision imaging polarimetry in the UBVRI filters. @Carciofi_2007 have demonstrated that IAGPOL is photon-noise limited up to polarization levels of $\sim 0.005\%$. A typical uncertainly in our measurements is $\sim 0.015\%$, but this varies due to a number of reasons, the main one is the different observing conditions (cloud cover). So far not all available data in the 2006 – 2009 period has been reduced yet, so this contribution presents only a sub-set of our observations in this period.
The data reduction was performed within the IRAF environment. For details on the reduction and observing strategy see @Carciofi_2007 and references therein.
Interstellar Polarization
-------------------------
Usually, a very tricky part of polarization studies is to obtain an estimate of the interstellar polarization (ISP) along the line of sight. For $\delta$ Sco we could not find a reliable estimate of the ISP in the literature, so we measured the polarization of few main-sequence field stars in order to determine this quantity. The analysis is still ongoing, but our preliminary results indicate that the field star HD 142705 (spectral type A0V) is a good proxy for the ISP. The BVRI polarization of this star is shown in Table 1.
\[tab:hd\]
[ccc]{} Filter & P (%) & $\theta$ (deg)\
B & $0.138 \pm 0.011$ & $116.0 \pm 2.3$\
V & $0.159 \pm 0.016$ & $120.8 \pm 2.9$\
R & $0.194 \pm 0.020$ & $122.1 \pm 2.9$\
I & $0.143 \pm 0.016$ & $123.2 \pm 3.3$\
![Intrinsic polarization angle of $\delta$ Sco in the BVRI filters. The vertical red line marks the epoch of the periastron passage.[]{data-label="fig:theta"}](p03_bednarski_theta1.eps "fig:") ![Intrinsic polarization angle of $\delta$ Sco in the BVRI filters. The vertical red line marks the epoch of the periastron passage.[]{data-label="fig:theta"}](p03_bednarski_theta2.eps "fig:")
![Top to bottom, on both sides: Light curve of $\delta$ Scorpii (S. Otero, priv. comm.) and intrinsic linear polarization in the B, V, R and I filters. The vertical red line marks the epoch of the periastron passage.[]{data-label="fig:pol1"}](p03_bednarski_pol.eps "fig:") ![Top to bottom, on both sides: Light curve of $\delta$ Scorpii (S. Otero, priv. comm.) and intrinsic linear polarization in the B, V, R and I filters. The vertical red line marks the epoch of the periastron passage.[]{data-label="fig:pol1"}](p03_bednarski_pol_rec.eps "fig:")
![Polarized spectrum of $\delta$ Scorpii at different epochs, marked in Fig. \[fig:pol1\].[]{data-label="fig:spec"}](p03_bednarski_angles.eps)
Results and Conclusions
=======================
The preliminary results of our polarization monitoring are presented below. In all plots the results have been corrected for the ISP, but it is important to recall that this correction is still preliminary.
In Fig. \[fig:theta\] we show the polarization angle (PA) for the BVRI filters. It is hard from the data to judge about possible variability, but one can safely put an upper limit of $\sim 2\deg$ to variations of the PA. Noteworthy is the absence of (large) PA variation during the periastron passage. Models of the tidal interaction between the disk and the secondary predict important disk warping during the periastron passage, depending on the orbital parameters and the orientation of the disk with respect to the orbital plane (see Okazaki, these proceedings). A disk warping would result in variations of the PA; the fact that none (or little) variation was observed gives important constraints to the model.
The BVRI polarization curves are shown in Fig. \[fig:pol1\], along with the light curve of $\delta$ Sco. These photometric data were obtained by S. Otero (visual photometry), B. Fraser and D. West (PEP photometry), and T. Moon (CCD photometry). The average error is about 0.05 mag. One of the main findings of this work is that at times the polarization seems to be correlated with the photometry, whereas at others it is anti-correlated. This behavior can be understood if one considers the fact that those observables trace the disk density at different disk locations: visual photometry is sensitive to the inner disk structure while polarization tracks the structure of the disk over larger areas [see @Carciofi_2011]. We expect, therefore, that the combination of photometry and polarization will impose quite stringent constraints on any model that try to explain the disk evolution.
The observed trends are indicative of a complex evolution of disk surface density over time. This is further illustrated by the temporal changes in the slope of the polarized spectrum, shown in Fig. \[fig:spec\] for eight different epochs (marked in Fig. \[fig:pol1\]). Least squares fits were applied on the VRI data, aiming at illustrating the temporal evolution of the polarization slope. This variation suggests that the density of disk is variable.
Finally, there are no signs of total destruction of the disk during the recent periastron passage. The polarization decreased slightly near the event, but quickly returned to its pre-periastron value.
D.B. acknowledges support from CNPq (grant 146314/2011-5). A.C.C. acknowledges support from CNPq (grant 308985/2009-5) and Fapesp (grant 2010/19029-0). D.B. thanks IAG and the organizing committee for the financial aid.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.